What is the most overrated virtue?

Interesting why of thinking about it. I suppose I consider any type of prayer needing to be directed at something otherwise its just a physical action.

I read, I write, I code, I cook. But these are all in the mundane to me. Its not spiritual just productive.

I understand.
It's different for everyone.
I getcha.
 
What period are you talking about exactly with regard to this view of the English parliament that you have?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta

1215, King John and the Barons. Yes its landowners and not a true democracy but its a massive step forward.

Examples -
  • Forbade the exploitation of a ward's property by his guardian.
  • Established protection for debtors, confirming that a debtor should not have his lands seized as long as he had other means to pay the debt.
  • Further addressed Jewish money lending, stating that a widow and children should be provided for before paying an inherited debt.
  • Forbade the selling of justice, or its denial or delay.
  • Stated that no free man could be imprisoned or stripped of his rights or possessions without due process being legally applied.

etc.

English Barons, English Democracy, in an early form.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta

1215, King John and the Barons. Yes its landowners and not a true democracy but its a massive step forward.

Examples -
  • Forbade the exploitation of a ward's property by his guardian.
  • Established protection for debtors, confirming that a debtor should not have his lands seized as long as he had other means to pay the debt.
  • Further addressed Jewish money lending, stating that a widow and children should be provided for before paying an inherited debt.
  • Forbade the selling of justice, or its denial or delay.
  • Stated that no free man could be imprisoned or stripped of his rights or possessions without due process being legally applied.

etc.

English Barons, English Democracy, in an early form.
Well, just a bit of background about me: I'm a High Medievalist, so I'm familiar with Magna Carta.

It wasn't particularly important at the time, and European monarchies are replete with examples of their magnates throwing their weight around like this in this period (when monarchies were weak) - there are plenty of other more 'democratic' institutions and polities that you could point to; the Italian & German city states, for example. It only really became 'important' when parliamentarians started to refer back to it as an ancient authority of their rights centuries later - a kind of myth of precedence that was common in the Renaissance.

My point is that 'England' and the English flag aren't really symbolic of 'democracy' as much as a very powerful oligarchy in the seventeenth century compared to its monarch. The English state was always very advanced and unusually centralised compared to its neighbours, even before the Conquest, but I just find it odd to make 'democracy' one of its defining features. 'Liberty', for sure - England and the United Kingdom was always noted for its 'liberty' by contemporaries, just not 'democracy'.
 
Well, just a bit of background about me: I'm a High Medievalist, so I'm familiar with Magna Carta.

It wasn't particularly important at the time, and European monarchies are replete with examples of their magnates throwing their weight around like this in this period (when monarchies were weak) - there are plenty of other more 'democratic' institutions and polities that you could point to; the Italian & German city states, for example. It only really became 'important' when parliamentarians started to refer back to it as an ancient authority of their rights centuries later - a kind of myth of precedence that was common in the Renaissance.

My point is that 'England' and the English flag aren't really symbolic of 'democracy' as much as a very powerful oligarchy in the seventeenth century compared to its monarch. The English state was always very advanced and unusually centralised compared to its neighbours, even before the Conquest, but I just find it odd to make 'democracy' one of its defining features. 'Liberty', for sure - England and the United Kingdom was always noted for its 'liberty' by contemporaries, just not 'democracy'.

I had a house mate who was in a similar era, the one who got his Phd earlier. Noice.

Alright I'll grant you, I was using Democracy and Liberty synonymously when I shouldn't have been. But Liberty has been a big part of English history.
 
I had a house mate who was in a similar era, the one who got his Phd earlier. Noice.

Alright I'll grant you, I was using Democracy and Liberty synonymously when I shouldn't have been. But Liberty has been a big part of English history.
For sure.

Back to English identity... there's a line in the Billy Bragg song 'Between the Wars' which strikes at the heart of the 'English' psyche, I think: 'sweet moderation, heart of this nation'. I even remember reading Orderic Vitalis talk about how the English are always obedient to their princes, comparing them with the Manceaux (people from Le Mans, France) who were 'rebellious by nature'. There's something there; it goes back a long way. The English are steady; never too extreme, always moderate and 'reasonable'. You could rebuild a legitimate national identity around that, I think, without pinning it to a system of government (although 'democracy' suits that national character).

That, to me, is England.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For sure.

Back to English identity... there's a line in the Billy Bragg song 'Between the Wars' which strikes at the heart of the 'English' psyche, I think: 'sweet moderation, heart of this nation'. I even remember reading Orderic Vitalis talk about how the English are always obedient to their princes, comparing them with the Manceaux (Maine, France) who were 'rebellious by nature'. There's something there; it goes back a long way. The English are steady; never too extreme, always moderate and 'reasonable'. You could rebuild a legitimate national identity around that, I think, without pinning it to a system of government (although 'democracy' suits that national character).

That, to me, is England.

That would be a dream to me. We're losing that reputation a bit at the moment sadly but if that becomes an English identity, I'd never be prouder.

I do fear we're going to become like Japan, with a reputation for being a xenophobic island that once had an Empire that did terrible but things but is now largely a side character in someone elses show.

And we won't even have an anime industry to take away the sting.
 
That would be a dream to me. We're losing that reputation a bit at the moment sadly but if that becomes an English identity, I'd never be prouder.

I do fear we're going to become like Japan, with a reputation for being a xenophobic island that once had an Empire that did terrible but things but is now largely a side character in someone elses show.
:unhappy: Hopefully not. Yeah that would suck.

And we won't even have an anime industry to take away the sting.
Lol.
 
Modesty is overrated.

I don't even see prayerfulness and magnanimity as virtues.

I dunno...there are some days when I'm like: "Godamnit this is rough...I need some prayer!"
I’d agree with Lady J on prayer - it’s a bit like saying conversationability is a virtue. Prayer is talking with God or the spirits, etc. If you think there are none then it’s meaningless and if you think there is someone to pray to it’s profound - but it’s not a virtue.

I think there are important virtues associated with it that aren’t on the OP list explicitly, but they are to do with any communication, not just prayer. They are related to Approachability - such as willingness to listen, openness to and tolerance of others’ viewpoints, willingness to share, ability to express your own viewpoint well.
 
Would virginity fall under the modesty virtue, you think?
Hm I'm not entirely sure, I think it depends on one's own stance on virginity. Looking up the definition, it's "the quality of not talking about or not trying to make people notice your abilities and achievements". Is staying a virgin an achievement? To some, it can be seen as representative of a 'wilful strength' so to speak - a choice where the person may be waiting for the right person to share it with. To others, it may be that the person simply can't attract someone for whatever reason. In my view, within the world of tinder and this apparent emphasis on sexual freedom, I would argue that it does fall under the virtue if one actively tries to keep it even despite opportunities. It underlines as I mentioned before a type of mental strength, and when it seems so easy to be able to arrange sex, it is admirable for someone to be able to keep such a part of themselves and offer it to the person they deem worthy.
Although of course if a person keeps bragging about it or shoving it down other's throats then that just all goes to shit, but let's forget those sorts for this ;P
 
I don't even see prayerfulness and magnanimity as virtues.

Magnanimity

I'm quite curious to know why you either don't see magnanimity as a virtue or consider it an 'overrated' virtue.

Interestingly, Aristotle—who invented virtue ethics—and the Greeks in general considered magnanimity the mother of all virtues. The perfectly moral man in Aristotelian ethics is sometimes called the "magnanimous man". He is also the template for Nietzsche's Superman, showing nobility of spirit and pathos of distance, and a kind of disinterested generosity (although this latter trait is debatable as regards Nietzsche's conception).
 
There are several reasons Ren. I'll try to explain, but I have just woken up, so my brain is a scrambled egg. :sweatsmile:

Virtue ethics is based upon the idea that there is a golden middle right, too little of a characteristic is bad and so is too much. I don't really see pride (as in, boasting) or humility as vices, so naturally I don't see the middle of that as a virtue either.
Looking at the term itself, I don't know what "great souled" means. What is that by itself? It seems to me that it's a composition of several other virtues, and as such redundant. The best person is someone who has all the good qualities. Wow, such revelation, much ethics. ;)
 
I for one look forward to hugging the American flag when I obtain citizenship. Does it not count if I hide a Union Jack in the back pocket?
No, don't hide where you've come from in a back pocket, carry it with you when you're sworn in. ;)

With no malice, though, I have questions; which flag holds your alliegence? Or will they both?

You of course do not have to answer that, I'm merely curious. You see, I ask because I'm the chairperson, (advocate is a better word for it), for one of the Five Pillars of the American Legion called the Americanism program.

I meet with groups of people and individuals to explain what the differences and similarities of Americanism, Patriotism, and a list of other "isms" really mean when kept in the context of the Constitution. Locally, I do things like help immigrants fill out their papers, find ESL classes, help them with their first voting experience, and find other tutors/ programs that help them in the transition of becoming a US citizen.

It's amazing to meet these folks and hear their story of why they want to be a citizen of the US and ask if they plan to apply for dual citizenship or are they cutting the cord completely with their home country. (Some have horrific stories of life before arriving in the US.)
 
What about Sobriety, you guys?

Would you say that it's a virtue? Or should be? It just came to mind.

Whatcha think?

Yes, it is usually seen as a virtue under the name temperance.

It's a virtue given that being dead drunk would significantly hamper the cultivation of the other virtues :D
 
Virtue ethics is based upon the idea that there is a golden middle right, too little of a characteristic is bad and so is too much. I don't really see pride (as in, boasting) or humility as vices, so naturally I don't see the middle of that as a virtue either.

Yes, virtue ethics is centred around the idea of the golden mean. This is also a good way to figure out if any given trait qualifies as a virtue in Aristotelian terms. It would have to have two identifiable 'negative poles'. In the case of pride, I would actually say it's a kind of golden mean, i.e. there is such a thing as not enough pride but also such a thing as too much pride. I can't exactly recall if this lines up with Aristotle's view, though.

I imagine the scheme could look something like this: Obsequiousness (vice) > Pride (golden mean = virtue) > Boastfulness (vice).

Looking at the term itself, I don't know what "great souled" means. What is that by itself? It seems to me that it's a composition of several other virtues, and as such redundant. The best person is someone who has all the good qualities. Wow, such revelation, much ethics. ;)

I'll get back to you on this later, because I think this is quite an important point.

I think magnanimity isn't a redundant virtue, but more like a necessary condition for being able to properly cultivate the other virtues.
 
Last edited:
No, don't hide where you've come from in a back pocket, carry it with you when you're sworn in. ;)

With no malice, though, I have questions; which flag holds your alliegence? Or will they both?

You of course do not have to answer that, I'm merely curious. You see, I ask because I'm the chairperson, (advocate is a better word for it), for one of the Five Pillars of the American Legion called the Americanism program.

I meet with groups of people and individuals to explain what the differences and similarities of Americanism, Patriotism, and a list of other "isms" really mean when kept in the context of the Constitution. Locally, I do things like help immigrants fill out their papers, find ESL classes, help them with their first voting experience, and find other tutors/ programs that help them in the transition of becoming a US citizen.

It's amazing to meet these folks and hear their story of why they want to be a citizen of the US and ask if they plan to apply for dual citizenship or are they cutting the cord completely with their home country. (Some have horrific stories of life before arriving in the US.)
Wow that is very cool, Sandie.
 
I imagine the scheme could look something like this: Obsequiousness (vice) > Pride (golden mean = virtue) > Boastfulness (vice).
I think we have a problem with pride, because, like love, we only have a single word to cover vastly different concepts. In one of it's manifestations, pride is the most evil of vices - it's putting oneself before all others habitually and absolutely. It's the fault of the narcissist and the megalomaniac who cause such harm and destruction in the world, and it lies at the root of many other vices. It's a crying shame that the same word to descibe this most dark of evils is also used to describe a realistic appreciation of one's own abilities and gifts, or those of our family, or our social groups. The opposite of the first sort of pride is humility, of the second is false modesty.
 
Back
Top