The tragedy of honor in early modern political thought : Hobbes, Mandeville, Montesquieu, and Rousseau

Publication Type

Journal Article

Publication Date

1-2021

Abstract

The academic defense of honor for its positive political and moral effects has surged recently among moral philosophers and political theorists. Challenging the narrative that the feudal legacy of honor has become outdated but acknowledging the reasonable points that opponents of honor have made, contemporary defenders aim to render honor compatible with society and politics today. This defense is reminiscent of that in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, especially four modes of honor developed respectively by Hobbes, Mandeville, Montesquieu, and Rousseau. Like contemporary scholars, these thinkers were conscious of the problems often associated with honor but appreciated its political usefulness. They aimed to preserve this feudal legacy in the early modern context. However, a comparative examination of these modes of honor reveals that, despite their internal coherence, they conflicted with one another owing to their authors’ conflicting understandings of the nature of honor. This conflict contributed to the tragic failure of the early modern defense of honor and testified to the conceptual elusiveness of honor. It is a cautionary tale for contemporary scholars who develop and defend essentialist and ahistorical understandings of honor.

Keywords

Honor, Hobbes, Mandeville, Montesquieu, Rousseau

Discipline

Philosophy | Political History | Political Science

Research Areas

Political Science

Publication

History of European Ideas

Volume

47

Issue

8

First Page

1243

Last Page

1261

ISSN

0191-6599

Identifier

10.1080/01916599.2021.1872038

Additional URL

https://doi.org/10.1080/01916599.2021.1872038

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS