December 28, 2008
-
Arrogance
What is arrogance?
There seems to be some sort of distinction between being confident and being arrogant, but it is hard to discern what entails the difference. For it seems the case that someone could be perceived as arrogant, without actually being arrogant. But then what is it that makes a person actually arrogant?
It seems arrogance has to do with intent, for it always characterized of the way a person acts in conversation. The audience perceives that the purpose of the words—that is, the purpose the speaker has for the words—is to establish the superiority of the speaker over that of his listener.
Now here is the problem if that is indeed true—how do you know what the purpose of a person is when speaking? My experience has been that if you have thought about some topic a good deal, and thus have a good deal of confidence in your position, it is nearly certain you will be perceived as arrogant by anyone listening if you choose to talk about it. But as we have said, there is a difference between confidence and arrogance; there is nothing about confidence that means a person considers themselves a better person than someone else. If a person takes a long time to verify each step in a math problem, their confidence in the correctness of their answer is in no way incompatible with them being a thoroughly humble person.
The problem, I think, is a difference in kinds of people. There are some people who are simply more interested in ideas than other people, so much so that they can participate in any intensity of discussion, so long as it remains focused on the issue, without ever even considering the status of their relationship with the other person. But for a person who does not track closely the status of ideas in their mind, a person who seems confident in their position on an issue becomes an anomaly; listening to them they think, “who does this? Why is this person so confident? What is going on?” Since they do not pay so much close attention to ideas themselves, enough so to develop a confident position, there must be some other explanation for why this person is so confident in their position. To them, the idea is not being considered at all; only the relationship is being affected, and the other peson is asserting their dominance. People stop listening to ideas, and all they hear is you saying over and over again, ”I am better than you.”
It is critical, then, for a person to determine the orientation of their audience. I may care a good deal whether or not the rational-actor model is true in international relations, where as my friend Leslie may not care at all. It would be a bad idea, then, to discuss it with her, since if she disagreed with me my confidence in relation to the position I hold would only be understood as me putting her down for being wrong about international relations.
A relationship-oriented person will always misinterpret an ideas-oriented person, unless they somehow come to understand the difference of the way these respective minds work, which I have found, is quite rare.
And to conclude, there is nothing that necessitates an ideas-oriented person must think themself better than other people because they happen to care about ideas. There are lots of things that make for a good life; for instance, I may understand philosophy, but I cannot even play an instrument, or do yoga, or in terms of my character I am not a very good servant. So while I think an ideas-oriented person may be at risk of being arrogant by actually thinking themself better than other people, this is often simply a confusion caused by a difference in kinds of people.
Comments (12)
I think a person comes across as arrogant, not because of their knowledge or confidence, but when they don’t respectfully acknowledge and listen to the other person’s opinion, or resort to ad hominems.
@musterion99 -
Yes, definitely. It might seem an implication of my post that because confidence does not entail arrogance that it is always an illusion that people who are confident are arrogant; but of course that’s not true. There are lots of things that people do, even when both people are confident, ideas-oriented people, that are rude and disrespectful, which is definitely indicative of arrogance.
Although I think that confidence is at least a precondition for being arrogant; I can’t conceive of someone who is arrogant but not confident. So that at least has to be a component.
extremely thought provoking.
So, what you are saying is that people of two mindsets misinterpret intent when they are unable to see where the other is coming from. And that people who can operate on both playing fields are a rarity?
I don’t think that people with this ability is a rarity. I think that people are not so sure how to express that they can see and appriciate both sides of the coin. Might shake up their image. I don’t know, just an idea.
@RealityDreams -
Really, not a rarity?
Well, all I can say is that I have been scarred by the amount of people I know who interpret the way I talk as being arrogant. This has caused me to become seriously disillusioned with how I should act around other people, where I ought to steer conversations, and so on. I’ve concluded that I should just never present an opinion I’ve thought about on anything ever.
Thinking seems to me to be very much a dialogue, where the consideration of an idea seems like the succession of one thought averring followed by another demurring. Conversation can take the same form, where different people take the role of an asserting or objecting thought, and by talking it out a whole group can essentially become one thinking mind. If you’ve ever read a Socratic dialogue you know what I mean.
Unfortunately I find that to most other people this is not even a category. People just think you’re trying to sound smart or something. Socrates would not have had many willing participants in today’s world.
Is your experience the opposite of this? You know people who can readily distinguish between a passion for discussing ideas and a desire to appear ‘above’ others?
@StrokeofThought -
[I can't conceive of someone who is arrogant but not confident. So that at least has to be a component.]
Right. I agree.
Also, I think that people who have a strong opinion on virtually everything and come across as though they know everything, can seem arrogant. I used to be this way and always thought I was right about everything and couldn’t understand why people would accuse me of being argumentive. I thought, why shouldn’t I give my opinion and argue if I’m right? I finally realized that all these people that had the same opinion of me couldn’t all be wrong and that maybe the problem was with me. I’ve since learned to be a little more humble, even if I think I’m right, and to be a better listener and leave room that maybe I’m not right. Even if I know I am right, and the other person doesn’t agree, I have to realize and come to a point where continuing the argument is fruitless and a waste of time, and try to do it without to much disrespect to the other person. I admit that it’s not always an easy thing to do.
@StrokeofThought -
Yes, I know people in certain circles that can readily understand the difference between appearing arrogant and having passion for certain subjects.
My best friend and I were just discussing this issue last night. We have a mutual friend that is often seen as arrogant. While I am not really bothered by him, my friend Kaitlin can hardly stand to be around him. She said that because he is always giving his opinion and spouting off about smart things, she feels stupid in his presence. So you are right- intelligence can sound like dominance to certain people.
I think you found the ‘solution to arrogance’ in determining different kinds of intelligence/orientation in people before speaking.
True arrogance must be when a person refuses to recognise these differences and *confidently* continues to express his opinion no matter his audience.
@musterion99 -
More great points. We ought disclaim the poverty of our intellects in the world of knowledge continually to ourselves and others; too often we don’t note all the things that we don’t write or say, because we don’t know them to write or say. We are indeed beggars in thought, questioners who find the occassional answer.
@Linley_K -
Well said – and to me it seems pretty easy to detect when people seem a bit put off by the content of a conversation. And there is no excuse for not stopping. Relationships are the bottom line of life, and I think it’s true that we should tend toward this truth in conversation, always submissing to it rather than to being perceived as right. (Or winning in a board game, for that matter… *regretful sigh* I am so competetive sometimes..)
@StrokeofThought -
[and to me it seems pretty easy to detect when people seem a bit put off by the content of a conversation. And there is no excuse for not stopping.]
I was going to bring that up also. It’s very annoying when people don’t detect it and don’t stop.
If two ideas-oriented people are having conversation, then there would be no problem. But if one of them is not, then i think it depends upon the way ideas-oriented person talks and the tone that is being used. Also body language, whether you are smiling or not, etc.