@kennethamy,
kennethamy;119353 wrote:Hmmm. You are beginning to move me, I admit. Is it illegitimate, then, to be proud of my son unless I believe I had something to do with his accomplishments? What, exactly is your view on this?
Yes, I believe it is mistaken to be
proud of your son unless you believe you had something to do with his accomplishments or what he is (i.e., his character). You may, of course, respect and admire him regardless of whether you had anything to do with his accomplishments or character. Presumably, if you raised your son, you had something to do with his character, so it is likely that feeling pride in your son, if he is good, is not misplaced; though, of course, it could be that the son turned out well
in spite of (rather than because of) what the father has done, in which case, the father ought not feel proud.
In practice, many people take credit for things for which they are not responsible, but to which they are very loosely connected, as in the example I have already given, the local athletic team. The team, being in some sense representative of the city (or area) where the person lives, often results in the person feeling proud when the team succeeds. And the fact that such people are giving themselves credit for things they have not done is well shown by them commonly saying, when the local team won, "we won."
Frankly, I think the "extension" of pride beyond its proper bounds in such cases is due to primitive ideas of what one is. If, for example, we look at the Bible, we find that punishments sometimes go onto the children of those who commit the crime, as if they were all somehow responsible, or tainted, by the original crime. For example (1 Samuel 3):
Quote:11 And the LORD said to Samuel, Behold, I will do a thing in Israel, at which both the ears of every one that heareth it shall tingle.
12 In that day I will perform against Eli all things which I have spoken concerning his house: when I begin, I will also make an end.
13 For I have told him that I will judge his house for ever for the iniquity which he knoweth; because his sons made themselves vile, and he restrained them not.
In this, God says he punishes the future generations for what Eli and his sons have done. It is as if the grandchildren (and great grandchildren, etc.) are regarded as merely extensions of Eli, instead of viewing them as individuals who may or may not turn out fine. In other words, it is a failure to distinguish between what one person does and what those associated with the person does.
Many people think in such ways, and so they end up feeling proud of the home team, even when they have absolutely nothing to do with the accomplishments of the local team. Or, to be more accurate, many people fail to think, and so they end up with primitive and ill-formed conceptions of what makes themselves good or bad.
Edited to add:
As a side point, there are interesting differences in Biblical stories for how far the blame should extend to future generations for what someone has done, as in Exodus 34:
Quote: 6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,
7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.
In this case, the "taint" only lasts for four generations, and does not extend forever for all future generations. This same amount of time appears in Exodus 20:5, Deuteronomy 5:9, and Numbers 14:18.
In Deuteronomy 23:2, the blame extends to ten generations:
Quote:A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
Fortunately, the laws of modern societies do not work in such a manner.