It is a common question among theologians, how sin impacts human thought. Does it remove from us any possibility of knowing? Are we doomed to epistemic darkness? Pride, however, is close kin to sin. I’m not certain there are any sins that don’t include within it some element of pride. So I ask, how does pride impact our thinking?
First, it encourages us to think too highly of ourselves. In understanding the impact of sin on the whole of our being, part and parcel of what we mean when affirming total depravity, we understand that we use our minds to excuse ourselves. God has given us the capacity for thought and we think up rationalizations for our sins. We excuse ourselves and create a self-image that is airbrushed by our pride.
Second, it encourages us to think too lowly of others. We use our minds to assess the character and behavior of others not in the interests of accuracy but in the interest of making us feel better about ourselves. We watch, observe, infer until we get to the point that we think we can safely say, “Yup, that person is no good, unlike me.”
The key is found in the inferring. Here we slip in speculation that our minds determine is actually information. We, in our pride, think we are insightful enough, educated enough to peer into the dark hearts of others and diagnose their sins. We conclude this one is a narcissist because a. we think we’re not only outstanding students of the symptoms and b. think we are outstanding pathologists of the behavior. To put it more clearly, we skew our perception of behavior, make our own self-serving assessment of motives, pronounce our subject guilty and then decide it is our God-given duty to herald this person’s guilt far as the curse is found.
The pride truly kicks in, however, when some people fail to embrace our judgment. Anyone responding to our pronouncement of the guilt of another with, “Well, first I’m not sure this is any of my business and second if it were it would be wise to hear the other side before I make any judgment” is a wicked enabler, an ostrich chewing sand, complicit in the crime or worst of all, one who, likely because of the patriarchy, refuses to believe victims. I understand that victims can be hurt when they are not immediately believed. I also understand that false accusers can act hurt when they are not immediately believed. Finally, I understand I can’t always tell the difference between the first and the second. Neither can you. We don’t know who the victim is until we know if a wrong was done.
Pride is what drives us to think we not only have to have a take on every accusation floating through the cyber-ether, but that we all have the wherewithal to reach a sound conclusion from afar. No call to be a voice for the voiceless, no insistence that we embrace the task of “raising awareness” should prod us into announcing conclusions we don’t have the evidence for. Embracing the silence in uncertainty may leave you with enemies on both sides of the courtroom. Rushing to judgment, however, displeases the Judge.