|
Honor
Oct 7, 2008 8:18:55 GMT -6
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 7, 2008 8:18:55 GMT -6
Here's another one that belongs somewhere else on the board.
I've long contended, after painful hours of reading - sparing no beverage to keep my courage and energy up - that 'honor' is a misused and certainly misunderstood term, especially by those who use it the most. It's a word like "class," in that those who use "honor" and "class" the most demonstrably have the least. I use them a lot, although mostly in discussing their misuse.
Today, we read that a financial type in California, after sustaining a huge amount of loss recently in the markets, killed himself. And to spare his family the horror of having had a father who failed, he shot his children. And to spare his wife the horror of living without him - and, perhaps the children - he killed her as well. In the three notes he left, he said he did it for 'honor.' (http://apnews.excite.com/article/20081007/D93LJ8G01.html)
Cynics (have we met? I'm a cynic...) might go so far as to say that whatever his valuation of his own life, there was nothing noble nor constructive or good about killing innocents, and that what he most feared was them doing well without him, and he didn't want to walk the lonesome valley alone. Honor or Class, my ass.
I fully realize the man was mentally ill, and we don't define words and meanings by the understandings of the mentally ill. Well, often. But, watch if or how the media will discuss this. They'll mostly try to spin this as repeat of the fictitious suicide jumps from Black Tuesday on Wall St.
Was failure justification for suicide? Would it be honorable that failures kill themselves? What IS honor, really? Those who smug up and intone that those who have it know what it is are usually the ones who don't know, don't exhibit it, and are addicted to the superficialities.
Johnson said patriotism was the last refuge of a scoundrel, and a politician across the pond here (I think Blaine) of the next century and under indictment felt the Brit had overlooked the enormous possibilities of the word 'reform.' We don't have to look far to find the word "honor" is a contender.
"Honor" - now called respect in the street lingo - is prevalent where just law is not. It operates outside of the judicial system, and its physical manifestations are often outside the law. It has admirers and detractors.
It appears in discussion about the LBH often, most often as a sort of cloaking device to prevent further evaluation or to engage in theatrical bromides of comradarie. Would suicides among the soldiers be dishonorable, and even so, would it be wrong? What about Custer?
Reno and Benteen are often called dishonorable for 'treason' and 'cowardice' but those who call them that have no problem with Lee or Longstreet, both of whom admitted they broke their vows of honor.
What exactly IS honor, and do those who claim to have it, exhibit it?
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 7, 2008 13:34:18 GMT -6
Post by crzhrs on Oct 7, 2008 13:34:18 GMT -6
Not to deviate here from the post . . . but one Presidential candidate who claims to be honorable is now acting in the most unhonorable manner toward his opposition.
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 7, 2008 15:49:47 GMT -6
Post by Mike Powell on Oct 7, 2008 15:49:47 GMT -6
''Chicago aint ready for reform!"
Paddy Bauler - April 5, 1955,
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 8, 2008 6:29:36 GMT -6
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 8, 2008 6:29:36 GMT -6
I wish you hadn't done that, crzhrs. It's a topic that ought to be discussed. Now, it won't.
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 8, 2008 6:39:57 GMT -6
Post by conz on Oct 8, 2008 6:39:57 GMT -6
DC,
Why do you think that it ought to be discussed? What is the point?
Clair
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 8, 2008 10:56:41 GMT -6
Post by clw on Oct 8, 2008 10:56:41 GMT -6
Good question, dc. I can only answer it from my own perspective. It's doing what I know is right even if it's not convenient. And it means keeping my word once I've given it. Probably an oversimplication, but there you go.
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 8, 2008 13:00:06 GMT -6
Post by biggordie on Oct 8, 2008 13:00:06 GMT -6
Personal integrity - but then again what is integrity?
My experience, garnered over some few years, is that virtually anyone who professes to have any particular quality, probably doesn't; and the louder the claim, the more deficient is the person in that quality.
If one is intelligent, or brave, or loyal, or honest, or honorable, etc etc etc, one need not proclaim it to the world. That is why members of congress and parliament are called "honorable gentlemen"........................................and why the biggest liars claim to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, mumble mumble mumble.
Joe Six Pack
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 8, 2008 13:29:38 GMT -6
Post by wild on Oct 8, 2008 13:29:38 GMT -6
Honour is the the value you place on your convictions. The only honerable act I can thnk of at the LBH is Boyer's decision to remain with Custer.Though perhaps that just comes under the heading of couragious. As regards Lee & Co they resigned their comissions. At Fredricksburg Meagher led forward the Irish brigade but because he had a "problem" with his foot and because he would not have stood a chance of survival mounted on a horse he did not go forward with his men.That was the pits worse thAn dishonerable.
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 8, 2008 16:35:03 GMT -6
Post by "Hunk" Papa on Oct 8, 2008 16:35:03 GMT -6
(1) What exactly IS honor, and (2) do those who claim to have it, exhibit it?
Taking (2) first, no, anyone who claims to be honorable is in no position to judge the veracity of his claim. Only others can verify whether or not a person is honorable and they do that by honoring him, not necessarily with garlands and titles, but by exhibiting the esteem in which they hold him. As it says in Romans 13:7, 'honor to whom honor is due' and it is not something you can exhibit, you can only be grateful that others have seen that trait in you. (1) Honor is of course synonymous with glory but I guess that is not the meaning you seek. Those who are honorable are invariably those who do not strive to be so. They are self-effacing, not self-serving, and they have high ideals which they will pursue even if that pursuit causes them inconvenience, monetary loss or high risk. There is no simple definition of honor because it is an abstract concept. You know it when you see it in someone but it is mostly impossible to put into words. Brutus considered himself an honorable man, but I have no doubt that Julius Caesar begged to differ. Honor cannot be a self appointed accolade.
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 8, 2008 17:07:31 GMT -6
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 8, 2008 17:07:31 GMT -6
This is what I mean.
Being honest and true to yourself is honorable, surely, but is it 'honor?' Much honor involves telling lies for higher good, does it not, in usage for the military? Folks here contend officers lie for the honor of the regiment, and we're to believe that is true despite conflict with every oath they've taken. At West Point it is required to rat on your peers if they cheat or violate the code. Honorable? If you fail to rat out someone, are you dishonorable? If you resign to relieve yourself of that discord, are you being dishonorable for failing to act on your previous oath? If you take an oath to defend something, receive a commission, and then resign it, are you relieved of your oath? What's the point of the oath, then, since it has no time limit, does it?
I don't think glory is synonomous with honor. All glory is an honor, but all honor is not a glory. "Sir, I have the glory of presenting ......"
Would a Quaker be insulted if referenced as honorable? Don't think so, but called "glorious" surely would be.
I think honor mostly means 'respect,' by which is usually meant acknowledgment of social position if not prominence in the society in question. In itself, is such acknowledgement honorable anyway?
Can the honor of a group be damaged by the actions of one derelict? Sometimes the insulted group honor is used to justify any number of atrocities to avenge themselves. Honorable?
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 9, 2008 2:27:23 GMT -6
Post by wild on Oct 9, 2008 2:27:23 GMT -6
The oath taken by military officers is an oath of allegiance and not binding after resignation or retirment. Honour requires no recognition.Many an honourable act has gone unnoticed and unsung.
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 9, 2008 15:58:56 GMT -6
Post by "Hunk" Papa on Oct 9, 2008 15:58:56 GMT -6
This is what I mean. (1) Being honest and true to yourself is honorable, surely, but is it 'honor?' (2) Much honor involves telling lies for higher good, does it not, in usage for the military? Folks here contend officers lie for the honor of the regiment, and we're to believe that is true despite conflict with every oath they've taken. At West Point it is required to rat on your peers if they cheat or violate the code. Honorable? If you fail to rat out someone, are you dishonorable? If you resign to relieve yourself of that discord, are you being dishonorable for failing to act on your previous oath? If you take an oath to defend something, receive a commission, and then resign it, are you relieved of your oath? What's the point of the oath, then, since it has no time limit, does it? (3) I don't think glory is synonomous with honor. All glory is an honor, but all honor is not a glory. "Sir, I have the glory of presenting ......" Would a Quaker be insulted if referenced as honorable? Don't think so, but called "glorious" surely would be. (4) I think honor mostly means 'respect,' by which is usually meant acknowledgment of social position if not prominence in the society in question. In itself, is such acknowledgement honorable anyway? (5) Can the honor of a group be damaged by the actions of one derelict? Sometimes the insulted group honor is used to justify any number of atrocities to avenge themselves. Honorable?
(1) Being honest and true to yourself is something that, as an individual, a person might be proud of, but it is not of itself, honorable, nor is it honor. A member of the Mafia would probably consider 'making his bones' as being honest and true to himself, but the act would not be considered honorable by the wider public and only his peers would consider he had gained honor, using their twisted idea of what that means. (2) What you are describing here is only for the 'greater good' in a very restricted sense and within a relatively narrow group of people. It is called an 'honor system' but in reality it is nothing but a method for making 'members' conform to a distorted form of loyalty. Lies and ratting on others can in no sense be considered honorable, except by those who want to maintain the illusion that their particular organization, be it military or civilian, is one which upholds the highest ideals. That such underhand methods may be necessary in the defense of one's country does not make them honorable. (3) DC, I had hoped that this could be a serious discussion without need for the introduction of semantics. Get hold of any good synonym dictionary and you will find, like it or not, that glory is a synonym for honor. In Roget's Thesaurus, both honor and glory are shown as meanings for prestige. A synonym does not have to have the same meaning as another word, it can simply be a very similar meaning. Can I suggest that you omit that kind of dissembling from this thread if you want it to have any gravitas? (4) Whilst respect must come into the reckoning because anyone who has been observed doing anything honorable earns our respect, it is a word to use with care. We respect some sportspeople, movie stars and other celebrities for their achievements, but we do not consider what they do honorable, but rather, enviable. (5) This is an example of the misuse of the word honor. Individuals or groups cannot bestow honor upon themselves. When such expressions as 'I was defending my honor' are used, the reality is they actually mean 'pride', because they are usually responding to an insult. To retaliate with violence is never honorable, even if it can be justified, because it inevitably leads to an escalation of violence until the original cause is lost in the mists of time.
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 9, 2008 16:25:35 GMT -6
Post by clansman on Oct 9, 2008 16:25:35 GMT -6
An honourable man is one who does not have to say he is honourable.
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 9, 2008 16:45:37 GMT -6
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 9, 2008 16:45:37 GMT -6
What do you think symantics is? The study of meanings. This is a thread about the meaning of "honor." www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semanticsAlso? Glory does not appear in the definition of honor, but honor appears in the definition of glory. Same MW site. This isn't trivia. Glory is an honor, all honor is not glory. I don't disagree with anything said, but these are mutually exclusive definitions. Given the frequency with which the word is used, that's dangerous. British common law has distinctions between Honor and Dignity, and it became a problem with dueling there and here. Issues of honor operate outside the law, law grants dignity. An honorable man is righteous, one would hope, but apparently not.
|
|
|
Honor
Oct 10, 2008 8:11:39 GMT -6
Post by wild on Oct 10, 2008 8:11:39 GMT -6
Society is governed by rules and regulations.These rules and regulations are policed.An honourable man is he who abides by the law regardless of policing.
At West Point it is required to rat on your peers if they cheat or violate the code. Honorable? If you fail to rat out someone, are you dishonorable? If you join the army you wear the boots. Yes it would be dishonourable notto rat on a member of the group infringing the rules. It is not possible under normal everyday circumstances to present cadets with serious decisions requiring honourable judgement.However by lowering the bar even as low as pettyness you simulate difficult decisions which will test the homour of the cadet.
|
|