SUNDAY, May 10, 2009
When I'd published this post the last time around, I wasn't completely satisfied with the outcome. Moreover, after researching a bit on the internet, I found better distinctions between the terms, and thought it necessary to include few more confounding terms. I've retained the original post at the end of the edited version, so that others' comments don't seem out of context. So now I'm updating my post with the further knowledge that I've gained.
We all unknowingly have our own definitions even for the most common terms. Many times, how one uses a word is also reason enough to create misunderstandings. Once in a while, it's good to try to come to a concrete definition of words we use. In one of my replies to a blogger, I realized that I had a very firm idea of pride, but that was different from hers. In my system of thoughts pride is not at all an evil. Rather, I've come to associate basic pride--the way one leads one life--such a prerequisite, that without it I'd really consider anyone's life really miserable. But the contention from the other side was that it does not take much for pride to turn into conceit and rudeness. Whereas, I've been so sure that somehow pride could never lead to rudeness. Then it struck me! Our definitions of pride were really disparate. So, let me try to define pride (the way I use it) and some related terms.
Pride. When you're aware of some of your ability and happy to possess it, that's pride. You think of that ability as a natural part of you. Like you can write, speak, walk, but are not constantly aware of possessing these abilities. The only thing that makes one proud of an ability is the knowledge that it's somewhat rare. You may have not been used to possessing that ability in the first place, but gradually you get "used to" your ability, and it comes to your mind only when circumstances demand the use of that ability, but what persists is the subcounscious memory that realization of possession of that ability had made you happy. And once you get used to it, you don't think about the degree to which it is rare among other people. If you encounter someone less able in the same sphere of life, you don't overlook that ability's presence. The need to constantly compare one's ability with others' vanishes. In simplest words, you just assimilate that ability, and it becomes a part of you. So, even if you encounter someone better than you in the chosen trait you won't feel insecure. I'd like to point out here though that this definition of pride is largely of psychologists and philosophers (and of course, me!). Religions have not tended to distinguish much between pride and arrogance, and neither do they have (to the limited extent I've researched on the internet) a descriptive term for entity I've described here as pride. Religious view of arrogance is pride when reflected in one's conduct.
Arrogance. When you're aware of some ability that you possess and think that very few other people possess it. Here, the difference is that the ability in question is considered important by you. For instance, if I have a good sense of smell, I won't be arrogant about it, as I'd consider it pretty trivial. I might not be even proud of it. But say, if I think I'm more intelligent than average people, and also think of intelligence as an important trait, then there's a chance that this awareness (pride) could transform into arrogance. I think the exact point pride turns into arrogance is when one uses a few of one's traits to make a sweeping conclusion to the effect that "on account of those abilities, I'm a better person (than some other person). I'm more important to this world". Thus arrogance is relative. I could be arrogant with a person less educated than me, but not with someone better educated. This way, I could be insecure in presence of someone better than me in the ability in question. But I could be equally proud of having beautiful handwriting both before people with worse as well as better handwriting than me. For, pride is absolute. Additionally, when a person is arrogant about certain ability, they're more likely to employ that ability even when not required. This is not because they'd want to demonstrate that ability to others, but because they can't get the awareness of that ability out of their consciousness and tend to think of presenting circumstances as means towards using that ability as an end, rather than other way round. Arrogance also makes a person expect it as natural for others to notice and appreciate their ability [I'd found this idea on some other blog that I don't remember], whereas feeling pride would be an extremely private affair not requiring any external reinforcement.
Pride v/s Arrogance. If I'm arrogant about certain abilities, and even if I retain my objectivity to consider some other person's abilities as good as mine, I'll only tend to classify people as less able, or equally able, or more able than me. I'll think it unimportant to try to make out as to who among the two less able than me, is more able. But if I'm proud of certain abilities, I'll not be so obsessed with my own abilities and not overlook totally others' abilities. I'll acknowledge others' abilities, too even if less impressive than mine. If I've to put it in most simple fashion possible, being proud of one's abilities is like getting used to one's clothes. You know you possess them (abilities), but don't think of them all the time. Whereas, arrogance of an ability is like wearing new clothes (and wanting to wear them again and again!), constantly thinking about them, and then constantly being conscious if others are noticing them!
Self esteem. While, pride and arrogance could be restricted to specific abilities, self esteem is the estimate of one's worth on the whole as a person. Thus, one could hold oneself in high or low esteem. Needless to say, one's overall estimate of one's worth is bound to be a composite of what one thinks of one's individual abilities and the respective significance of those abilities. Both people who're proud or arrogant of a large number of abilities would thus possess high self esteem. In contrast, low self esteem would stem from lack of such convictions.
Conceit. It is overestimating one's abilities and/or self worth. If this overestimation leads to arrogance, the person would end up making fool of themselves, and that would hurt their self esteem very badly. But if they keep it merely to themselves, i.e., if they're merely proud of it, they'd be proven overconfident, and would be confused if their estimation of their ability was exagerrated or that of difficulty in situation in question was too conservative. But the way I've defined pride, it's unlikely that a person could ingrain it without actually using that ability on multiple occasions, so overestimating one's ability is unlikely. Conceit could result from both wrongly estimating one's oneself, or because of flattery.
Vanity. Vanity results when one suspects (rightly or wrongly) to be bereft of a highly desirable ability/quality (though, most often used in context of one's appearance), but does not acknowledge this doubt honestly to oneself. This self doubt results in a lot of insecurity and exaggerated attempts at concealing the deficiency. The difference in how vanity manifests itself from arrogance, is that vain person would be insecure of the impression they create on others all the time and irrespective of whether their subjects possess more or less of the said quality. And so their behavior would turn out to be same with all the people all the times.
Rudeness. Rudeness is something that totally baffles me. I see it as pointless. And when I'm talking of it being pointless, I'm implying that it is cold-blooded, i.e., indulged in with complete awareness and sometimes, even after a lot of thought!
Rudeness may or may not be related to arrogance about specific abilities. Rudeness as an act could be an outcome of irritation, fear, anger, or even contempt (in which case only benign people--those not in position to harm--are subjected to rudeness!). If you're vain, you could end up being rude to someone just because they didn't acknowledge your supreme ability which never was there!
Rudeness as a trait results when one does not consider the others worthy of existence (sic!). Yes, so what gives people the right to think of someone else's existence as unimportant in comparison with their own? It is at this level maybe some kind of arrogance or vanity are involved. Arrogant people use their superiority to assume the right to insult (because they actually think that person before them is unworthy of breathing the same air as them!). Vain people by being rude try to reinforce their nonexistent supremacy over others (to convince the other and themselves of the former's unworthiness). Habitually rude people "just assume" that they're more important. Maybe this trait arises from their being less conducive to a social life. Social, as in a life that entails, sharing (resources) and respecting, basically, acknowledging someone else to be as important as the self, that too in one's own system of thoughts. So just maybe, we all possess a predilection to rudeness (on account of always placing our "self" before others--we can see the world only from our perspective, so that's not aberrant at all for our most unadulterated attitude to be "I'm most important"), but most of us by social conditioning learn to empathize (that everyone feels that "I'm most important") and dilute our importance in social dealings. Some don't learn, or have a steeper learning curve!
But is it not possible for me to be actually better than some people in terms of parts (i.e., the individual abilities I possess) and also as a whole (as a person, that is)?
Now that is a loaded question, isn't it? But I think I've the ability to do this verbal tight-rope walk :) Everyone says that one should be aware of one's weaknesses, so by that logic, should one also not be aware of one's strengths? One should be, most definitely! One should repent and be ashamed of one's deficiencies and weak moments, they say; then should one not rejoice in one's abilities and accomplishments? Why be so partial only to the negative feelings of shame and regret? Why not be "balanced"? Look carefully, being free of conceit and arrogance, as well as possessing appropriate pride and good self esteem all require lot of mental hardwork. They entail constant monitoring of one's own as well as others' realistic abilities and deficiencies and the challenges posed by life-situations. That mental hardwork is introspection. If after honest assessment if we feel someone that we're better than someone else in certain ability, so be it! Why be guilty about it. Likewise, why be guilty of actually concluding someone to be incompetent at certain task. Imagine what would happen if we were to allow those with squint to fly planes only because it would be conceited to think they're incapable of doing so! The premise that we humans cannot objectively assess others' abilities vis-a-vis our own is a sweeping overgeneralization, and reeks of paranoia of conceit. Even if there is a possibility of misjudgement (of abilities, others' or our own), realistically, life doesn't afford us the luxury to do away with it.
To summarize:
Pride = awareness of specific ability + "feeling good" about it + coming to terms with the awareness and the feeling (gradually, relegating them to the subconscious)
Arrogance = awareness of specific ability + "feeling good" about it + being constantly conscious of the ability, and craving for that feeling of exhilaration
Self esteem = Overall assessment (could be low or high) of one's worth + consequences (pride/arrogance v/s shame/vanity) of such assessment
Conceit = Overestimating one's ability or overall self-worth
Vanity = Suspicion of being deficient in certain abilities + exagerrated attempts to cover up the deficiency + feeling of intense insecurity
Rudeness = Unwarranted bad behavior. Period.
If one were to consult a dictionary or thesaurus, most of the above terms have been shown to be synonymous with each other. But we know more people consider arrogance to be worse than pride. Likewise, self esteem is thought of as a defensive feeling, as in it is to be called upon only when one's respect is overrun. In this sense, sense esteem requires initiation by an externa agent, but we know, we can possess self esteem even without involving others. So, this was my attempt at assigning specific meanings to the above terms, and hence, no doubt, they're my personal opinion, but not without some help from Wikipedia, and a couple of bloggers who I don't even remember but whose opinions I came across only by googling. No doubt, some readers might find these distinctions artificial or different from theirs. And that's where (when I get some feedback) the fun begins! ;)
-----
Original Post
Submitted on:
SUNDAY, APRIL 19, 2009
We all unknowingly have our own definitions even for the most common terms. Many times, how one uses a word is also reason enough to create misunderstandings. Once in a while, it's good to try to come to a concrete definition of words we use. In one of my replies to a blogger, I realized that I had a very firm idea of pride, but that was different from hers. In my system of thoughts pride is not at all an evil. Rather, I've come to associate basic pride the way one leads one life such a prerequisite, that without it, I'd really consider anyone's life really miserable. But the contention from the other side was that it does not take much for pride to turn into conceit and rudeness. Whereas, I've been so sure that somehow pride could never lead to rudeness. Then it struck me! Our definitions of pride were really disparate.So, let me try to define pride and some related terms.
Pride. When you're aware of some of your ability and happy to possess it, that's pride.
Arrogance. When you're aware of some ability that you possess and think that very few other people possess it. Here, the difference is that the ability in question is considered important by you. For instance, if I have a good sense of smell, I won't be arrogant about it, as I'd consider it pretty trivial. I might not be even proud of it. But say, if I think I'm more intelligent than average people, and also think of intelligence as an important trait, then there's a chance that this awareness (pride) could transform into arrogance. So, arrogance, may be requires a standard to compare oneself against. I think the exact point pride turns into arrogance is when one uses a few of one's traits to make a sweeping conclusion to the effect that "on account of those abilities, I'm a better person (than some other person). I'm more important to this world". Thus, arrogance is relative. I could be arrogant with a person less educated than me, but not with someone better educated. But I could be equally proud of having beautiful handwriting both before people with worse and better handwriting than me. For it is absolute.
But is it not possible for me to be actually better than some people in terms of parts (i.e., the individual abilities I possess) and also as a whole (as a person, that is)?
That is a difficult question to answer. But I think I do have an answer now. If I'm arrogant about certain abilities, and even if I retain my objectivity to consider some other person's abilities as good as mine, I'll only tend to classify people as less able, or equally able, or more able than me (notice the emphasis). I'll think it unimportant to try to make out as to who among the two less able than me, is more able. But if I'm proud of certain abilities, I'll not be so obsessed with my own abilities and not overlook totally others' abilities. I'll acknowledge others' abilities, too even if less impressive than mine.If I've to put it in most simple fashion possible, being proud of one's abilities is like getting used to one's clothes. You know you possess them (abilities), but don't think of them all the time. Whereas, arrogance of is like wearing new clothes, constantly thinking about them, and then constantly being conscious if others are noticing them!
Rudeness. Rudeness may or may not be related to arrogance about specific abilities. Rudeness results when one does not consider the other person worthy of existence [(sic!); contempt of sorts]. Yes, so what gives people the right to think of someone else's existence as unimportant in comparison with their own? It is at this level maybe some kind of arrogance is involved. But it's some nonspecific kind of arrogance. Rude people "just assume" that they're more important. Maybe this trait arises from their being less conducive to a social life. Social, as in a life that entails, sharing, respecting, basically, acknowledging someone else to be as important as the self, that too in one's own system of thoughts. So maybe, by default, we humans do possess certain kind of rudeness. But this seems to be a too far-reaching conclusion I'm drawing. I must not overreach my ability to get my mind into others' shoes!
When I'd published this post the last time around, I wasn't completely satisfied with the outcome. Moreover, after researching a bit on the internet, I found better distinctions between the terms, and thought it necessary to include few more confounding terms. I've retained the original post at the end of the edited version, so that others' comments don't seem out of context. So now I'm updating my post with the further knowledge that I've gained.
We all unknowingly have our own definitions even for the most common terms. Many times, how one uses a word is also reason enough to create misunderstandings. Once in a while, it's good to try to come to a concrete definition of words we use. In one of my replies to a blogger, I realized that I had a very firm idea of pride, but that was different from hers. In my system of thoughts pride is not at all an evil. Rather, I've come to associate basic pride--the way one leads one life--such a prerequisite, that without it I'd really consider anyone's life really miserable. But the contention from the other side was that it does not take much for pride to turn into conceit and rudeness. Whereas, I've been so sure that somehow pride could never lead to rudeness. Then it struck me! Our definitions of pride were really disparate. So, let me try to define pride (the way I use it) and some related terms.
Pride. When you're aware of some of your ability and happy to possess it, that's pride. You think of that ability as a natural part of you. Like you can write, speak, walk, but are not constantly aware of possessing these abilities. The only thing that makes one proud of an ability is the knowledge that it's somewhat rare. You may have not been used to possessing that ability in the first place, but gradually you get "used to" your ability, and it comes to your mind only when circumstances demand the use of that ability, but what persists is the subcounscious memory that realization of possession of that ability had made you happy. And once you get used to it, you don't think about the degree to which it is rare among other people. If you encounter someone less able in the same sphere of life, you don't overlook that ability's presence. The need to constantly compare one's ability with others' vanishes. In simplest words, you just assimilate that ability, and it becomes a part of you. So, even if you encounter someone better than you in the chosen trait you won't feel insecure. I'd like to point out here though that this definition of pride is largely of psychologists and philosophers (and of course, me!). Religions have not tended to distinguish much between pride and arrogance, and neither do they have (to the limited extent I've researched on the internet) a descriptive term for entity I've described here as pride. Religious view of arrogance is pride when reflected in one's conduct.
Arrogance. When you're aware of some ability that you possess and think that very few other people possess it. Here, the difference is that the ability in question is considered important by you. For instance, if I have a good sense of smell, I won't be arrogant about it, as I'd consider it pretty trivial. I might not be even proud of it. But say, if I think I'm more intelligent than average people, and also think of intelligence as an important trait, then there's a chance that this awareness (pride) could transform into arrogance. I think the exact point pride turns into arrogance is when one uses a few of one's traits to make a sweeping conclusion to the effect that "on account of those abilities, I'm a better person (than some other person). I'm more important to this world". Thus arrogance is relative. I could be arrogant with a person less educated than me, but not with someone better educated. This way, I could be insecure in presence of someone better than me in the ability in question. But I could be equally proud of having beautiful handwriting both before people with worse as well as better handwriting than me. For, pride is absolute. Additionally, when a person is arrogant about certain ability, they're more likely to employ that ability even when not required. This is not because they'd want to demonstrate that ability to others, but because they can't get the awareness of that ability out of their consciousness and tend to think of presenting circumstances as means towards using that ability as an end, rather than other way round. Arrogance also makes a person expect it as natural for others to notice and appreciate their ability [I'd found this idea on some other blog that I don't remember], whereas feeling pride would be an extremely private affair not requiring any external reinforcement.
Pride v/s Arrogance. If I'm arrogant about certain abilities, and even if I retain my objectivity to consider some other person's abilities as good as mine, I'll only tend to classify people as less able, or equally able, or more able than me. I'll think it unimportant to try to make out as to who among the two less able than me, is more able. But if I'm proud of certain abilities, I'll not be so obsessed with my own abilities and not overlook totally others' abilities. I'll acknowledge others' abilities, too even if less impressive than mine. If I've to put it in most simple fashion possible, being proud of one's abilities is like getting used to one's clothes. You know you possess them (abilities), but don't think of them all the time. Whereas, arrogance of an ability is like wearing new clothes (and wanting to wear them again and again!), constantly thinking about them, and then constantly being conscious if others are noticing them!
Self esteem. While, pride and arrogance could be restricted to specific abilities, self esteem is the estimate of one's worth on the whole as a person. Thus, one could hold oneself in high or low esteem. Needless to say, one's overall estimate of one's worth is bound to be a composite of what one thinks of one's individual abilities and the respective significance of those abilities. Both people who're proud or arrogant of a large number of abilities would thus possess high self esteem. In contrast, low self esteem would stem from lack of such convictions.
Conceit. It is overestimating one's abilities and/or self worth. If this overestimation leads to arrogance, the person would end up making fool of themselves, and that would hurt their self esteem very badly. But if they keep it merely to themselves, i.e., if they're merely proud of it, they'd be proven overconfident, and would be confused if their estimation of their ability was exagerrated or that of difficulty in situation in question was too conservative. But the way I've defined pride, it's unlikely that a person could ingrain it without actually using that ability on multiple occasions, so overestimating one's ability is unlikely. Conceit could result from both wrongly estimating one's oneself, or because of flattery.
Vanity. Vanity results when one suspects (rightly or wrongly) to be bereft of a highly desirable ability/quality (though, most often used in context of one's appearance), but does not acknowledge this doubt honestly to oneself. This self doubt results in a lot of insecurity and exaggerated attempts at concealing the deficiency. The difference in how vanity manifests itself from arrogance, is that vain person would be insecure of the impression they create on others all the time and irrespective of whether their subjects possess more or less of the said quality. And so their behavior would turn out to be same with all the people all the times.
Rudeness. Rudeness is something that totally baffles me. I see it as pointless. And when I'm talking of it being pointless, I'm implying that it is cold-blooded, i.e., indulged in with complete awareness and sometimes, even after a lot of thought!
Rudeness may or may not be related to arrogance about specific abilities. Rudeness as an act could be an outcome of irritation, fear, anger, or even contempt (in which case only benign people--those not in position to harm--are subjected to rudeness!). If you're vain, you could end up being rude to someone just because they didn't acknowledge your supreme ability which never was there!
Rudeness as a trait results when one does not consider the others worthy of existence (sic!). Yes, so what gives people the right to think of someone else's existence as unimportant in comparison with their own? It is at this level maybe some kind of arrogance or vanity are involved. Arrogant people use their superiority to assume the right to insult (because they actually think that person before them is unworthy of breathing the same air as them!). Vain people by being rude try to reinforce their nonexistent supremacy over others (to convince the other and themselves of the former's unworthiness). Habitually rude people "just assume" that they're more important. Maybe this trait arises from their being less conducive to a social life. Social, as in a life that entails, sharing (resources) and respecting, basically, acknowledging someone else to be as important as the self, that too in one's own system of thoughts. So just maybe, we all possess a predilection to rudeness (on account of always placing our "self" before others--we can see the world only from our perspective, so that's not aberrant at all for our most unadulterated attitude to be "I'm most important"), but most of us by social conditioning learn to empathize (that everyone feels that "I'm most important") and dilute our importance in social dealings. Some don't learn, or have a steeper learning curve!
But is it not possible for me to be actually better than some people in terms of parts (i.e., the individual abilities I possess) and also as a whole (as a person, that is)?
Now that is a loaded question, isn't it? But I think I've the ability to do this verbal tight-rope walk :) Everyone says that one should be aware of one's weaknesses, so by that logic, should one also not be aware of one's strengths? One should be, most definitely! One should repent and be ashamed of one's deficiencies and weak moments, they say; then should one not rejoice in one's abilities and accomplishments? Why be so partial only to the negative feelings of shame and regret? Why not be "balanced"? Look carefully, being free of conceit and arrogance, as well as possessing appropriate pride and good self esteem all require lot of mental hardwork. They entail constant monitoring of one's own as well as others' realistic abilities and deficiencies and the challenges posed by life-situations. That mental hardwork is introspection. If after honest assessment if we feel someone that we're better than someone else in certain ability, so be it! Why be guilty about it. Likewise, why be guilty of actually concluding someone to be incompetent at certain task. Imagine what would happen if we were to allow those with squint to fly planes only because it would be conceited to think they're incapable of doing so! The premise that we humans cannot objectively assess others' abilities vis-a-vis our own is a sweeping overgeneralization, and reeks of paranoia of conceit. Even if there is a possibility of misjudgement (of abilities, others' or our own), realistically, life doesn't afford us the luxury to do away with it.
To summarize:
Pride = awareness of specific ability + "feeling good" about it + coming to terms with the awareness and the feeling (gradually, relegating them to the subconscious)
Arrogance = awareness of specific ability + "feeling good" about it + being constantly conscious of the ability, and craving for that feeling of exhilaration
Self esteem = Overall assessment (could be low or high) of one's worth + consequences (pride/arrogance v/s shame/vanity) of such assessment
Conceit = Overestimating one's ability or overall self-worth
Vanity = Suspicion of being deficient in certain abilities + exagerrated attempts to cover up the deficiency + feeling of intense insecurity
Rudeness = Unwarranted bad behavior. Period.
If one were to consult a dictionary or thesaurus, most of the above terms have been shown to be synonymous with each other. But we know more people consider arrogance to be worse than pride. Likewise, self esteem is thought of as a defensive feeling, as in it is to be called upon only when one's respect is overrun. In this sense, sense esteem requires initiation by an externa agent, but we know, we can possess self esteem even without involving others. So, this was my attempt at assigning specific meanings to the above terms, and hence, no doubt, they're my personal opinion, but not without some help from Wikipedia, and a couple of bloggers who I don't even remember but whose opinions I came across only by googling. No doubt, some readers might find these distinctions artificial or different from theirs. And that's where (when I get some feedback) the fun begins! ;)
-----
Original Post
Submitted on:
SUNDAY, APRIL 19, 2009
We all unknowingly have our own definitions even for the most common terms. Many times, how one uses a word is also reason enough to create misunderstandings. Once in a while, it's good to try to come to a concrete definition of words we use. In one of my replies to a blogger, I realized that I had a very firm idea of pride, but that was different from hers. In my system of thoughts pride is not at all an evil. Rather, I've come to associate basic pride the way one leads one life such a prerequisite, that without it, I'd really consider anyone's life really miserable. But the contention from the other side was that it does not take much for pride to turn into conceit and rudeness. Whereas, I've been so sure that somehow pride could never lead to rudeness. Then it struck me! Our definitions of pride were really disparate.So, let me try to define pride and some related terms.
Pride. When you're aware of some of your ability and happy to possess it, that's pride.
Arrogance. When you're aware of some ability that you possess and think that very few other people possess it. Here, the difference is that the ability in question is considered important by you. For instance, if I have a good sense of smell, I won't be arrogant about it, as I'd consider it pretty trivial. I might not be even proud of it. But say, if I think I'm more intelligent than average people, and also think of intelligence as an important trait, then there's a chance that this awareness (pride) could transform into arrogance. So, arrogance, may be requires a standard to compare oneself against. I think the exact point pride turns into arrogance is when one uses a few of one's traits to make a sweeping conclusion to the effect that "on account of those abilities, I'm a better person (than some other person). I'm more important to this world". Thus, arrogance is relative. I could be arrogant with a person less educated than me, but not with someone better educated. But I could be equally proud of having beautiful handwriting both before people with worse and better handwriting than me. For it is absolute.
But is it not possible for me to be actually better than some people in terms of parts (i.e., the individual abilities I possess) and also as a whole (as a person, that is)?
That is a difficult question to answer. But I think I do have an answer now. If I'm arrogant about certain abilities, and even if I retain my objectivity to consider some other person's abilities as good as mine, I'll only tend to classify people as less able, or equally able, or more able than me (notice the emphasis). I'll think it unimportant to try to make out as to who among the two less able than me, is more able. But if I'm proud of certain abilities, I'll not be so obsessed with my own abilities and not overlook totally others' abilities. I'll acknowledge others' abilities, too even if less impressive than mine.If I've to put it in most simple fashion possible, being proud of one's abilities is like getting used to one's clothes. You know you possess them (abilities), but don't think of them all the time. Whereas, arrogance of is like wearing new clothes, constantly thinking about them, and then constantly being conscious if others are noticing them!
Rudeness. Rudeness may or may not be related to arrogance about specific abilities. Rudeness results when one does not consider the other person worthy of existence [(sic!); contempt of sorts]. Yes, so what gives people the right to think of someone else's existence as unimportant in comparison with their own? It is at this level maybe some kind of arrogance is involved. But it's some nonspecific kind of arrogance. Rude people "just assume" that they're more important. Maybe this trait arises from their being less conducive to a social life. Social, as in a life that entails, sharing, respecting, basically, acknowledging someone else to be as important as the self, that too in one's own system of thoughts. So maybe, by default, we humans do possess certain kind of rudeness. But this seems to be a too far-reaching conclusion I'm drawing. I must not overreach my ability to get my mind into others' shoes!
