barryg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Lee Gold) (05/25/85)
If one should only take pride in what one oneself is, then it's a knotty philosophic problem as to whether one is morally entitled to pride in the achievements of one's past. (Certainly it's easy enough to say that one has outgrown the stupidities of one's youth and shouldn't be ashamed of them any more. By the same token, if one's gotten lazy, is one entitled to pridefully boast about the accomplishments of one's long lost youth?) In practice, one takes pride in ANYTHING one identifies with. And for most of us that takes in a lot of territory. Our youth, our family, our friends, our co-workers, our co-religionists, our compatriots, our fellow women (or men), our fellow humans--and once we contact the dolphins or Martians or whatever--our fellow sentients. First convince a sports fan not to be proud of the home team. Then come back and tell the net alll you've learned about pride. --Lee Gold
dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi) (05/30/85)
In article <2024@sdcrdcf.UUCP> barryg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Lee Gold) writes: >If one should only take pride in what one oneself is, then it's a knotty >philosophic problem as to whether one is morally entitled to pride in the >achievements of one's past. (Certainly it's easy enough to say that one >has outgrown the stupidities of one's youth and shouldn't be ashamed of >them any more. By the same token, if one's gotten lazy, is one entitled >to pridefully boast about the accomplishments of one's long lost youth?) I never said you should take pride in what you *are*, only in what you have done. Allowing pride in what you *are* leaves the door open for some unpleasant things, such as some people going around being proud to be white. Disallowing it, though, has the effect of disallowing another group of people from going around being proud to be black. You can allow it for blacks and disallow it for whites, but I care too much for consistency to do that. (The word pride has more than one meaning, and I've tried, once or twice, to define which meaning I intend by it... one more try... the meaning I intend is the pride you feel when you have done something that you think is great. When you feel pride in the deed of some other person of the same race/sex/handedness, is it the same feeling you would feel if it were your own accomplishment? If yes, this is the attitude that I have been trying to say doesn't make sense, at least not to me. If no, never mind.) About your question... I think it makes sense to treat pride and shame in a similar manner, ie. If your pride in past deeds outlasts your shame in past misdeeds, you're resting on your laurels. If your shame outlasts your pride, you're punishing yourself needlessly. I'm not about to claim that I've managed to live up to this ideal... >In practice, one takes pride in ANYTHING one identifies with. And for >most of us that takes in a lot of territory. Our youth, our family, >our friends, our co-workers, our co-religionists, our compatriots, our >fellow women (or men), our fellow humans--and once we contact the dolphins >or Martians or whatever--our fellow sentients. > >First convince a sports fan not to be proud of the home team. Then come >back and tell the net alll you've learned about pride. Y'know, I've occasionally caught myself feeling proud because the Milky Way galaxy, *my* galaxy, is larger than most... doesn't make sense, but there it is. -- David Canzi "All in all you're just another prick in the stall." -- men's room graffiti
ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) (06/11/85)
> {David Canzi} >> *Women have no business being proud when other women overcome the >> historical male prejudice in our society. > >Once again, briefly. I have been suggesting that it doesn't make sense >for men/women/blacks to go around being proud/ashamed of the deeds/misdeeds >of other members of their sex/race. A special case of this is that it >makes no sense for women to be proud, etc... By quoting this special >case out of the context of the generality, you can create a false >impression of what was being said. Your general statement is nearly as asinine the special case, though I tend to agree with you about shame, which ideally has no place in my life. The establishment of a general feeling of `group pride' was critical in the growth of the Black, Gay, and Women's movements, not just as a means of establishing solidarity and a group spirit, but also as a partial cure for the `low self-esteem' typically experienced by individuals in those groups. Now you tell net.women readers that it is wrong to feel proud when another person breaks the chains of the past? Why? Would you prefer that the women's movement fade away? Thanks a lot for your helpful wisdom. Regardless of what you say, there have even been a few men who make me proud -- even if most of them are DEAD. Like John Lennon, for instance, who set a magnificent image. How many famous men do YOU know who have stayed at home and played the nurturing role? It does not strike me as at all odd that he was assassinated. Anyway, if you do not understand, too bad. This newsgroup already receives so many comments that seem to be directed against the few feminist articles to appear, I suppose your remarks are but another straw. -michael
dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi) (06/17/85)
In article <317@spar.UUCP> ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) writes: >>Once again, briefly. I have been suggesting that it doesn't make sense >>for men/women/blacks to go around being proud/ashamed of the deeds/misdeeds >>of other members of their sex/race. ... > > Your general statement is nearly as asinine the special case, > though I tend to agree with you about shame, which ideally has > no place in my life. When you feel that some deed of yours is good, you typically feel pride. When you feel that some deed of yours is bad, you typically feel shame. In these cases, pride and shame are a result of your judgement of your actions. Pride and shame are mirror images of each other. If you feel pride when somebody else who resembles you (eg. of the same race or sex) does something good, on what grounds can you exclude being ashamed if that person does something bad? > The establishment of a general feeling of `group pride' was critical in > the growth of the Black, Gay, and Women's movements, not just as > a means of establishing solidarity and a group spirit, but also > as a partial cure for the `low self-esteem' typically experienced > by individuals in those groups. Which meaning of the word pride do you intend here? Pride (self respect) or pride (feeling of accomplishment)? I've been talking about one, and you're talking about the other. The 'group pride' you're talking about is, or should be, nothing more than individual self-respect. It's self-respect that makes it possible for an individual to recognize that a situation is unfair to him/her. (People with too little self-respect tend to think that they deserve it when they get a raw deal.) So, liberation movements such as those you mentioned, have to encourage self-respect in their members before they can do anything else. > Now you tell net.women readers that it is wrong to feel proud when > another person breaks the chains of the past? Why? Consider yer basic white racist. He feels proud of the accomplishments of other whites, ie. his opinion of himself is improved by contemplating them. If the accomplishments of other whites reflects on the wonderfulness of this white, by the same reasoning it reflects on every white. By this line of reasoning, the entire white race can be declared to be great and wonderful on the basis of a few splendid examples. The premise of the argument is that there are great white people (which is true), but the conclusion is false. Therefore, the argument is invalid. Now, consider a woman, whose opinion of herself is somewhat enhanced by the contemplation of the accomplishments of other women. Clearly, if the accomplishments of other women reflect on her own wonderfulness, by the same reasoning they reflect on every woman. By this line of reasoning, the entire female gender can be declared to be great and wonderful on the basis of a few splendid examples. This is exactly the same argument as in the previous paragraph, except for a substitution of terms. It is part of the nature of logic that invalid arguments do not become valid by substituting terms. My opinion is that the fallacy in the argument is in judging oneself on the basis of the accomplishments of other people who are like one in some way. > Would you prefer that the women's movement fade away? Do you think that the women's movement can't hold itself together without relying on bad logic? > Thanks a lot for your helpful wisdom. You're welcome. -- David Canzi ...being a man involves accepting what and who we are without either shame or pride. P.S. Pardon the apparent sexism of the quote above, the man who wrote it is gay. Many gay men worry about the question "Am I a man?" P.P.S. I'm on vacation, and won't be around to take part in the shouting matches for the next three weeks.