Mon 3 Nov, 2014 08:40 pm
Having no understanding of these concepts and the effects thereof, as a youngster, and having been reared in a post-christian culture that imbued, indeed, still imbues these traits, I occasionally wonder if, as I now do, whether folk (in general) have the capacity to identify with the true nature of the mindset that becomes them.
1. The opposing factors are self-supportive - One's pride is equal to the measure of one's shame - Thus, One without pride is one without shame - Thus, pride is shame suppressed and vice versa.
2. Of egotistical value alone, the nature of one who is vain/proud is beneficial only in a society that flourishes upon these qualities and detrimental in a society that doesn't.
3. These qualities cannot exist where there is no class-distinction. If you perceive yourself as neither superior nor inferior to others (therefor equal) there is no 'competitive-edge' for those, said, qualities to spring from.
I perceive all people as equal (all 'things' actually, but beside the point) because everyone is (or has the ability to be) outstandingly brilliant at something and outstandingly abysmal at something else.
Life is far less demanding when the ego is expelled.
I'm not sure if shame is opposite to pride. I think that shame and pride might be indirectly opposite.
I understand that humility is what is opposite to pride, and honor is what is opposite to shame.
Pride is ego-inflation.
Shame is ego-deflation.
How are they not opposites?