Dear Friends,
This Sunday we are discussing again the subject of arrogance. We
discussed this in September 2012, so maybe it's about time that we had
another go at arrogance.
Indeed, it is quite fortunate that we should be discussing arrogance
again now because last time I concluded my essay with:
-- Maybe the popular saying that power corrupts and absolute power
corrupts absolutely is true and bound together by the strong sense of
arrogance.—
Nearly four and a half years later we are in the mist of global
political uncertainty because of two arrogant world leaders who are
precisely today exercising extreme political power with a full swing of
arrogance. A necessary condition of extreme (political) arrogance is
that one does not care if one might be wrong in one's (political
policies) actions.
I am of course referring to President Trump and Prime Minister Theresa
May; they are both pursuing policies that are based on complete
disregard to the needs and conditions of other people including many who
voted for them. And their arrogance is not only based on the fact that
they are pursuing xenophobic ideologies that Britain and the United
States, with other allies, helped destroy when they defeated the forces
of fascism in Europe and Japan; but more importantly because they are
also intentionally destroying the social and political achievements of
these past 60 or so years.
And like their predecessors in Germany and Italy, these two leaders
today justify their arrogance by hiding behind the political mantra "the
people have spoken" whilst at the same time exploiting centuries old
prejudices.
But what are the implications of this political arrogance? Will the
present President of the United States divide the nation into civil
disobedience between racists and freedom loving people? Will the present
British Prime Minister revive some form of classical European fascism
but maybe with some sort of modern mutation? Or is this arrogance the
pride before the fall of the once two super powers who were the
guardians of freedom and democracy? Will history repeat itself?
I am not convinced that history will repeat itself, but I am also
convinced that the situation today is equally dangerous. The problem is
not only that at face value both the President and the PM seem to have
certain character traits that might, under different circumstances, make
them unsuitable for their office.
The problem today is that the official opposition parties in both
countries are completely ineffective. In the United States the two
Democratic contenders for the White House were more concerned about
discrediting each other than coming up with cogent political arguments
against the now incumbent of the White House. The Democratic party
candidates in the 2016 presidential elections were more like two alley
tomcats in the Reichstag during the Weimar Republic, than a flotilla of
ships about to liberate Europe on D-Day.
In British English we have a term that changed its meaning after WW2:
collaborator. This term changed meaning from cooperation with others to
working or helping the enemy and was used to describe those people who
helped or cooperated with the Nazis in France. For many, many years this
was a very serious pejorative term although some attempts were made to
rehabilitate this word, with some success, mainly because the Americans
did not have the pejorative meaning.
The negative term of collaborator can easily be applied to the leader of
the Opposition in Britain, Jeremy Corbyn, not only because he lead the
Labour Party during the referendum pretending to be against Brexit, but
he intentionally undermined the efforts of the Remain campaign. But more
importantly because he has given the Prime Minister a blank cheque to
pursue her racist and xenophobic policies without even any attempt to
hold the government to account. Trump and May are not only the product
of extremism but also the consequence of the absence of any checks and
balances. In other words unchecked arrogance can only spiral into
extremism of the unsocial kind.
Political arrogance is like an infectious disease, it is as virulent as
much as the antiviral is ineffective.
In the meantime, I have corrected as many typos as I could find from the
2012 essay.
Arrogance (Friday, September 14, 2012)
We all know from instinct that arrogance is bad. We also know from
instinct whether someone is being arrogant or self confident.
Indicators of arrogance, amongst many, are a feeling of superiority over
others, self importance and in many cases condescending attitude towards
others. Pride is also implied in the meaning of arrogance. However, the
emotion of pride comes in two manifestations, 1) a strong sense of
personal status and of course 2) a sense of personal achievement when
conferred by others for meritorious behaviour or acts.
The pride we feel due to merit is usually also shared by those around us
(and vice versa) and of course this pride is rather positive. For
example, the pride we feel when our team wins the cup, pass an exam, and
the achievements of our country for that matter. Positive pride is
respected. Negative pride is not respected by others since we are
claiming status which we might not deserve or an ostentatious exhibition
of feelings. Thus an arrogant person takes pride in their achievement
especially when dominating or belittling people.
Arrogance is, on the other hand, at the extreme end of this group of
negative emotions and their manifestation in public. A necessary
condition for arrogance, which pride does not have, is that arrogance is
always directed towards someone, be it an individual, a group or even a
peoples.
A feeling of superiority over others and condescending behaviour have
not only the effect of trying to establish that one is more important
than other people but that other people are not considered to have any
relevant worth to the arrogant person. Individuals who are rather
sensitive in character are usually emotionally hurt by the attitude and
behaviour of an arrogant person. Others might feel more visceral emotions.
If we accept that arrogance manifests itself when interacting with
others, than we can assume that there is a voluntary act and a belief to
trigger, so to speak, that act. Although arrogance is an act it can also
be a character trait of a person. And as such, maybe it takes its roots
are in the basic aggressive instincts we possess as human beings. Maybe
nice people, who employ a strategy of cooperation to get along, are
equally taking advantage of some rational basic instinct: a monster trap
or a honey trap!
We can also debate whether arrogance is an inherited character trait or
maybe a developed character, which in many cases, have a bearing on
responsibility, I think that this is a side issue since we people are
being arrogant and others are hurt and it does not matter where and how
that emotion originated. We can safely assume that a person, who is not
deranged nor has a mental disease, is acting as a rational agent.
A weak definition of arrogance might be the projection onto others of
one's beliefs and at the same time not only excluding the opinions of
others but that others cannot possibly have any valid opinions to
contribute in the first place. Professional status can easily be a
breeding ground for arrogance to develop in people.
If beliefs (opinions) are a necessary condition for a voluntary action,
then what an arrogant person is implying is that the other person cannot
possibly have any valid beliefs that ought to lead to an action.
Needless to say this simple view of the mechanism of arrogance is very
much determined by the circumstances of the situation. Maybe someone
might be arrogant but also happen to be well informed on a situation
that makes their opinion or beliefs the right sort of opinions to bring
about a positive outcome to a situation. The issue is, maybe, one of
social interaction and social protocol rather than the veracity of a
person's beliefs. Much as we might dislike this idea, even arrogant
people have the right to be correct and to hold true and valid beliefs.
Maybe it is this idea that an arrogant person also has the right to hold
valid and true beliefs, and employ them for action, that makes us feel
revulsion towards giving an arrogant person a fair break. How can we
possibly even listen to an arrogant person, even if they are right? The
suggestion that even they have rights suggests that the weak version of
the meaning of arrogance is not adequate or maybe just that, a weak
version and therefore limited in scope. And to add insult to injury, a
nice and cooperative person might very well be wrong no matter how well
meaning they might be.
This suggests that we might need a stronger version of arrogance and I
therefore propose this: one thinks (believes) not only that one is right
and that others are insignificant and irrelevant but that one also
thinks that one is immune from the effects of even being wrong or doing
wrong.
Hurting one's feeling is bad, but maybe not disastrous, and as I have
suggested being wrong is not the exclusive domain of arrogant people,
arrogant people can also be right. But maybe the issue is not so much
whether one is right or wrong but rather has one considered the
implications and consequences of maybe being wrong?
So from linking arrogance to a character trait, we are extending this
link to rational value judgements. Considering whether one is right or
wrong is not only to consider the consequences of our actions but also
the possibility that we might have to change our course of action. But
feeling immune from the consequences of being wrong or not considering
that one might be wrong introduces an element of good and bad or evil
which a character trait does necessarily imply.
The idea that a person does not consider the consequences of being wrong
or feel personally immune from the consequences of being wrong is
probably the most unacceptable human trait at the extreme.
In an applied philosophical context and maybe more relevant for us these
days is whether power leads to arrogance, specifically the strong
version of arrogance? Precisely the position one takes that we can
exercise our power how we like and if we get it wrong it is of no
consequence to us. I propose that corruption, including nepotism, is
clear examples of strong arrogance.
I am inclined to think that power in and of itself does not necessarily
lead to strong arrogance, but maybe arrogance, especially of the strong
kind, is an infectious trait that we either pick up from those arrogant
people around us, or maybe a dormant trait that only needs the right
conditions to manifest itself. Maybe the popular saying that power
corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely is true and bound
together by the strong sense of arrogance.
http://philomadrid.blogspot.com.es/search/label/Arrogance
Best Lawrence
tel: 606081813
philomadrid@gmail.com <mailto:philomadrid@gmail.com>
Blog: http://philomadrid.blogspot.com.es/
<http://philomadrid.blogspot.com.es/>
PhiloMadrid Meeting
Meet 6:30pm
Centro Segoviano
Alburquerque, 14
28010 Madrid
914457935
Metro: Bilbao
-----------Ignacio------------
Open Tertulia in English every
Thursdays at Triskel in c/San Vicente Ferrer 3.
Time: from 19:30 to 21h
http://sites.google.com/site/tertuliainenglishmadrid/
<http://sites.google.com/site/tertuliainenglishmadrid/>
----------------------------
from Lawrence, SUNDAY PhiloMadrid meeting at 6:30pm: Arrogance
PhiloMadrid - Pub Philosophy Meetings in Madrid
Showing posts with label Arrogance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arrogance. Show all posts
14 September 2012
from Lawrence, Sunday PhiloMadrid meeting: Arrogance + NEWS
Messages from Carmen and Lola + short essay
Dear Friends,
First of all I hope that Marie is doing well after her unfortunate accident last week. Maybe we will
have more news on Sunday.
And of course, I look forward to our meeting on Sunday to kick off the new season. We are discussing
Arrogance which seems to have found a new realm of existence in the new world order of politics and
economics. In my short essay I try to argue for this new (or maybe not so new) and virulent
existence of arrogance.
In the meantime Carmen has sent me the link of her jewellery; if you need more details or wish to
contact Carmen please let me know. And finally Lola has asked me to send you details of a flat she
has for rent.
---from Carmen's jewellery TarTeTaTin ---
Carmen has sent me a link for her jewellery and info (in French), TarTeTaTin
http://loversofmint.blogspot.fr/search/label/createurs
---from Lola-----
Dear lawrence
Could you ask if anyone is looking for a flat to rent this year or several months ?
Apartment Retiro area, 1 bedroom, ( it is not a studio ) bathroom, dinning-room kitchen in salon.
Completely furnishes. Near Goya / Felipe II, well communicated, Ibiza or O´Donnel underground. Many
buses . 21 63,61,26,15. C2, 53 ... There is everything in the area. My cell . 66440.4.0.5.9 (the
dots are for security reasons, please remove them if you want to call Lola! Lawrence)
Thanks
Lola
Best Lawrence
PhiloMadrid Meeting
Meet 6:30pm
Centro Segoviano
Alburquerque, 14
28010 Madrid
914457935
Metro: Bilbao
-----------Ignacio------------
Thursday's Open Tertulia in English
Important Notice: From December 1st, the Tertulia will take place at O'Donnells (ex-Moore's) Irish
Pub, c/ Barceló 1 (metro Tribunal)
http://sites.google.com/site/tertuliainenglishmadrid/
----------From Luisa---------
Please not you will have to let her know in advance if you wish to attend, thanks:
Data of language exchange,
Location: Café Comercial
Address: Glorieta de Bilbao, 7
Website location:
http://maps.google.com/maps/place?hl=es&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=glorieta+de+Bilbao+en+Madrid&fb=1&hq=glorieta+de+Bilbao&hnear=Madrid,+España&cid=168580715753984644
Dates: on Saturday
Time: from 12:30 to 14:45
Price: 2.50 € (exchange organizing, hiring the top of the cafeteria and coffee, tea, soda, wine or
beer are included).
Luisa - email to confirm please alvarez_luisa@hotmail.com
--------end----
Arrogance
We all know from instinct that arrogance is bad. We also know from instinct whether someone is being
arrogant or self confident.
Indicators of arrogance, amongst many, are a feeling of superiority over others, self importance and
in many cases condescending attitude towards others. Pride is also implied in the meaning of
arrogance. However, the emotion of pride comes in two manifestations, 1) a strong sense of personal
status and of course 2) a sense of personal achievement when conferred by others for meritorious
behaviour or acts.
The pride we feel due merit is usually also shared by those around us (and vice versa) and of course
this pride is rather positive. For example, the pride we feel in when our team winning the cup,
passing an exam, and the achievements of our country for that matter. Positive pride is respected.
Negative pride is not respected by others since we are claiming status which we might not deserve or
an ostentatious exhibition of feelings. Thus an arrogant person takes pride in their achievement
especially when dominating or belittling people.
Arrogance is, on the other hand, at the extreme end of this group of negative emotions and their
manifestation in public. A necessary condition for arrogance, maybe which pride does not have, is
that arrogance is always directed towards someone, be it an individual, a group or even a peoples.
A feeling of superiority over others and condescending behaviour have not only the effect of trying
to establish that one is more important than other people but that other people are not considered
to have any relevant worth to the arrogant person. Individuals who are rather sensitive in character
are usually emotionally hurt by the attitude and behaviour of an arrogant person. Others might feel
more visceral emotions.
If we accept that arrogance manifests itself when interacting with others, than we can assume that
there is a voluntary act and a belief to trigger, so to speak, that act. Although arrogance is an
act it can also be a character trait of a person. And as such, maybe it takes its roots in the basic
aggressive instincts we possess as human beings. Maybe nice people, who employ a strategy of
cooperation to get along, are equally taking advantage of some rational basic instinct: a monster
trap or a honey trap!
We can also debate whether arrogance is an inherited character trait or maybe a developed character,
which in many cases, have a bearing on responsibility, I think that this is a side issue since we
people are being arrogant and others are hurt it does not matter where and how that emotion
originated. We can safely assume that a person, who is not deranged nor has a mental disease, is
acting as a rational agent.
A weak definition of arrogance might be the projection onto others of one's beliefs and at the same
time not only excluding the opinions of others but that others cannot possibly have any valid
opinions to contribute in the first place. Professional status can easily be a breeding ground for
arrogance to develop in people.
If beliefs (opinions) are a necessary condition for a voluntary action, then what an arrogant person
is implying is that the other person cannot possibly have any valid beliefs that ought to lead to an
action. Needless to say that this simple view of the mechanism of arrogance is very much determined
by the circumstances of the situation. Maybe someone might be arrogant but also happen to be well
informed on a situation that makes their opinion or beliefs the right sort of opinions to bring
about a positive outcome to a situation. The issue is, maybe, one of social interaction and social
protocol rather than the veracity of a person's beliefs. Much as we might dislike this idea, even
arrogant people have the right to be correct and to hold true and valid beliefs.
Maybe it is this idea that an arrogant person also has the right to hold valid and true beliefs, and
employ them for action, that makes us feel revulsion towards giving an arrogant person a fair break.
How can we possibly even listen to an arrogant person, even if they are right? The suggestion that
even they have rights suggests that the weak version of the meaning of arrogance is not adequate or
maybe just that, a weak version and therefore limited in scope. And to add insult to injury, a nice
and cooperative person might very well be wrong no matter how well meaning they might be.
This suggests that we might need a stronger version of arrogance and I therefore propose this: one
thinks (believes) not only that one is right and that others are insignificant and irrelevant but
that one also thinks that one is immune from the effects of even being wrong or doing wrong.
Hurting one's feeling is bad, but maybe not disastrous, and as I have suggested being wrong is not
the exclusive domain of arrogant people, arrogant people can also be right. But maybe the issue is
not so much whether one is right or wrong but rather has one considered the implications and
consequences of maybe being wrong?
So from linking arrogance to a character trait, we are extending this link to rational value
judgements. Considering whether one is right or wrong is not only to consider the consequences of
our actions but also the possibility that we might have to change our course of action. But feeling
immune from the consequences of being wrong or not considering that one might be wrong introduces an
element of good and bad or evil which a character trait does necessarily imply.
The idea that a person does not consider the consequences of being wrong or feel personally immune
from the consequences of being wrong is probably the most unacceptable human trait at the extreme.
In an applied philosophical context and maybe more relevant for us these days is whether power leads
to arrogance, specifically the strong version of arrogance? Precisely the position one takes that we
can exercise our power how we like and if we get it wrong it is of no consequence to us. I propose
that corruption, including nepotism, is clear examples of strong arrogance.
I am inclined to think that power in and of itself does not necessarily lead to strong arrogance,
but maybe arrogance, especially of the strong kind, is an infectious trait that we either pick up
from those arrogant people around us, or maybe a dormant trait that only needs the right conditions
to manifest itself. Maybe the popular saying that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely is true and bound together by the strong sense of arrogance.
Best Lawrence
from Lawrence, Sunday PhiloMadrid meeting: Arrogance + NEWS
Dear Friends,
First of all I hope that Marie is doing well after her unfortunate accident last week. Maybe we will
have more news on Sunday.
And of course, I look forward to our meeting on Sunday to kick off the new season. We are discussing
Arrogance which seems to have found a new realm of existence in the new world order of politics and
economics. In my short essay I try to argue for this new (or maybe not so new) and virulent
existence of arrogance.
In the meantime Carmen has sent me the link of her jewellery; if you need more details or wish to
contact Carmen please let me know. And finally Lola has asked me to send you details of a flat she
has for rent.
---from Carmen's jewellery TarTeTaTin ---
Carmen has sent me a link for her jewellery and info (in French), TarTeTaTin
http://loversofmint.blogspot.fr/search/label/createurs
---from Lola-----
Dear lawrence
Could you ask if anyone is looking for a flat to rent this year or several months ?
Apartment Retiro area, 1 bedroom, ( it is not a studio ) bathroom, dinning-room kitchen in salon.
Completely furnishes. Near Goya / Felipe II, well communicated, Ibiza or O´Donnel underground. Many
buses . 21 63,61,26,15. C2, 53 ... There is everything in the area. My cell . 66440.4.0.5.9 (the
dots are for security reasons, please remove them if you want to call Lola! Lawrence)
Thanks
Lola
Best Lawrence
PhiloMadrid Meeting
Meet 6:30pm
Centro Segoviano
Alburquerque, 14
28010 Madrid
914457935
Metro: Bilbao
-----------Ignacio------------
Thursday's Open Tertulia in English
Important Notice: From December 1st, the Tertulia will take place at O'Donnells (ex-Moore's) Irish
Pub, c/ Barceló 1 (metro Tribunal)
http://sites.google.com/site/tertuliainenglishmadrid/
----------From Luisa---------
Please not you will have to let her know in advance if you wish to attend, thanks:
Data of language exchange,
Location: Café Comercial
Address: Glorieta de Bilbao, 7
Website location:
http://maps.google.com/maps/place?hl=es&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=glorieta+de+Bilbao+en+Madrid&fb=1&hq=glorieta+de+Bilbao&hnear=Madrid,+España&cid=168580715753984644
Dates: on Saturday
Time: from 12:30 to 14:45
Price: 2.50 € (exchange organizing, hiring the top of the cafeteria and coffee, tea, soda, wine or
beer are included).
Luisa - email to confirm please alvarez_luisa@hotmail.com
--------end----
Arrogance
We all know from instinct that arrogance is bad. We also know from instinct whether someone is being
arrogant or self confident.
Indicators of arrogance, amongst many, are a feeling of superiority over others, self importance and
in many cases condescending attitude towards others. Pride is also implied in the meaning of
arrogance. However, the emotion of pride comes in two manifestations, 1) a strong sense of personal
status and of course 2) a sense of personal achievement when conferred by others for meritorious
behaviour or acts.
The pride we feel due merit is usually also shared by those around us (and vice versa) and of course
this pride is rather positive. For example, the pride we feel in when our team winning the cup,
passing an exam, and the achievements of our country for that matter. Positive pride is respected.
Negative pride is not respected by others since we are claiming status which we might not deserve or
an ostentatious exhibition of feelings. Thus an arrogant person takes pride in their achievement
especially when dominating or belittling people.
Arrogance is, on the other hand, at the extreme end of this group of negative emotions and their
manifestation in public. A necessary condition for arrogance, maybe which pride does not have, is
that arrogance is always directed towards someone, be it an individual, a group or even a peoples.
A feeling of superiority over others and condescending behaviour have not only the effect of trying
to establish that one is more important than other people but that other people are not considered
to have any relevant worth to the arrogant person. Individuals who are rather sensitive in character
are usually emotionally hurt by the attitude and behaviour of an arrogant person. Others might feel
more visceral emotions.
If we accept that arrogance manifests itself when interacting with others, than we can assume that
there is a voluntary act and a belief to trigger, so to speak, that act. Although arrogance is an
act it can also be a character trait of a person. And as such, maybe it takes its roots in the basic
aggressive instincts we possess as human beings. Maybe nice people, who employ a strategy of
cooperation to get along, are equally taking advantage of some rational basic instinct: a monster
trap or a honey trap!
We can also debate whether arrogance is an inherited character trait or maybe a developed character,
which in many cases, have a bearing on responsibility, I think that this is a side issue since we
people are being arrogant and others are hurt it does not matter where and how that emotion
originated. We can safely assume that a person, who is not deranged nor has a mental disease, is
acting as a rational agent.
A weak definition of arrogance might be the projection onto others of one's beliefs and at the same
time not only excluding the opinions of others but that others cannot possibly have any valid
opinions to contribute in the first place. Professional status can easily be a breeding ground for
arrogance to develop in people.
If beliefs (opinions) are a necessary condition for a voluntary action, then what an arrogant person
is implying is that the other person cannot possibly have any valid beliefs that ought to lead to an
action. Needless to say that this simple view of the mechanism of arrogance is very much determined
by the circumstances of the situation. Maybe someone might be arrogant but also happen to be well
informed on a situation that makes their opinion or beliefs the right sort of opinions to bring
about a positive outcome to a situation. The issue is, maybe, one of social interaction and social
protocol rather than the veracity of a person's beliefs. Much as we might dislike this idea, even
arrogant people have the right to be correct and to hold true and valid beliefs.
Maybe it is this idea that an arrogant person also has the right to hold valid and true beliefs, and
employ them for action, that makes us feel revulsion towards giving an arrogant person a fair break.
How can we possibly even listen to an arrogant person, even if they are right? The suggestion that
even they have rights suggests that the weak version of the meaning of arrogance is not adequate or
maybe just that, a weak version and therefore limited in scope. And to add insult to injury, a nice
and cooperative person might very well be wrong no matter how well meaning they might be.
This suggests that we might need a stronger version of arrogance and I therefore propose this: one
thinks (believes) not only that one is right and that others are insignificant and irrelevant but
that one also thinks that one is immune from the effects of even being wrong or doing wrong.
Hurting one's feeling is bad, but maybe not disastrous, and as I have suggested being wrong is not
the exclusive domain of arrogant people, arrogant people can also be right. But maybe the issue is
not so much whether one is right or wrong but rather has one considered the implications and
consequences of maybe being wrong?
So from linking arrogance to a character trait, we are extending this link to rational value
judgements. Considering whether one is right or wrong is not only to consider the consequences of
our actions but also the possibility that we might have to change our course of action. But feeling
immune from the consequences of being wrong or not considering that one might be wrong introduces an
element of good and bad or evil which a character trait does necessarily imply.
The idea that a person does not consider the consequences of being wrong or feel personally immune
from the consequences of being wrong is probably the most unacceptable human trait at the extreme.
In an applied philosophical context and maybe more relevant for us these days is whether power leads
to arrogance, specifically the strong version of arrogance? Precisely the position one takes that we
can exercise our power how we like and if we get it wrong it is of no consequence to us. I propose
that corruption, including nepotism, is clear examples of strong arrogance.
I am inclined to think that power in and of itself does not necessarily lead to strong arrogance,
but maybe arrogance, especially of the strong kind, is an infectious trait that we either pick up
from those arrogant people around us, or maybe a dormant trait that only needs the right conditions
to manifest itself. Maybe the popular saying that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely is true and bound together by the strong sense of arrogance.
Best Lawrence
from Lawrence, Sunday PhiloMadrid meeting: Arrogance + NEWS
24 March 2011
from Lawrence, this Sunday meeting, Arrogance + News
Meet O'Connor's at 6, essay, + NEWS
Dear Friends,
First of all, I would like to thank Diana, Marga and Paloma (in
alphabetical order) for sending me the Spanish version of the email to
the Director of EspacioPozas 14. I sent it last night and have not had a
reply. In the meantime thanks once again to Maria for suggesting the place.
I will also write to Nacha later on and we still have Patatus as a
possible option.
Last Sunday we were about seventeen of us at O'Connor's and had the end
corner all for ourselves. The fact that there were no sports events did
help a lot.
So this Sunday we will meet again at O'connors to discuss Arrogance. As
I try to argue in my short essay maybe there is more to arrogance than
just a person being unpleasant. Upon reflection, in this day and age we
are not short of a few arrogant people on the international arena.
In the meantime I have the following news items:
Jim has a flat for rent, Peter is still looking for a flatmate, Ian has
a vacancy at his company and Miguel has sent me details about the next
Maths tertulia.
---------Jim-------
Hi Lawrence,
with regards to the flat I mentioned on Sunday. The details are as follows:
It is located in Calle Miami on the corner with Calle Alcala.
The flat is 80 M2, has two bathrooms, three bedrooms, a kitchen, dining
area a Sitting room
and a terrace.
Heating is by gas (boiler located in the kitchen). The flat is well
communicated. Suanzes metro stop (line 5- green line) is 3 to 4 minutes
walk from the house. The Number 104 and 77 buses stop in front of the
house. Also the night bus N5 (Búho). There i a taxi rank in Ciudad
Lineal,which is about 5 to 10 minutes walk.
Alcala Norte is in walking distance also. This is a Shopping Mall which
has Cinemas and a supermarket.
The flat is bright and has some nice views of the park (Suanzes).
Anyone interested can call me at 639181866.
Regards,
Jim
------------------------Peter----------------------
Peter has asked me once again to remind you that he is looking for
someone to share his flat with in Mostoles close to public transport;
very good conditions. Central heating and central hot water. English
spoken at home if you wish. Single room still available. : tel 609257259
--------------Ian-----------
Here is a link to the job posting on Infojobs:
http://www.infojobs.net/madrid/inside-sales-software./of-i775b85eb174fa0b1663cf41bfa6afb
The company I work for is looking to employ an inside sales person
ASAP.. The person would need to be fluent in English at a minimum, with
other language abilities being a much wanted plus. Good languages to
have are German, French or Spanish. The job would involve working on the
telephone and email, corresponding with our resellers and helping to
process orders. They should have good computer skills (able to type, use
Outlook, Excel and Word) and ideally be smart (brains) and motivated.
The salary range is between 18-35K p.a on a permanent contract. The
salary offered to a candidate depends on their abilities and experience.
If they are intelligent, with various languages and are an eager go
getter then they will be at the 35K end of the scale. Alternatively, if
they are a school leaver, with limited experience and language ability
then the lower end would be where they would be at.
Who we hire will depend on the candidate, with the mix of abilities they
offer.
Remember, our company is based in a comfortable office, very close to
the north end of the Retiro park making for a nice central location to work.
Anyone interested? Please pass this message on to all our friends.
Take care for now.
saludos,
Ian Cummings
m: +34 686966896 - e: ianrcummings@gmail.com
Yahoo IM: ianrcummings - Skype: ianrcummings
----------------------Maths Tertulia---------------------
(Miguel has also included a reading list and links which I will post of
the blog: philomadrid.blogspot.com)
Estimado tertuliano,
La conferencia de Miguel Ángel Madruga del pasado Martes fue muy
interesante y amena, así como la tertulia que siguió. Como él mismo
comenta, después de un aperitivo histórico, entramos en el plato fuerte:
la máquina de cifrar Enigma, con su estructura y funcionamiento.
Le agradecemos el esfuerzo de preparación, que a juzgar por lo
presentado ha sido considerable, así como las referencias que nos envía
sobre la historia de la criptografía y que adjunto.
Damos también las gracias a Roberto Álvarez Chust por el proyector, al
Ateneo de Madrid por dejarnos la sala y a Juan Valentín por sus
gestiones para ello.
Saludos cordiales,
J. Miguel
P.S.: Si quieres impartir una conferencia de contenido matemático
envíame un mensaje de correo para tratar los detalles. En particular, si
la conferencia trata la relación entre determinismo y aleatoriedad será
especialmente bienvenida, ya que en la tertulia se ha mostrado interés
por ello.
Si quieres darte de baja en la lista de correo envía otro mensaje con
"Baja" en el campo "Asunto".
-----------------------end news--------------------
Best
Lawrence
Arrogance
To accuse someone of arrogance is not very nice. However, the irony is
that such an insult would have the same effect on the person as water
would have on a duck's back.
The meaning of arrogance captures a range of concepts including pride,
self importance, feeling of superiority, self worth, and a sense that
one is better than others. And of course we have no doubt in identifying
arrogant people.
However, what makes a person from being an unpleasant person to being an
arrogant? And why should arrogance attract such a extreme disapprobation
and censure?
But such ideas as importance, pride, worth, better than others are in
themselves neither negative nor objects of disapproval. For example, we
expect someone to feel proud if they are awarded a coveted prize. Indeed
we would accuse them of being ungrateful if they do not show a degree of
pride in receiving the prize. And of course, some people are just better
than others, in what they do, their personality, their abilities and so
on. It does not mean, however, that just because some people are better
than others in some things those others are somehow a lesser person or
an inferior person in the same way that a frozen pizza is an inferior
pizza from one prepared by a Neapolitan pizzaiolo in a wood oven.
On the other hand, pride, worth, importance and superiority are
qualities which by definition are relative to other people. John is
better because we think that he has qualities that are more desrable
than those exhibited by Betty. Not only does this language imply a value
judgement on the part of society, but more importantly these qualities
confer social hierarchical powers. In a world where hierarchy and power
are the norm the CEO of a bank is regarded as being more important that
the street cleaner.
Maybe it is because these qualities confer real powers and authority in
our society that society regulates them and on who to confer them. Thus
by creating the term arrogance, as a term to disapprove of someone who
confers these labels on themselves, shows how important these qualities
are. And not only that, but that these qualities are conferred on us by
society suggests that maybe there is also some democratic process going
on here. We agree that someone ought to feel proud or that someone is
indeed better than the rest of us.
Maybe there is even something else going on. When we feel that someone
should feel proud in receiving a coveted prize are we also implying that
they also have some sort of moral duty to feel proud? Maybe a moral duty
that arises from the fact that they were chosen from a group of equally
suitable candidates? Thus the morality arises from respect towards those
who were not chosen.
When someone expresses self pride or expresses a feeling of self
importance we are maybe trying to imply that these people have stolen or
misappropriated social qualities which can only be conferred by society.
Thus when someone says or behaves as if they are more important than
others without having first been invested by society of such qualities
they are exercising a power which they are not entitled to have. They
are appropriating privileges that only society can confer on its members.
But arrogance goes beyond the meaning of not being entitled to some
quality. Indeed I would argue that what really makes arrogance a
despicable title to be bestowed on someone is that it is usually also
associated with actions and behaviours that are unjust, unfair, bad and
maybe also evil.
It not only that an arrogant person feels superior that makes this
person repugnant but the fact that their relationship with others leaves
no doubt in the minds of others that those others have no human worth or
their only worth is one of servitude. It is the lack of respect toward
those who are doing, say a menial job, that makes the high flyer arrogant.
Thus, when someone thinks they are superior, because they have a certain
racial background, the issue of arrogance is not a question of race but
rather the race of the other person would exclude that person from being
treated as an equal, indeed, treated as a person at all. And therefore
not worthy of the respect and courteously of an equal and a peer.
My argument, is that arrogance is an unacceptable personality trait not
because it is usually associated with certain qualities such as, pride,
importance, superior, but rather arrogance implies a behaviour that
excludes others a priori (so to speak). Thus an arrogant teacher is
arrogant not because they have superior knowledge than the pupil but
because the teacher does not accept or believe that the pupil might have
anything of relevance to say about the discipline the teacher excels in.
In a way this implied meaning of exclusion in arrogance is the first
stage of why arrogance is an undesirable personality trait. Excluding
others, and what they have to say, implies that what we have to say is
the truth or the source of ultimate wisdom. If a mathematician believes
that the 18 year old undergraduate has nothing of worth to say about a
mathematical problem, that leaves the lecturer the only one with the
truth about mathematics.
The lecturer might be right about the mathematical problem and the
undergraduate wrong, but in a normal social interaction we expect the
teacher to listen to the student and then explain why they are wrong or
why they should not pursue that line of thinking. Maybe as an
undergraduate they are not being evaluated on whether they can solve
long standing problems in mathematics but whether they can understand
what the key problems are in mathematics. Indeed, it is of course
arrogant of universities not to spell out the scope of why students are
at university in the first place.
And finally, the ultimate stage of unpleasantness of arrogance is that
the arrogant person will easily lose sight of what is the right thing to
do, and the wrong thing to do, and I do not necessarily mean this in a
moral sense.
Thus someone might progress from having feelings of superiority to
acting on the belief that they only know what is the right thing to do,
on to the ultimate extreme situation of what they do is by definition
the right thing that has to be done.
And when the whole gamut of hideousness of arrogance is expressed by a
person that person changes from being a social pariah to being a danger
to society. In politics we usually call these people partisans, tyrants,
dictators or mad dogs.
Take care
Lawrence
from Lawrence, this Sunday meeting, Arrogance + News
Dear Friends,
First of all, I would like to thank Diana, Marga and Paloma (in
alphabetical order) for sending me the Spanish version of the email to
the Director of EspacioPozas 14. I sent it last night and have not had a
reply. In the meantime thanks once again to Maria for suggesting the place.
I will also write to Nacha later on and we still have Patatus as a
possible option.
Last Sunday we were about seventeen of us at O'Connor's and had the end
corner all for ourselves. The fact that there were no sports events did
help a lot.
So this Sunday we will meet again at O'connors to discuss Arrogance. As
I try to argue in my short essay maybe there is more to arrogance than
just a person being unpleasant. Upon reflection, in this day and age we
are not short of a few arrogant people on the international arena.
In the meantime I have the following news items:
Jim has a flat for rent, Peter is still looking for a flatmate, Ian has
a vacancy at his company and Miguel has sent me details about the next
Maths tertulia.
---------Jim-------
Hi Lawrence,
with regards to the flat I mentioned on Sunday. The details are as follows:
It is located in Calle Miami on the corner with Calle Alcala.
The flat is 80 M2, has two bathrooms, three bedrooms, a kitchen, dining
area a Sitting room
and a terrace.
Heating is by gas (boiler located in the kitchen). The flat is well
communicated. Suanzes metro stop (line 5- green line) is 3 to 4 minutes
walk from the house. The Number 104 and 77 buses stop in front of the
house. Also the night bus N5 (Búho). There i a taxi rank in Ciudad
Lineal,which is about 5 to 10 minutes walk.
Alcala Norte is in walking distance also. This is a Shopping Mall which
has Cinemas and a supermarket.
The flat is bright and has some nice views of the park (Suanzes).
Anyone interested can call me at 639181866.
Regards,
Jim
------------------------Peter----------------------
Peter has asked me once again to remind you that he is looking for
someone to share his flat with in Mostoles close to public transport;
very good conditions. Central heating and central hot water. English
spoken at home if you wish. Single room still available. : tel 609257259
--------------Ian-----------
Here is a link to the job posting on Infojobs:
http://www.infojobs.net/madrid/inside-sales-software./of-i775b85eb174fa0b1663cf41bfa6afb
The company I work for is looking to employ an inside sales person
ASAP.. The person would need to be fluent in English at a minimum, with
other language abilities being a much wanted plus. Good languages to
have are German, French or Spanish. The job would involve working on the
telephone and email, corresponding with our resellers and helping to
process orders. They should have good computer skills (able to type, use
Outlook, Excel and Word) and ideally be smart (brains) and motivated.
The salary range is between 18-35K p.a on a permanent contract. The
salary offered to a candidate depends on their abilities and experience.
If they are intelligent, with various languages and are an eager go
getter then they will be at the 35K end of the scale. Alternatively, if
they are a school leaver, with limited experience and language ability
then the lower end would be where they would be at.
Who we hire will depend on the candidate, with the mix of abilities they
offer.
Remember, our company is based in a comfortable office, very close to
the north end of the Retiro park making for a nice central location to work.
Anyone interested? Please pass this message on to all our friends.
Take care for now.
saludos,
Ian Cummings
m: +34 686966896 - e: ianrcummings@gmail.com
Yahoo IM: ianrcummings - Skype: ianrcummings
----------------------Maths Tertulia---------------------
(Miguel has also included a reading list and links which I will post of
the blog: philomadrid.blogspot.com)
Estimado tertuliano,
La conferencia de Miguel Ángel Madruga del pasado Martes fue muy
interesante y amena, así como la tertulia que siguió. Como él mismo
comenta, después de un aperitivo histórico, entramos en el plato fuerte:
la máquina de cifrar Enigma, con su estructura y funcionamiento.
Le agradecemos el esfuerzo de preparación, que a juzgar por lo
presentado ha sido considerable, así como las referencias que nos envía
sobre la historia de la criptografía y que adjunto.
Damos también las gracias a Roberto Álvarez Chust por el proyector, al
Ateneo de Madrid por dejarnos la sala y a Juan Valentín por sus
gestiones para ello.
Saludos cordiales,
J. Miguel
P.S.: Si quieres impartir una conferencia de contenido matemático
envíame un mensaje de correo para tratar los detalles. En particular, si
la conferencia trata la relación entre determinismo y aleatoriedad será
especialmente bienvenida, ya que en la tertulia se ha mostrado interés
por ello.
Si quieres darte de baja en la lista de correo envía otro mensaje con
"Baja" en el campo "Asunto".
-----------------------end news--------------------
Best
Lawrence
Arrogance
To accuse someone of arrogance is not very nice. However, the irony is
that such an insult would have the same effect on the person as water
would have on a duck's back.
The meaning of arrogance captures a range of concepts including pride,
self importance, feeling of superiority, self worth, and a sense that
one is better than others. And of course we have no doubt in identifying
arrogant people.
However, what makes a person from being an unpleasant person to being an
arrogant? And why should arrogance attract such a extreme disapprobation
and censure?
But such ideas as importance, pride, worth, better than others are in
themselves neither negative nor objects of disapproval. For example, we
expect someone to feel proud if they are awarded a coveted prize. Indeed
we would accuse them of being ungrateful if they do not show a degree of
pride in receiving the prize. And of course, some people are just better
than others, in what they do, their personality, their abilities and so
on. It does not mean, however, that just because some people are better
than others in some things those others are somehow a lesser person or
an inferior person in the same way that a frozen pizza is an inferior
pizza from one prepared by a Neapolitan pizzaiolo in a wood oven.
On the other hand, pride, worth, importance and superiority are
qualities which by definition are relative to other people. John is
better because we think that he has qualities that are more desrable
than those exhibited by Betty. Not only does this language imply a value
judgement on the part of society, but more importantly these qualities
confer social hierarchical powers. In a world where hierarchy and power
are the norm the CEO of a bank is regarded as being more important that
the street cleaner.
Maybe it is because these qualities confer real powers and authority in
our society that society regulates them and on who to confer them. Thus
by creating the term arrogance, as a term to disapprove of someone who
confers these labels on themselves, shows how important these qualities
are. And not only that, but that these qualities are conferred on us by
society suggests that maybe there is also some democratic process going
on here. We agree that someone ought to feel proud or that someone is
indeed better than the rest of us.
Maybe there is even something else going on. When we feel that someone
should feel proud in receiving a coveted prize are we also implying that
they also have some sort of moral duty to feel proud? Maybe a moral duty
that arises from the fact that they were chosen from a group of equally
suitable candidates? Thus the morality arises from respect towards those
who were not chosen.
When someone expresses self pride or expresses a feeling of self
importance we are maybe trying to imply that these people have stolen or
misappropriated social qualities which can only be conferred by society.
Thus when someone says or behaves as if they are more important than
others without having first been invested by society of such qualities
they are exercising a power which they are not entitled to have. They
are appropriating privileges that only society can confer on its members.
But arrogance goes beyond the meaning of not being entitled to some
quality. Indeed I would argue that what really makes arrogance a
despicable title to be bestowed on someone is that it is usually also
associated with actions and behaviours that are unjust, unfair, bad and
maybe also evil.
It not only that an arrogant person feels superior that makes this
person repugnant but the fact that their relationship with others leaves
no doubt in the minds of others that those others have no human worth or
their only worth is one of servitude. It is the lack of respect toward
those who are doing, say a menial job, that makes the high flyer arrogant.
Thus, when someone thinks they are superior, because they have a certain
racial background, the issue of arrogance is not a question of race but
rather the race of the other person would exclude that person from being
treated as an equal, indeed, treated as a person at all. And therefore
not worthy of the respect and courteously of an equal and a peer.
My argument, is that arrogance is an unacceptable personality trait not
because it is usually associated with certain qualities such as, pride,
importance, superior, but rather arrogance implies a behaviour that
excludes others a priori (so to speak). Thus an arrogant teacher is
arrogant not because they have superior knowledge than the pupil but
because the teacher does not accept or believe that the pupil might have
anything of relevance to say about the discipline the teacher excels in.
In a way this implied meaning of exclusion in arrogance is the first
stage of why arrogance is an undesirable personality trait. Excluding
others, and what they have to say, implies that what we have to say is
the truth or the source of ultimate wisdom. If a mathematician believes
that the 18 year old undergraduate has nothing of worth to say about a
mathematical problem, that leaves the lecturer the only one with the
truth about mathematics.
The lecturer might be right about the mathematical problem and the
undergraduate wrong, but in a normal social interaction we expect the
teacher to listen to the student and then explain why they are wrong or
why they should not pursue that line of thinking. Maybe as an
undergraduate they are not being evaluated on whether they can solve
long standing problems in mathematics but whether they can understand
what the key problems are in mathematics. Indeed, it is of course
arrogant of universities not to spell out the scope of why students are
at university in the first place.
And finally, the ultimate stage of unpleasantness of arrogance is that
the arrogant person will easily lose sight of what is the right thing to
do, and the wrong thing to do, and I do not necessarily mean this in a
moral sense.
Thus someone might progress from having feelings of superiority to
acting on the belief that they only know what is the right thing to do,
on to the ultimate extreme situation of what they do is by definition
the right thing that has to be done.
And when the whole gamut of hideousness of arrogance is expressed by a
person that person changes from being a social pariah to being a danger
to society. In politics we usually call these people partisans, tyrants,
dictators or mad dogs.
Take care
Lawrence
from Lawrence, this Sunday meeting, Arrogance + News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)