Five Values

QuirkyLemonFlower said:
Resilience
Courage
Truth
Curiosity
Kindness
Click to expand...
Same question, Quirks - do you think these values have always been there, or do you think they've been forged by life experiences?

The particular experiences I'm detecting in some of these responses come through very strongly for each individual.

This is essentially in the context of what John was saying about how we cone to have our values.
 
I can narrow it down to five themes that can be described using different words.

1. (Heart) Empathy/Compassion/ Ethics/Kindness/Understanding
2. (Mind) Wisdom/ Intelligence/Consciousness/Intuiveness/Solitude (Yes, solitude goes into the mind category.)
3. (Community) Accountability/ Altruism/ Equality/Freedom/Harmony
4. (Self) Creativity/Talent/Beauty/Vision
5. (Relationships) Strength/Loyalty/Trust
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
Same question, Quirks - do you think these values have always been there, or do you think they've been forged by life experiences?

The particular experiences I'm detecting in some of these responses come through very strongly for each individual.

This is essentially in the context of what John was saying about how we cone to have our values.
Click to expand...

I guess the top three are from my life experiences that you're aware of and that's strengthened my resilience and given me courage each day. Truth is becoming more and more important value as I get older. The number of people in my life who aren't truthful or people I come across feels like it's just forever increasing.

And the last two are just something that's always been a part of me, this could be down to nurturing? Albeit a weird form of nurture. I wanted to add creativity too because that's something I've been from a very small age and I value that a lot.
 
The only thing I could come up with is sublimation. Most values I would list are still aspirational, and perhaps will even stay that way. I never could identify things like these within me if I thought there was enough discrepancy in my recent behaviour and the sense these values made to me - it's the same problem as with the command "describe yourself in five adjectives". But I know that one thing I've always done is to try and turn my weakness into something more venerable and refined, even when I have misled myself, even when I fail and keep failing at it. And the same was done to everything that was of me.

Anything else is a subset of it in any case. I could say I value humility, discipline etc. but in accordance with the video, I know I don't. I do not characterize them consistently. But if there is something where all of it points to, it's found in the words nolo episcopari.
 
I had to give this some thought because my values aren't explicit, they're more instinctive and internalized but I'd say it goes something like this:

Tolerance
Balance/Integration -> big picture
Discrimination/Disambiguation
Fairness
Perseverance
 
Peppermint said:
I had to give this some thought because my values aren't explicit, they're more instinctive and internalized but I'd say it goes something like this:

Tolerance
Balance/Integration -> big picture
Discrimination/Disambiguation
Fairness
Perseverance
Click to expand...
I like these, especially the two 'processes'.

I also tend to think that ENFPs will not usually define their values like this; they're more instinctive, like you say.
 
Five is kind of a weird number for this.
One, two or three sets a harder limit and is interesting in its own way.
But we all have way more than five that we try to juggle.
Picking five is far enough / deep enough cognitively to where it starts to feel loose/tricky to choose.
But that's also what makes it interesting. I'd probably have listed some slightly differently on any other given day.
But I tried to encompass my whole being in a sort of playful way with it. Still tough.
 
Wyote said:
Five is kind of a weird number for this.
One, two or three sets a harder limit and is interesting in its own way.
But we all have way more than five that we try to juggle.
Picking five is far enough / deep enough cognitively to where it starts to feel loose/tricky to choose.
But that's also what makes it interesting. I'd probably have listed some slightly differently on any other given day.
But I tried to encompass my whole being in a sort of playful way with it. Still tough.
Click to expand...
I found it a bit like trying to choose five favourite pixels from a screen image, actually ..... to exaggerate of course.
 
I like five for this exercise, not only for the obvious limitations it imposes - making it difficult in an interesting way - but also in that it subverts our natural need to impose symmetry upon concepts which are in some way supposed to be transcendant.

One has this symmetry in its wholeness, of course.

So does the polarity of two and the mysterious trines of three. Four preserves the symmetry of two; six is divisible enough and in enough ways that symmetrical hierarchies can be made of it. Seven has a similar mysticism to three.

Five, by contrast, forces each choice into its own category. There's something about it which makes it useful for this kind of exercise which is hard to articulate. I don't know if Sinek had all of this in mind when he said 'five', but there's a good chance that this was at least part of the instinct.
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
I like five for this exercise, not only for the obvious limitations it imposes - making it difficult in an interesting way - but also in that it subverts our natural need to impose symmetry upon concepts which are in some way supposed to be transcendant.

One has this symmetry in its wholeness, of course.

So does the polarity of two and the mysterious trines of three. Four preserves the symmetry of two; six is divisible enough and in enough ways that symmetrical hierarchies can be made of it. Seven has a similar mysticism to three.

Five, by contrast, forces each choice into its own category. There's something about it which makes it useful for this kind of exercise which is hard to articulate. I don't know if Sinek had all of this in mind when he said 'five', but there's a good chance that this was at least part of the instinct.
Click to expand...

nerd
(yup)
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
I like five for this exercise, not only for the obvious limitations it imposes - making it difficult in an interesting way - but also in that it subverts our natural need to impose symmetry upon concepts which are in some way supposed to be transcendant.

One has this symmetry in its wholeness, of course.

So does the polarity of two and the mysterious trines of three. Four preserves the symmetry of two; six is divisible enough and in enough ways that symmetrical hierarchies can be made of it. Seven has a similar mysticism to three.

Five, by contrast, forces each choice into its own category. There's something about it which makes it useful for this kind of exercise which is hard to articulate. I don't know if Sinek had all of this in mind when he said 'five', but there's a good chance that this was at least part of the instinct.
Click to expand...
Depends how we look at five. The Quincunx is a most important symbol, and is highly symmetrical - which is very appropriate for something that signifies the resolution of opposites into an integrated and centred wholeness.

upload_2021-3-29_21-54-12.webp


So we could arrange the four classical elements into a Quincunx, centred on an integrating wholeness, and associate values with what each element represents. This is illustrative of course, and I'm sure different people would see different associations, contrasts and symmetries:
upload_2021-3-29_22-43-10.webp

We should do something similar with our five favourite vices as well maybe ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top