| Summary: | <p>I aim to construct an account of humility which explains and satisfies as many of our pre-theoretical intuitions about the trait as possible, whilst also being internally consistent and otherwise compelling. Starting from a man-on-the-street understanding of what humility involves, I build a secular account of humility which seems coherent and attractive. I then contrast this with a 'radically' Christian understanding of humility drawn from the work of Kent Dunnington, who constructs his account from writings from the early desert monastics and St Augustine, and ultimately on Jesus's willingness to "[humble] himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross" (Philippians 2:8). Having established its distinctiveness, I explain why Christian humility is thought to clash so fundamentally with classical accounts of the virtues, such as those put forward by Aristotle, leading to the oft-cited rift between ‘classical’ and ‘Christian’ virtue ethics. Finally, I investigate whether there are any reasons to consider Dunnington's a more compelling account of humility than its secular counterpart. I compare the two accounts on various grounds including their internal consistency, the viability of their schemes for attaining humility, and their reasons for appraising humility as morally valuable. </p>
|
|---|