Ah, now that’s a lovely wrinkle I hadn’t thought of, which could easily overwhelm any of the effect described in the root post here; and would at least need to seriously think about.
(My not having thought of it may from be the same sort of blind spot that arises from psychological studies tending to be performed on Amero/European college students...)
If you have any insights as to why my comment elicited this positive/accepting response, when ChristianKI’s comment (which seems to me substantially overlapping) didn’t, I would be interested in them. (To a lesser extent, I have the same question about and shminux’s comment, but it’s clearer to me how someone could fail to connect the concept of “honor” with the concept of intergenerational reputation, despite those two ideas being intimately connected in my head).
If you have any insights as to why my comment elicited this positive/accepting response, when ChristianKI’s comment (which seems to me substantially overlapping) didn’t, I would be interested in them.
When I read the post, I was planning to respond with:
Of course, there is an obvious, physically real afterlife: one’s descendents.
Then I saw that you had already pointed that out. ChristianKI’s comment doesn’t point that out, which is why I would have responded positively to yours and not to his. (Why do some individuals care about the state of the future after they die?)
Reputations that last inter-generationally can apply and modify behaviours (even including kids trying to get their parents to act better) even if no individual cares about what happens after they-in-particular happen to die.
When shminux mentioned ‘honor’, my thoughts were more along the lines of an internally-generated code of conduct (eg, “What you are in the dark”) than an externally-enforced one; perhaps describable as honne rather than tatemae and giri.
Ah, now that’s a lovely wrinkle I hadn’t thought of, which could easily overwhelm any of the effect described in the root post here; and would at least need to seriously think about.
(My not having thought of it may from be the same sort of blind spot that arises from psychological studies tending to be performed on Amero/European college students...)
If you have any insights as to why my comment elicited this positive/accepting response, when ChristianKI’s comment (which seems to me substantially overlapping) didn’t, I would be interested in them. (To a lesser extent, I have the same question about and shminux’s comment, but it’s clearer to me how someone could fail to connect the concept of “honor” with the concept of intergenerational reputation, despite those two ideas being intimately connected in my head).
When I read the post, I was planning to respond with:
Then I saw that you had already pointed that out. ChristianKI’s comment doesn’t point that out, which is why I would have responded positively to yours and not to his. (Why do some individuals care about the state of the future after they die?)
Just for the record, I’m male. Christian is my first name and Kl the first two letters of my last name.
Edited.
Reputations that last inter-generationally can apply and modify behaviours (even including kids trying to get their parents to act better) even if no individual cares about what happens after they-in-particular happen to die.
When shminux mentioned ‘honor’, my thoughts were more along the lines of an internally-generated code of conduct (eg, “What you are in the dark”) than an externally-enforced one; perhaps describable as honne rather than tatemae and giri.
Yes, more of a self-respect thing, like not shoplifting even when there is no danger of getting caught. I suppose the word “honor” is too ambiguous.