TY  - CHAP
AB  - Abstract Scholars who study humility tend to think of it in highly individualized terms, such as an absence of vanity or an accurate self-assessment. Individuating definitions can lead to such jarring concepts as the “humble white supremacist” (Roberts & Wood, 2007). Qualitative sociological research in the (predominantly North American) evangelical movement to accept and affirm lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI) identities, same-sex marriage, and sex/gender transition reveals that humility is not simply the awareness that “I could be wrong.” That awareness is rooted in what we have found to be humility’s defining element, concern to foster relationship. These findings prompt us to define humility as a fundamentally social disposition, as concern to protect the kinds of intimate connection with others that can transform the self. Recognizing the social nature of humility reveals why humility is incompatible with injustice.
VL  - 36
SN  - 978-1-78973-949-7, 978-1-78973-950-3/0198-8719
DO  - 10.1108/S0198-871920190000036006
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1108/S0198-871920190000036006
AU  - Moon Dawne
AU  - Tobin Theresa W.
PY  - 2019
Y1  - 2019/01/01
TI  - Humility: Rooted in Relationship, Reaching for Justice
T2  - Religion, Humility, and Democracy in a Divided America
T3  - Political Power and Social Theory
PB  - Emerald Publishing Limited
SP  - 101
EP  - 121
Y2  - 2024/04/24
ER  -