They are generally praised in the abstract, but in concrete terms of actual people in terms of attracting a contemporary following (and not distant, historical, and academic respect), boldness has usually trumped humility. The idea that there was a time when people didn't flock to the overcompetent people presenting strong-leader images over people with genuine humility is just one of the many ways people create a mythical past to paint the manifestation of long-present aspects of human culture as novel degeneracy into which the world has recently fallen.
> in concrete terms of actual people in terms of attracting a contemporary following (and not distant, historical, and academic respect), boldness has usually trumped humility
I don't think that's true: Confucious, Jesus, George Washington, Lincoln, MLK ... Eisenhower, every president before Trump, the New England culture of looking down on ostentation and displays of wealth, .... I read a New Yorker article several years ago about a culture of Wall Street leaders in the 1980s who purposely wore cheap watches, had homes with low fences, etc.
Jesus had a relatively small band of followers that abandoned him at the first sign of unpopularity with authorities, pissed off more people than followed him, and was murdered by the public authorities at the demand of the local population. He got a bigger posthumous following after (actually or in a myth created by people seeking their own influence) rising from the dead.
Says a lot more about the respect for miracles than respect for humility, however much one might read what is written about him as calling for humility from his followers. Meanwhile the list of historical figures whose rise to influence was fueled by the exact opposite of humility is...not short.
> every president before Trump,
Very many of the Presidents before Trump were...not known for humility in their time. Some have had that added to their popular myth afterwards, but, I mean, plenty not even that, and probably the most recent one that was (I'm...not young, and Carter is probably the only one in my lifetime you might make a case that it was something he was particularly known for.)
I don't want to get into religious debate, but you might want to re-read the Gospels - you are missing the fundamental message of Jesus, which has turned out to be extremely popular - arguably the most popular text and message in the world.
> Very many of the Presidents before Trump were...not known for humility in their time.
Who? What did they do? Nobody like Trump or other people I named.
> I don’t want to get into religious debate, but you might want to re-read the Gospels - you are missing the fundamental message of Jesus, which has turned out to be extremely popular - arguably the most popular text and message in the world.
You might want to reread the upthread context: I was discussing the role of humility “in concrete terms of actual people in terms of attracting a contemporary following” and distinguishing that form backward-looking regard (since we are comparing to how Trump is currently viewed, where we can see only the contemporary regard and not what future generations will think of him in retrospect.)
What has happened after the time of Jesus ministry with respect to the impact of works written about him is irrelevant.
What was the attitude toward humility 2000 years ago, and where? I personally have no idea.
Jesus is certainly far, far more influential than 2000 years ago. Christianity was an obscure religion and probably nobody had heard of Jesus outside the immediate region.
Jesus' very clear message of humility is published in a massive best-selling book that got gold filigree letters in the medieval manuscripts and which was promoted in buildings that were for a thousand or so years the largest and grandest that most people ever saw, and led to the creation of the famously wealthy Catholic church (whose stuff was famously confiscated by Henry VIII when he needed more gold) led by popes whose desire for expensive art led to the sale of indulgences that led to Martin Luther and a massive europe-wide series of conflicts, and also led to the less famous but more infamous Knights Templar who didn't survive having their money taken.
Parable of the sower comes to mind: hear the word, but did not follow it.
Except the popularity in that era was due to all the powerful people saying it proved their right to absolute power and sometimes made other religions (including denominations of Christianity) illegal, and popularity waned rapidly as it stopped being required.
Actually reading the bible is a big part of why I switched from Catholic to Wicca as a teen before deciding it was probably all ahistorical anyway.
(I'm not trying to sell Jesus or Christianity; I'm just talking factually about the text of the Gospels. For those unfamilar - the Gospels are the first four books of the New Testament, in which the authors describe Jesus' actual words and life, often quoting Jesus. The rest of the New Testament is other people's responses to about Jesus and Christianity.)
As I understand it: Humans are complicated, as Jesus depicted them. They are both terminally weak and flawed, and there is also good and justice and mercy in them - the many angels of our natures. Jesus ministered to the weak and flawed, not the good and just, certainly not to the perfect. It's a message of love to people who sin, which is pretty much everyone; Jesus didn't expect differently. His message was to love the sinners and for the sinners to accept his love.
All human institutions are flawed and to a degree corrupt; they are run by sinners. I'm not defending the Catholic Church or any church or religion, my point is that if we throw out the good when there are flaws, major flaws, we are left with nothing. Not even ourselves.
Musk is not a figurehead of confidence, and really is nothing like SBF. In fact, he’s regularly very direct about conveying the level of uncertainty when discussing the possibility of RUDs with Starship or being optimistic about deadlines for Tesla when he’s speaking in long form and not taken out of context with a sound bite.
You're rewriting history. We don't need to list all the extreme claims and exaggerations. And his 'short form' communication is not someone else taking him out of context, but how he regularly communicates - on X.
Look at how many public figures embrace the extreme overconfidence as a mark of tactical genius: SBF, Musk, lots of other SV figures, Trump, etc.
Humbleness, humility used to be admired. Can you imagine someone saying that now?