Happy New Year to you all! A colleague shared this quote for the New Year and it seems too good and appropriate not to share it with the SHC community.
The difference between a moral man and a man of honor is that the latter regrets a discreditable act, even when it has worked and he has not been caught. — H. L. Mencken
I admit, I am not sure that I completely agree with Mencken’s aphorism, but it certainly is thought provoking. For example, I don’t think, for example that a “moral man” would do the discreditable act in the first place. (OK, so even the most “moral” of us, do them at times, but I think the moral person would also have remorse, otherwise they would not be a “moral” character.)
Any thoughts?
I agree with you Dean Brady.
I think that Mencken’s statement on a moral man versus an honorable man, while brief, is accurate and at the same time questionable.
I have had my share of unintentionally discreditable actions. I can understand where you are coming from when you say that a moral person by definition does not commit discreditable acts. That is a true statement, but when you combine morals with humanity, the is a margin of expected moral failure that you need to keep in mind. Nobody is perfect. That is the extent of the accuracy in Mencken’s statement.
“The difference between a moral man and a man of honor is that the latter regrets a discreditable act, even when it has worked and he has not been caught. — H. L. Mencken”
The clause, “when it[the discreditable act] has worked,” implies that there is an intrigue of sorts; the action was meant to hurt someone else for personal gain. A moral man will never plan deviously against another. A moral man only does what he thinks is right. He will never feel regret because he thinks that what he did was right. (I suppose he could have done something society frowns upon that he thinks is okay. In which case he is still by definition a moral man.) He has his ideals on right and wrong, and since he is moral, he will do what he perceives is right.
I am not sure I have met too many honorable men before. Also, I am not sure I am able to judge whether or not another man is honorable. I would imagine that someone who is really worthy of respect and honor will have enough empathy to mourn every wrongful action that hurts another person. So an honorable man will regret his wrongful deeds.
I suppose after saying that, I should mention that I respect my professors, but I do not think they are worthy of honor. But respected implies honorable, so maybe I should distinguish the two.
Here are respect 1 and respect 2…
1) [Fake] Respect can be achieved with a 6-digit income and a notable résumé. It can be achieved with winning scholarships, awards, grants, trophies, and the Presidential election. The easiest way to detect if someone has this kind of respect is wait for him to leave the room. If people start joking about the way he walks or sweats when he is teaching the class, he probably has this kind of respect.
2) [Living] Respect is a summation of good values: morals, responsibility, always doing what is right! This type of respect often is noticed in a person with strong charisma. Groups of people will either want to be around him, or want to kill him because this kind of person may be viewed as radical (for doing what he thinks is right).
After all, Jesus didn’t have a Ph.D or a 6-digit income but is honored by billions.
Sorry for the ramble! I forget what I wrote already because it was so much.
With the exception of Yeshua, there hasn’t been a perfect person. So we must accept that Mencken’s moral man has likely committed a discreditable act or two.
Then we might ask, why wouldn’t the moral man regret his discreditable acts? The only answer I can see is that the discreditable acts were not committed with immoral intent. That would include either (non-reckless) accidental commission, or lacking awareness of the acts’ immorality at the time of commission (or that the acts, while discreditable, are not immoral). Being a moral man, he is judged by YHWH or by himself. The man of honor however, counts himself judged by the opinion of others. Public opinion, not having certain knowledge of the inner man, will speculate as to whether there was intent or not. The acts, being discreditable, would lower public opinion if revealed. He fears men rather than YHWH.
My personal thoughts are that a moral man does the right thing bc that’s what society expects out of them. That’s what morals are, it’s a culmination of societies views and expectations. This as opposed to an honorable man who does the right thing bc that’s what he expects out of himself. He holds himself to higher standards regardless of what society thinks is acceptable. This makes all the difference when noone is there watching what you do and this is why a honorable man regrets it when he does something wrong. He let himself down. A moral man who doesn’t get caught has let noone down. It’s a matter of motivation. This is why I completely agree w the quote. But that’s just my opinion. I think a person should do the right thing bc of their own personal code of ethics. Society accepts way too many things that it shouldn’t these days.