
Life on the slippery Earth - Thevet
https://aeon.co/essays/aztec-moral-philosophy-didnt-expect-anyone-to-be-a-saint
======
cdoxsey
An important thing to remember when reading ancient western sources is that
their culture is significantly different from our own, which can color our
view of the language they use.

Honor and shame are pre-eminent, for example, Isocrates:

> Pursue the enjoyments which are of good repute; for pleasure attended by
> honor is the best thing in the world, but pleasure without honor is the
> worst.

> Strive by all means to live in security, but if ever it falls to your lot to
> face the dangers of battle, seek to preserve your life, but with honor and
> not with disgrace; for death is the sentence which fate has passed on all
> mankind, but to die nobly is the special honor which nature has reserved for
> the good

In many modern cultures you rarely see much talk about honor. We tend to be
much more concerned with personal satisfaction or internal moral standards.

Honor is dynamic and relational. It is the esteem granted by one's community;
the respect of others.

The reverse is shame, not a personal moral failing to your own standards
(which we would likely call guilt), but a failing in the eyes of your
community. Shame is a strange word, in that to have shame is good (meaning you
are aware of the standards of your community and careful to stay within them),
but to be shamed is the worst thing that can happen to you.

I'm not saying these concepts don't exist in our culture today, they do,
perhaps most prominently when we celebrate courage on the battlefield, but in
the Ancient world (and in may cultures in the world today), these concepts
were much more important. To give a sense of the kinds of things that result
from this:

\- Defending the honor of your community is extremely important. Honor
challenges happen all the time - and to simply refuse to engage, is itself a
kind of response - one where you "lose face". On the flip side, winning the
challenge can enhance your place in society.

\- Relationships were structured around honor/shame dynamics through the use
of patronage. A patron would be someone of means, with access to wealth,
property, opportunities for advancement, and the patron would in return
receive loyalty and an increase in their reputation. Think "The Godfather".
This give and take, debt and payment, was fundamental. Seneca:

> We are to speak of benefits, and to define a matter which is the chief bond
> of human society; [...] Men must be taught to be willing to give, willing to
> receive, willing to return; and to place before themselves the high aim, not
> merely of equalling, but even of surpassing those to whom they are indebted,
> both in good offices and in good feeling; because the man whose duty it is
> to repay, can never do so unless he out-does his benefactor

\- Kinship was extremely important. In general you were devoted to the well-
being and status of your family, and were skeptical of outsiders. Honor is
inherited, and your status is enhanced if your Father is an important figure
in society. However this also means your status is diminished if members of
your family (or tribe) commit shameful acts.

All that to say, I think the premise of this article is incorrect. The
classical tradition is very much concerned with the social ramifications of
behavior in ways a 21st century American would likely find quite distasteful.

