Jack Malebranche: What is Honor?

March 15th, 2008 by info | Posted in Blog Feeds |

Today, honor is used as a synonym for “good” or “morally upright.” The association with “chivalry” has fallen out of fashion in many circles, but it still hangs around the word, making it, like the word masculinity, seem to be undefinable. This is not the sort of honor that interests me. My gut perception of the word honor, something I wrote almost instinctively about in Androphilia has to do with strength. After writing Androphilia, I read James Bowman’s Honor: A History, which I highly recommend. Bowman crystallized for me the essence of both honor and masculinity. I will write about this in greater detail in a long form essay I have planned for a future book, but for right now, I’d just like to quote Mr. Bowman, who clears up a few things in the following passages:

“Chivalry” as an exaggerated respect paid to womanhood is a distinctly Western “notion” as are many other qualities still gathering dust in our mental attics in boxes labeled “honor.” Sportsmanship and fair play, for instance, are likewise Western in provenance…”

This passage is also important:

It is seen as being–as in many ways it is–anti-feminist, anti-egalitarian, hypocritical and an incitement to violence. It is also by definition exclusionary and therefore uncompassionate–if only because it must include the possibility of shame and disgrace.

This, however, is most important:

Yet if honor, unlike morality, is by its very nature relative to a particular social context, it does not seem to be the case that it varies randomly from group to group. Some groups at some times may value some qualities more than others, but at its most basic, that to which we pay honor–or, to use the synonym in more common use today, respect–is remarkably consistent. Moreover, in spite of the discrediting that honor has undergone, the basic honor of the savage–bravery for men, chastity for women–is still recognizable beneath the surfaces of the popular culture that has done so much to efface it. If you doubt it, try calling a man a wimp or a woman a slut.

I would actually exchange “bravery” with “strength” in this passage, because strength is more of a root concept than bravery. He almost implies this by using the word “wimp” instead of “coward.” A wimp is not merely afraid, but, it is assumed, weak and deficient. Bravery is proof of strength, proof of self-assurance and confidence in a man’s strength. One is brave because one either believes he has a chance in Hell of winning, or because he is disciplined and determined enough to sacrifice himself for a cause.