Well, if I take my English's dictionary :
Arrogance :
Humble :
1.
not proud or arrogant; modest:
to be humble although successful.
2.
having a feeling of insignificance, inferiority, subservience, etc.:
In the presence of so many world-famous writers I felt very humble.
3.
low in rank, importance, status, quality, etc.; lowly:
of humble origin; a humble home.
4.
courteously respectful:
In my humble opinion you are wrong.
5.
low in height, level, etc.; small in size:
a humble member of the galaxy.
Considering humility is the supposed opposite of arrogance, I am assuming that humility mainly imply inferiority which means that it isn't really a good behavior either.
Rationally speaking if arrogance is 10 and humility is -10 wouldn't 0 be the rational answer as of how to act considering the society seems to value humility due to the desire or rather good feeling humans feel when someone act as inferior toward them ?
If the above is true it means that both humility and arrogance are "bad" and should be seen from a different perspective.
I have this belief that humility is a part of good critical thinking, and that egoism undermines it. I imagine arrogance as a kind of mind-death. But I have no evidence, and no good mechanism by which it might be true. In fact, I know the belief is suspect because I know that I want it to be true — I want to be able to assure myself that this or that intolerable academic will be magically punished with a decreased capacity to do good work. The truth could be the opposite: maybe hubris breeds confidence, and confidence results? After all, some of the most important thinkers in history were insufferable.
Is any link, positive or negative, between arrogance and reasoning too tenuous to be worth entertaining? Is humility a pretty word or a valuable habit? I don't know what I think yet. Do you?