Detailed Reading 7.The second part of the defense,"it really doesn't hurt anybody,"is equally revealing."It doesn't hurt anybody" means it doesn't do that abstraction called society any harm.The harm it did to the bribe-taker and the cheater isn't important;it is purely personal.And persona,as opposed to social decency,doesn't count for much. Sometimes I am inclined to blame sociology for part of this paradox.Sociology has tended to lay exclusive stress upon social morality,and tended too often to define good and evil as merely the "socially useful"or its reverse. Translation
7. The second part of the defense, "it really doesn't hurt anybody," is equally revealing. "It doesn't hurt anybody" means it doesn't do that abstraction called society any harm. The harm it did to the bribe-taker and the cheater isn't important; it is purely personal. And persona, as opposed to social decency, doesn't count for much. Sometimes I am inclined to blame sociology for part of this paradox. Sociology has tended to lay exclusive stress upon social morality, and tended too often to define good and evil as merely the "socially useful" or its reverse. Detailed Reading
Detailed Reading 8.What social morality and social conscience leave out is the narrower but very significant concept of honor-as opposed to what is sometimes called merely "socially desirable conduct".The man of honor is not content to ask merely whether this or that will hurt society,or whether it is what most people would permit themselves to do.He asks, and he asks first of all,would it hurt him and his self- respect?Would it dishonor him personally? Question Translation
8. What social morality and social conscience leave out is the narrower but very significant concept of honor — as opposed to what is sometimes called merely "socially desirable conduct". The man of honor is not content to ask merely whether this or that will hurt society, or whether it is what most people would permit themselves to do. He asks, and he asks first of all, would it hurt him and his selfrespect? Would it dishonor him personally? Detailed Reading
Detailed Reading 9.It was a favorite and no doubt sound argument among early twentieth-century reformers that "playing the game" as the gentleman was supposed to play it was not enough to make a decent society.They were right:it is not enough.But the time has come to add that it is indeed inevitable that the so-called social conscience unsupported by the concept of personal honor will create a corrupt society.But suppose that it doesn't?Suppose that no one except the individual suffers from the fact that he sees nothing wrong in doing what everybody else does? Translation
9. It was a favorite and no doubt sound argument among early twentieth-century reformers that "playing the game" as the gentleman was supposed to play it was not enough to make a decent society. They were right: it is not enough. But the time has come to add that it is indeed inevitable that the so-called social conscience unsupported by the concept of personal honor will create a corrupt society. But suppose that it doesn't? Suppose that no one except the individual suffers from the fact that he sees nothing wrong in doing what everybody else does? Detailed Reading
Detailed Reading Even so,I still insist that for the individual himself nothing is more important than this personal,interior sense of right and wrong and his determination to follow that rather than to be guided by what everybody does or merely the criterion of "social usefulness".It is impossible for me to imagine a good society composed of men without honor. Translation
Even so, I still insist that for the individual himself nothing is more important than this personal, interior sense of right and wrong and his determination to follow that rather than to be guided by what everybody does or merely the criterion of "social usefulness". It is impossible for me to imagine a good society composed of men without honor. Detailed Reading
Detailed Reading 10.We hear it said frequently that what present-day men most desire is security.If that is so,then they have a wrong notion of what the real,the ultimate,security is.No one who is dependent on anything outside himself,upon money,power,fame,or whatnot,is or ever can be secure. Only he who possesses himself and is content with himself is actually secure.Too much is being said about the importance of adjustment and "participation in the group".Even cooperation,to give this thing its most favorable designation,is no more important than the ability to stand alone when the choice must be made between the sacrifice of one's own integrity and adjustment to or participation in group activity. Question Translation
10. We hear it said frequently that what present-day men most desire is security. If that is so, then they have a wrong notion of what the real, the ultimate, security is. No one who is dependent on anything outside himself, upon money, power, fame, or whatnot, is or ever can be secure. Only he who possesses himself and is content with himself is actually secure. Too much is being said about the importance of adjustment and "participation in the group". Even cooperation, to give this thing its most favorable designation, is no more important than the ability to stand alone when the choice must be made between the sacrifice of one's own integrity and adjustment to or participation in group activity. Detailed Reading