A Great Soul on the Seven Deadly Sins

[Zarathustra]

JemCheeta, I agree. I think your post points out just what I was saying: there are exceptions to everything, even my own points! As fans of such an ambiguous, paradoxical work of literature, perhaps this is something we can all agree on?

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

of course, but if we just end up with that at every thread, couldn't we shut the whole forum down? NAY! it is fun to go back and forth with little logics and such!

[Plissken]

Plissken, maybe I'm taking you too seriously, but yes, education without intelligence is a great thing. We wouldn't have accountants without it! Are you suggesting that stupid people shouldn't receive education?

Determination and a good work ethic are far more important to success in a career than intelligence. Plenty of philosophy majors are waiting tables (I know, I was a philosophy major).

I was just reminded of my Father's favorite criticism of environmentalists who wanted to, say, save salmon from silt, or underbrush from old-growth timber.

"An education without the capacity to think for yourself is a dangerous thing."

[Zarathustra]

Sadly, I think public education in America is all about teaching kids not to think for themselves. Most of what they learn, they could learn in much shorter time (I know, because when I explain algebra to my 11-year-old, I can make clear in 5 minutes what the teacher mangled in 1 hour). So what are they doing for the rest of the time? Teaching kids to show up on time, dress appropriately, learn to obey authority, conform with their peers, and do their assigned task.

What does this sound like? Corporate America! Yes, that's what public education is all about: making you a good little drone. Not that this is a bad thing. We need drones. The ones that can escape the limits of the system will escape. Those who can't need a place, too.

[Avatar]

Like JemCheeta, I half-way agree with you Malik. At least insofar as the question of "Deadly Sins", and the dangers of excess.

And I certainly agree that education systems are set up to produce those "drones," probably everywhere in the world. It's in the best interests of government that the drones are produced, and it literally may be as simple as that.

--A

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

Now HERE malik, I agree with you 100 percent. Oh man do I agree with you, because all of a sudden i am IN corporate america!
but actually, often what they are teaching is factory america, with the bells and all.
and they teach to the proficiency test, which is the most useless thing ever (I know because I am great at standardized tests and awful at academics)

It's not just as simple as the goverment wants drones. Drones succeed. Drones keep good jobs by slaving themselves, and get nice houses and cars. That's what people want, and drones get it. But how do we encourage otherwise? Off topic.

[ur-bane]

Plissken, maybe I'm taking you too seriously, but yes, education without intelligence is a great thing. We wouldn't have accountants without it! Are you suggesting that stupid people shouldn't receive education?

Determination and a good work ethic are far more important to success in a career than intelligence. Plenty of philosophy majors are waiting tables (I know, I was a philosophy major).

Sorry to get back to this, but I am catching up on the Weekend Watch.

Malik, I hope there is on of these--> after "We wouldn't have accountants without it."
When I first read that, my blood started boiling. My wife is an accountant, who also happens to be one of the most intelligent people I have ever met. I took strong offense at that comment.
It wasn't until I read:

JemCheeta, I agree. I think your post points out just what I was saying: there are exceptions to everything...

that the blow was softened. No offense to anyone here, but this damn stereotypical grouping to make a point really pisses me off. Cite specifics, not generalizations. Especially generalizations that have no basis in truth.[/rant]

[wayfriend]

So you can't take pride in a job well done? You can't take pride in your kids? No pride in your appearance, your country, your team, nothing? I think you're going to part ways with a lot of people, Wayfriend. Without pride, what motivation do you have other than fear to be anything other than average?

Unless you dodge it by calling pride something else, like self-respect, personal satisfaction, etc. There's a reason for other words like hubris.

Yes, that's my stance. Pride is Pride, and Pride is Bad.

Taking pride in a job well done, in your children, your appearance, your country, your team: all of these seem like a good thing. And, 99 times out of 100, they do no one no harm. But one day, one time, they will get you, and do enough harm to pay back all those other times, and more so. As I said, pride is tricksey - it lulls you, it lures you, and then it lights into you.

Yes, there are other words. Pride in your appearance, your children, and your job is also called 'vanity'. Lack of pride is also called 'humility'.

But let me pose this: show me a situation where having pride, taking pride, or being prideful has given you any benefit over not having it. Or when having humilty instead of pride has been a disadvantage. (Which doesn't prove it is a Deadly Sin, I know. But one step at a time.)

Hint: You need to carefully distinguish not-pride from laziness, lack of confidence, etc. These are different things. For example, saying 'if I didn't have pride in my appearance, I would look like a slob and smell foul' is bogus for this proposition. Not having pride doesn't mean you aren't sensible, it doesn't mean you are lazy, it doesn't mean you don't try to meet standards of propriety. So if you are slovenly and smelly, that's not a lack of pride, that is a lack of other things. What lacking pride would mean, for example, is that you don't waste capital on clothes because they are more flattering than others.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

I see where you are coming from wayfriend, and I think if we follow it far enough you'll have me totally convinced.
Answer me this then: Is it possible to know that one did well, and not be expressing the 'sin' of pride?

Like, I clean the floor, and I do it well. The floor is clean. There's no inherent pride in my knowing that I cleaned the floor well, is there?

[ur-bane]

Taking pride in a job well done, in your children, your appearance, your country, your team: all of these seem like a good thing. And, 99 times out of 100, they do no one no harm. But one day, one time, they will get you, and do enough harm to pay back all those other times, and more so. As I said, pride is tricksey - it lulls you, it lures you, and then it lights into you.

Perhaps you could give an example? This is an interesting line of thought (that I don't agree with). But I'd really like you to expand on this.
What would be that "one day, one time"?

[Plissken]

Taking pride in a job well done, in your children, your appearance, your country, your team: all of these seem like a good thing. And, 99 times out of 100, they do no one no harm. But one day, one time, they will get you, and do enough harm to pay back all those other times, and more so. As I said, pride is tricksey - it lulls you, it lures you, and then it lights into you.

Yes, there are other words. Pride in your appearance, your children, and your job is also called 'vanity'. Lack of pride is also called 'humility'.

But let me pose this: show me a situation where having pride, taking pride, or being prideful has given you any benefit over not having it. Or when having humilty instead of pride has been a disadvantage. (Which doesn't prove it is a Deadly Sin, I know. But one step at a time.)

Hint: You need to carefully distinguish not-pride from laziness, lack of confidence, etc. These are different things. For example, saying 'if I didn't have pride in my appearance, I would look like a slob and smell foul' is bogus for this proposition. Not having pride doesn't mean you aren't sensible, it doesn't mean you are lazy, it doesn't mean you don't try to meet standards of propriety. So if you are slovenly and smelly, that's not a lack of pride, that is a lack of other things. What lacking pride would mean, for example, is that you don't waste capital on clothes because they are more flattering than others.

First off, I really believe that this is the kind of thought that comes about when religion is used as Class-based crowd control. Teaching the serfs that all pride is sin is just another way to keep them from thinking for themselves or trying to rise above their station.

Secondly, the distinction between healthy and excessive pride has already been addressed. Simply saying that because of the possible dangers of excessive pride, all forms of pride are to be avoided is pretty much a non-argument. It's kind of like saying that all fire is bad, because you might burn the forest down.

Finally, I will elaborate an example of healthy pride that I have already given: When a parent takes pride in a childs growth or accomplishment, the parent learn both hope and higher expectations for that child. When the parent expresses that pride to the child, the child learns what behaviour is correct, honor, pride in performing action or thought correctly, and a desire to continue causing pride in both the heart of the parent and himself.

Are there dangers of excess at every point in this chain? Surely. Are the dangers worth sacrificing pride of accomplishment in a child's heart? Surely not.

Even the Bible teaches the importance of moderation in all things. I suggest that this lesson applies to both pride and humility - as well as moderation.

[wayfriend]

Answer me this then: Is it possible to know that one did well, and not be expressing the 'sin' of pride?

Yes, by accepting criticism, but shunning praise. If you accept criticism, even from yourself, you will know if you have done well. But you should not demand/expect praise for your success, even praise from yourself. Instead, you should be concerned about whether you have done your best, and how you might do better in the future.

Perhaps you could give an example? This is an interesting line of thought (that I don't agree with). But I'd really like you to expand on this.

I wish I had a handy story. All I can say right now is: Pride can be habituated. Then one day your pride will be attacked or undermined. You will mistakenly undertake defending your pride, or restoring your pride, and end up doing things that you regret later. Or your pride will grow, until it is excessive, but you won't notice it until you do something that you regret later.

Pride prevents you from saying 'I'm sorry' when you should. (That's my particular problem.)

Pride keeps you from changing your ways, when changing them would be good.

Pride won't let you admit that you are wrong, when you are wrong. Pride won't let you see that you are wrong, when you are wrong.

Pride insists that something is good for other people, but not for you, when it is good for you.

Pride tells you what is your place, and what is someone else's place, when they are the same place.

Pride lets you become estranged from your family, even though you've been taught that family is everything.

And so on ...

[ur-bane]

Pride prevents you from saying 'I'm sorry' when you should. (That's my particular problem.)

Pride keeps you from changing your ways, when changing them would be good.

Pride won't let you admit that you are wrong, when you are wrong. Pride won't let you see that you are wrong, when you are wrong.

{snip}

Pride lets you become estranged from your family, even though you've been taught that family is everything.

And so on ...

Aren't these examples more closely related to stubbornness. At least, to me stubbornness is a more accurate term.

The {snip}

...Pride insists that something is good for other people, but not for you, when it is good for you...

I do see this example as pride/arrogance, therefore I removed it from the quote.

[Plissken]

Pride prevents you from saying 'I'm sorry' when you should. (That's my particular problem.)

Pride keeps you from changing your ways, when changing them would be good.

Pride won't let you admit that you are wrong, when you are wrong. Pride won't let you see that you are wrong, when you are wrong.

Pride insists that something is good for other people, but not for you, when it is good for you.

Pride tells you what is your place, and what is someone else's place, when they are the same place.

Pride lets you become estranged from your family, even though you've been taught that family is everything.

And so on ...

Not saying that you're sorry is denial, not pride.

Not changing your ways is stubborness.

Not admitting (or seeing) that you're wrong is denial again.

I don't really understand the place thing.

A great number of things could estrange you from your family, depending on the circumstances - common sense and life experience could work in tandem (with complete humility) to effect the same change in many people's lives.

Look, I understand what you're trying to say. But most of the situations that you cite are examples of either an excess of pride, or something else entirely.

An excess of humility could lead to many equally "sinful" and problematic situations:

A person could be too humble to effect a nessecary change in a friends life. (While believing that they aren't worthy to judge what their friend is going through, etc.)

I myself am too humble too make a claim as to whether or not there is a God, what She is doing, what It wants, or what His name is - and the more I study, the more humble I am on the subject.

As with anything else, these examples don't mean that humilty is a bad thing - only that an excess of humility is a problem.

[Avatar]

Damn, I think that there are good points on both sides here.

Of course, one way to avoid an excess of pride is to try and avoid it completely, and it is, in any case, a very fine line.

I certainly don't think that pride is important enough to prevent you from doing things that you should, but I guess it's another fine line.

Wayfriends mention of vanity made me think of something else. A friend and I were once debating a similar issue, and she said something that I'll never forget. It may be only tenously related to this question, but it was an important distinction I think. She said, "Confidence leaves room for improvement, Vanity doesn't."

--Avatar

[[Syl]]

But let me pose this: show me a situation where having pride, taking pride, or being prideful has given you any benefit over not having it. Or when having humilty instead of pride has been a disadvantage. (Which doesn't prove it is a Deadly Sin, I know. But one step at a time.)

Easy. I've always prided myself on being intelligent (I don't think it's the end-all-be-all, nor do I think I'm the most intelligent person ever, but...), especially when it comes to language. So here I am, a young student at a certain institute. My pride in my ability led me to score very high on the final test. That score netted me an extra $100 a month.

Now, you might chalk that up to ability alone, but you'd be mistaken. I'm a slacker by nature. I usually do just enough that I'm doing just enough more than just enough . But the things I care about, the things I take pride in... that's a different story.

[Plissken]

Yay! Someone gets it!

[wayfriend]

Aren't these examples more closely related to stubbornness. At least, to me stubbornness is a more accurate term.

Not saying that you're sorry is denial, not pride. [etc]

Yes, these things are stubbornness and denial. That is a description of the behavior, but not the cause of the behavior. Sometimes (and I only say sometimes) the cause of this behavior is Pride. [I was asked for examples; you over-generalized them.]

Now, you might chalk that up to ability alone, but you'd be mistaken. I'm a slacker by nature. I usually do just enough that I'm doing just enough more than just enough . But the things I care about, the things I take pride in... that's a different story.

This is another interesting example of the sin of pride. Do you think you ('you' in the general sense: ie anyone) would be a better person if you did not need Pride as a lure, if you could learn to motivate yourself for other, better reasons? As I said, Pride can be habituated, and like a drug, it can outshine and occlude other worthy things, leaving you unable to yearn for them. Pride is a motivation, there's no disagreement. But is it a good one? [edit to add] If you were a slacker who could be motivated by coccaine, does that make coccaine a good thing?[/edit]

Yay! Someone gets it!

I think it's been clear from the beginning that this side of the argument is 'gotten' by the majority, if not everyone; but I hope someone gets the other side (even if they don't agree).

[[Syl]]

No, I don't think I'd be a better person. Not as a whole. A different person, sure, but not better. And by phrasing it in those terms, are you saying you're a better person than others for being motivated the way you are? Isn't that in itself a form of pride?

Well, you'd have to read the legalization thread in the Close for my stance on cocaine, but sure, why not. Like pride, I think drugs are only a liability when taken to excess. You could easily substitute cocaine with money, sex, donuts, and so forth. Now, if you only do something because you're addicted to cocaine, well, you're a junkie. Only for money and you're greedy (or a Republican *rimshot*). Sex, and you're a whore. Donuts, and you're Homer Simpson. *shrug*

Don't get me wrong, Wayfriend. I get what you're saying. I think your view is admirable. But it's an ideal. And just because something doesn't live up to an ideal, it doesn't mean it's wrong.

[Zarathustra]

When I first read that, my blood started boiling. My wife is an accountant, who also happens to be one of the most intelligent people I have ever met. I took strong offense at that comment.

Yeah, I recognized this particular danger when I was trying to come up with an example--a career choice--to illustrate my point in a funny way. I should have added the smiley to soften the blow. With today's political correctness, the number of groups you can safely make fun of is dramatically shrinking. To me, that's a sad thing. I mean, if you can't make fun of accountants, who can you make fun of? I wanted to use lawyers, because everyone hates lawyes , but lawyers are pretty smart.

I'm sure there are many smart accountants. They're relatively good at applied mathematics, for instance. That is the danger of generalizing, you'll often offend the exceptions. Sorry about that.