“Out of how we can be better than others, we feel pride. Pride signals a betterment of us, over others, making it meant for an accomplishment. Even without the boast, we can speak of the betterment, of skills, as factual in understanding how pride becomes legitimated only on where it made a person, out of sheer choice.”– Modern Romanticism
Some believe that “who they are” had not been out of choice. After this, “what one can become” reveals the skills of an individual, that are either superior or inferior to another person. With a decision comes a consequence. With self-control, in an idea of a person knowing “who they are”, means that such should be protected. We succeed, though in forgetting who we are, we become diseased in egotism. We come to believe that who we are shows that betterment over someone else, instead of what we can become.
Pride has always been that expression of betterment, that if matching what one has become, matches in perfection. What one has become, relating to their successes with involved skills, compares not to who they are, though shows understanding of who they are to not jeopardize that identity. What a person can become requires protection of their identification of themselves, that their successes do not ruin such. Ruining one’s identity has always been a result of considering one’s identity over their skills, to an expression of pride for this former notion to a person. As a person knows themselves, they can comprehend their limits upon their skills, with also their limits upon what can be adopted for further greatness and power.
If this expression of pride matches a person for “who they are”, instead of “what they can become”, it reveals their belief of betterment upon their identity. If pride signals betterment with one’s skills for what one can become, to express it for one’s identity brings about this notion that being superior can also have a relation to this. If an individual expresses their superiority for who they are, there can be nothing else to this except for a prevalent insecurity for wanting control. An individual who expresses their pride upon identification reveals their egotism in deciding that who they are can be their only superiority over someone else. Egotism, as well, shows up with a person who believes in excellence among their work, not for itself, though for who made it. If in pride, a person can express it for their identification, such shows an egotism that means whatever accomplishment has been made, it will be praised for who made it, not for what it might be.
In understanding that a creation, not a creator, means more for pride’s sake, it becomes understandable that identity shows a lesser importance over accomplishment. Identities do fade, while what remains has always been those accomplishments by individual persons, making it objective that a person for “who they are” reveals an inferiority to “what they can become”. With what a person can become, there it decides how their future and a new generation’s future, led with example, can be built. As what passes down for birthing generations are those accomplishments, not those identities, makes whatever accomplishment being someone’s identification as destined to crumble under the coming weight of the future. Bloodlines become thinned. Identities become either reversed or discarded, as there can be no pride to something that never mattered. One can be proud for what lasts, not for what fades into blankness.