Sin of the Devil

I am proud to say that pride is one of my favorite sins that I routinely practice (don't get me started on sloth and gluttony!!!).

Since the birth of my daughter, I have often stated that pride is my favorite thing about fatherhood. How very ironic that love, often described as one of the cardinal virtues, manifests itself so overtly as pride, the first of the seven deadlies. But there's nothing for it; when my three-year-old explains the difference between stop and go, counts higher than she ever has before, sings a song perfectly (like Cole Porter's "My Heart Belongs to Daddy"), the emotion that comes swelling first and foremost... is pride.

And I won't be ashamed of that!

Moreover, I feel very strongly that a proper sense of pride (the kind Rand had in mind) is crucial to morality. I refrain from theft, rape, and murder, etc. not because of my fear of getting caught but because my sense of pride would be irreversibly damaged by the thought that I had become such a man. I work hard, care for my family, and help the occasional old lady across the street, not because society dictates such needs but because of my own sense of pride. We are nicer and kinder to each other because of our own desire to keep our heads held high.

By the way, Mr. Peterman, it so happens that Howard Roark IS Frank Lloyd Wright. Rand made no secret of the fact that Wright served as a direct inspiration for her creation of the Roark character.

So DreadPirateRoberts, are you saying that self-respect is a sort of pride?

Why not? Whatever we choose to call it, it exists and serves its purpose in keeping us responsible citizens, family members and friends I suppose...

I'm not sure there's really anything wrong with having some pride in yourself. Arrogance is another matter. That's just my humble, and proudly accurate, opinion.

But that pride that keeps us doing the right thing - how are we to say it's pride? It could be self-respect, which certainly isn't bad; or it could simply be our idea of honour, and that's always been something entirely benign. Pride is such a convoluted idea that I'm surprised it could have been voted one of the seven deadly sins way back when without some delving into the actual idea. Did they think we could figure it out for ourselves? Did they take pride at face value and say, "This is bad"? Pride comes with so many implications, I don't think we can simply take pride for what it is and be so black-and-white about it. On the one hand, pride leads to downfalls: being overly confident in oneself, for example; but it can also lead us to achieve great things: the pride that we have in a certain ability of ours can lead us to hone this ability and... well, I don't know, get rich or something. But that leads to the bad sort of pride. So I guess we just have to divide it into 'good' and 'bad' pride. Pride is too comprehensive.

Yes, exactly. Self-respect is a kind of pride. Indeed, it is the most important kind of pride. From it, all other great personal qualities spring. We have marathon runners and triathletes in this little online community. Think of the pride they must feel when they finish an event. Think of the immense improvements of body and spirit they have accomplished, all motivated by the desire to feel that particular pride.

Though I am not a religious man, I have always loved the Biblical concept "You must love your neighbor as you love yourself". This is also echoed in the Koran, "You must wish for your brother the same fortune you wish for yourself". Both of these imply that you must love yourself and wish yourself great fortune first. The same goes for pride. We cannot be proud of each other until we are first proud of ourselves. We cannot respect each other until we first respect ourselves.

Arrogance is, of course, another matter. That is a closer sibling to the "false pride" to which our host refers in the opening article. I sometimes find myself guilty of arrogance, of forgetting that there are others who know more than I, my own capacity for error, my occasional sense of unearned superiority. Whenever I catch myself being arrogant... it is a severe blow to my pride.

To have pride in your own personal accomplishments, your family, your friends, your business, is not a sin.

Arrogance is a sin. When you're arrogant you trample on others rights, you don't respect their dignity, you belittle other's achievements. Arrogance and it's cousin "bragging" are short sighted. The "greatest" get beat soon or later. Ceasar died at the hands of assasins, Napoleon "met his Waterloo", Hitler (the arrogant leader of the Master Race) ended his life with a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head and having his remains burned in a shallow ditch. Bin Laden, another arrogant clown, now lives in a cave.

Of course, sometimes you have to announce your accomplishments. Achilles would blow his own horn to announce himself at a banquet because he could trust no one to do it right. At least he didn't need a cadre of publicists to spin things for him. (Brad Pitt did a good job "spinning" for Achilles in "Troy") After 3,000 years we still remember Achilles.

And don't forget, during the Renaissance, an esay called "An Oration on the Dignity of Man". This advocated pride, placed "man" in the realm of angels, and basically argued that if Man was God's glory then glorious we should be.

Ayn Rand had it right. Howard Roark was right. He created the building, what gave others the right to change it? Piccasso didn't have a committee to approve his paintings and make "neccessary" changes. Michaelangelo did not allow the Pope to make changes to the Sistine Chapel.

As one of those triathletes and marathoners on this site I'll say this: I am proud of my accomplishments. But I also know that I'm not an elite, never will be. Others are faster, in better condition than me. I respect and cheer the elites as they pass me. (an "elite" is anyone faster than me). I also respect and cheer on those I leave behind. Do they envy me? Maybe. But they shouldn't.

I have a frfiend who has finished several Ironmans and dozens of marathons (under three hours). I envy his ability. But he once said he envied me because he could not imagine running those extra 2 or 3 hours it takes me to finish.

Pride? Yes. But it's all relative to something else. So humility is neccessary.

I hear that spouting any of Ayn Rand's opinions is likely to be considered a
new deadly sin.

To: Dutchman,

As to Ayn Rand: I am a sinner. And proud of it!

Though there is an "i" in pride, there is no - as the adage goes - "i" in team. In the sports world the word pride is often bandied about, but almost always relates to the team and not the individual. You hear about "Celtic Pride" (This Thursday @ 9:00 on ABC), or "The Pride of the Yankees" (there is no "i" in Gary Cooper), or the "proud tradition of the New York Giants". In each case, the individual takes pride in being a part of the whole, and that whole's success. Whether they are the star center fielder or the last guy on the bench, the culture of pride exists and is enjoyed by all involved. In many ways team or organizational pride is really the great equalizer.

I am also struck by a "pride" of Lions.........................

It is inhuman to not feel pride in ones children or accomplishments, we should feel our hearts swell at those things. But when such pride translates into the kind of arrogance that makes one think the sound of ones own voice is the most worthy sound around is when pride goes sour. Sinful even.

How does one know what is a sin and what isn't? Please tell me the benchmark.

I believe it is true that pride is a preoccupation with self, I would like to observe that most of the happiest days I can remember were days that were so full with other things and other people that I had no time to consider myself. But on the subject of pride and self, I think Desiderata said it best ...."do not compare yourself to others lest you become vain or bitter." If you have have joy in your accomplishments without comparing yourself to others then you can avoid pride, and just be happy.

Pride; once you wander past its usage to describe a group of lions, it becomes a slippery slope, where there is no consensus as to whether it is a good or bad thing when it is used to describe an emotion. But fear not! This is just another excellent example of why the words “it” and “depends”, when combined, form one of the most logical and useful phrases, dare I say, in the universe . . . well our universe anyway.

It depends on:

Pride is a good thing in the context of measuring current or recent effort. Individuals should always be able to feel some level of pride for using their best efforts and skills to accomplish something. This type of pride could also be in the context of a group e.g., we (in this example, we is, coincidentally, a pride of proud lions), did the best we could to have antelope for dinner, we can be proud of that. OK, what’s for desert?

Pride is a good thing to feel when you are reflecting on something you have recently accomplished.

Pride is a bad thing when you are boasting about what you have accomplished, especially if its in the distant past.

Pride of ownership is good when it is a reflection or observation of someone who takes good care of their possessions. Mowing your lawn, painting your house, preventive maintenance on your car, and flossing are examples of this.

Pride of ownership is bad when it is just another way of boasting and elevating your self-image in comparison to someone else. I think you should be able to feel proud of what you accomplished that enables you to buy whatever you want, but perhaps not to buy it in order to feel proud.

I think healthy pride, or good pride exists in the desire and actions taken to do the best or be the best you can possible be; and then you let those actions and accomplishments speak for themselves.

False pride, or bad pride is usually on the on the backs of someone else’s efforts and skills. It’s used to favorably measure yourself, your worth, strictly by comparison to someone else.

I think it boils down to the adage that actions speak louder than words. It takes a good bit of self-confidence to be comfortable with that, but it sure feels good to not having to reach so far to pat yourself on the back all of the time.

Isn't pride, like most other sins, relative? One man's pride is another man's arrogance. One man's recovery day is another man's slot. It's all hazy to me. When my behavior hurts me or others, that's when I try to take notice, learn, and change accordingly.

And so far, I'm pretty proud of that.

To: Agent666,
I hope this is not a sin to ask, are you the one Blogging about the hottest startups in Texas!?!

To Expat, we all have our weaknesses. My lack of tolerance is probably a bit of sin.
But I subscribe to what Mae West. Everything I like is either illegal, immoral or
fattening. Speaking of pride turning into arrogance, we have two shining examples:
Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds. And then we have the current administration.
Arrogance turning into more arrogance.

A lot of the difficulty I see in the discussion here is that of translation. Pride wasn't the original term, and I would assume the word translated is somewhat different in English. And perhaps it also has to do with a question of moderation. Feeling satisfied with yourself and your accomplishments is fine, but in my opinion it doesn't become pride until your compare yourself to others and find yourself superior. Like many other words, pride has become diluted in meaning over the years, rather like love. I did a series of photographs on the seven deadly sins a while back which might be of interest ...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/toddland/sets/72157602224938384/

To Dtuchman:

I hate to break it to ya, but the quote you attribute to Mae West is actually from Alexander Woollcott. Like Frank Lloyd Wright = Howard Roark, Woollcott also inspired some popular literary and dramatic characters including Addison De Witt in "All About Eve", Sheridan Whiteside in "The Man Who Came to Dinner", and Waldo Lydecker in "Laura". He was known for addressing his dearest friends, "Hello, repulsive." But was loved regardless.

Woollcott never had children of his own but stood godfather to many of his friends' progeny. When discussing this, he described himself as "Alway a godfather, never a god."

In Milton's "Paradise Lost" Lucifer who later becomes Satan is cast out of Paradise because he's basically narcisstic. He suffers fom vanity and self-love. he believes he and the other angels are self-created. God does not take action until Lucifer attempts to overthrow God. God casts him out from Paradise.

Lucifer gets to rule his own Paradise: Hell.

I think true Pride is not vanity or narcissism. False pride, based on arrogance is vanity and narcissism. Narcissus fell in love with his own image, Zuez turned him into a flower. Maybe that shows the fleeting aspect of vanity and narcissism. It will last for a while, then be gone with yesterday's autumn leaves.

Perhaps the warning of Milton is we should be careful about making ourselves into the gods of our own world. We might get our wish. Lucifer did.

To Dread

I stand corrected. Nice catch. But Mae West did say, "He who hesitates is a damned fool."

"Between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before. "
Mae West

"Sin" is little more than a thinly veiled argumentum ad baculum wielded over the weak by a militant church during the long period of history in which the church's condemnation would lead to your execution by the state.

And "Hell" itself, hardly invented by a church that can claim no original doctrine of its own, is the mere demonization of the church's worst enemy's after life - specifically the Norse, and their Hel. Funny how the actual word "Hell" doesn't appear in Christian writings until the 14th century - not until after the church had fully suppressed the Germanic tribes in the "Northern Crusades". It's remarkable, in all of the erudite writings concerning "Hell" and its meanings, that no one takes the time to track the simple etymology of the word "Hel". It's plain to find, and I commend the search to all of you (the unabridged and annotated Oxford English Dictionary is a good start).

And this brings us back to the issue of "sin". Everyone understands that "sin" is a tool used by a church administration to single out its trouble makers and force them to toe the company line. But what few people know is, prior to the church's usurpation of the individual's innate ethical compass, that a much more subtle and complex moral standard existed that placed the ultimate responsibility for moral behavior squarely on the individual shoulders of the one making tough choices. Today, we might call such an individualistic moral concept "weird", and that's exactly what it was: Wyrd.

In a world of Wyrd, there is no "sin", and there is nobody to wield the clumsy brickbat of "sin" against those who unapologetically make their own way. There is rather the complex web of inter-relations among people who choose thoughtfully from the infinite array of ethical nuances that, we all know, every day presents us. And at the end of it all, we are (optimally) left with our honor intact and our pride of self fully justified. Better to ponder the deeper meanings of honor with pride, and the ethics of Wyrd, then try to plumb the inscrutable depths of an oriental cult.

Who said, "It's not boasting if you can do it"? Pride in personal achievement is certainly no sin.

Statements like "Proud to be an American" are the ones that mystify me. Something that is an accident of birth is hardly something to which we can ascribe pride. You might as well say, "Proud to be 5'11" and blue-eyed."