5 ms·

I was sad to read a document by the US military defining “honor.” It was an extremely narrow and technical definition. Not the sort of thing that you’d die over

I was sad to read a document by the US military defining “honor.” It was an extremely narrow and technical definition. Not the sort of thing that you’d die over. Like defining “crown” as “an head-worn ornament associated with royalty” and “country” as “an established political unit”. Makes “For Crown and Country” seem like something a crazy person would say. You can do the same with “Duty, Honor, Country.”

niemandhier 2y ago
Interesting does anyone know where to find the American definition? When I was serving in the German armed forces they taught us, that “Inner honour is the ones subjective sense of dignity and value” and that if those values would not align to what military service demands we should not take our pledge and leave. “Personal honour” is a legally protected entity under German law, so the definition is more or less universally agreed on.
- Hilift 2y ago
  The US Navy has detailed specifications and tables on honors. Like the number of sideboys present for visiting dignitaries, ruffles and flourishes, guns on arrival/departure, and boat "gongs". https://www.seaflags.us/customs/trads.html https://www.seaflags.us/customs/trads.html https://www.seaflags.us/customs/honors.html https://www.seaflags.us/customs/honors.html
  - WesolyKubeczek 2y ago
    That seems to be a different kind of honor. The one that can be pluralized and given to someone entitled. Not the intrinsic honor a person must possess to deserve genuine respect.
- pyuser583 2y ago
  I was reading the US Manual of the Law of War by the Department of Defense. It is based off Prussian legal theory. I’m having trouble finding the definition, but the only available online PDF is a new version. The new version talks about honor, but never defines it. As it’s generally used, the phrase “honor” is transnational. A soldier who does a good job, in the eyes of both friend and foe, has honor. So in their German context, there is debate over which solders in WWII were honorable. Certainly not those involved in the holocaust, but probably most of those who served on U-Boats. The honor should be recognized by American soldiers as well. But you see how this becomes circular. To steal from Euthyphro, is something honorable because it is honored, or is it honored because it is honorable? In practice, it limits what harm can be inflicted, and requires assuming enemy soldiers are good and decent humans until proven otherwise. The definition I found disturbing treated honor like it was a presumption of technical competency for foreign soldiers. This sounds pretty different from what you’re describing, which seems more similar to the English word “conscience.”
pyrale 2y ago
> Makes “For Crown and Country” seem like something a crazy person would say. The "for Crown" part definitely sounds crazy even with context.
dredmorbius 2y ago
Do you recall that definition or have a link to the doc?

niemandhier 2y ago

Interesting does anyone know where to find the American definition? When I was serving in the German armed forces they taught us, that “Inner honour is the ones subjective sense of dignity and value” and that if those values would not align to what military service demands we should not take our pledge and leave. “Personal honour” is a legally protected entity under German law, so the definition is more or less universally agreed on.

Hilift 2y ago
The US Navy has detailed specifications and tables on honors. Like the number of sideboys present for visiting dignitaries, ruffles and flourishes, guns on arrival/departure, and boat "gongs". https://www.seaflags.us/customs/trads.html https://www.seaflags.us/customs/trads.html https://www.seaflags.us/customs/honors.html https://www.seaflags.us/customs/honors.html
- WesolyKubeczek 2y ago
  That seems to be a different kind of honor. The one that can be pluralized and given to someone entitled. Not the intrinsic honor a person must possess to deserve genuine respect.
pyuser583 2y ago
I was reading the US Manual of the Law of War by the Department of Defense. It is based off Prussian legal theory. I’m having trouble finding the definition, but the only available online PDF is a new version. The new version talks about honor, but never defines it. As it’s generally used, the phrase “honor” is transnational. A soldier who does a good job, in the eyes of both friend and foe, has honor. So in their German context, there is debate over which solders in WWII were honorable. Certainly not those involved in the holocaust, but probably most of those who served on U-Boats. The honor should be recognized by American soldiers as well. But you see how this becomes circular. To steal from Euthyphro, is something honorable because it is honored, or is it honored because it is honorable? In practice, it limits what harm can be inflicted, and requires assuming enemy soldiers are good and decent humans until proven otherwise. The definition I found disturbing treated honor like it was a presumption of technical competency for foreign soldiers. This sounds pretty different from what you’re describing, which seems more similar to the English word “conscience.”

pyrale 2y ago

> Makes “For Crown and Country” seem like something a crazy person would say. The "for Crown" part definitely sounds crazy even with context.

dredmorbius 2y ago

Do you recall that definition or have a link to the doc?