I think you understand the concept that I was trying to convey, and are trying to say that ‘humble’ and ‘humility’ are the wrong labels for that concept. Right? I basically agree with the OED’s definition of humility: “The quality of being humble or having a lowly opinion of oneself; meekness, lowliness, humbleness: the opposite of pride or haughtiness.” Note the use of the word opposite, not absence.
Besides, shouldn´t a person who believe himself unworthy tend to accept ideas that contradict his own original beliefs more easy? E.g. Oh, Dr. Kopernikues claims that the earth ISN`T flat? Well, who am I to come and believe otherwise?
That’s exactly the problem, at best one ends up following whoever is loudest, at worst one ends up saying “everybody is right” and “but we can’t really know” and not even pretending to try to figure out the truth.
The Oxford Dictionary defines humility as to be humble OR having a lowly opinion of oneself. Well, if one is meeky, that could be a problem. I agree. My theory is that if you are modest, you have superior advantage in critical thinking compared to an arrogant person :)
Let us say that an arrogant scientist and a modest scientist is doing research. A modest person will be more open to hypotheses that seems unlikely. If evidence later is updated, I think that a humble scientist will have an easier time cooping with it and maintain his critical thinking while an arrogant person will be more likely to try to find evidence supporting his own claims.
Ok, then, humble from the OED: “Having a low estimate of one’s importance, worthiness, or merits; marked by the absence of self-assertion or self-exaltation; lowly: the opposite of proud.”
I think you understand the concept that I was trying to convey, and are trying to say that ‘humble’ and ‘humility’ are the wrong labels for that concept. Right? I basically agree with the OED’s definition of humility: “The quality of being humble or having a lowly opinion of oneself; meekness, lowliness, humbleness: the opposite of pride or haughtiness.” Note the use of the word opposite, not absence.
That’s exactly the problem, at best one ends up following whoever is loudest, at worst one ends up saying “everybody is right” and “but we can’t really know” and not even pretending to try to figure out the truth.
The Oxford Dictionary defines humility as to be humble OR having a lowly opinion of oneself. Well, if one is meeky, that could be a problem. I agree. My theory is that if you are modest, you have superior advantage in critical thinking compared to an arrogant person :)
Let us say that an arrogant scientist and a modest scientist is doing research. A modest person will be more open to hypotheses that seems unlikely. If evidence later is updated, I think that a humble scientist will have an easier time cooping with it and maintain his critical thinking while an arrogant person will be more likely to try to find evidence supporting his own claims.
Ok, then, humble from the OED: “Having a low estimate of one’s importance, worthiness, or merits; marked by the absence of self-assertion or self-exaltation; lowly: the opposite of proud.”
Clicking out.