7 ms·

You shouldn't be driven by pride, no, but you should still feel it. There is nothing wrong about being proud of helping others for example.

dmos62 5y ago
> There is nothing wrong about being proud of helping others for example. I disagree. Pridefulness stays pridefulness irregardless of the context. Whether you puff up because you did something socially rewarding or not doesn't matter. The other side of the coin with pride is shame. A prideful person might feel pride if he helps someone, and that's nice, because he's told himself that not helping is shameful, so he just went from shame to pride. But pride is only good in relation to shame. If he had the choice, he'd choose to be happy about helping through empathy for example, rather than pride. It's best to escape the duality of pride and shame. I'll put it another way. Would you prefer to do something out of shame, fear, lust, pride, courage, caring, love or joy? It's not all the same, is it?
- naveen99 5y ago
  > irregardless Double negative in a single word. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless Interestingly the redundancy of Java is problematic for a similar reason that the redundancy of a double negative can actually reverse the meaning.
- anaerobicover 5y ago
  It seems we need to be distinct in pride as public vs. pride as private. In private, you are being proud of a thing you have done, it gives you good feeling and confidence, and inspiring you to go on to other works. It is positive and to build you up, not to put down another. In public to be prideful, it is at expense of others, you put you above the other, and it is fueled by the external. It is negative energy sucked from outwards.
  - dmos62 5y ago
    There isn't actually a distinction. In both cases it's the super-ego, the internal representation of "public", that's the ruleset for what's good and bad. Pride is about judgment (and self-judgment) by the super-ego. You could argue that if you're alone it's not destructive, but I don't believe that.

dmos62 5y ago

> There is nothing wrong about being proud of helping others for example. I disagree. Pridefulness stays pridefulness irregardless of the context. Whether you puff up because you did something socially rewarding or not doesn't matter. The other side of the coin with pride is shame. A prideful person might feel pride if he helps someone, and that's nice, because he's told himself that not helping is shameful, so he just went from shame to pride. But pride is only good in relation to shame. If he had the choice, he'd choose to be happy about helping through empathy for example, rather than pride. It's best to escape the duality of pride and shame. I'll put it another way. Would you prefer to do something out of shame, fear, lust, pride, courage, caring, love or joy? It's not all the same, is it?

naveen99 5y ago
> irregardless Double negative in a single word. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless Interestingly the redundancy of Java is problematic for a similar reason that the redundancy of a double negative can actually reverse the meaning.
anaerobicover 5y ago
It seems we need to be distinct in pride as public vs. pride as private. In private, you are being proud of a thing you have done, it gives you good feeling and confidence, and inspiring you to go on to other works. It is positive and to build you up, not to put down another. In public to be prideful, it is at expense of others, you put you above the other, and it is fueled by the external. It is negative energy sucked from outwards.
- dmos62 5y ago
  There isn't actually a distinction. In both cases it's the super-ego, the internal representation of "public", that's the ruleset for what's good and bad. Pride is about judgment (and self-judgment) by the super-ego. You could argue that if you're alone it's not destructive, but I don't believe that.