Why humility matters: Moral exemplarity
Whenever we hear about the good deeds of moral exemplars, it is hard not to stand in awe of their brave and/or compassionate actions. These are individuals who dedicate significant time and energy, who even risk their lives, to save the lives of others and to protect and promote their wellbeing; individuals who fight for justice and work tirelessly to create a saner, more humane, more compassionate world.
What makes such exemplarity possible, psychologically speaking? The position I've argued for elsewhere (Wright, 2019) is that humility is foundational to mature virtue and moral func- tioning—and thus, to moral exemplarity. To see this, consider: humility allows for the (at least temporary) transcendence of our natural centeredness. And in escaping the centripetal force of our own needs, etc. we become able to genuinely experience the pull of the others' needs, etc. as they truly are—as being on par with our own. Thus, we become genuinely connected to the living beings around us, and to humanity as a whole; we become committed to and responsible for their wellbeing.
This is exactly the sort of life-long connection and commitment to, and responsibility for, others that we see demonstrated in the lives (and actions) of moral exemplars (Colby and Damon, 1992; Monroe, 2004, 2011; Oliner, 2003; Oliner and Oliner, 1988). And research on exemplars has revealed that at the heart of this connection and commitment is their experience of what has been referred to as “enlightened self-interest” (Frimer and Walker, 2009; Frimer, Walker, Dunlop, Lee, and Riches, 2011)—the synergistic integration of their self and other-oriented values. That is, exemplars report experiencing the benefitting of others and of themselves as complementary facets of their larger life values/goals, rather than as contradictory values that have to be chosen between, creating competition, internal tension, and guilt.
In other words, exemplars experience their own needs, etc. as essentially woven into the needs, etc. of those around them, of their communities (Frimer, et al., 2011; see also Colby and Damon, 1992; Monroe, 2004, 2011)—so when they act on the behalf of those individuals and communities, they are acting on their own behalf as well.My own research has found a significant relationship between people's humility (as measured by our Dual-Dimension Humility Scale, Wright, et al., 2018) and the integration of their self and other-oriented values, expressed both explicitly in value statements and implicitly in life narratives and in their actions toward others in a competitive activity. Specifically, people high in humility expressed a deep investment in the lives and wellbeing of others, rather than being merely absorbed with the satisfaction of their own needs, etc. And they more frequently opted to share a portion of their winnings with their competitors, rather than keep them only for themselves (Wright, Goya-Tocchetto, Beck, Kutty-Falls, Sweat, and Swett, 2019).
Importantly, it is their experience of a deep and abiding connection with, commitment to, and responsibility for, others that empowers exemplars to dedicate themselves to saving lives, fighting injustices, caring for the sick and hungry, and protecting the weak, vulnerable, and oppressed, even when there is great potential risk to themselves. They do not feel alone, but rather grounded by and embedded in—both supporting and supported by—the inter-connected web of humanity, and of living beings more generally, of which they are a part (Brooks, 2015; Colby and Damon, 1992; Monroe, 2004, 2012; Oliner, 2003; Oliner and Oliner, 1988).
What is more, in order to be able to appropriately and consistently engage with and advocate for the needs, etc. of others across a range of situations, moral exemplars must be able to identify and evaluate the relevant information, decide what to do, and then implement their decision successfully, ideally in a way that is in sync with the situation itself.This means that: 1) they must be able to perceive, identify, understand, and properly evaluate the facts with respect to what to do (or not do), 2) they must be able to properly weigh the needs, desires, interests, beliefs, goals, and values of everyone involved in determining what to do (or not do), and 3) they must be able to carry it out without having to fight against internal conflict or “corruption”.
Among other things, all of this requires moral exemplars to cognitively and affectively experience and appreciate the significance of many different features of the situation, as they actually are, in order to determine the appropriate response.And this requires the absence—the “quieting”—of anything that might bias, distort, or otherwise interfere with this process.
Central among these influences are those that arise from our natural centeredness. While certainly not the source of every potential bias and distortion, many are likely to originate from this source, and they are arguably often some of the more powerful and pernicious distorting influences—especially since they are generated by our natural default setting. And these are the influences most effectively (and perhaps only) combated—and ultimately quieted—through humility. It is thus arguably the core catalyst for the transformation undergone by moral exemplars.4 It is also foundational to mature moral functioning and the ability to generate appropriate moral responses more generally.
34.5