[Type 1] E1s: Do you feel that the world has moral imperatives we all must subscribe to?

[Usehername]

I had a great conversation with an ENFP friend tonight. She feels no moral imperatives besides "do no harm." She has no expectations, and is therefore joyful when she finds out that "there's nachos!" She has more emotional space in her heart for other worldviews than I do, and is more generous with others fucking up.

I feel like I have all sorts of moral imperatives that go beyond "do no harm." I believe we should serve the world, and on the flip side, that we should humbly accept the help and generosity of others, because we're all here to connect. I see the world through action-oriented imperatives (ex. reach out and talk to someone who is hurting); ENFP friend doesn't. It doesn't mean that our behaviour is that different, she reaches out to help people, but she doesn't feel any *sense of responsibility* to help anyone.

Thoughts?

Do 1s need to give in to the existential fuckitalls and have no expectations such that we're happy with nachos, or are we just not built that way? There's a white knight/judgmental/anxiety/anger element to having a world full of moral imperatives. Is our journey as 1s to learn how to give in to it all? Or do we have a mission and a purpose that makes our weaknesses understandable?

 

[Working On It]

Anxiety = losing the anticipation of greater good. As a one I do not think I have to settle for nachos, or that others who need help has to settle for nachos either.

I can move in a non offensive way to bring and encourage hope. I don't serve others to fulfill a responsibility. I am happy. I love living. I am thankful. I already feel great about life. I move in the lives of others to help them experience something different than what they are able to experience alone. Hopefully they feel the need to share their joy also. I delight in the other person's joy. I have never taken on a philanthropic challenge and judged others, yet judgement/discernment is always there to help guide us all through the challenge. As a 1w2 I'm aware of the dynamics and can use that judgement/discernment to keep the peace.

I don't want to save others. I don't want to judge anything other than the quality of my work. I choose the flip side of anxiety which is hope. Anger can easily be replaced with determination to solve problems in a non threatening way, "Come now. Let's reason TOGETHER." I can't do anything if I don't start with respecting those who are with me. Respect moves me to help others. Love keeps them in my life longterm.

 

[Fidelia]

Oh yeah, I feel there are moral imperatives for sure. Now, it's hard for me to know how much of that has to do with my world view (which does have absolutes), how much has to do with the influence of an ENFJ e1 mother and how much has to do with my enneagram type. I feel like "do no harm" is a pretty big copout when you have the resources that others don't have access to to do good. Lack of action (to me) in some circumstances is very similar to taking harmful action if it is in your power to prevent something bad from happening and you choose not to act. However, I also have a hard time seeing inaction in a neutral light. Not taking action is taking action in some sense.

 

[EJCC]

Do 1s need to give in to the existential fuckitalls and have no expectations such that we're happy with nachos, or are we just not built that way? There's a white knight/judgmental/anxiety/anger element to having a world full of moral imperatives. Is our journey as 1s to learn how to give in to it all? Or do we have a mission and a purpose that makes our weaknesses understandable?

There's a scale, I think. There are levels of healthiness. One of the levels of unhealthiness, that I see very strongly in my 1w9 (INTJ) friend, is constantly holding everyone and everything to those moral imperatives, and feeling horrible every time people fail to meet them. It makes her cynical, disillusioned, and perpetually wounded by the wrongs of humanity. She constantly (half-)jokes about dropping out of school, moving to the middle of the woods, and becoming a hermit. In my opinion, this is a pretty horrible and miserable way to live, but I can't imagine anyone except a type 1 living that way. (i.e. living with that level of sensitivity, not living as a hermit.)

The following is only my example because I'm the only type 1 that I can speak for really well here, so don't think that I presume to be living the "best" way: I know that 1s don't have to be built to live that way, because I don't live that way, as the only person that I hold ALL of my moral standards to is myself. Obviously I hold more of those moral standards to people, the closer friends they are to me -- which also means that I'm pretty selective about SOs/dates -- but generally, I expect people to be hypocrites, and to do both good and terrible things. It makes life a lot easier for me, and saves a lot of emotional energy. So, to answer the question in the OP from my perspective: I don't think anyone must subscribe to moral imperatives, but it would be awesome if everyone could at least try to. There's no doubt in my mind that those imperatives exist, but I have zero faith in humanity to become less hypocritical about any of them. The best you can do, is be as morally upright as you can be, but accept the "bad" tendencies within yourself that are impossible to change.

Also:

Lack of action (to me) in some circumstances is very similar to taking harmful action if it is in your power to prevent something bad from happening and you choose not to act. However, I also have a hard time seeing inaction in a neutral light. Not taking action is taking action in some sense.

^ This. I completely agree.

 

[SD45T-2]

I feel like "do no harm" is a pretty big copout when you have the resources that others don't have access to to do good. Lack of action (to me) in some circumstances is very similar to taking harmful action if it is in your power to prevent something bad from happening and you choose not to act. However, I also have a hard time seeing inaction in a neutral light. Not taking action is taking action in some sense.

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!"

 

[Hyacinth]

The only moral imperative is be good, or be good at it.

 

[Savitri]

I don't think I owe the world anything, however I do feel I have a mission. My focus is more on faulty systems that affect the efficacy of programs/policies that have detrimental effects on the economy, and thus the living standards of society as a whole.

Anywho, [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] what you said reminded me of Voltaire:

Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do.

 

[Savitri]

Bah! Double post.