September 27, 2022
Oof, you can tell by the year that this is an old one. I have a blog for posperity. I have a blog for prosperity. I have a blog for prosp-
TLDR; Prestige and humility are mutually exclusive. Signalling humility is societally advantageous. Authentic humility manifesting in low conviction harms one’s success on traditional paradigms.
There I was, standing in an office kitchen, and someone came in. Immediately I went into an invisible panic, trying to decipher what was the correct thing to do in this very normal social situation.
They come up to me, and as the normally-functioning being they are, they say “hello” and begin introducing themselves.
New to the office, and as an individual with relative human decency, I have to introduce myself. So I begin spewing the most convoluted set of phrases this person likely has ever heard.
For someone, if I had to try and explain what I was thinking while saying this nonsense, it probably was along the lines of “Don’t mention specifics because what if she works in the same field as me? They’ll start asking me questions…then I’ll sound dumb”, “Name-drop institutions and basic functions and they’ll go along their way” and “don’t just name-drop because no one cares and no one likes a humble bragger”.
Not-so-inexplicably, my efforts to “be (intrinsically) humble” came across, and they very candidly explained that “being humble” which I assume they meant in an extrinsic fashion wouldn’t get me very far in life.
Although I went along with my day as normal, luckily with no more awkward introductions, I have begun to question humility, what it means, whether I hold it as a virtue, and whether it is valuable if I do. Retrospectively, I can’t say if I was actively trying to be intrinsically humble as I assume my mannerisms were a result of internalized inferiority. Regardless, were they right, was trying to be humble (subconsciously or consciously) going to hold me back? Understanding Humility
Prestige is the antonym for humility. The definition of “prestige” is “A high standing, achieved through success or influence or wealth etc.” This definition is the crux of whether one should be humble at all, assuming success, influence and/or wealth are things to be desired. Even if all of you’re life pursuits were centred around being the most altruistic, being the most successful at this is inherently valuable if not necessary. If you’re utilitarian on this front, that should mean you’re strongly optimizing in pursuit of this aim.
Suppose achieving a high level of success or influence is the pinnacle of one’s aim (earning revenue, making an impact), and high social standing is just a direct correlation. In that case, one should chase prestige and inadvertently object to humility.
The term signalling probably entered my vernacular about a year ago. But, unfortunately, amongst the group that inadvertently introduced me to this word, I had managed to surround myself with people attending elite institutions that felt so foreign.
I went from having a slow-growing network of adults who had even attended post-secondary institutions in the Western World to knowing people who had attended, were attending, or were likely on track to attend the top universities in the US and the UK. Whether these people intended it or not, just the names of their alma matters made me see them in a glowing light – at least at first, and at least at the start of my falling for brand name universities.
The funny thing is that many of these people were very aware of the pedestals their institutions had provided for them. In giving me advice on what to do next, many highly encouraged me to apply to Ivys, Oxbridge and the like. Although still in denial of the fact of plausible acceptance to any of these institutions, I saw the value of admission and attendance to one of these schools. The tokenism of these institutions wasn’t hidden from me during these conversations. I reached a point where I assumed signalling was second-order from its value. Signalling through your university was first about your prestige factor, which then signalled your competence. So I wondered, was prestige truly instrumental, or was it becoming prized?
A major anxiety for me now entering the college admissions process, is not that I won’t get into the right university for my goals; acquiring the right internships to skill-build, connecting with interesting people, etc. but that my institution won’t be well-regarded enough to maintain status amongst a group of people who I want to maintain status with. I’m now painfully aware of the instrumental convergence with converting prestige into…I’m not sure…some combination of success and influence doesn’t sound all too bad.
Assuming prestige and humility are mutually exclusive, prestige is almost all-encompassing of things that any sane being would want. So why does humility still at the very least feel like a virtue?
Social incentives that highly encourage humility are more strong nudging to act with humility. Again, however, it may be best to look at religion to understand why this trait is societally valued. Religion is a good example of how superficially good acts can become culturally normative even if they exist outside the religious constraints they were prescribed.
True humility within the Abrahamic religions comes from a notion of complete subserviency to a greater power – God. However, it can be assumed that not all disciples have a fear of God as their true reason for humility. In theory, the global optima of fearing God should manifest in not chasing social status and recognizing that one’s abilities as a human are negligibly better to others, relative to the divine figure. However, in the absence of faith but the presence of religion, generally, one would be looked down upon for being overly pompous, and others police their mannerisms based on humility, whether it is in recognition of this ultimate aim (fearing God) or not.
It is quite well known, that a key characteristic of the human race is our social group dynamics. Generally, being in them is beneficial, and we ensure that our actions are well received in said groups for longevity. Regardless, although it can be argued that narcissism and egocentrism are despised, and those that possess them are likely not to have good standings, most social groups, especially those developed under the premise-of survival, have an “alpha with its followers” model. Although today analyzing corporate culture, more egalitarian power distributions are at the very least have become more socially acceptable.
CEOs today are more likely to come forward and express how they view everyone as their equals, but with complete and (mutual) serendipity. The only value in leadership is having a definite say over decisions when efficiency and select totalitarianism are needed. One can argue that trust in a leader having the group’s best interest is most important, but one can’t say that a leader speaking on behalf of their govern is not valuable. If humility was so virtuous as to reign over human kinship, then one could argue that civilization would collapse. Instead, prestige asserts dominance and worthiness to be a leader, and leadership allows for collective action – a fundamental principle in a functioning society.
I distinctly remember our teachers throwing around the term “sore loser” in elementary school enough that I developed a disdain for the term. In practice, I think the average elementary school environment strives for a “regression to the mean” approach to social status, albeit superficially. In practice, the most athletic were likely to continue being MVPs supporting sports championship wins, and the mathematically gifted would continue correctly answering questions. At the same time, their arms stay sore from remaining in a constant upright position – in apprehension for the teacher’s next question. Regardless, at least in the average, liberal Canadian school, teachers would encourage the maths whiz to let others answer and support general participation on sports teams.
Generally, the common theme was that even if you had innate talent (or whatever allowed you to excel relative to average), demonstrated competency should be equal amongst everyone in the environment. Although, this does not apply in the “real world”, generally, high-performers continue to do well, but with the nuance of not overshining the others. Corporate environments are an interesting example and likely mirror their traditional school equivalents, where performance reviews are tied with material and social incentive. Thus, with promotions and higher pay on the line – it is not the time to be humble. Rather, it is a time to break away from the pack, by all means possible.
I’ve concluded that assuming epistemic humility manifests as expected is disadvantageous for an individual seeking success on traditional paradigms, but superficial humility is relatively beneficial.
Epistemic Humility: Epistemic humility refers to the idea that our views, opinions and a general understanding of our knowledge rely on our skewed perceptions of the world. Genuine epistemic humility can manifest in a multitude of ways. However, I believe this means that no statement is said with 100% confidence and is subject to change with new information or framing.
Superficial Epistemic Humility: I believe that someone can be epistemically humble but not superficially epistemically modest, and depending on one’s circle, this can be harmful to their seeking of status. Superficial epistemic humility is based on the principle that you can signal uncertainty in your statements while having high confidence that your views aren’t subject to change.
In writing this, I realize humility is indeed good. I deemed myself competent in recognizing when others and myself lacked it at times. I found this recognition to turn off bad signals in my mind, so much so that I would veer towards not stating “accomplishments” and constantly hedging to ensure that others’ narcissism radars wouldn’t be turned on.
I suppose the pursuit of authentic humility is one engrained in societal constructs. Still, actively trying to be authentically humble (by the exemplified definition) is likely not in your best interest (with nuance).
Notes
Other people’s thoughts that I find interesting on the topic: