The Instigator
Imperfiect
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
ElCorazonAma
Pro (for)
Winning
34 Points

Humility is thinking of oneself less.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 9 votes the winner is...
ElCorazonAma
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/1/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,339 times Debate No: 64322
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (9)

 

Imperfiect

Con

First round is opening arguments. :)
ElCorazonAma

Pro

Definitions:
Humility-
the quality or condition of being humble; modest opinion or estimate of one's own importance, rank, etc.


Introduction
There is specific illustrations as to what humility looks like because it can easily be overlooked do to ones actions. I will give the differences as to what humility is and is not as well as giving the BoP of the resolution.
1. false humility
2. actual humility.


I. False Humility

On many cases of humility, various if not all, mistake false humility with actual humility. This is done through the excuses of manipulation and frustration. Reason being in either of these situations, is more or less do to the fact that a person may not truly be concerned at all or expect something in return out of greed or hidden motive. Let's examine both aspects individually.

" Case of manipulation- (manipulate) to manage or influence skillfully, especially in an unfair manner.
1. Deceiving someone's feelings or minds into believing or doing something worth gaining for self gratifying motives.
2. To possibly cause harm

" Case of frustration- a. the prevention or hindering of a potentially satisfying activity
b. the emotional reaction to such prevention that may involve aggression.
1. Irrisistable annoyance of misunderstanding situations
2. Unconcerned and resulted to avoidance
3. Cause harm or threats out of anger

Neither cases are good because in the end, they may result to harming the other individual because they either desire something or want to left alone. For example in a situation of someone who portrays themselves to be "homeless" seeks out money and henceforth begins asking anyone for the funds. Some individuals go to the extent of switching leg limps or having a doll as a pretend-baby or say things that would attempt to influentialy deceive . This can be a means of manipulation. While the people who is being asked by the homeless ones for money, may result in frustration by the decietfulness of the individuals so they either result in avoiding or just hand the money to get them out of they're way of destination or even go to the extent of gruesome words. In any case to this, the person asking is fasley humbling themselves and the person giving or sharing is out of false humility as well.



II. Actual Humility

True intentional humility is not something that is taught, but lived out by the good motive of the heart. Humility is something that a person does with the soul and whole being of concern and love and care for another and/or others. Taking the extra mile of doing/giving (regardless of what it is) and does not expect a single thing in return. The showcase of actual humility may result in; unexpectation, willing and faithful. We may now evaluate these individually as well.

" Case of unexpectation- Absence of expectation; want of foresight.
1. Is to not expect or want or desire anything back.

" Case of willing- a. Disposed or inclined; prepared.
1. Nothing to lose.
2. Ready to take any course of action.

" Case of faithful- a. strict or thorough in the performance of duty:
a faithful worker. b. true to one's word, promises, vows, etc.
1. Loyal and promising.
2. Honest.
3. Ability to do with genuine love and care.

In all these cases, the actual humility is taken directly from a true nature of being humble, which is resulted to it being good. Example of illustrated actual humility using the same analogy of the "homeless" situation. The homeless person who is evidently asking not necessarily for money but where they may find good places for help and have sickness involved is not out of any negative intention but being calm and understanding to those who are unable to help but still accepting to whatever comes they're way. And the persons that the homeless are asking are giving what they can or all they have or even offering to provide them the way or places to get help. In any case here, both are being genuinely humble In the interest of the others situations and in the most that they can help it just wait with no intention of expectation in either cases but just with an act of loyalty and good nature of care, to which displays actual humility.

Conclusion

"Humility is thinking of oneself less", is not so much of seeking whether or not what you can gain for satisfying gratification or how harmful you can be to another, but how you can help or care, love, give and expect nothing. It takes an act of true nature to be humble and know the other/s will be fine in the end and do all you can for the others around you. It's not so much pitying yourself and thinking horribly low of yourself out of mere loathe, but a willingness heart of knowing that regardless of the outcome for yourself as long as others and other things are taken care of that is all that matters even if you fail or don't receive anything. In the end it is all worth it.


http://dictionary.reference.com...
http://dictionary.reference.com...
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Imperfiect

Con

Pro defines Humility as modest opinion of one's own importance, rank and other things including self-worth and sexual prowess.

Regarding the issue of false humility, it is interesting to understand false humility and how it works before analyzing what actual humility is. When one is using manipulation via false humility what they actually display is a huge ability to think of themselves but sacrificing their time and efforts knowingly and strategically in order to gain the reputation of someone who is always there for other because they are so aware of how they can individually, uniquely and personally contribute to their surroundings in a way that others can only dream of doing.

I am not entirely sure what frustration has to do with this resolution so I will ignore it on grounds of irrelevance.

Humility itself is actually something children are taught from a very young age. Children are very egotistic in their philosophy and decision making[1] because they have not yet understood that anyone other than themselves can have feelings or personalities of their own. They only perceive reality subjectively and make decisions on impulse.[2] As children grow into adolescents they begin to maintain some sense of narcissism but less than children have. This arrogance fades further away as they approach adulthood not because they think of themselves less but because their thought process itself alters.

In essence, thinking of oneself less does not increase humility, it increases arrogance. Only an arrogant individual is able to say "I am better than everyone" and not think twice about it. The humble individual thinks *I have these attributes and this means I also have some weaknesses to go with my strengths".

Humility requires no love, nor masochistic gratification. It merely requires to true analysis of oneself to see the unpleasant flaws that the arrogant refuse to think about in the first place within themselves.

[1] http://www.iep.utm.edu...
[2] http://www.hincksdellcrest.org...
ElCorazonAma

Pro

In my two illustrations "false humility" & "actual humility" were just to point to the obvious as to what it is what it can be and what it is not.

What I also wanted to point out is the difference between guilt can be a trigger for false humility and remorse can be a sign for actual humility. Between the two guilt can longer on forever but it doesn't mean a person truly has shown true intention of humility because it can just be a form of "I feel sorry for myself" rather than a "I did wrong and I'll take my punishment to learn from it" which the latter is more of having remorse for what was done.

Guilt attempts to stay focused on oneself while being remorseful is acknowledging what you did wrong but being able to attain responsibility and accepting what's to come. It's not so much thinking of oneself in the remorseful manner, but more of taking responsibility for ones actions. This doesn't cause someone to think of oneself but rather to think less of oneself in a humble manner.
Debate Round No. 2
Imperfiect

Con

Imperfiect forfeited this round.
ElCorazonAma

Pro

My opponent is unable to finish because as it would appear, his account has been closed. So if you vote only vote based off the first arguments just to make it fair for my opponent. Don't look at the FF or count that in the voting. Just arguments vote ONLY please. First ones.
Debate Round No. 3
Imperfiect

Con

Imperfiect forfeited this round.
ElCorazonAma

Pro

Vote ONLY on first round arguments. Nothing more.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
== RFD ==

Con doesn't define what "thinking of oneself less" means. Pro argues that it means prioritizing others over yourself. Con tries to argue that it means "thinking less of yourself," i.e. the belief that you are somehow inferior to others. I'm not really sure which definition to use, since neither side defined the topic. However, since Pro's definition is plausible and fits grammatically (since under Con's interpretation, the wording should be "think less of yourself" not "think of yourself less"), I award the argument point to Pro. I think Pro upholds the proper meaning of the resolution better.
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
eh. I just didn't feel like the topic resonated. Also, you two were taking two different sides.
Posted by ElCorazonAma 2 years ago
ElCorazonAma
why boring?? but thanks for voting lol!!
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
This was actually probably Marie's most boring debate yet. -.-
*yawn*
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
RFD
Marie opens up with the definitions of humility and basically sums up with the fact that people think of themselves less, regardless of false or actual humility.
Con says "Humility itself is actually something children are taught from a very young age. Children are very egotistic in their philosophy and decision making[1] because they have not yet understood that anyone other than themselves can have feelings or personalities of their own. They only perceive reality subjectively and make decisions on impulse.[2] As children grow into adolescents they begin to maintain some sense of narcissism but less than children have. This arrogance fades further away as they approach adulthood not because they think of themselves less but because their thought process itself alters.

In essence, thinking of oneself less does not increase humility, it increases arrogance." (I think he meant more of ignorance, rather than arrogance. Being in abnegation is still humiliation rather than arrogance.) And talks about how one needs to analyze him or herself in order to fulfill humility. I think con was a little confused about the resolution, as Marie clarifies in the next round, "guilt can be a trigger for false humility and remorse can be a sign for actual humility. " Then talks about how her situations show that thinking oneself as a lesser person, rather than just thinking oneself "less". Overall I felt like con misinterpreted the resolution, leading to his ultimate loss. By con's interpretation, the resolution WOULD be "humility is thinking of oneself FEWER TIMES". But that doesn't seem to be the resolution. As I see it, Marie wins this one due to her clarification in the definitions.
Posted by ElCorazonAma 2 years ago
ElCorazonAma
Okay, thank you.
Posted by Imperfiect 2 years ago
Imperfiect
yes just do whatever you want
Posted by ElCorazonAma 2 years ago
ElCorazonAma
Soooo are we just rebuttaling now? Or can I still add arguments? Because it doesn't exactly look like you stated your case? Or maybe I'm not reading rightly? Please clarify what you would like so that I may begin to proceed forth on this debate.
Posted by Truth_seeker 2 years ago
Truth_seeker
Can't wait to vote on this debate aha :) Very interesting topic here.
Posted by ElCorazonAma 2 years ago
ElCorazonAma
23hrs?! Dawgnoggits!! I didn't see those credentials. *sighs* oh well ... -_-
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Tweka 2 years ago
Tweka
ImperfiectElCorazonAmaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Truth_seeker 2 years ago
Truth_seeker
ImperfiectElCorazonAmaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Reasons for voting decision: Spelling and Grammar goes to con as Pro made a few mistakes such as "influentialy deceive." Arguments go to Pro as Pro demonstrated by defining humility the characteristics of who a true humble person is. Con's rebuttal was not solid as Con did not refute Pro's position that humility by her definitions is thinking of ones self less. "In essence, thinking of oneself less does not increase humility, it increases arrogance. Only an arrogant individual is able to say "I am better than everyone" and not think twice about it. The humble individual thinks *I have these attributes and this means I also have some weaknesses to go with my strengths". Both sides could have effectively done better. Pro could've numbered her sources as well as clarify things and Con could have simply stated that humility had nothing to do with Pro's listed qualities of humility which would make him the winner. Happy to clarify my RFD.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
ImperfiectElCorazonAmaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con should lose conduct for the multiple forfeits, but per the request of Pro I will withhold from removing those points from Con. Arguments - Pro. Con presented a case where humility was not necessarily think less of oneself but rather it leads to arrogance. Unfortunately, there was little to no evidence supporting this claim. With a weak rebuttal from Con, I view Pro's cases to be greater in regards of meeting the BOP. For this, Pro wins arguments.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
ImperfiectElCorazonAmaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: I just don't see the arguments I need to from Con here. He essentially just argues alternate outcomes, that thinking less of oneself leads to something other than humility. His attempt to do so, however, is incredibly weak, and comes without an alternative explanation of what that is. Without that alternative viewpoint, I'm left to accept Pro's explanation, which doesn't jive in the slightest with Con's viewpoint. Perhaps it does lead to arrogance, but Con needed to either explain why Pro's definition shows a link to arrogance, or provide a definition that better links to it. He did neither. Even managing that, he needed to also show that arrogance is necessarily achieved without humility, as I'm given no reason to believe that an arrogant person cannot also be humble.
Vote Placed by Cermank 2 years ago
Cermank
ImperfiectElCorazonAmaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Honestly, I found the definition of humility conflating with that of empathy. Even though the definitions seemed fine, its interpretation by Pro was different than what I would have done. But given the definition (and since con did not challenge it), pro seem to have made arguments that were not addressed by Con. Con's arguments were merely assertions w/o any train of logic, so I would give this to Pro. :)
Vote Placed by ShadowKingStudios 2 years ago
ShadowKingStudios
ImperfiectElCorazonAmaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Even without the FF Con was not convincing. FF so Pro wins by default,
Vote Placed by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
ImperfiectElCorazonAmaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for forfeit. RFD in comments.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
ImperfiectElCorazonAmaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
ImperfiectElCorazonAmaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments. Giving conduct to Marie because of the very loose, undefined resolution.