• About
  • Instructions for Contributors
  • Honor Scholarship

Honor Ethics

~ Devoted to the study of honor as an ethical value

Honor Ethics

Category Archives: announcements

Call for Abstracts: Perspectives on Modern Honor

15 Wednesday Jan 2014

Posted by dan demetriou in announcements

≈ Leave a comment

The editors of Perspectives on Modern Honor (Lexington Books/Rowman & Littlefield, forthcoming 2015) invite abstracts on the topic of honor and liberalism. Invited contributors include:

  • Amitai Etzioni (Sociology, George Washington)
  • Sharon Krause (Political Science, Brown)
  • Richard Ned Lebow (International Relations, Dartmouth & King’s College)
  • Stephen Forde (Political Science, North Texas)
  • Joseph Vandello and Vanessa Hettinger (Psychology, Florida State)
  • Paul Robinson (International Relations, Ottawa)
  • Ajume Wingo (Philosophy, Colorado)
  • Andrea Mansker (History, Sewanee)
  • Mark Griffith (University of West Alabama)
  • Tony Cunningham (Philosophy, College of St. Benedict/St. John’s)
  • Ryan Rhodes (Philosophy, Oklahoma)
  • Dan Demetriou (Philosophy, Minnesota-Morris)

Guidelines: Please send a 300-500 word abstract (appropriate to a chapter length of 7,500-9,000 words) to the editors by Feb 15, 2014.

Laurie Johnson (Political Science, Kansas State) at lauriej@ksu.edu
Dan Demetriou (Philosophy, Minnesota-Morris) at ddemetri@umn.edu

Replies will be given by March 1, 2014, and completed manuscripts will be due to the editors by April 15, 2015.

More about the project:
Honor is, for many, an outdated concept that clashes with modern, liberal, priorities. Honor is associated with medieval chivalry, the warlike virtues, and in our own times such reprehensible acts as terrorist attacks and honor killings. None of this is very attractive in a world in which women have made great gains towards full equality, where war can be total, and where terrorism beleaguers Western societies. Even early modern and Enlightenment thinkers often rejected honor (or re-defined it) as an irrational human motivation which leads nations and individuals to fight over religious and ethnic rivalry or trivial matters, such as insults. Thomas Hobbes, for instance, rejected aristocratic honor as a major cause of quarrel, and sought to control its power by placing it in the hands of an absolute sovereign. John Locke attempted to replace the quest for honor as a motivation with the pursuit of enlightened self-interest and commodious living.

And yet, there is a growing interest in reviving honor and making it “safe” for modern liberal society. This concern recognizes that members of liberal democratic societies are finding it increasingly difficult to find common ground, or to foster any agreement about expectations for private and public conduct. Honor is a concept that can be interpreted in a secular manner, which gives it an edge over purely religion-based attempts at creating a code of conduct in societies with great religious diversity and a separation of church and state.

A growing body of literature is addressing these benefits of honor, as well as the challenges to developing honor codes in liberal societies, but authors define honor in a variety of ways and take different approaches to how to operationalize honor in modern liberal societies. This groundbreaking volume will be the first to engage scholars representing various disciplines in a dialogue about what honor means and role it should play in liberal societies.

General areas of consideration for authors can include:

1. How should we define honor or categorize types of honor?

2. Are honor and liberalism in fact, or in principle, in tension, or are they mutually reinforcing?

3. Is military honor alive in modern liberal societies, and if so, does it pose a problem for them?

4. How should we react to non-Western honor motivations (i.e., Western vs. non-Western honor)?

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Ajume Wingo: Source of Mandela’s greatness is that he gave up power

09 Monday Dec 2013

Posted by dan demetriou in announcements, history of honor, honor and the law, honor in contempory media, honor in the news, philosophy of honor, political science of honor, stories of honor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

mandela and honor

Honorethics.org contributor Ajume Wingo had a great letter published in the Denver Post yesterday on Nelson Mandela. It discusses an important point almost totally ignored in the encomia we are hearing about the South African president: how unique and important it was that Mandela gave up power.Ajume Wingo

The true source of Mandela’s greatness is how he gave up that power. It was his exit — dignified and orderly — more than anything else that sets him apart. His exit from office at the height of his power, popularity and health put him in the company of Cincinnatus of ancient Rome and George Washington — exemplars of the rule of law and the ideals of leadership in a republic.

I know Ajume has been thinking and writing on the theme of rulership and liberalism for some time. In the developed West, we have grown accustomed to our leaders stepping down when their tenure is up, but of course there is little reason to make the same assumption in many parts of the world. Figuring out how to persuade leaders to give up power—especially when the populace will let them get away with keeping it—would be huge accomplishment for the cause of liberalism and rule of law.

Could leaders be persuaded by money? Maybe. However, as Wingo’s piece notes, African billionaire Mo Ibrahim has funded a foundation offering $5 million, and an annual stipend of $200,000, to African leaders who (among other things) “serve their constitutionally mandated term.” The prize seems to be an insufficient incentive. Maybe the prize cannot compare to the richer spoils of electing oneself president for life. However, we do have some historical precedent on the matter. As Ajume notes, Washington and Cincinnatus also refused sorts of kingship.

Beyond their non-pecuniary motives, I cannot say much about Cincinnatus’ or Mandela’s motives. But in the case of Washington, some historians argue that concern for honor was key. Douglass Adair, Lorrraine Smith Pangle and Thomas Pangle, Joanne Freeman, and Gordon Wood all speak to the concern Washington had for his honor and reputation. Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

New book series: Honor and Obligation in Liberal Society

18 Monday Nov 2013

Posted by dan demetriou in announcements, history of honor, honor and the law, philosophy of honor, political science of honor

≈ Leave a comment

I’m pleased to announce a new book series edited by honorethics.org contributors Laurie Johnson (Political Science, Kansas State) and Dan Demetriou (Philosophy, Minnesota-Morris) on the theme “Honor and Obligation in Liberal Society” (Lexington Books/Rowman & Littlefield).

Here is a description of the series’ purpose:

——

Liberalism’s political, economic, and social benefits are undeniable. However, these benefits come with a price: liberal societies are losing their sense of honor, civic obligation, higher moral purpose, shared values, and community. This series focuses on classical liberalism, honor, and social and civic obligation.  

We invite contributions on the problems raised by liberalism in general, and especially scholarship addressing how honor codes are challenged or changed by liberalism. We also welcome manuscripts which conceptualize liberalism in ways compatible with modern needs, and submissions covering the so-called “bourgeois virtues” extolled by liberal philosophers and their connection to materialism, individualism, and social obligation. Scholars who can address the international dimension of these questions are also sought: for instance, globalization may spread economic development, but at what expense to cultural norms and practices that have kept traditional societies intact? 

The series is open to contributions from scholars representing classics, political science, international relations, philosophy, history, literature, religious studies, and other disciplines whose work bears on these questions. Successful proposals will be accessible to a multidisciplinary audience, and advance our understanding of liberalism, its development, and its repercussions for our future.

——

You can find the proposal guidelines at lexingtonliberalism.com.

We are also contemplating an edited volume of essays on these themes, perhaps with an associated conference. Expect announcements about that in the Spring of 2014. In the meantime, we thank you for passing along this call for proposals/manuscripts to scholars writing on these topics.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Welcome Tony Cunningham

30 Wednesday Oct 2013

Posted by dan demetriou in announcements, honor in literature, philosophy of honor

≈ 1 Comment

On behalf of honorethics.org, I am pleased to welcome Tony Cunningham as a contributor.

Tony is Professor of Philosophy at St. John’s University in Collegeville, Minnesota.  He is the author of Modern Honor: A Philosophical Defense (Routledge, 2013). He comes to his philosophical interest in honor via his deep interests in literature and moral psychology.  His earlier work on literature and the emotions, The Heart of What Matters: The Role for Literature in Moral Philosophy (Berkeley, 2001), led him back to classic texts like Homer’s Iliad and Euripides’ Hecuba to think carefully about complex topics like anger, shame, and humiliation.  This work led him to other rich resources for honor like the Icelandic sagas, the American South, samurai Japan, and contemporary American gangs.  As he argues, most of modern moral philosophy abandoned the notion of honor, and philosophers erred badly by so doing because a sense of honor is at the center of our ethical experiences for creatures like us.

A description of Modern Honor:

This book examines the notion of honor with an eye to dissecting its intellectual modern honordemise and with the aim of making a case for honor’s rehabilitation. Western intellectuals acknowledge honor’s influence, but they lament its authority. For Western democratic societies to embrace honor, it must be compatible with social ideals like liberty, equality, and fraternity. Cunningham details a conception of honor that can do justice to these ideals. This vision revolves around three elements—character (being), relationships (relating), and activities and accomplishment (doing). Taken together, these elements articulate a shared aspiration for excellence. We can turn the tables on traditional ills of honor—serious problems of gender, race, and class—by forging a vision of honor that rejects lives predicated on power and oppression.

Tony is particularly interested in making philosophy relevant for everyday people embroiled in the business of living. As he sees it, the real business of philosophy is to become people on whom nothing is lost. He has essays reflecting these aims on anger, consolation, and modesty.

Welcome, Tony! We look forward to your contributions.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Notice: Laurie Johnson’s blog, recent book

04 Saturday May 2013

Posted by dan demetriou in announcements, political science of honor

≈ Leave a comment

I just wanted to alert readers that Laurie Johnson has a new blog, Honor Today. On it, I noticed her new book, Locke and Rousseau: Two Enlightenment Responses to Honor, which I look forward to buying and reading as soon as possible!

It’s great to see more content on honor getting shared out there!

johnson - locke rousseau

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Welcome Peter Olsthoorn

14 Wednesday Nov 2012

Posted by dan demetriou in announcements

≈ Leave a comment

On behalf of honorethics.org, I am pleased to welcome Peter Olsthoorn as a contributor.

Peter Olsthoorn teaches ethics at the Netherlands Defense Academy. He has written several articles on honor in political theory and military ethics, as well as the monograph Military Ethics and Virtues: An Interdisciplinary Approach for the 21st Century (Routledge, 2010).

A description of his Military Ethics and Virtues:

Although long-established military virtues, such as honor, courage and loyalty, are what most armed forces today still use as guiding principles in an effort to enhance the moral behavior of soldiers, much depends on whether the military virtues adhered to by these militaries suit a particular mission or military operation. Clearly, the beneficiaries of these military virtues are the soldiers themselves, fellow-soldiers, and military organizations, yet there is little that regulates the behavior of soldiers towards civilian populations. As a result, troops trained for combat in today’s missions sometimes experience difficulty in adjusting to the less aggressive ways of working needed to win the hearts and minds of local populations after major combat is over. It can be argued that today’s missions call for virtues that are more inclusive than the traditional ones, which are mainly about enhancing military effectiveness, but a convincing case can be made that a lot can already be won by interpreting these traditional virtues in different ways.

This volume offers an integrated approach to the main traditional virtues, exploring their possible relevance and proposing new ways of interpretation that are more in line with the military tasks of the 21st century. The book will be of much interest to students of military ethics, philosophy, and war and conflict in general.

Some of Peter’s articles of special interest to honorethics.org readers would be his:

“Honour, face and reputation in political theory,” European Journal of Political Theory

“Honor and the Military,” International Journal of Applied Philosophy

“Honor as a Motive for Making Sacrifices,” Journal of Military Ethics

Welcome aboard, Peter! We look forward to your contributions.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Welcome Robert Oprisko

02 Thursday Aug 2012

Posted by dan demetriou in announcements, honor and international studies

≈ Leave a comment

On behalf of honorethics.org, I am pleased to welcome Robert Oprisko as a contributor.

Robert L. Oprisko is a Visiting Assistant Professor of International Studies at Butler University, Indiana. Dr. Oprisko specializes in how social structure (from the individual to the international system) leads to conflict and cooperation. He has previously taught for Purdue University and Johns Hopkins University and is an expert at developing teams for Model United Nations. He is the author of the recent Honor: A Phenomenology:

A ground-breaking examination of honor as a metaphenomenon, this book incorporates various structures of social control including prestige, face, shame and affiliated honor and the rejection of said structures by dignified individuals and groups.  It shows honor to be a concept that encompasses a number of processes that operate together in order to structure society. Honor is how we are inscribed with social value by others and the means by which we inscribe others with social honor. Because it is the means by which individuals fit in and function with society, the main divisions internal (within the psyche of the individual and external (within the norms and institutions of society). Honor is the glue that holds groups together and the wedge that forces them apart; it defines who is us and who them. It accounts for the continuity and change in socio-political systems.

Welcome aboard, Robert! We look forward to your contributions.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Welcome Ryan Rhodes

07 Saturday Jul 2012

Posted by dan demetriou in announcements

≈ Leave a comment

On behalf of honorethics.org, I am pleased to welcome Ryan Rhodes as a contributor.

Ryan just completed his Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Oklahoma, where he wrote a dissertation on honor entitled Heroes Great and Small. Ryan was a speaker at 36th Annual Midwest Philosophy Colloquium’s “Honor and Ethics Mini-Conference,” where he presented a very well received paper entitled “Honor and the Moral Value of Reputation.” Apart from honor, Ryan writes about the use of fiction in philosophical illumination and situationist challenges to virtue ethics.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Honor and Ethics mini-conference: speaker bios and abstracts

03 Tuesday Apr 2012

Posted by dan demetriou in announcements, anthropology of honor, history of honor, honor code, honor system, philosophy of honor, political science of honor

≈ Leave a comment

The 36th Annual Midwest Philosophy Colloquium on “Honor and Ethics” is this Friday, April 6, at the University of Minnesota, Morris. The schedule and other particulars can be found here.

We at UMM are very excited to be hosting this first-of-its-kind event!

About our speakers (in order of presentation):

Ryan Rhodes is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Oklahoma, where in May he will defend a dissertation on Honor. He has previously co-authored a chapter of Batman and Philosophy, and presented a paper on the relationship of Newcomb’s problem to freedom and foreknowledge. His other research interests include the use of fiction in philosophical illumination, and situationist challenges to virtue ethics.

Stephen Mathis is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Wheaton College in Norton, Massachusetts, where he teaches courses in Social/Political Philosophy and Legal Philosophy, and also serves as Pre-Law Advisor. His primary area of research concerns action theoretical issues within the criminal law, but he has also written on moral theory, moral issues in education, and moral and economic issues in sports.

Shannon French is Director of the Inamori International Center for Ethics and Excellence at Case Western Reserve University. Prior to leading the Inamori Center, Dr. French was the associate chair of the Department of Leadership, Ethics and Law at the United States Naval Academy. Dr. French’s research and scholarly interests are primarily in the area of military ethics, but also include leadership ethics, professional ethics, moral psychology, biomedical and environmental ethics. Her The Code of the Warrior: Exploring Warrior Values, Past and Present (2003) features a forward by Senator John McCain.

Laurie Johnson is a Professor of Political Science at Kansas State University, specializing in political thought. She is the author of five books, including Thucydides, Hobbes, and the Interpretation of Realism; Political Thought: A Guide to the Classics; Hobbes’s Leviathan; Thomas Hobbes: Turning Point for Honor; and soon to be published Locke and Rousseau: Two Enlightenment Responses to Honor. Dr. Johnson is Director of the Primary Texts Certificate at Kansas State.

Frank Stewart is a Professor Emeritus at the department of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. His research interests are in social anthropology, linguistics, and the law, with a special focus on the Bedouin of the Sinai. He has taught or held research appointments at New York University, Harvard Law School, and the Princeton Institute for Advanced Studies. Honor (1994) is one of his many publications.

Lad Sessions is a Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Washington and Lee University, where he started teaching in 1971. He is the author of three books, the most recent being Honor for Us: A Philosophical Analysis, Interpretation, and Defense (2010). Dr. Sessions’ many academic publications discuss issues ranging from philosophy of religion, Rawls on liberalism, the philosophy of science, and the nature of sportsmanship.

Abstracts

Ryan Rhodes, “Honor and the Moral Value of Reputation”

Some of the most common objections to honor-based ethics concern its emphasis on pride and reputation, and the charge that the person of honor has an essentially backwards moral orientation. On one hand, he cares too much about other people and their perceptions, to the detriment of his virtue and authenticity. On another, he cares too much about himself and his regard, to the detriment of others’ welfare. Hence, this feature of honor is seen as a hindrance to true morality. I argue that this view rests on a mistake. That is not to say that there is nothing to the objections in question, but rather that they fail to recognize a crucial role of public esteem in the moral life. Pride and reputation are essential constituents of good character, because the ability to exercise virtue in a community depends in part on how one is perceived. The positive regard of others is something we ought to care about for specifically moral reasons, because it enables one to engage and lead those others in the quest for greater human excellence. As such, the honorable person rightly cares about being viewed favorably, because he cares about the values his life stands for and their relation to the good of other people.

Stephen Mathis, “Justifying Academic Honor Codes”

Academic honor codes at colleges and universities seek to (and very often do) express the values and commitments of the academy, often more explicitly and powerfully than any other feature of academic institutions. For this reason alone, academic honor codes are worth studying more closely. In this talk, I argue that honor codes help to define the individual academic communities in which they arise, and the features those various codes—and communities—share are characteristic of the academy as a whole. If I am right about this claim, then academic honor codes would identify and reinforce the boundaries of the academic community as a moral community; so characterized, academic honor codes would warrant attention, even from those at institutions without them. The best justification for such codes is one which prioritizes the academic pursuit of knowledge above many other interests, including the individual self-interest of the students subject to those codes.

Shannon French, “Honor Through the Ages:  Differing Conceptions of a Key Concept at the Heart of the Warrior’s Code”

I will examine how the concept of honor was understood in different historical warrior cultures, including those of the Roman legions and the Japanese samurai. I will also consider the idealized accounts of warrior honor that are depicted in classic works as Homer’s epics and ancient Icelandic sagas. Finally, I comment on what role the concept of honor can and should play in the culture of the modern US military.

Laurie Johnson, “Honor in Today’s America: The Liberal Origins of Honor’s Decline”

I will discuss the importance of honor in three areas of contemporary significance: the economy, the family, and academics. All three have been negatively impacted by a loss of honor as a motivation for doing the right thing. The economic crisis that began in 2007 was, by many accounts, partly brought on by a lack of concern for honor and integrity in the banking and investment industries. The ongoing disintegration of the American family reveals the loss of honor and responsibility in our closest relationships. Integrity and honor in academic endeavors has also declined, with an increase in plagiarism and other forms of cheating. I will also briefly discuss my research, which connects key classical liberal ideas with the decline of honor as a motivation in modern society. Liberal ideals such as individualism and individual rights, the contract as the model for personal relationships, materialism, and the elevated importance of privacy, all can be connected with the decline in the importance of honor. I ask, can there be an honor code compatible with liberalism?

Frank Stewart, “An Anthropologist Looks at Honor”

Perhaps the most characteristic feature of Bedouin law is a cluster of institutions centered on the concept of ‘ard. I suggest that Bedouin ‘ard is a right of a particular kind, and that in the major European languages the word ‘honor’ also often refers to the same kind of right. I shall call that right personal honor. Its main characteristics are: (i) it is a right to respect, (ii) it can be lost, (iii) in order to retain it one must follow certain rules, the honor code, and (iv), there is at least one word or phrase that is regularly used to refer to this right. Personal honor is therefore part of what may be called a (personal) honor system, and these four items define such a system, albeit in an extremely rough and ready way. For an honor system to function there must also, of course, be an honor group, that is, a set of people who have a joint commitment to the honor code. The notion of an honor system represents an attempt to develop a cross-cultural concept from the notion of honor as it functioned until recently in certain strata of Western societies, and as it still functions among the Bedouin.  Honor systems are probably also to be found in other Middle Eastern, Central Asian and North African societies, though our information about them is at best sketchy. Whether such systems are, or were, to be found elsewhere in the world, I do not know. My hope is that if this question is addressed, then the answer will not only bring new facts to light, but also lead to improvements to the crude model of such a system that is presented here.

Lad Sessions, “Honor, Morality, Brotherhood”

This discussion is a conceptual analysis—with a wee bit of prescription. I regard my analyses as more provocative than conclusive; while I do hope they will prove persuasive, perhaps because they harmonize with unanalyzed concepts you already have, I will be content if they merely (!) induce further reflection. The proposals are no mere academic exercises; they have substantial implications.  I intend to highlight some important resemblances and some vital differences among three concepts that are distinct but which are easily confused and conflated, with arguably dangerous results. I call these three concepts Honor, Morality, and Brotherhood, and I intend to stretch them as widely as possible, beyond their origins in certain local contexts. They are familiar to all, yet easily misunderstood—or perhaps I should say quite differently understood. I have three basic tasks, each three-fold: (i) to sketch my account of each of the three concepts; (ii) to highlight three important similarities and differences among them; and (iii) to suggest three important issues, or lines of inquiry, that result from seeing things this way.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Welcome Andrea Mansker

05 Thursday Jan 2012

Posted by Jim Peterman in announcements, evolution of honor, history of honor, stories of honor

≈ Leave a comment

I am pleased to introduce my colleague at Sewanee: The University of the South, Andrea Mansker, Associate Professor of History, who has agreed to be a contributor for this blog.

Andrea’s recently published book, Sex, Honor and Citizenship in Early Third Republic France (Palgrave Macmillan 2011) describes and analyzes a variety of fascinating case studies of women using resources available in the male-oriented honor system of early twentieth-century France to rectify the inequalities of a gender system that excluded women from various forms of professional and legal agency and protection.

One especially interesting case is that of the feminist journalist Arria Ly, who in the decade before the Great War published critiques of the traditional requirement that honorable women marry as the sole means of gaining social recognition. In defending female singularity, Ly butted heads with conservative critics, including Prudent Massatt, who in writing accused Ly of being a lesbian. Responding to this criticism/insult, Ly used the duelist’s resort in demanding satisfaction in the name of all women. (I leave out the fascinating details of her use of the duelist’s rituals, which I encourage you to read in the text itself.)

In the course of analyzing the background and impact of this and other interesting cases, Andrea offers an analysis of the character and function of the system of honor that made possible this encounter, and Ly and other women’s unprecedented use of various honor-related masculine privileges. She argues that during this period, the honor system functioned as an unstable field of contestation, “whose meaning was reassessed by men and women in their daily interactions.” This feature of the system allowed women to successfully redefine their own relation to honor based on their own, often courageous, actions, some of which exposed the cowardice and hypocrisy of men who opposed them. They were able to use this feature of the honor system even to subvert the ideology of male superiority, which traditionalists took as the foundation of the honor system. Andrea’s analysis implies that central to this system of honor were the various forms of ritual of shaming and honoring that made it possible for women, who appropriated those rituals, to achieve a modification of their own social status and the honor system itself. If the fin-de-siecle honor system she has examined is paradigmatic for honor systems generally, that might suggest that a successful honor system needs enough flexibility for its adherents to be able to use its ritual devices to correct its own ideologically-driven injustices.

My short introduction to her book pales in comparison to the richness of detail and insight she brings to this subject.  I am grateful to Andrea for her work on this topic. I look forward to her posts. Please join me in welcoming her to this blog.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts
Newer posts →

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Recent events:

Kansas State mini-conference: "Perspectives on Modern Honor"

Book series: Honor and Obligation in Liberal Society

Honor and Ethics Mini-Conference

Contributors

  • Andrea Mansker
  • Craig Bruce Smith
  • Dan Demetriou (administrator)
  • Graham Oddie
  • Jim Peterman
  • Joe Thomas
  • Lad Sessions
  • Laurie M. Johnson
  • Mark Collier
  • Mark Griffith
  • Paul Robinson
  • Peter Olsthoorn
  • Robert Oprisko
  • Ryan Rhodes
  • Shannon French
  • Sharon Krause
  • Steven Skultety
  • Tamler Sommers
  • Tony Cunningham
  • Valerie Soon

Recent posts

  • Two new books on honor by contributors Tamler Sommers and Craig Bruce Smith
  • Jordan Peterson on the play/honor (agonism) ethic
  • Honor and the Military Photo Scandal
  • HonorShame.com write-up of Honor in the Modern World
  • “Ethics for Adversaries” blog

Contributors’ Books

Johnson and Demetriou's Honor in the Modern World

Peter Olsthoorn's Honor in Political and Moral Philosophy

Joe Thomas' Leadership, Ethics and Law of War Discussion Guide for Marines

Anthony Cunningham's Modern Honor

Laurie Johnson's Locke and Rousseau: Two Enlightenment Responses to Honor

Peter Olsthoorn's Military Ethics and Virtues: An Interdisciplinary Approach for the 21st Century

Tamler Sommers' A Very Bad Wizard

Lad Sessions' Honor For Us

Andrea Mansker's Sex, Honor and Citizenship in Early Third Republic France

Laurie Johnson's Thomas Hobbes: Turning Point for Honor

Shannon French's The Code of the Warrior

Sharon Krause's Liberalism With Honor

Robert Oprisko's Honor: A Phenomenology

Graham Oddie's Value, Reality, Desire

Paul Robinson's Military Honour and the Conduct of War

Jim Peterman's Philosophy as Therapy

Archives

  • October 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • May 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • August 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • January 2012
  • November 2011
  • October 2011

Social

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Follow Following
    • Honor Ethics
    • Join 110 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Honor Ethics
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: