Pride is absurd. White Pride, Gay Pride, Latino Pride
and Nationalist Pride are only a few examples of the type of vacuous,
intellectually distorted, emotional nonsense that people employ all
the time. So many people say they have “pride” as if they've only
just discovered a new word for which they're looking for even the
weakest excuse to use it. The problem I have with this is when
people say they're "proud" of something, of which they
ought not to be "proud". I know that may sound a bit
extreme, a bit harsh. But, if I didn't grab your attention I might
not save you from a life of misery. Well, okay, it's not likely
actually misery, it's more likely just occasional inaccuracies and
misunderstandings. But, the point remains about pride. Pride is a
word that is very often used wrongly.
Just to be clear on a few things, before I continue on
about pride. When people say “gay pride” perhaps what they mean,
what they ought to be saying is, “not ashamed to be gay”. And why
not? There is nothing about being gay, which one should be ashamed
of, at all. The term, though not synonymous, is understood to mean
“unashamed”. Unlike though, with racial or ethnic or religious “pride”,
which is synonymous, in these cases, with “supremacy”. La Raza,
the Ku Klux Klan and the Black Panthers are racial supremacy groups
that advocate racism against people who are not “superior”, in
other words members of their own race or ethnicity, in their views.
Their use of the word “pride” is meant to be a dodge, or a cover,
or code word, for racial identity and their supposed supremacy.
The fact about pride is that it requires an
accomplishment of some sort. All too often one hears – what at
least to me sounds something like the dragging of fingernails on
chalkboard people throwing the word “pride” around, needlessly
or carelessly. In some ways it may cheapen that to which it is being
applied, and sometimes it's used entirely inappropriately. One must
wonder what does a person mean when they say they are “proud” of
this thing or that. There are times, of-course, when it's use is
completely appropriate. But, that's not the point. The correct use of
a term does not arouse a need to improve clarity. Correct use of
terms simply does not arouse the ire of those of us who do care about
the art and science of communication.
The sloppy use of language makes me cringe, as it would
anyone who wishes to be clear. Everyone has their own perceptions,
but to be understood correctly, we must first get past our own
perceptions. There must be uniformity in our understanding of what
the terms we use mean. We need standards, or else our words become
meaningless. Our efforts at communication become useless when we are
not clear. We need to read dictionaries, reliable ones, multiple
ones. We need to settle on the definition that most of the
dictionaries are in consensus on, for each term. We need the simplest
and yet most accurate definition. After-all, definitions must be
agreed upon if we are to convey our concepts accurately. If you use
unclear terms, words that can be understood differently by others,
poor context or grammar, you may not be saying what you intend.
Others will likely not be receiving your message as you want them to
understand it.
I do, in fact, see a commonplace misunderstanding of the
term "pride". Certainly a review of some various
dictionaries reveals that there are multiple ways that the term is
commonly used. But, still many people use the word all too loosely.
It's not that people are saying something like "I'm too proud to
be seen with you", in which case they would mean proud in the
sense of self-esteem, or even arrogance. Nor, is the use of proud as
in "the head stands proud of the shoulders" being
discussed, in that case it would be using the term to mean standing
above, or out from, something. It should go without saying that we're
not discussing a group of lions, a “pride” being similar to a
“herd” or a “flock”. Rather, the meaning of "proud",
implicit in the topic, is that of accomplishment.
Some people talk about their racial or gender pride, or
ethnic pride, but that's a misunderstanding about pride. In some
cases, like the use of the term in Gay Pride Parade, what is really
meant is “not ashamed”. Clearly, it is fair to be unashamed of
one's sexual orientation, though the word is still being misused.
“Gay Pride” raises a whole other set of issues, like that of
choice. If you can be “proud” of being gay, then why, for
fairness sake, can't I be proud of being straight? I'll assume that
what is meant, and clumsily conveyed, by “gay pride” is rather
“not ashamed to be gay”. That would be fair then. Obviously, one
doesn't choose their skin color or arrangement of genitals, or in
which culture they're raised. In this way one cannot honestly be
"proud" of one's religion, after all one who merely
maintains the beliefs they're taught to believe in hasn't
accomplished any feat, in that regard.
Religious people may often say that they are “proud”
of being a Christian, or a Muslim, for example. The problem is that
in most cases, unlike with atheism, one really did not accomplish
anything to become a Christian or a Muslim, etcetera. Most religious
people are simply being as they were programmed by other people:
their parents or other family members, religious leaders, friends and
society. They are acting in accordance to the external programming
which was implanted in their youth, such that they've essentially not
accomplished on their own being as they are. This is akin, in a way,
to being “proud” to be black or to be white, or “proud” to be
a male or to be a female, for example. This sort of so-called pride
is an absurdity. Each of us was born male or female. Every person was
born into a group of skin-color. It's an accident of birth, and so
not an accomplishment because it is a state of being which was
permanently imposed from the outset. Though, obviously, religion is
different in that it's not unchangeable. The point is that virtually
all religious people were taught in their youth, when they were most
impressionable, to be religious. It comes, almost, as natural to
them. In fact, usually little thought is given to one's religious
beliefs.
But, to think critically, to apply logic and to be
rational is an accomplishment, that is worthy of the term. It's a
feat that one accomplishes every time one thinks about their beliefs,
analyzes the evidence and consciously decides to either accept or
reject a proposition because of it's merits. In this way, since
religion is the norm, being an atheist is something of which one can
rightfully be proud. The reason being is, as bluntly as it is, that
so many people simply accept primitive and unfounded fantasies as if
they were reality. There is no accomplishment in merely acquiescing
to popular pressure, to obediently accept conformity for the sake of
comfort rather than honesty. I'm proud to say that I'm an atheist.
And since one can only have pride in an accomplishment, and since
realizing that faith is not a virtue, coming to grips with reality
rather than denying it, is an accomplishment, the term fits.
An "atheist" is a person who has no beliefs in
a deity. That's all it means. What we can be "proud" of is
how we become an atheist, or the reasons we are an atheist. Since to
be "proud" requires an accomplishment to be "proud"
of, one cannot be proud merely of being an atheist. This is because
being an "atheist" is a state of being, not an
accomplishment. But, one can be proud of thinking critically, because
that is an action and so can be an accomplishment. Thus, one has
pride in being an atheist only to the extent that to become an
atheist one accomplished the act of thinking critically. In other
words, when one says “I'm proud to be an atheist” one means the
connoted critical thinking that lead to being an atheist is what one
is actually proud of. One is proud of his or her correct use of logic
and one's critical thinking skills. One is, therefore, also proud of
the act of rejecting claims that are lacking the requisite evidence.
Copyright © 2012 Joshua Michail
