On honor

Honor is the demand for appreciation of integrity.

Integrity is the possession of fixed habits of thought. Integrity can also be phrased as the tendency to adhere to one’s principles, or to “stick to your guns”. This is a virtue among friends and allies because the predictability of behavior it produces allows for communication and collaboration in pursuit of common ends.

Recognition of integrity is necessary for a man to develop a reputation of integrity. When I say “demand” for recognition, I mean this both in the typical sense and in the economic sense. A TT, for example, may have integrity and may or may not be recognized for it, but they don’t demand recognition either for themselves or for others. Thus, they have little to no concept of honor. An MM may or may not actually have integrity, but they will demand recognition for it. Therefore, they often have honor and always wish to be seen as honorable.

Typically, the honorable and dishonorable can be distinguished by projection- an honorable man will almost always insist on recognition for integrity when it appears in others. A dishonorable man may give the appearance of this but his appreciation will be a poor predictor of actual honor. I suspect T-front is a good predictor of undervaluation for the reputation part, and T-back is a good predictor for undervaluation of integrity itself. (Here it may be helpful to note that the working definition of integrity does not require honesty, although habitual honesty is a type of integrity.) Therefore, an MT will value integrity highly but fail to demand public recognition of it. For example, pinning a medal on an MT (or a TT) in front of a cheering crowd is a great way to make them feel like they’re being punished for something horrible they did.

A TM will demand public recognition of integrity, but internally not value the thing itself very much. They are thus the most likely of the Edenic types to be seen as dishonorable. A T-back will often privately recognize integrity if you ask them directly: “Can we trust X to continue being Y in situation Z?” But it’s a cold observation of some abstract parameter about an object showing predictable behaviors, rather than a valuation of a human subject. They don’t see much point in talking about it except when it’s instrumental to something else, like accounting for biases in a witness’s account. For example, when I describe Koanic and Vox Day as extremely consistent, I don’t mean it as a compliment or an insult. It’s just a property of the material, like the rigidity of a metal, which predicts how frequently they will change form.

There’s a common lower class speech that I like to mock which goes “You gotta respeck me! You disrespeckin and I’ma disrespeck you back but you want respeck you gotta respeck me first!” There’s wisdom hiding in this bravado. Effectively, it’s a claim to belong in the class of honorable men who can bargain and negotiate with each other on reasonable terms.

The problem is that the signal tends to be a counterfeit because it’s so easy for impulsive people to claim, right before impulsively victimizing someone and back-rationalizing it as justifiable. Hence the misspellings above, which are meant to represent the tendency for the unintentional associated signals (speech patterns, etc.) indicating contradictory values. It’s not exactly impossible for a poor person to have integrity, but it is unlikely. People atomized by hard economic realities have greater difficulty forming habits of thought, just as wagies who don’t know what their hours will be next week can hardly form habits of behavior.

Two of the reasons highly virtuous people often enjoy imitating low-class behavior are 1) it filters for observers who can pick out the signal of integrity in the noise, and 2) it’s a form of peacocking, because integrity in a poor person signals greater inherent genetic character.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to On honor

  1. Obadiah says:

    Good post.

    I didn’t have a lot of integrity for most of my life due to being very Ne-dominant and thus very psychologically-flexible (Ne, I believe, being a biological adaptation to a large group-size whose purpose is to understand how the environment works).

    This passage from Jung could be re-titled “the life and times of Obadiah Cuckleham” and it would be an accurate title:

    “Whenever intuition predominates, a particular and unmistakable psychology presents itself. Because intuition is orientated by the object, a decided dependence upon external situations is discernible, but it has an altogether different character from the dependence of the sensational type. The intuitive is never to be found among the generally recognized reality values, but he is always present where possibilities exist. He has a keen nose for things in the bud pregnant with future promise. He can never exist in stable, long-established conditions of generally acknowledged though limited value: because his eye is constantly ranging for new possibilities, stable conditions have an air of impending suffocation. He seizes hold of new objects and new ways with eager intensity, sometimes with extraordinary enthusiasm, only to abandon them cold-bloodedly, without regard and apparently without remembrance, as soon as their range becomes clearly defined and a promise of any considerable future development no longer clings to them. As long as a possibility exists, the intuitive is bound to it with thongs of fate. It is as though his whole life went out into the new situation. One gets the impression, which he himself shares, that he has just reached the definitive turning point in his life, and that from now on nothing else can seriously engage his thought and feeling. How- [p. 465] ever reasonable and opportune it may be, and although every conceivable argument speaks in favour of stability, a day will come when nothing will deter him from regarding as a prison, the self-same situation that seemed to promise him freedom and deliverance, and from acting accordingly. Neither reason nor feeling can restrain or discourage him from a new possibility, even though it may run counter to convictions hitherto unquestioned. Thinking and feeling, the indispensable components of conviction, are, with him, inferior functions, possessing no decisive weight; hence they lack the power to offer any lasting. resistance to the force of intuition. And yet these are the only functions that are capable of creating any effectual compensation to the supremacy of intuition, since they can provide the intuitive with that judgment in which his type is altogether lacking. The morality of the intuitive is governed neither by intellect nor by feeling; he has his own characteristic morality, which consists in a loyalty to his intuitive view of things and a voluntary submission to its authority, Consideration for the welfare of his neighbours is weak. No solid argument hinges upon their well-being any more than upon his own. Neither can we detect in him any great respect for his neighbour’s convictions and customs; in fact, he is not infrequently put down as an immoral and ruthless adventurer. Since his intuition is largely concerned with outer objects, scenting out external possibilities, he readily applies himself to callings wherein he may expand his abilities in many directions. Merchants, contractors, speculators, agents, politicians, etc., commonly belong to this type.

    Apparently this type is more prone to favour women than men; in which case, however, the intuitive activity reveals itself not so much in the professional as in the social sphere. Such women understand the art of utilizing every social opportunity; they establish right social con- [p. 466] nections; they seek out lovers with possibilities only to abandon everything again for the sake of a new possibility.

    It is at once clear, both from the standpoint of political economy and on grounds of general culture, that such a type is uncommonly important. If well-intentioned, with an orientation to life not purely egoistical, he may render exceptional service as the promoter, if not the initiator of every kind of promising enterprise. He is the natural advocate of every minority that holds the seed of future promise. Because of his capacity, when orientated more towards men than things, to make an intuitive diagnosis of their abilities and range of usefulness, he can also ‘make’ men. His capacity to inspire his fellow-men with courage, or to kindle enthusiasm for something new, is unrivalled, although he may have forsworn it by the morrow. The more powerful and vivid his intuition, the more is his subject fused and blended with the divined possibility. He animates it; he presents it in plastic shape and with convincing fire; he almost embodies it. It is not a mere histrionic display, but a fate.”

  2. Obadiah says:

    “Two of the reasons highly virtuous people often enjoy imitating low-class behavior are 1) it filters for observers who can pick out the signal of integrity in the noise, and 2) it’s a form of peacocking, because integrity in a poor person signals greater inherent genetic character.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Flanders

    “Despite a meek outward appearance, Ned hides an exceptionally well-toned physique.[3]”

  3. glosoli says:

    I once had a Melony area manager, ex-HR guy, total dick, no idea about business, we didn’t get on at all.

    In my final yearly review with him (he was leaving the area), he said to me ‘Well glosoli, it’s good to have principles, but one shouldn’t die for them’. My reply was along the lines of ‘I wouldn’t die for them, but I’ll never drop them’.

    He said at the end of the meeting that he’d have me on his team in the future, I said nothing and looked him in the eye, then left. Ugly mother-f’er he was, physiognomy really is real.

    I mostly popped by to share a Thal dig find link. We wuz good at tool-making, better than Saps, who could have guessed.

    https://www.archaeology.org/issues/110-1311/trenches/1395-neanderthal-tools-suggest-two-traditions-in-europe

  4. bicebicebice says:

    Dank

  5. Imhc says:

    Integrity is the possession of fixed habits of thought.

    A salient mark of womanhood, so to speak…

  6. Obadiah says:

    Also, give me my medal.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s