"Pride comes before the fall." I don't know who said this but I frequently remind myself of this quote when I see pride in others and in myself. I also think then about an episode in Homer's Odyssey where Odysseus outwits the cyclops and on his escape with his crew, he loudly touts and belittles the blinded cyclops. He and his crew almost died because while Odysseus was touting loudly, the cyclops used his ears to approximate his location and threw a tree at the ship which almost sank it. I remember discussing hubris in class. Some pun intended here-- hubris is an Achille's heel for many: individuals, companies, and countries.
Look where 8 years of George W.'s "Cowboy Diplomacy" (i.e. if you are not with us then you are against us!" has gotten us. Loss of respect around the world, corporate welfare, Iraq fiasco, decaying infrastructure, etc. etc. I was FOR going into Iraq. I believed in the neocon idea of "behavior modification." In the case of the Middle East, go and kill the enemy before the enemy stands up to kill you. I know that some would think that this is too simple. But I believe in pragmatism. I used to love watching Rumsfeld and his entertaining bravado. It was a great show and it showed the might of our power. I didn't think then hubris. But as months went on and we were dragged into a quagmire. I relialized that Rumsfeld and the Cheney administration was in a state of hubris and denial. They listened to no one. It was a crusade with no eyes and ears. Bucaneering in the dark at best.
Hubris has been the downfall of many companies as well. Think Enron, think Bear Stearns, etc. They all believed that they were invincible and right.
I have also worked for people who were full of hubris. I haven't seen them fall but I'm certain that the model and the outcome is most likely to be the same.
Just as there is false charm and fool's gold, hubris is false confidence. It's delusional, vane confidence. It's confidence on steroids. Steroids kill.
Our confidence must be tempered with some genuine humility.
My dad once told me, "the trees that don't survive in a storm are those that do not bend." It's true. If one can not bend alittle, one breaks eventually.
This applies to all: individuals, companies, and countries.
Stop shouting. Stop exerting. Be tranquil. Close your eyes and listen. Listen and reason. Behave.
I was thinking about this because we think that we are the greatest country in the world. But we are not. We are the only industrialized nation without universal health care, our infrastructure (roads, telecom) is crumbling, our technology is not the most modern, our diplomacy is laughable, the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. We are becoming a second world power, devolving. The Canadian $ is now in parity with the U.S. $. I never thought that I would be around to see it happen. Remember, tortois and the hare?
Pride doest come before the fall.
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
"Pride cometh before a fall, and a haughty spirit before destruction."
It's from the Bible; Proverbs. 16 - 18.
No charge. (Verbum sap sat.)
This seems like a somewhat watered down concept of hubris. More than just pride or arrogance, hubris in the deepest sense suggests some truly shocking sort of moral blindness, like the unnecessary humiliation of a fallen adversary, or the desecration of a body. It is an evocative and reverberant word, and loses power if it is used too casually. e.g. -- "The hubris of Food Emporium, to charge more than Zabar's for asiago."
Interesting. I agree with you Pierce. But then my Oddyseus analogy is correct. Unnecessary humiliation of blinding a Cyclops. As for Bush, I think it's hurbris as well. Blind arrogance.
I agree that in the magnitude and the intensity of things hubris is the most intense. Just as there is annoyance, anger, then wrath (albeit, wrath would apply to a hero, demigod, or a god.)
Thanks for the quote from the Bible. So, the spectrum is: confidence, haughtiness, arrogance, than hubris.
Is there anything else in this spectrum? I love identifying nuances. Just as the eskimos supposedly have several different descriptions/words for 'white'.
Precision vocabulary. Very important.
Bush is not sufficiently distinguished to begin with to be afflicted with hubris, which is seen as a hamarteia, or much more simply "tragic flaw." Hubris takes a different form in each who suffers from it, like Oedipus, Creon, Othello or Hamlet. The reason hubris is noticeable in them is that they are men of stature with potential for true greatness. Bush has little or no stature, and therefore, nowhere to fall "from". I always found it laughable that some people found Nixon a tragic figure. He was pathetic, of course, but lacked utterly the true stature to be considered tragic.
Interesting. So, would assasination of JFK, Martin Luther King Jr... kingly men would then be tragic? I think yes. How about early demise of people like Elvis, Jim Morrison, Kurt Cobain, etc.?
How about the firemen who died in 9/11 trying to rescue people? Can death of some common people or other ill fate struck upon 'common' people be considered tragic? Curious.
Btw, I haven't read Creon. I'll wikipedia that. I have the complete plays of Aeschylus, Euripides, and Sophocles on my bookshelf that I've been meaning to get to. I love the Greek tragedies. Such gravity.
I guess one might say that there are both classical and modern understandings of concepts like "tragedy" and "hubris". Perhaps the categories apply to non-fiction only by extension, since "tragedy" is technically a highly artificial fictional form, isn't it?
From the classical point of view, was JFK a "tragic" figure. Can his case be shoe-horned into Aristotelian categories? Usually in a classic tragedy, there is a subtle and deeply ironic connection between the sources of the protagonist's stature and the protagonist's "hamarteia" or "flaw". Othello, was a very task-oriented general -- he didn't stop until the task (the military campaign) was completed. In the same way, once Iago got the ball rolling, and particularly after the handkerchief business, there was no way to stop the ball rolling down the hill. Once he set his mind on something . . .
And the results could be good or bad.
Was JFK in any way responsible for his fall? Did anyone warn him about the dangers of open cars, a danger so taken-for-granted now? Did he say "Fuck it. I want to see and be seen?" Usually, a tragedy unfolds slowly, and the seeds of the climax and denouement are sown in the earliest scenes. Oedipus had to KNOW what was the cause of the "miasma" in Thebes. That is clear from his first speech. (Since his own action toward his father and mother are the cause of the miasma, he is both the initiator and the goal of his own search. The ultimate and most perfect classical tragedy. But all of that is carefully worked out by Sophocles in a basically fictional construct.)
In the trade center on September 11, it is likely that there were many truly heroic deeds. It is also quite likely that there were cowardly deeds, and also people simply paralyzed by terror.
It is likely that acts by firemen may well have fallen into all three categories. Since so many people died, there are not too many witnesses. And the heroic deeds, as we know, were by no means limited to fireman. Many civilians are known to have given their lives while trying to help others, in many cases when they could have quite legitimately hit the stairs and gotten away.
The firemen were doing the job that they chose to do, competed to do, and were paid to do. The job that they have chosen is one which entails many risks.
Over two hundred of those who died could probably have gotten out if they had heard and responded to the direct order order to leave the building, which they seem not to have heard because of the faulty Giuliani radios, that everybody knew would not work in a complicated high-rise situation.
I would not consider their collective deaths to be tragic, since they were doing what they chose to do, were aware of the inherent dangers in the job, and were paid to do it. I suspect that there might have been many individual incidents of beyond-the-call-of-duty self-sacrifice, but not enough is known about what went on in the building. The entire incident was horrific and ghastly, and the cause of incalculable grief for the families and friends of those who died. But to call their deaths tragic seems to me to be at best a bit inaccurate.
I think that most people will disagree with you regarding the firemen. But I agree with you. I personally don't consider people who chose to go into a profession and doing their jobs knowing the risks and meet with misfortune, tragic. Just very unfortunate and sad.
I guess then the same goes for the Holocaust and Pearl Harbor?
So, some words have very strict qualifiers eventhough in modern usage they have become synonyms outside of the classical definition. Similar to liberal vs. orthodox interpretations.
Thanks for the comment. Very edifying. I know that you've been teaching this stuff for years and it's certainly evident.
Post a Comment