The problem with Binns argument rests on arbitrary distinctions such as the difference between separation vs. oppositon or right place vs. appropriate process. He acts like he is refuting other scholars, when all he is doing is defining into existence his own strawmen. I don't think that Taylor said that these vices destroy the self rather they corrupt the self. The self is no longer capable of satisfying any aspect of its desires. With envy the self does not view itself in a very good light, so to make it feel better it tears down others, the very act of destroying others in ones own mind makes the self even less desirable and so accomplishes nothing.
Pride seems to be the most insiduous of the vices described.
It is necessary to some degree in order not to fall prey to other vices. The problem with pride is when someone views themselves as being above others. When they deem themselves on a different plane they become static. The person then seizes to improve themself and so can not take pride in any self improvement. One must recognize one's own faults and see them as areas to improve in order for one to truly take pride in oneself for if you don't think that you are improving yourself with time you probably won't take pride in yourself.