I think part of what's going on is that because our culture is more ideologically egalitarian than when condescension was recognized as a virtue, we are uncomfortable acknowledging the distinctions in status that are a prerequisite to regarding someone as virtuously condescending. To say "that was very condescending of you Billy, good job!" we must presuppose that Billy is somehow above whomever he condescended to. And we don't like doing that. It's the same phenomenon as almost everybody in the country calling themselves middle class.
This sounds right to me, and partially explains why theologians can still get away with talking about divine condescension, since we are not quite so bold as to claim equality with God (yet).
"Down to earth" as a phrase is in the vicinity of the old virtue, as is "unpretentious." Neither is quite right, of course. (this comment brought to you by the first two terms that occurred to me to describe the way Dean Zimmerman explains complicated ideas, which is the dictionary definition of the old virtue)
Well, for the first question, I would forward Courage as the stinkiest virtue: for whatever the sticking place is that you screw it to, it's probably not good-smelling.
The closest existing term I can think of is Fraternizing -- it invokes the republican cries of "liberte, fraternite, egalite!" Yet it is a vice where inappropriate ("no fraternizing with the enlisted men, officer!"). Perhaps recasting it in greek will give it the punch of a neologism. Adelph-- adelfice? Adelphage?
Or perhaps, without a view to station, we cannot think condescension. Substationate? Subiration? I fear it is better to popularize the old word, which has a certain pedigree, than to make a new one.
I think part of what's going on is that because our culture is more ideologically egalitarian than when condescension was recognized as a virtue, we are uncomfortable acknowledging the distinctions in status that are a prerequisite to regarding someone as virtuously condescending. To say "that was very condescending of you Billy, good job!" we must presuppose that Billy is somehow above whomever he condescended to. And we don't like doing that. It's the same phenomenon as almost everybody in the country calling themselves middle class.
(Edited for typos)
I like this explanation.
This sounds right to me, and partially explains why theologians can still get away with talking about divine condescension, since we are not quite so bold as to claim equality with God (yet).
"Down to earth" as a phrase is in the vicinity of the old virtue, as is "unpretentious." Neither is quite right, of course. (this comment brought to you by the first two terms that occurred to me to describe the way Dean Zimmerman explains complicated ideas, which is the dictionary definition of the old virtue)
These are both pretty close, and I do think there is value in using an existing term if there is one.
Well, for the first question, I would forward Courage as the stinkiest virtue: for whatever the sticking place is that you screw it to, it's probably not good-smelling.
The closest existing term I can think of is Fraternizing -- it invokes the republican cries of "liberte, fraternite, egalite!" Yet it is a vice where inappropriate ("no fraternizing with the enlisted men, officer!"). Perhaps recasting it in greek will give it the punch of a neologism. Adelph-- adelfice? Adelphage?
Or perhaps, without a view to station, we cannot think condescension. Substationate? Subiration? I fear it is better to popularize the old word, which has a certain pedigree, than to make a new one.
Thinking of the Greek, "Adelphage" sounds like what happens if Hannibal Lector invites Adele over for dinner.
Courage is definitely in the running for stinkiest virtue! :)