Taylor mentions early in the chapter that there are three types of pride; vanity, conceit and arrogance. She states that arrogance is the deadliest of the three; but I feel that all three are equally detrimental to one’s self. Taylor’s main argument thus far seems to be that every person wants what he/she sees as a worthwhile life, and in order to accomplish this one needs a self. In each of the three types of pride, the self is being deceived. For If one lacks a self (free from deceptions) than they also lack the ability to see what a worthwhile life truly is.
Taylor’s main arguments for vanity appear to be the vain person’s absorbing concern with her appearance; she will spend much time on her appearance in order to hide from others and at the same time shield herself from reality (71). The vain appear to lack a self free from deception.
Taylor’s main argument for the conceited seems to lie in the fact that the conceited use others to measure their own superiority; the conceited point out the flaws and inferiorities of other people, in order to boost their own confidence and superiority. This also seems to relate closely to self deception; by pointing out the flaws in others the conceited are pointing out their own superiorities, and thus cannot have a true perception of their own self.
The arrogantly proud also seem self deceptive, for they “think of themselves as operating with a value-system which is superior to that of others” (78). By thinking themselves to be superior they lack the ability to see their true self.
It seems to me that Taylor doesn’t do a clear enough job distinguishing arrogance from the other forms of pride; the harm in all three seems to lie in self-deception. And if it in fact does lie in self deception, it seems to me that they would all be equally has deadly to the self.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I’m not sure if you missed it or if you thought it was irrelevant, but the distinction that you’re looking for is made by Taylor, and it’s present in your analysis as well but you didn’t mention it explicitly. The main difference between arrogance and conceit** is that conceit feeds off of how others view you, whereas arrogance is wholly self-reliant. If you exhibit arrogance then you never need to look at another person and see how they act in relation to you – you already know that you are among the best (if not the best) and therefore you don’t need to prey on others’ insecurities.
Your analysis of their similarities is correct: arrogance still relies on self-deception to make one feel assured about oneself. Around page 79 Taylor gets around to articulating a main feature of arrogance’s unique deadliness. As I just mentioned, those who are arrogant do not take into consideration other people’s opinions; therefore, they have no objective knowledge and no concept of the difference between objective and subjective information. They know only their opinions, and that their opinions must be correct because they are the one with that opinion. This makes their self-deception more deadly than someone who is conceited or vain. Someone who is conceited must still look to others to measure herself as better; therefore, she at least has some concept of objective knowledge because she is comparing herself to others.
If you still don’t think there’s too big a distinction, that’s ok because it is possible that Taylor is looking a little too hard into the differences – I personally agree with Taylor in thinking that because the arrogant lack an appreciation for other opinions, even a distorted appreciation, it is worse than the other forms of pride.
** Conceit is mentioned to mean conceit and vanity to reduce wording awkwardness, unless vanity is mentioned separately.
Post a Comment