OT: Humility as a \'virtue.\' (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Thursday, October 21, 2010, 01:27 (5147 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

That is a common misunderstanding of the words humility and pride, confusing them with submission and arrogance. Wordnetweb.princeton.edu defines humility as "a disposition to be humble; a lack of false pride". This is the trait that I admire. Pride in a job well done is not a bad thing, nor is pride in ones accomplishments, as long as it is not a false or excessive pride, otherwise known as arrogance.
> > 
> > We should take this offline perhaps--but I just don't see it as a virtue. A humble person is "one who demonstrates humility." Humility is this:
> > 
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humility
> > 
> > "The term "humility" comes from the Latin word humilitas, a noun related to the adjective humilis, which may be translated as "humble", but also as "low", "from the earth", or "humid", since it derives in turns from humus (earth)"
> > 
> > It's also termed as "egolessness," but aren't the things that make great men (or women) exactly that trait that values the self?
> 
> Yes, of the earth. I really like that description. Truly great men and women do not take pride in things which they have not accomplished, and they rightfully take pride in the things that they have accomplished. The earth is a source of strength, nourishment, support, inexorable resolve, and stability. I fail to see where any of those things could be considered negative. 
> 
> From your own link:
> 
> >Recent research suggests that humility is a quality of certain types of leaders. For example, Jim Collins and his colleagues found that a certain type of leader, whom they term "level 5", possesses humility and fierce resolve.[11] Humility is being studied as a trait that can enhance leadership effectiveness. The research suggests that humility is multi-dimensional and includes self-understanding and awareness, openness, and perspective taking.-This is certainly true of Julius Caesar. Among his men he regularly ate with them and worked to know many of them personally. Yet many value his actions as self-serving. Good leader? Misanthrope? Which is it?

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"