For various reasons, I don't spend as much time as I have in the past reading books by others that are not scripture. However, I do always have one I am working through. Because there are so many good books out there and I spend so little time reading them, I am always bitterly disappointed when a book I'm excited to read turns out to be bad. The really bad ones I can set aside and move on from. The worst books are those so bad that they hurt to read while giving the impression that setting them aside might result in missing something worthwhile.
I'm currently reading such a book. One positive of this book is that it has several quotes from others that are gems. I keep a collection of quotes by others which I treasure. I'm not sure this will make it to my list, but it has given me pause. The story goes that Beethoven was having an argument with a prince during which he said: "Prince, what you are, you are through chance and birth; what I am, I am through my own labor. There are many princes and there will continue to be thousands more, but there is only one Beethoven."
There is only one Beethoven
This quote in itself is a full story, and a valuable one at that. I don't know who that prince was, although one could easily look it up. What I do know is that no one has ever heard of him. In other words, Beethoven was right. And while Beethoven knew it in the moment, the prince's perspective was different enough that he had to be told.
What's the point?
So often, normal people object to the correct self-description of exceptional people because they assume that the only reason they are calling attention to it would be out of a desire to feel better about themselves. That would be the reason a normal person would do so, and it might be the reason some exceptional people do so, but there are many exceptional people who accomplish what they do for other reasons. While normal people tend to ignore exceptional examples, those few they notice are typically dismissed away as gifts that were not earned, and therefore nothing to be proud of. Many if not most exceptional people accomplish more and better than normal people precisely because they have better motives than normal people do. It is in service to these motives that they say what they do, just the same as that for which they are known. They do not do more and better because they are better, but they are better because they do more and better, and they do more and better because they want what is more and better more than normal people do.
It is this same drive that compels them towards greater things in all things. Those who see things more clearly don't just see themselves more clearly. They also see the rest of the world more clearly, and this brings to their attention problems and solutions beyond the view of normal people. Often, these cannot be resolved without adjusting the perceptions of the normal people, for few people are capable of single handedly solving problems that impact all people. In Beethoven's case, he was creating timeless masterpieces for all, but needed money to free his time for the work. Beethoven made a true point: the prince's money was a much lesser contribution to the end result than Beethoven's work, and the prince's timeless glory would be limited to his financial contribution to the same. This proved true in quite a literal way: the prince's name is memorialized in the title of the works he supported, and that is how most people who have heard his name know of it.
Had the prince persisted in the perspective that he was Beethoven's superior, he would have failed to give him the money he needed, Beethoven would not have made the work he did, and we would not know of either of these two men today, nor be recipients of the many downstream effects of Beethoven's work. In order for Beethoven to solve the problem only he could solve, the prince needed to understand that what Beethoven was doing was much more important than anything else the prince could do.
But weren't there other Beethovens?
How could Ludwig say there was only one Beethoven? Ludwig had parents. Ludwig had siblings. What did he think of them? He didn't consider them of the same caliber as himself. This isn't speculation. His brother managed to make a measurable sum of money in business matters. When he bought an estate, he wrote a letter to Ludwig which he signed "From your brother Johann, landowner." Ludwig signed his reply, "From your brother Ludwig, brain owner." Ludwig obviously valued his own intelligence differentially to his brother's wealth. Frequently, people like Ludwig von Beethoven find that they are capable of many things, and that they could very well replicate or surpass the achievements of others in their own fields if it weren't for their preference for the fields producing the accomplishments for which they are known. Again, no one knows of or cares about Ludwig's brother or his land.
Is it morally wrong to testify of yourself?
We tend to think that descriptions of personal excellence are automatic signs of moral lack. Folks don't seem to realize that this is only true in cases where the praise is unmerited. If Ludwig's brother had said "there is only one Beethoven" it would have been absurd. He did nothing that was unique or exceptional. If Ludwig had said any less, it would have been dishonest. In the case in point, Ludwig was correcting the prince's self-perception. The prince falsely believed he was addressing some generic courtier. Beethoven correctly adjusted his perception by reminding the prince of his place. This is a virtuous and necessary act.
To stand as a witness to God means to stand for good, truth, beauty, utility, and any other form of godliness wherever we find it. If that virtue is found in ourselves, this does not decrease the need or benefit of attesting to its value, nor does it diminish it's actual source or eventual end: God.
When we judge exceptional people according to normal standards, we will force them into a box into which their achievements cannot fit. This diminishes the benefit rendered to the world through the gifts of God, and dims the beacon that guides all to him. If Beethoven were described in the same limitations as his brother or the unknown prince, we could not enjoy his exceptional music or appreciate his exuberant personality. As with so many traits, these co-occur, and to take away the latter would be to strip the former. So many obviously good things co-occur with what we would normally don't appreciate as much. If Beethoven though less of himself, he would doubtless have created less or lesser music.
The real matter is not whether praise comes from self or others, but whether it is true or not. Moral statements are true statements, and true statements are moral statements. A moral person must state the truth--particularly the otherwise unspoken truth, and especially if others don't agree. If the truth happens to be about the speaker, so be it. It happens to be the case that the more exceptional a person is, the less likely others will be to recognize or admit it, and the more likely he will be to testify of himself, since no one else can or will.
As with all cases of excellence, Jesus Christ is the pinnacle example of the need for exceptional people to testify of themselves:
13 The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true.
14 Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go. (John 8)
Jesus bore witness of his own meekness--something modern people would have a serious problem with if they were there to see it, and something his contemporaries would have strongly disagreed with:
Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. (Matthew 11:29)
And this is not just something God himself could or should do. In Numbers 12:3, Moses wrote that he was the meekest man on earth! Again: was he right? If so, why would it be so important for others to know that he should say so?
Accurate descriptions of exceptional people must contain exceptional descriptions. It is impossible to fully appreciate a gift in your heart while diminishing its worth with your mouth.
For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift. (D&C 88:33)
When a person testifies of themselves, and their testimony is true, they are giving us two gifts: first, themselves, and second, an expanded understanding of the value of that gift.