• 图案背景
  • 纯色背景


  • 2019-11-16
    为大人带来形象的羊生肖故事来历 为孩子带去快乐的生肖图画故事阅读

Honor A Phenomenology_部分1


内容提示: Honor: A PhenomenologyHonor is misunderstood in the social sciences. The literature lacks bothaccuracy and precision in its conceptual development such that we nolonger say what we mean because we have no idea what we're saying. Weuse many terms to mean honor and mean many different ideas when werefer to honor.Honor: A Phenomenology is designed to fix all of these problems. Aground-breaking examination of honor as a metaphenomenon, this bookincorporates various structures of social control includin...

文档格式:PDF| 浏览次数:3| 上传日期:2019-01-20 09:36:54| 文档星级:
Honor: A PhenomenologyHonor is misunderstood in the social sciences. The literature lacks bothaccuracy and precision in its conceptual development such that we nolonger say what we mean because we have no idea what we're saying. Weuse many terms to mean honor and mean many different ideas when werefer to honor.Honor: A Phenomenology is designed to fix all of these problems. Aground-breaking examination of honor as a metaphenomenon, this bookincorporates various structures of social control including prestige, face,shame, and affiliated honor and the rejection of said structures by dignifiedindividuals and groups. It shows honor to be a concept that encompassesa number of processes that operate together in order to structure society.Honor is how we are inscribed with social value by others and the mean sby which we inscribe others with social honor. Because it is the meansby which individuals fit in and function with society, the main divisionsinternal (within the psyche of the individual and external (within the normsand institutions of society). Honor is the glue that holds groups togetherand the wedge that forces them apart; it defines who is us and who them. Itaccounts for the continuity and change in socio-political systems.Robert L. Oprisko is a Visiting Assistant Professor of International Studiesat Butler University in Indianapolis, Indiana. He received his PhD in Politi-cal Science from Purdue University. Routledge Innovations in Political TheoryFor afull list of titles in this series, please visit www.routledge.com13 Political Theory of Global 21 European Integration and theJustice Nationalities QuestionA cosmopolitan case for the World Edited by John McGarry andState Michael KeatingLuis Cabrera22 Deliberation, Social Choice and14 Democracy, Nationalism and Absolutist DemocracyMulticulturalism David van MillEdited by Ramon Maiz and FerranRequejo 23 Sexual Justice I Cultural JusticeCritical perspectives in political15 Political Reconciliation theory and practiceA nd rew Schaap Edited by Barbara Arneil,Monique Deveaux, Rita Dhamoon16 National Cultural Autonomy and Avigail Eisenbergand Its Contemporary CriticsEdited by Ephraim Nimni 24 The International PoliticalThought of Carl Schmitt17 Power and Politics in Terror, Liberal War and the CrisisPoststructuralist Thought of Global OrderNew theories of the political Edited by Louiza Odysseos andSaul Newman Fabio Petito18 Capabilities Equality 25 In Defense of Human RightsBasic issues and problems A non-religious grounding in aEdited by Alexander Kaufman pluralistic worldAri Kohen19 Morality and NationalismCatherine Frost 26 Logics of Critical Explanation inSocial and Political Theory20 Principles and Political Order Jason Glynos and David HowarthThe challenge of diversityEdited by Bruce Haddock, Peri 27 Political ConstructivismRoberts and Peter Sutch Peri Roberts 28 Th e New Politics of Masculinity 37 Reth inking Gramsc iMen. Power and Resistance Edited by Marcus E. GreenFidelma Ashe38 A utonomy and Identity29 Citizens and the State The politics of who we are.Attitudes in Western Europe and Ros HagueEast and Southeast AsiaTakashi Inoguchi and Jean 38 Dialectics and Contem poraryBlondel PoliticsCritique and Transformation from30 Political Language and Hegel through Post-MarxismMetap hor John GrantInterpreting and changing theworld 39 Liberal Democracy as the End ofEdit ed by Terrell Carver and HistoryJernej Pikalo Fukuyama and PostmodernChallenges31 Political Pl ura lism and the S tate Chris HughesBeyond sovereigntyMarcel Wissenburg 40 Deleuze and World PoliticsAlter-globalizations and nomad32 Political Evil in a Global Age scienceHannah Arendt and international Peter LencotheoryPatrick Ha yd en 41 Utopian PoliticsCitizenship and Practice33 Gra msci and Global Politics Rhiannon FirthHegemony and resistanceMark McNally and John 42 Kant and Inter nationalSchwarzmantel Relations TheoryCosmopolitan Community34 Democracy and Pl ura lism BuildingThe political thought of William Dora IonE. ConnollyEdited by Alan Finlayson 43 Ethnic Diversity and the NationS tate35 Multicult ura lism and Mora l National CulturalAutonomyConflict RevisitedEdited by Maria Dimova-Cookson David 1. Smith and John Hidenand Peter Stirk44. Tensions of Mode rn ity36 Jo hn Stuart Mill- Tho ught and Las Casas and His Legacy in theInfluence French EnlightenmentThe saint of rationalism Daniel R. BrunstetterEdited by Georgios Varouxakisand Paul Kelly 45 Honor: A PhenomenologyRobert L. Oprisko Honor: A PhenomenologyRobert L. Oprisko~ 1 Routledge~ ~ Taylor & Francis GroupNEWYORK LONDON First published 2012by Routledge711ThirdAvenue, New York, NY 10017Simultaneously published in the UKby Routledge2 Park Square, Milton Park,Abingdon, Oxon OXl4 4RNROll/ledge is an imprint <if the Taylor <'(- Francis Group,an informa business© 2012 Robert L. OpriskoThe right of Robert L. Oprisko to be identified as authorof this work hasbeen asserted by himlher in accordance withsections 77 and 78 of theCopyright, Designs and PatentsAct 1988.All rights reserved. No partof this book may be reprintedor reproduced orutilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, nowknown or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or inany informationstorage or retrieval system, without permission inwritingfrom the publishers.T rad emark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks orregistered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanationwithout intent to infringe.Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Puhlication DataOprisko, Robert L.Honor : a phenomenology / by Robert L. Oprisko.p. cm.Includes bibliographical references and index.I. Honor. 2. Social ethics. I. Title.BJ1533.H80 632 012I79'.9--<lc232012007941ISBN: 978-0-415-53226-6 (hbk)ISBN: 978-0-203-11023-2 (ebk)Typeset in Sabonby IBT GlobalPrinted and bound inthe United States of America onsustainably sourcedpaper by IBT Global. To Maureen and the Oprisko and Yann families ContentsList of Figures X111Ack now le dgmen ts xvPART IAn Introduction to Honor1 Introduction 32 Honor and Value 293 Honor and Identity 40PART IIE xternal Honor4 Prestige 635 Shame 716 Face 787 Esteem 858 Affiliated Honor 929 Glory 100 XII ContentsPART IIIInternal Honor10 Honorableness 11311 Dignity 120PART IVThe Politics of Honor12 Rebellion and Revolution 13313 Lessons from Honor 146App endix: Key Concepts 157Notes 165Ref erences 195Index 207 Figures2. eoretical model of relations among motivational types ofvalue, higher order value types, and bipolar value dimensions.K orn probst resonance circuit.Int ersections of identirarian categories.Nor mative interaction effects between honor and fame.Th e relationship between excellence and social value inhighly hon orable individuals.Evolutionary tension between status quo m aint enance andreVISIOn .Affiliation of gro up m emb ers to com peting value systems.Relationship of honor processes.String composition.353850103135138140147155 AcknowledgmentsTh e production of this work has been a passi on, one of love and hatethat has developed a final product for which I am humbled, elated, andexhausted. I would not be here and this book would not have been writtenif it were not for a numb er of individuals who inspire me. If I am to be tru eto the content of this m anu script, I must honor them.I begin with Professor Michael Weinstein and the tru e mentorship he hasgiven me. You are a tru e friend and colleague. I would also like to th ankProfessor Lou Beres for suggesting that I include the Iliad as a thread toweave throu ghout the substantive chapters. I would also like to emphasizethe imp ort ance of P rof essor Berenice Carroll for being my rock at Purdu e-you have strengthened me. I would also like to th ank P rof essor AntonioMenendez for sup por ting me at Butler University and for providing unwav-ering support for b oth pedagogy and research.In my academic j ourn ey I have been blessed by meeting wonderful col-leagues who have aided my accomplishments. Iwould like to single out Vic-toria Rose, Josh Caplan, and Aviral P ath ak. Others who have helped shapethis project, whether they know it or not, are: Alex Polky, David Blackfield,David Van Arsdell, M an ish Gupt a, and Steve Proth ero- our conversationsprove that good philosophy can happen on the porch over a good cigar.I would not be me with out family and this would not be complete with-out a group of people that legally can't get rid of me. To my aunt, MelindaBelles, for expecting n othin g less than what was bey ond my best until it wasmy be st-th ank s for pushing and never ever being satisfied with perfection.To Kathy and Greg Ma llon, th ank you for being great parents. I'm sureyou were shocked to have a 26-year-old delivered to you (out of nowhere)just because you moved to West Lafay ett e. Th ank s for always being there,for standing with me, and for reminding Maur een just how lucky she is. Iinclude the Wah l, Prothero, Mikl ozek, Kvidahl, Gupta, Catallozzi, Fr ank ,and Fischer families in this debt of gratitude.To my wife M aur een, you are, as Professor Weinstein would say, mybeloved colleague. I love you. To Mr . and Mr s.James and Mary anne Yann( and Ra, Kate, Katelynn, Jimm y, and Patty) th ank you for inviting me in XVI Ackn owl edgmentsto become a Yann and giving your blessing for Maur een to become anOpri sko. The first book is done and I promise several more to come.Thi s book would not exist ifit weren't for the faith, devotion, understand-ing, flexibility, and general amazingness of my editor, Natalja Mortens en,and her assistant Darcy Bullock. Th ank you so much for believing in meand helping me realize this dream. I believe this to be the beginning of abeautiful friendship and professional p artner ship.Last, but not least, I must thank the organizations that have allowedme to continu e to write. At Purdue University, low e a debt of gratitudeto the D epartment of Political Science, the Women's Studies Program,the D eptartment of Organization, Leadership, and Supervision, and theFaculty Fellow Progr am. My th ank s to the Center for Talented Youth atJohn s Hopkin s University and, at Butler University, to the Intern ationalStudies Program.All illu stration s by Paige Ragan. Part IAn Introduction to Honor 1 Introduction"Human beings do not normally a ttend to the deeper levels of the self.. . because consciousness . . . substitutes the sy mbo l for the reality,or perceives the reality only th rough the symbo l."!IN MEDIAS RESHonor is a multiphenomenal category of concepts that , as a system, hier-archically st ruc tures society when an Oth er inscribes value o nto an indi-vidual. To study honor, one must study value, virtue, law, and all of thesocial sciences. It is a subtle concept whose influential tendrils extend wellbey ond its underst andin g in c omm on usage. Honor, when elevated to awholly inclusive level of ab str action, binds individuals tog eth er and form ssociety, but it also tears them apart. Honor provides a novel lens throu ghwhich politics can be viewed and int erpret ed, but it is actively being dimin -ished within the academy.Rec ent liter atu re on honor strongly suggests that social science is look-ing for some other concept to replace it. Honor's evolution as a concep thas instilled it with qualities that are politically i nco rrec t, display some ofthe less fl att ering qualities of hum anit y, and p erp etu ate inequality. Wh yd oth social science prot est so much? Evicting honor as a concept of criti-cal inquiry does not produ ce a politically correct global social environ-m ent , it would not eliminate the mor e base qualities of hum anit y, and itw ould not eradicate in equality . Honor is a social fact, even if some wouldchoose to ign or e it.Th e question now be com es "Is h onor interesting enough to merit a com-prehensive scholarly examination?" By thinkin g in t erm s of what is owedhonor, we are valuing the concept and evaluating it within l ar ger contexts.Com pared to other concepts, how does it rate? Does hon or belong within atheoretical monograph? Furth erm ore, we are objectifying honor and claim-ing d omini on over it by judging it and granting it social value merely byquesti onin g how much social value it has. We are judging whether or notwe should honor honor.Perhapswe should not. Honor evokes a multitud eof images, few of whichfit into the early 21 xt century Ameri can world. He arin g the word h onor sug-gests blood mixed with irr ationality: men killing their wives to preventfamily dishonor, kni ght s slaying dragons to win enough hon or to marry aprincess, and one thous and Greek ships sailing to Troy (and staying for ten 4 Honor: A Phenomenologyyears) to bring back a wife who ran away with a dashing young man . Butif h onor is a social fact, it must be all around us. Does everyday, ordinaryhonor m att er when there are no dragons left to slay and no beauties left toreclaim? Are we left only with the ins anit y of blood feuds and egoism? Thatwill depend on how one chooses to examine honor. Sometimes the journeyis the key to underst and the destination.Hon or has lost its way. The primary methodological difficulty within thestudy of honor isthat theword means many things and that, because it meansmany things, its value as a word becomes relatively meaningless. We usemultiple concepts interchangeably when speaking about honor, disregardingconceptual differences. By aggregating related but unique concepts togetheras one, the academicdiscourse on honor is mired in absurdity. Our disc our seon honor has been weakened by our lack of specificity in dealing with honoras experienced universally. Many honor studies focus on particularities ofindividual honor cultures rather than showing procedural trends in honor'smanifestation through out cultures, societies, peoples, and groups.'This study begins, therefore, in the middle of thing s- a great manythings. Th e literature of honor is expansive and connective, which meansthat a holistic undert akin g of honor must also be expansive and connective.It is my hope that this project does so, yet meets D ahl' s requirements thattheory should be b oth comprehensive and par simonious. .1 I conceptualizeho nor as the category of related processes that structure social reality byinscribing value onto persons and groups. Th ese processes are both internaland exte rna l to individuals.Hon oring is an action between two (or more) parties, typically an indi-vidual and a group. However, an individual can affiliate with or have mem-bership in multiple groups simultaneously. He or she honors and is honoredbased upon relational identities within these groups. His or her identity canbe discrete, or nested, such as being a citizen of Indianapolis, Indiana, andof the United States. All are accurate, but the imp ort ance of each identitydepends upon the level of analysis within an inquiry. Honor structures soci-ety, including politics, and accounts for corporatized agency from individualto group to state to system.To fully erect a general understanding of the pro-cess of honor, we must examine the pieces directly and indirectly engaged.First there is a relationship between at least two parties: the honoree and thehonoring-agent. Almost assuredly the group(s) to which these parties belongare involved as witnesses to the honor processes. There is an act on behalfof the honoree either of being, having, or doing. Thi s act is recognized bythe honoring-agent as having value that reaches a thr eshold of exceptional-ity that the group designates for public n otat ion. Th e bestowal of honor isthe inscription of a value upon a p art y by an Other. The honoring process iscontinuous; it sets new precedence and requires maintenance.Because honoring is the process whereby a group confers a value uponthe individual, it represents n oth ing less th an the means by which indi-viduals and groups bind themselves, and it inc orpor ates the assumption Introduction 5and divesting of sovereignty. Throu gh the action of confe rra l, the h onor -ing agent is claiming sovereignty over the individual, g ran ting a distinc-tion of, if n othin g else, exceptionalism, typically ref err ed to as excellence.Th e individual divests him- or herself of per sonal sovereignty in order togain and m aintain social value according to rules and rituals that representthe sacred and bind the p arti es tog eth er. Thi s is n ot alw ays a h app y andunchallenged pro cess.Insof ar as the conferral is a value placed upon the individual, that indi-vidual bec om es exceptional or excellent in a p arti cul ar way according tothe group and is treated as such. Thi s valuation becomes real f or the mem-bers of the design atin g group. Mor e appropriately, the individual membersof the group accept the parti cular value-designation as fact. Th e sover-eign character of the group manifests itself throu gh the inscription of valueupon the individual regardless of the individu al' s will. Th e acceptance andpromulgation of this value by other members of the gro up result in thereality of this social valuation regardless of wh eth er the individual desiresto be so designated. The individual may resist either the desi gna tion or thesovereignty of the hon orin g-agent in a particular social sphere. Th ere aremany parti es (individuals and groups), each of which may make cl aim s ofsovereignty. The areas of overlap, where cl aim s to sovereignty are multipleand challenged, pres ent real points of contestation in social life.Honoring is, therefore, a pro cess of altering social reality through them edium of value. Th e pro cess affects not only the honoring agent or thehonoree, but also the other individual members under the sovereignty ofthe honorin g agent. H onor must be b orn e by the honor ee, be stow ed bythe honorin g agent, and observed by others for honoring to be effective.'Th e use of value is imp ort ant as value includes absolute, relative, and idealforms. Positive valuations of actions and qualities can generally be consid-ered "goo d" and can increase honor. Negative valuations of actions andqualities may be deemed "bad" and can either decrease honor or increasesha me.' Th e degree to which a p art icul ar quality or action approaches theideal is its excellence.The process of hon orin g is c ontinuou s; it is the mann er in which real-ity is socially con stru cted because it is the means by which value is c on-f err ed by the sovereign and accepted by the group. It creates, de stro ys, andalters norm s throu gh the m aint en anc e and revision of the social status quo.Inst anc es of h onor ing may be lim ited in tim e, space, and content, but anindividual's h onor is constantly under revision and interpretation. As honoris the real manifest ation of social value for individuals and group s, it isonly avoided either throu gh revision of the value system or by a politi-cal contestation with the group." Th e desi gnati on of actions as "good" or"excelle nt" doesn't alter the characteristics or actions themselves, merelythe value a ttac hed to said c harac teristics and actions. Because of this, it isaccurate to state that h onor is a timeless and universal phenomenon thatr epr esents the axiological tot al social fact. 6 Honor: A Phen om enologyThe primary goal of this project is to provide a conceptual precisionthat is currently lacking in the literature. Th erefore, this study will definethe concepts of honor based upon the distinct relational processes. I beginwith a procedural division between processes of social intercourse betweenindividuals and groups (exte rna l honor) and those that occur within anindividual's psyche (internal h onor ). Rather than getting bogged down byusing the w ord "h ono r" and a descriptive modifier, I use key terms that aremostly concepts that functionally relate to one an oth er and have alr eadybeen examined within the lite ratu re. Th e following are core concepts thatf orm external honor:1. Prestige is the process of h onor by which an individual part y gainssocial value for qualities, characteristics, and actions that are deemedexcellent and are valued as "good" by a group to which h or sheaffiliates or of which he or she is a member. Prestige increases an indi-vidual's hierarchical position vis-a-vis oth ers in a group.2. Sha me is the counterpart to prestige and is the process by which anindividual p art y gains social value for qualities, characteristics, andactions that are deemed excellent, but are valued as "bad" by thegroup. Shame decreases an individual's hier ar chical position vis-a-visothers in a group.3. Face is the process of honor by which an individual part y maintainshis or her position as an honor-peer in a particular honor-gr oup .Face is the h onor process that exists between social equals and isexceptionally fragile. M att ers of face concern access to valued socialidentities. Saving face refers to a p art y resisting either the loss of aparticular identity or a lower, or less valued, position within a peergroup, effectively nullifying peer status.4. Esteem is a process of honor by which an individual (or group) isgiven social value by an individual or group for excelling in an honor-system, even though it is not a system that both p art ies share. Neitherpart y need accept the value system or obey the h onor code of theother. Esteem merely recognizes that an Other is considered sociallyvaluable and has attained honor within a known, though foreign,honor-system.5. Affiliated Honor is the circuitous process by which an individualmember and his or her group gain social value from their mutu alassociation. Membership in a group is an identity that acc ord s honorto the individual based upon the value of the group's reputation. Con -cordantly, the value of a group's reputation is based upon the aggre-gate value of its members and their average contribution. Derivingsocial value throu gh affiliated h onor is a double-edged sword; a part ymay gain prestige and distinction from membership, but can also bedishonored or shamed. Introduction 76. Glory is the combination of fame and honor. Thi s process of honorechoes across time and space. Glory possesses a sacred quality andelevates a societal exemplar to become a tr an scendent exemplar p arexcellence of a particular quality or action. Glory m anif ests itself inmyths and legends.Honor is also internal, it includes people's self-reflective evaluation not onlyabo ut where they does stand, but where they should stand based upon howthey value Others in their life-world. Th ere are two primary internal pro-cesses of honor:1. Honorableness is the process whereby an individual in corporat eshonor as a valued quality of his or her self. It has depth that increasesas the individual's feeling of a tta chment increases. Th e honorablenessof an individual ranges from the nonexistent to the absolute. Honor-ableness measures the depth of people's commitment to how they aresocially valued.2. Dignity is the process whereby people inscribe themselves with socialvalue. They do so by establishing a personal honor code that, forthem, is absolutely binding and non-negotiable, to which they are theexemplar par excellence. Personal dignity is a direct challenge to theauthority of exte rna l valuation.The tension between exte rna l and internal processes of honor provides thedynamic between anarchy and world order. Continuity and change in socialinstitutions and political leadership are functions of honor. Rebels emergeto challenge value systems when they feel inadequately valued. Revolution-aries emerge to challenge status-quo leadership for dominion over value.THE ORIGINS OF HONORTheorists through out the social sciences have engaged with h ono r or some-thing akin to honor for thous and s of years. Greek virt ues including aidosand arete begin an examination into what and who is to be valued socially,for what reasons, and in w hat way. Virtues represent what moral philoso-phersdetermine that individuals "ought" to achievetow ard "the good" withregard to sociation.?It is the philosophical projection of value systems.Aristotle examined honor vis-a-vis virt ue in trying to define the "chiefgood":The refined and active again conceive it to be honour: for this may besaid to be the end of the life in society: yet it is plainly too superficial forthe object of our search, because it is thought to rest with those who pay 8 Honor: A Phenomenologyrather than with him who receives it, whereas the Chief Good we feelinstinctively must be something which is our own, and not easily to betak en f rom us. And besides, men seem to pur sue honour, that they may"[Sidenote: 1096a] believe themselves to be good: for instance, they seekto be hon our ed by the wise, and by tho se among whom they are kno wn,and for virtue: clearly then, in the opinion at least of these men, virtue ishigher than honour. In truth , one w ould be much more inclined to th inkthis to be the end of the life in society; yet this itself is plainly not suf-ficiently final: for it is conceived possible, that a man possessed of virtuemi ght sleep or be inactive all throu gh his life, or, as a third case, sufferthe greatest evils and misfor tun es: and the man who should live thus noone would call h app y, except f or mere disputation's sake."According to Aristotle, honor is many things. It must be active and it issomething that is given to men, me anin g that they do n ot possess it in andof themselves and that it is merely a virtu e and a good, th ough not virtuewrit large and the good. It is also "the motive from which the Brave manwithstands thin gs fearful and p erf orm s the acts which accord with Cour-age."? Hon or encompassed the golden mean b etw een pride and humility,and am bition and unambitiousness.Honor develops conc eptu ally af ter Aristotle. Throu gh out hum an his-tory, philosophers, politicians, and interest groups have att empted tomonopolize the me ani ng of honor based upon the norms they wished toinstitutionalize and the excellences they sought to p romot e. Th e strugg lefor defining what is h onor able and to be honored has dis tort ed scholarlyund erstanding of honor as a social process that can be examined devoid ofn orm ative ascription or ideological p romoti on. H onor infers so much thatit means little; the value placed upon the word is too m urk y to prom oted epth in understa ndin g.!" Thus begins the pro blem of honor in the socialsciences that the current discourse has sought to remedy.MODERN FOUNDATIONS OF HONORTh e recent engagement with honor as an important field of study acrossthe social sciences is almost invariably traced to anthropol ogy and theedited w or ks of Peristiany and Pitt-Rivers. Th eir collected works in culturalant hro pology established themselves as the foremost experts on honor fol-lowing the publication of the collected works Honor and Shame: Values ofthe Mediterranean and Honorand Grace in An thropology. Th eir influenceon ant hro pological studies of honor in the Mediterranean shaped studiesof honor via field examinations that sought to articulate p arti cular honor-systems in p arti cul ar hon or- group s. Th e anthropological wave of h onorstudies may be traced to the 1960s, but it does not m ark the origin of inves-tigation into the general concept of honor. Introduction 9This wor k tra ces the origin of the current examination of honor notto Peristiany, but furth er back, to Ha ns Speier. Speier is not tr aditionallyaccorded inclusion within conceptual studies of honor , but I believe hisexclusion is to the d etrim ent of academic investigations of honor. In aneffort to argue for this inclusion of his theories as f oundat ional to studies ofhonor, I give his w ork greater attention.Speier's collection of essays c ombin es to form a th orou gh and convincingargument regarding honor as a f orm of political tool for social planning."Speier's interpre tatio n of honor as a tool of social co ntro l reinforces Fou-caultian biopower. Speier asse rts that social pl annin g is "co ncerned withhum an actions, i.e., with something distinctly complex in motivation andconsequence and general in scope.t'< It has an objective which is political invalue ." Speier comb ines the social plan with material reality and individualability to f orm a holistic system on which plans depend. Th e plan need notbe something that finds cooperation from the p opul ace, or at least from ap ort ion of the populace, unless it is an emergency. Social planning is r ath era means by which a system defines freedom and control ."Speier states that the combination of internal and external pres sur ef orm s the b ound aries of the gro up. His analysis is in acc ord ance with Sim-mel's evaluation of conflict as b oth an integrative and disintegrative force. ISHe states,pressure upon the structure reduces its inn er tension. This means thatinte rna l dissent will decrease; conflicting interests within the group,which haveappeared imp ort ant , willgain a new ax iologicalsignificancesince they are refined with reference to the menace that threat ens every-one. Co nsent, solidarity, and all other c omm on b ond s which existedbefore pressure was exerted will be revitalized and grow stronger."Solidarity is bought by a formation of identity of an "us" that must con-cern itself with a "them" whose interests are different, forei gn, alien, andother. Th e group is a m anif estation of psychological reality, the associationof individuals who dimin ish themselves based upon the "p opulari ty of thenotion" that there is a collective.'?Th e change in values of a gro up will disrupt it and create resistance.Speier asserts that the sovereign must use planned education as a means toexert rigid control over the basic mores of life. Social pl annin g is, therefore,a means by which the values of a group are created, altered, and de stro yedby the sovereign authority. Speier gets more specific: "c ontrol of socialesteem or prestige must be considered in ord er to underst and importantimplications of radical pl annin g." Th e social incentives employed for con-trol of individual action "fa ll und er the general heading of honor."!" Heaccepts both pos itive and negative incentives to fall under the hon or-systemas there is a need to employ b oth a ca rro t and a stick in the form ation ofgeneral will around social values. 10 Honor: A Phenomenology"Honor is a basic form of social co ntro l, whatever the specific content ofthe honorable may be."!" "In West ern civilization .. . the phenomen on ofhon or was mi sund ersto od and identified with the pre posterous and artificialprestige of the effete ar istocracy."?" Honor creates and is created by socialdistincti on s, it lies in all men, but stratifies them socially according to f orm sof social value. "In all social relationships . . . honorific distinctions also playa qualifying, hier ar chizing role."!' A key to the public's buying in with axi-ologicalsocial c ontrol throu gh h onor -systems lies in the unequal distributionof value. Speier finds social hon or to exist in multiple social gro ups fromJesuit m onk s to aristocracies, monarchies, democracies, and milit ar ies; andhe finds that the liberalization of West ern society after the Enlightenmentdid not eradicate honor, as Mandeville stated, but r ath er saw we alth as themeans by which honor and social distinction were accepred.FSpeier exa mines social stratification as a mea ns by which social classesform and int eract. He seeks to ex am ine social stratification generally as aph enom enon and insists th at any f orm of division that exists f or a groupis p arti cul ar to that gro up (and perhaps others), but is neither tim eless noruniversal. Hier ar chy is a "specific cha rac teristic" of social classes f orm edby reco gniti on and acceptance of a social position of either superiority orinf erior iry." S ocia l stratification re sult s from a group's com bina tion offunctional aut hor ity and satisfaction of the needs and wa nts of society.Fun ctional auth ori ty "is dep end ent on social and t echn ological change andis the object of social conflict and struggle.'?" Satisfaction of the needsand wants of society suggests that "class is based on its m emb ers' con-tributi on to wh at is c on sidered useful. ... Class is n ot in t erm s of socialusefulness as such, but in t erm s of its contribution acco rding to a scale ofvalues pecul i ar to a specific social structure.v" Co mbining these theoriesof social stratification re sult s in a conflict of establishing what is valued bythe group writ large by the gro ups writ small based up on t...