This is a summary of the following book: The Soul of Civility by Alexandra Hudson
Introduction: Why This Book Exists
In the introduction of "The Soul of Civility: Timeless Principles to Heal Society and Ourselves," Alexandra Hudson explains the motivation behind writing the book and outlines its central themes. She begins by highlighting the significance of manners and civility, drawing from personal experiences and broader societal observations.
Hudson introduces the concept of civility by referencing notable figures named Judith who are experts in manners, specifically mentioning her mother, Judith Johnston Vankevich, known as Judi the Manners Lady. Hudson’s upbringing, influenced by her mother’s emphasis on politeness and hospitality, shapes her understanding of civility as an outward expression of inward character.
However, Hudson recounts her personal struggle with the superficiality and manipulation often associated with politeness. Her experience working in Washington, DC, exposed her to the dual tactics of ruthlessness and extreme politeness used for personal gain. She observed that politeness, when divorced from genuine respect for others, becomes a tool for self-aggrandizement and manipulation.
The introduction also delves into Hudson’s transformative realization during a retreat organized by the Aspen Institute. Discussions on Martin Luther King Jr.’s "Letter from Birmingham Jail" led her to understand the moral foundation of civility, distinguishing it from mere politeness. Hudson identifies three key insights from Dr. King’s letter:
Moral Foundation for Civility: Treating others with decency, dignity, and respect is essential because of their inherent worth as human beings.
Just and Unjust Laws and Norms: Just norms uplift human personality, while unjust norms degrade it. This applies to both formal laws and informal social mores.
Difference Between Civility and Politeness: Civility is rooted in genuine respect for others, while politeness focuses on external compliance with social norms. Civility sometimes requires actions that may appear impolite but are morally necessary.
Hudson emphasizes that civility is crucial for human flourishing and navigating societal differences. She contrasts the superficiality of politeness with the deeper, morally grounded disposition of civility. The book aims to explore how civility can heal societal divisions and promote a more respectful and cooperative way of living together.
Quotes and Principles
1.) Politeness can be used as a tool for ruthless ends and is not inherently good in itself.
I discovered that those who survived and succeeded in Washington often did so using two tactics: punishing ruthlessness or extreme politesse. At first, I thought these two modes were opposites, two poles on the spectrum. I learned that instead they were two sides of the same coin: both originated from a dark place in the human spirit—a place where people are willing to instrumentalize and use others as means to their own selfish ends.
They knew that overt aggression would only take them so far. They instead used politeness as their weapon of choice. This allowed them to shroud their opportunism in the appearance of altruism, disguising their true aims while disarming their opponents. When I first met these people, I thought that I had finally found a contingent who, like me, had faith enough in social pleasantries to gloss over differences and enable working relationships. But I soon came to realize that, for them, the rules were merely a tool of self-aggrandizement.
2.) Civility is related to treating people as though they had tremendous worth and not as objects.
Martin Buber’s I-it and I-thou distinction. It is wrong to use others, because this treats a person—a “thou”—as though they were a thing—an “it.”
3.) Civility means treating people as ends in themselves and not instrumentalizing them as means to an end.
Dr. King’s words helped me realize that the defining ethos of my time in
government was instrumentalizing others—seeing them as a means to an
end instead of beings with dignity and moral worth, and as ends in
themselves.
4.) Civility means seeing everyone else as moral equals worthy of basic respect and is much deeper and important than politeness which is compliance with external rules of etiquette.
Third, there is a fundamental difference between civility and politeness.
People tend to use these terms interchangeably when referring to all things
to do with mores, manners, and etiquette, as well as to general standards of
social propriety and living well together. But not all social norms are equal
—or desirable. Civility—the motivation behind our conduct that sees other
persons as our moral equals and worthy of basic respect—is much deeper,
richer, and of greater import than politeness, or external compliance with
rules of etiquette. Politeness and manners are the form, the technique, of an
act, but civility is more.
5.) Civility sometimes means speaking hard truths that make us uncomfortable and may even be seen as impolite.
“Instead of focusing on the form alone, civility gets to the motivation
of an act. Civility is a disposition that recognizes and respects the common
humanity, the fundamental personhood, and the inherent dignity of other
human beings. In doing so, civility sometimes requires that we act in ways
that appear deeply impolite, such as telling people difficult truths or
engaging in civil disobedience—the example that King used.”
This fundamental respect for the personhood of others empowers us—
and in fact, obligates us—to be civil, not polite. We owe others the truth
when we think they’re wrong. We owe our fellow citizens and community
action in the face of injustice.
6.) Politeness is a technique while civility is a disposition. While Politeness is neither good nor bad in itself civility is inherently good.
Civility is a disposition, a way of seeing others as beings endowed with dignity and inherently valuable. Politeness, by contrast, is a technique: it is decorum, mores, and etiquette. Politeness, the thing that manners and mores serve, is neither good nor bad in itself. It can be used for good or for ill depending on a person’s inner motivation—depending on whether they’ve adopted the disposition of civility. At its best, the form of politeness can help mitigate the awkwardness, discomfort, and annoyance inherent in social life—but it will only ever apply surface-level fixes, and will never be enough to help us navigate our profound and important disagreements. At its worst, politeness makes difference and disagreement worse by fostering feelings of selfishness, pride, and superiority over others. Politeness can be and has been weaponized to penalize difference, oppress vulnerable populations and voices, and silence dissent.
7.) Respect calls us to “re-look” at others and remember their innate dignity as beings made in the image of God.
The word “respect” comes from the Latin word “specere,” which means “to look at.” Respect calls us to “re-inspect” others, to see them as they really are, as beings with innate dignity, and to treat them with the decency and civility they deserve as members of the human community.
8.) It is very important that we learn to distinguish civility from politeness as civility can be misused to mean shutting down dissent and opposing free expression.
We lack precision in how we distinguish civility from politeness. We often
use the words interchangeably, and have done so for a long time. When
people hear the word “civility” and recoil, it’s often because they’ve seen
the word weaponized and used to silence dissent and oppress free
expression. But they’ve confused civility with politeness. It’s common to
group civility and politeness together—calling for more or less of them,
part and parcel. Confusion around these words and their meanings is
understandable. Even the dictionary defines these two words synonymously.
9.) The Word “Polite” means “to polish and make smooth” our social interactions.
“The word “polite” comes from the Latin polire, which means “to polish,
to make smooth.” Politeness focuses on external appearances; it is about
“smoothing over” and diminishing our differences instead of equipping us
to act in light of them.”
10.) The word Civility derives from the idea of conduct befitting a citizen.
“Civility” comes from the Latin civilis, which relates to the status,
conduct, and character befitting a citizen of the civitas, or city. More than
conformity to particular rules of conduct, civility is a general attitude
toward life with others. Understanding the difference between civility and
politeness is the beginning of the solution to our civility problem, and has
the potential to change for the better the trajectory of our lives, our public
discourse, our society, and our world.”
11.) One can be polite but deeply uncivil at the same time.
“Politeness—in focusing only on compliance with superficial rules and techniques—allows people to do and say things that can seem respectful but that are deeply uncivil.”
12.) Politeness can even lead to pride, gatekeeping and social division.
“In addition to suffocating dialogue about important issues, politeness
can also breed feelings of superiority by giving people an excuse to look
down on those unfamiliar with certain rules and norms. These classist
criticisms of divisive social rituals should all be directed toward abuses of
politeness, not civility.”
13.) Civility encourages rigorous debate around the issues of most importance but gives everyone the disposition to be able to do so without damaging relationships.
“Civility promotes the rigorous debate that might on the
surface seem impolite but, nevertheless, authentically respects others. Civil
conduct of this nature might not find a home in a high-society banquet hall.
After all, we often hear that politics and religion are topics that the polite
conversationalist should avoid. But such civil conduct is essential to our
democracy, to our freedom, and to human flourishing across history and
culture. The disposition of universal respect for our fellow human beings
helps us act in ways that enable us to survive and thrive.”
14.) Differences Between Politeness and Civility
Aspect: Etymology
Politeness: From the Latin word polire meaning "to smooth" or "polish". Politeness focuses on appearances, form, and style. It smooths and polishes over our differences.
Civility: From the Latin word civitas meaning "city". Civility focuses on the disposition and conduct appropriate to citizens and their duty to the city.
Aspect: Essence
Politeness: Focuses on technique, or compliance with rituals and rules.
Civility: Cultivates the right motivation behind an act instead of focusing on the act itself.
Aspect: Justification
Politeness: Practical. Can be abused to instrumentalize others and promote self-advancement. Facilitates behavioral coordination. Minimizes social friction.
Civility: Moral. Recognizes our shared humanity and the irreducible dignity we all share as human beings.
15.) Everyday Situations Examples
Situation: Your boss gets a new haircut that looks terrible
Polite Response: Politeness often does or says the right thing for the wrong reason. Flattery is a technique of choice for the polite person, who would compliment their boss on her haircut in an attempt to "smooth" things over before their upcoming annual bonus review meeting.
Civil Response: Civility rejects flattery. The civil person doesn’t do or say things merely to win favor with others, because doing so isn’t respectful toward them. The civil person would stay silent about the haircut, or they would find something else that they could compliment honestly.
Situation: You’re at a formal dinner, and the guest next to you drinks from the bowl that you know is used for washing before a meal
Polite Response: Politeness embraces classist rules of etiquette that divide because it allows one to feel superior to the uninitiated. The polite person would silently judge and look down on others for not recognizing a finger bowl for what it is.
Civil Response: Civility realizes that perfect knowledge of the rules of etiquette is not a proxy for genuinely other-regarding behavior. The civil person would overlook and immediately forget the unintentional faux pas, and strike up a conversation with their seatmate in an attempt to earnestly get to know them. Or they would discreetly inform them of their error so they might avoid it again in the future.
Situation: Someone you love and respect voices a political opinion with which you disagree
Polite Response: Politeness “polishes” over difference and avoids tough conversations because that is the easier—if not respectful—course. The polite person would change the subject to something less controversial, smoothing over differing opinions in order to avoid the conflict.
Civil Response: Civility calls for telling the truth and having tough conversations, but doing so in love, care, and kindness for the other person. The civil person would voice their disagreement in a calm, respectful manner, knowing that respecting someone means not patronizing them. The civil person would also know how to gently de-escalate a conversation, as relationships matter more than winning an argument.
16.) Modern definitions of civility are often vague or conflate it with politeness.
“Modern writers have tended to define civility as being 1) purely manners, 2) a network of “communicative norms,” 3) a concept somehow related to democracy and civil society, 4) a “strategic tool,” or 5) they’ve avoided defining it at all, throwing their hands up and invoking former Supreme Court associate Justice Potter Stewart’s now-famous non-definition of obscenity, merely claiming, “I know it when I see it.”
Chapter 1: A Timeless Problem
In the first chapter of "The Soul of Civility," Alexandra Hudson explores the pervasive and enduring nature of incivility, drawing on historical, philosophical, and literary sources to illustrate the complexity and persistence of this issue.
Incivility: A Persistent Human Challenge
Hudson begins by discussing everyday instances of incivility, such as being cut off in traffic or demeaned by a colleague, underscoring how these small acts contribute to a larger societal problem. She asserts that incivility threatens the stability and tranquility of social life, and this is not a new phenomenon. Citing Ecclesiastes 1:9, she emphasizes that "there is nothing new under the sun," suggesting that incivility has been a timeless human problem(Alexandra Hudson - The …).
Historical and Literary Insights
To provide historical context, Hudson references "The Epic of Gilgamesh," the world's oldest story, which highlights the fragility and promise of social relationships. In the epic, Gilgamesh, the king of Uruk, is initially portrayed as a tyrant who disregards the well-being of his citizens. The gods create Enkidu to challenge Gilgamesh, leading to a transformative friendship that tempers Gilgamesh’s excesses. This story illustrates how the roots of incivility are deeply embedded in human nature and the importance of relationships in overcoming it.
Hudson further discusses St. Augustine's concept of "libido dominandi" (the lust for domination) from "The City of God," highlighting how excessive self-love and the desire for power have historically threatened human communities. She also references Norbert Elias’s "The History of Manners" and other works that explore the evolution of social norms and their role in mitigating human selfishness.
Philosophical Perspectives
Philosophically, Hudson draws on the ideas of various thinkers who have examined the human condition and the necessity of civility. She references Xunzi, a third-century Chinese philosopher, who viewed human nature as inherently chaotic and prone to cruelty, thus necessitating moral cultivation and social norms to achieve harmony. This view aligns with Hudson’s argument that civility is essential to counteract the baser instincts of human nature.
The Role of Self-Love
Central to Hudson’s argument is the notion that self-love is both a defining feature and a significant threat to human communities. She explains that while humans are inherently social and cooperative, their self-interest often hinders their ability to live harmoniously with others. This duality is a timeless issue that has manifested in various forms throughout history.
Modern Implications
Hudson also addresses contemporary concerns, noting that while incivility is often perceived as a uniquely modern problem, it is, in fact, an enduring challenge. She argues that recognizing the timelessness of incivility helps us approach current societal issues with greater humility and perspective. By understanding the historical and philosophical roots of incivility, we can better navigate the complexities of modern social life and work towards more effective solutions.
Conclusion
In Chapter 1, Alexandra Hudson effectively lays the groundwork for her exploration of civility by demonstrating the persistent nature of incivility throughout human history. By drawing on a rich array of historical, literary, and philosophical sources, she highlights the complexity of this issue and sets the stage for a deeper examination of how civility can address the challenges posed by human nature and societal dynamics.
Quotes and Principles
1.) Civilization is more than culture, technology or manners but is a specific disposition and frame of mind in how we view and treat others.
“Civilization is often thought of in terms of a society’s level of technology, artistic or cultural achievements, system of manners, preparation and consumption of food, development of its scientific knowledge, or sophistication of its governmental institutions, education system, or religions. But it is also much more than external achievements. Civilization—like civility, as we’ll learn—is also a frame of mind. It lives or dies in the heart of a society’s citizens.”
2.) Civility is not inherent in human nature but is a fruit of deliberate cultivation of character.
“Like a garden, both civility and civilization are not natural. They are all
forms of culture, and the fruit of cultivation, in the literal sense: both
“culture” and “cultivation” derive from the Latin cultivat, which refers to
taking raw, untouched land and turning it into crops or a garden. Civility
and civilization require cultivating the raw stuff of humanity and making it
into something better—refining it so it might become more arable and
fruitful.”
“An old Cherokee was teaching his grandson about life. “A fight is going on inside me,” he said to the boy. “It is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves. One is evil—he is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.” He continued, “The other is good—he is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith. The same fight is going on inside you—and inside every other person, too.” The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather, “Which wolf will win?” The old Cherokee simply replied, “The one you feed.”
3.) The foundational belief of civility is that all human life is inherently and equally valuable.
“We can instead redirect our resources—the water, fertilizer, and sun that are our time, energy, and attention—to nourish the seeds, or cultural values, that support the social project, such as the value that all human life is equally, intrinsically valuable.”
4.) The foundational idea of barbarism is an attack on the idea that all human life is inherently equal and valuable. One can be a technologically advanced barbarian or a primitive civilized person.
“True civilization isn’t about the sophistication, intelligence, or
complexity of a society or its people. It is about the substance, the
humanity, of it. Gilgamesh was king of the most advanced urban center of
his day in a region of the world thought of as “the cradle of civilization.”
Yet, before his conversion to humaneness by friendship, he acted in barbaric
and inhumane ways, abusing and exploiting the people around him. Enkidu,
by contrast, is depicted as simple, primitive, and closer to nature—and yet
he is the one filled with kindness and humanity. Enkidu is therefore a better
representative of civilization because of his kindness. Before his
conversion, and despite his sophistication, Gilgamesh, by contrast,
represents barbarism because of his cruelty.”
5.) The Dual nature of man means that we must cultivate and conquer our evil impulses in order to achieve civility.
“What a Chimera is man! What a novelty, a monster, a chaos, a contradiction, a prodigy! Judge of all things, an imbecile worm; depository of truth, and sewer of error and doubt; the glory and refuse of the universe.” Blaise Pascal
6.) Civility means treating with respect those who can do nothing for us.
“It demands that we treat with respect those we do not like, those who are not like us, those we do not need favors from, and those who cannot do things for us in return. Our drive for selfpreservation means that we must consciously battle the perennial temptation to see the world and others exclusively through the lens of our own experiences and advancement. We instrumentalize people when it suits us— and are quick to (appear to) be kind and generous when we have something to gain.”
7.) Whenever a power balance is exploited the will to dominate is manifested.
Whenever a power imbalance is exploited, and the humanity of a
person is diminished, someone has allowed their will to dominate others to
operate unchecked.
8.) St. Augustine of Hippo said that we all have a base desire to dominate others and treat them as objects to the fulfillment of our own desires.
St. Augustine of Hippo, who lived and wrote just prior to the fall of
Rome in the fifth century, was among the first to offer an explanation and a
remedy for the basic human drive to dominate others. He wrote in The City
of God that the defining impulse of humanity was the libido dominandi, or
the lust for domination.1 For Augustine, the libido dominandi was the
impulse to control everyone and everything around us. He thought it was
inextricably linked to incurvatus in se, or the “inward curve to the self” that
is an indelible part of our character as human beings. Both the libido
dominandi and the incurvatus in se originate from our foundational selflove.
Together, they vanquish any hope we might have of a tranquil social
life. They alienate us from others because they lead us to objectify them.
We begin to see others as things to be controlled and used for our purposes
rather than as human beings to be respected and cherished.
9.) When we don’t master our lust for domination, it begins to dominate us.
“The libido dominandi and incurvatus in se alienate us from others, but
also harm us. The libido dominandi—or the dominating lust—becomes the
lust that dominates. The master is revealed to be mastered by his lusts. We
saw this with Gilgamesh, as his lust to dominate others soon became a lust
that dominated him. The same is true for us. Consider the vain person who
is constantly surveying social contexts in order to ensure that he is close to
powerful people and doesn’t look like a fool. That desire becomes the thing
he pursues at all costs—even at the cost of his own enjoyment of life. When
we desire something—or avoid something—too much, we can become
controlled by it.”
10.) When we objectify and harm one human, we diminish and harm all humans.
“The civility of no race can be perfect whilst another race is degraded. It is a doctrine alike of the oldest and of the newest philosophy, that man is one, and that you cannot injure any member without a sympathetic injury to all the members.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson
11.) Human nature involves a state of “disordered loves” and we must cultivate ourselves to rightly order our loves.
“Humanity’s default state, Augustine thought, was defined by “disordered loves.” But through cultivation, education, training, and habit, Augustine thought that we could “rightly order our loves.” He saw this ordering of loves as putting God and others before ourselves—which he called ordo amoris—and felt that it should be the goal of any education worth its salt.”
“Augustine was a student of Plato, and he built upon Plato’s idea of a just
individual soul building a just society. Plato thought that the just person was
one whose reason, or head, had learned to rule their passions—including
their lust to dominate—through their courage, or chest. A just person has
cultivated this arrangement of the soul. They’ve become civilized by
diminishing their base, primitive instincts. A society of just persons, for
Plato, is what builds a just, and civilized, society.”
12.) Civilization is not fundamentally rooted in architecture of institutions but in the character of a people.
“People have long looked to such superficial things to judge other cultures as lesser and distinguish themselves as better. But that is merely the “pursuit of luxury and a false civilization,” as the French Revolution leader Mirabeau wrote. The civilization of a nation is not located in impressive architecture or institutions. It is instead located in the character of its people. Civilization is the cumulative effect of individuals’ decisions to take the humanity of their fellow persons seriously.”
13.) Kindness means treating all the way we would treat our own KIN.
“Civility obligates kindness in its literal sense: treating strangers and
visitors with the benevolence with which we would treat our kin. The word
“kind” is etymologically related to the word “kin,” as in “kinship,” derived
from the Old English word for “family,” “rank,” and “race.” Being kind is
literally about treating a stranger with the benevolence one would offer a
family member, a person of the same social class, or someone from the
same tribe. Incivility and barbarism all consist of being hostile and cruel to
the stranger, to those in need, and to those who are powerless and unable to
repay acts of kindness.”
14.) Civilization itself rests upon reverence for life.
“Reverence for Life affords me my fundamental principle of
morality, namely, that good consists in maintaining, assisting, and
enhancing life, and to destroy, to harm, or to hinder life is evil.” —Albert Schweitzer
15.) The material view of civilization is false as true civilization is the attitude of a deep reverence for life.
“He offered an account of true civilization in his book The Philosophy of Civilization. In this work, Schweitzer said that there were two definitions of civilization: the material and the ethical. The material view defined civilization purely according to its creative, artistic, technological, cultural, and other material attainments—in other words, the sort of superficial attributes that Saddam Hussein thought defined civilization. For Schweitzer, the material view was false civilization. He favored the ethical definition as true civilization, which he defined as a “mental attitude” premised on “reverence for life”—a phrase he coined for the view that saw human life, and all life in general, as intrinsically valuable.”
16.) Every stable society must have a worldview that respects the intrinsic dignity of human beings. The material benefits are by-products of this fundamental belief.
“In an argument similar to Martin Luther King, Jr.’s, Schweitzer said that
to perpetuate and foster life is an unalloyed good; to degrade it is an
unalloyed evil. Individuals in a society must adopt a weltanschauung—a
“theory of the universe,” or worldview—that respects personhood and the
intrinsic dignity of the human being in order to be a true civilization.
Reclaiming a high view of personhood begins with appreciating the
capability and potential within each of us. After that, Schweitzer says, we
become inspired to realize our potential in ways that benefit our fellow
human beings and the world around us and bring about social, cultural, and
scientific advancements.”
“In other words, the things that lead to achievements in culture,
technology, and infrastructure are by-products of a society that values the
intrinsic worth of human life. They do not make a true civilization—a true
civilization, one that values the dignity of the person and nurtures his or her
potential, makes it. Once a society has lost its reverence for life—once it
has come to see its value as a civilization in purely material terms, and
degraded the personhood of its own citizens or other groups—it begins to
decay. Only a vigilant commitment to a reverence for life can prevent
civilization from descending into barbarism and chaos, Schweitzer argued.”
17.) Civilization rests upon the virtue of temperance or self-control and from moving from nature towards culture or cultivation of virtue.
“Elias scoured etiquette manuals from across European history and found
that, over this period of time, these books increasingly suggested that
readers cultivate habits of self-control—both physical and emotional. For
Elias, self-control—or restraining our selfish will to dominate others and do
whatever we want—is the secret to living peacefully together in
civilization. This shift toward people possessing greater self-control and
valuing it in others, Elias argued, started from the upper echelons of society
—beginning with members of the court, whence we get our word
“courtesy”—and moved downward, disseminating through the intellectual,
middle, and lower classes.”
“A man who knows the court is master of his gestures, of his eyes
and his face; he is profound, impenetrable; he dissimulates bad
offices, smiles at his enemies, controls his irritation, disguises his
passions, belies his heart, speaks and acts against his feelings.
—Jean de La Bruyère, seventeenth-century French philosopher”
“For Elias, the civilizing process that he observed through examining
changes in social norms meant that people consciously moved away from
nature and toward culture. They wanted to distance themselves from the
raw stuff of humanity and make themselves into something more suitable
for social life. Elias wrote, “In the course of the civilizing process, [people]
seek to suppress in themselves every characteristic that they feel to be
‘animal.’”
18.) What we believe will ultimately determine how we behave and the reality we live in.
“Watch your thoughts, they become your words; watch your words,
they become your actions; watch your actions, they become your
habits; watch your habits, they become your character; watch your
character, it becomes your destiny.” —Lao Tzu
19.) Civilization is not the norm in human history but is a rare achievement that must be guarded diligently.
“Many assume that the social realities we enjoy—equality under the law,
relative peace, prosperity—are natural, the default state of humanity. But
this is not the case. Civilization and community are not foregone
conclusions. They are the work—the cultivation—of thousands of years of
intellectual history, political theory, and institutional development. These
institutions are supported by a vast aggregation of individual, voluntary
social interactions. And such interactions are in turn supported by
individuals who consciously cultivate and nurture a respect and even love
for their fellow human beings”
“One of the most dangerous errors is that civilization is
automatically bound to increase and spread. The lesson of history
is the opposite; civilization is a rarity, attained with difficulty and
easily lost.” —C. S. Lewis
20.) Human nature will always pull us towards instrumentalizing others so that we must constantly fight against it.
“The self-love that tempts us to instrumentalize others—to use them as
means to our ends, or to be kind only when it benefits us—is like gravity.
The pull toward dehumanizing others is ever-present and powerful. We
must be vigilant to defend against it.”
21.) Those who reject civilization become tyrants and become dominated by their lusts like a disease that overwhelms them.
“Whoever has experienced the power and the unrestrained ability to
humiliate another human being automatically loses his own
sensations. Tyranny is a habit, it has its own organic life, it
develops finally into a disease. The habit can kill and coarsen the
very best man or woman to the level of a beast. Blood and power
intoxicate … the return of the human dignity, repentance and
regeneration becomes almost impossible.” —Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Chapter 2: A Timeless Solution
In the second chapter, Hudson delves into the enduring solution to the problem of incivility, which is the cultivation of civility itself. By examining ancient texts and historical examples, she demonstrates the consistency and timelessness of the principles of civility across different cultures and eras.
The Teachings of Ptahhotep
Hudson begins with the story of Ptahhotep, a wealthy and powerful statesman in ancient Egypt around 2400 BCE. Ptahhotep, after a successful career in the Pharaoh's court, chose to retire and reflect on what constitutes a well-lived life. He distilled his insights into a series of maxims known as "The Teachings of Ptahhotep," which is considered the oldest book in the world. These maxims emphasize the importance of self-restraint, humility, and the consideration of others as fundamental to living well within a community .
Ptahhotep’s teachings focus on controlling one’s selfish impulses to foster social harmony. He highlights the destructive nature of greed and envy, advising against slander and emphasizing the virtues of generosity and kindness. His maxims also cover the importance of treating one's spouse with respect and the benefits of helping friends and neighbors(Alexandra Hudson - The …).
Historical Continuity
The chapter continues by exploring similar principles found in other historical texts. Hudson references ancient Hindu epics like the Mahabharata and the Bhagavad Gita, which also stress the need to overcome selfish desires to achieve a noble and fulfilled life. The Bhagavad Gita, for instance, teaches the renunciation of the ego and selfish desires as the path to spiritual freedom and immortality.
Classical and Philosophical Insights
Hudson then turns to the classical Greek orator Isocrates, who praised the customs and laws of Egypt for their wisdom. Isocrates, despite his controversial career, contributed to the discourse on civility by advocating for the application of reason and moral education to temper human behavior. His works reflect a broader classical understanding that civility is essential for societal cohesion and individual moral development.
The Tower of Babel
Another significant narrative discussed is the Tower of Babel from the Hebrew Bible. This story illustrates the dangers of hubris and the fragmentation of human society due to the lack of a common language and purpose. Hudson uses this story to underscore the importance of communication and shared norms in maintaining civility and preventing social discord.
Civility as Language
Hudson introduces the idea that civility itself is a language—a "grammar of conduct," as C. S. Lewis described. This language of civility is expressed through rituals, norms, and behaviors that communicate respect and consideration for others. Just as verbal languages are codified in dictionaries, the language of civility is embedded in social customs and etiquette manuals, which have guided human interactions throughout history.
Conclusion
Chapter 2 of "The Soul of Civility" emphasizes that the principles of civility are timeless solutions to the perennial problem of human selfishness and social discord. By drawing on diverse historical and philosophical sources, Hudson illustrates that civility has always been, and continues to be, the key to achieving social harmony and human flourishing. The consistency of these principles across cultures and epochs suggests their fundamental importance in promoting a well-ordered and cooperative society.
Quotes and Principles
1.) To sin is to fall short of an ideal. We are called to “kill” our baser natures and to learn to order our loves correctly: God, others and self.
“Our word “sin” is related to an ancient Greek archery term for “missing the mark, or target.” We sin when we fall short of an ideal. Jesus Christ’s teachings encourage followers to subjugate these baser parts of our nature that cause us to fall short—to “die to” our fallen nature, and to become “a new creation” in faith in Jesus Christ.”
“Christ was asked which is the greatest commandment, he replied, “Thou
shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and
with all thy mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the
second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two
commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
Known as the “dual commandment,” this mandate is essentially one
single, unified call for people to love things in their proper order: God first,
others second, ourselves last.”
2.) Petrus Alfonsi’s Disciplina Clericalis was a handbook on wisdom for the people of Al-Andalus.
“Petrus Alfonsi was a Jewish convert to Christianity who lived in eleventh-century
Islamic Spain. Born and raised in Al-Andalus, the Muslim-ruled area of the
Iberian Peninsula, he was intimately familiar with the Jewish, Christian, and
Islamic traditions. He wrote the Disciplina Clericalis, which distilled
popular Eastern wisdom for a Western audience in a collection of fables and
adages. He wrote the book first in Arabic, and then in Latin and other
languages as the demand grew”
“Alfonsi saw himself as merely a messenger, distilling from observation and study different ethical traditions that helped people lead full, rich, and meaningful lives. He didn’t create these guidelines—God did. After all, he wrote, “For in anything
invented by man, there is no perfection.” Citing the Hebrew Bible and
Arab poetry, the Disciplina Clericalis begins and ends with advice on the fear of God, reminiscent of a core aspect of Ptahhotep’s advice.”
3.) Daniel of Beccles wroteh Liber Urbani which was very popular in 12th century England.
“Daniel of Beccles was the Emily Post of twelfth-century England.
While Ptahhotep wrote about broad, high-level principles, Beccles’s
Urbanus magnus—sometimes referred to as Liber Urbani, or Book of the
Civilized Man—left no aspect of human life untouched. At nearly three
thousand lines, ten times longer than any other contemporary book on the
subject, it is the most substantial “courtesy poem” in any language and was
enormously popular. Written to “old King Henry” (probably Henry II), its
tone is that of a father’s advice to a son, but it was intended for women,
aristocrats, and laymen alike.”
“It outlines best practices for “elegance of manners” (gracia morum) at the table,
including over three hundred lines on what to drink and eat.”
4.) The Italian Guest was another very famous book on civility in the Middle Ages.
“Apparently 1216 was a bad year for civility in the German Middle Ages.
One Thomasin von Zirclaere, an Italian transplant to Germany, was so fed
up with what he saw as the degraded state of common decency and manners
of the Germans he was surrounded by that he spent a frenzied ten months
composing an epic poem on manners called Der Wälsche Gast, or The
Italian Guest. This outsider had decided that adaptation to his new environs
was not an option: Germans would have to improve their manners if they
were to keep their new Italian companion.”
The Italian Guest was the most important didactic work of the German
High Middle Ages. The poem was so popular that it is preserved to this day
in twenty-four illuminated medieval manuscripts—works of art, some of
which took years for transcribers to adorn and complete.
Thomasin urges young noblemen and-women in his readership to model
their lives and conduct after the great mythic and historic heroes of the
recent and distant past—including Charlemagne, King Arthur, Gawain,
Percival, and the Knights of the Round Table, as well as Biblical heroes
such as Job, David, Moses, and more.
5.) Cato’s Distichs was another influential handbook in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Era.
“Cato’s Distichs, a Latin textbook for children that consisted of a series
of rhymes meant to inculcate manners and morals in young pupils, may be
the most influential handbook of the Middle Ages.”
“This textbook was for many years incorrectly attributed to the famous
Roman historian Cato the Elder, but it is now attributed to the relatively
unknown Dionysius Cato. The work was revived during the Middle Ages
and became an influence, though now underappreciated, on centuries of
thinkers to come. Luminaries from Geoffrey Chaucer and Cervantes to
Benjamin Franklin learned civility by the Distichs’s instruction.15 Chaucer’s
The Canterbury Tales, for example, makes frequent reference to the
Distichs, often to affirm that the failure to have read the famous manual
marked someone’s education as incomplete.”
“Franklin, nourished by Cato’s teachings as a child, said the book was
“very proper to be put in the hands of young persons,” and even printed
his own translation in 1735.17 In the preface to his edition, Franklin noted
that he wasn’t sure printing an old manners manual was a wise business
move, but said it was worth reproducing good and virtuous content for its
own sake. And, besides, as the preface states, he had faith in the American
people to know a good thing when they saw it—and, ideally, buy his book!
Franklin’s flattery did the trick: his edition sold well, and was a well-known
textbook in the American founding era.”
6.) Facetus was the title of another beloved twelfth-century courtesy poem inspired by Cato’s Distich.
“Facetus was the title of another beloved twelfth-century courtesy poem
inspired by Cato’s Distichs, which remained widely used until the fifteenth
century.”
“The Latin word rusticus, whence we get our word “rustic,” was
important to Facetus in particular and to medieval courtesy books in
general. A “rustic” person was someone who hadn’t yet made the sacrifices
necessary to live happily with others.”
Chapter 3: Integrity
In Chapter 3, Alexandra Hudson focuses on the theme of integrity, a cornerstone of civility. She defines integrity as the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles, emphasizing its importance in fostering trust and building a cohesive society.
Historical Foundations of Integrity
Aristotle's Virtue Ethics: Hudson draws on Aristotle's philosophy, which posits that integrity is crucial for achieving eudaimonia (human flourishing). Aristotle’s virtue ethics highlight that living a good life requires cultivating virtues, including integrity, which involves consistency in one’s actions and adherence to moral principles.
St. Augustine's "Libido Dominandi": She references St. Augustine's concept of "libido dominandi" (the desire to dominate), explaining how unchecked self-love and the desire for power can corrupt individuals and societies. Augustine believed that integrity is essential for countering these tendencies and maintaining social order.
Integrity in Public and Private Life
Trust in Institutions: Hudson discusses how integrity in public life is vital for maintaining trust in institutions. She argues that when public figures lack integrity, it leads to cynicism and disengagement among citizens. The erosion of trust in institutions can destabilize democratic societies and market economies.
Political and Corporate Scandals: She provides contemporary examples, such as political scandals and corporate fraud, to illustrate the consequences of lacking integrity. These instances demonstrate how unethical behavior by leaders undermines public trust and can have widespread negative impacts on society.
The Consequences of Hypocrisy
Definition and Impact: Hudson defines hypocrisy as the pretense of having virtues, beliefs, or qualities that one does not actually possess. She explains that hypocrisy is particularly damaging because it erodes personal credibility and social trust.
Historical Examples: She cites historical and modern examples of hypocrisy, such as political leaders who publicly espouse moral values while engaging in unethical behavior. These examples highlight how hypocrisy can lead to significant social and moral consequences, including public disillusionment and loss of trust in leadership.
Socrates and Personal Sacrifice
The Story of Socrates: Hudson recounts the story of Socrates, who chose to face death rather than compromise his principles. Socrates’ commitment to his beliefs, even at the cost of his life, exemplifies the highest form of integrity. His story underscores the idea that true integrity often requires personal sacrifice but ultimately contributes to the greater good.
Modern Examples of Integrity
Ethical Business Practices: Hudson discusses companies known for their ethical standards, arguing that businesses with high integrity tend to perform better in the long run. These companies build trust with customers, employees, and partners, demonstrating that integrity can lead to sustainable success.
Cultivating Integrity
Self-Reflection: Hudson advises regular self-reflection to ensure that one’s actions align with their values and principles. She stresses the importance of being honest with oneself about one’s motivations and behaviors.
Consistency and Accountability: She emphasizes the need for consistency in actions and holding oneself accountable. This involves being open to feedback and willing to correct mistakes.
Transparency: Hudson advocates for transparency in dealings with others to build trust and credibility. Being clear and open about one’s intentions and actions helps maintain integrity.
Ethical Decision-Making: She encourages developing a habit of ethical decision-making, considering the long-term consequences of actions. Making decisions based on ethical principles rather than convenience or self-interest is key to maintaining integrity.
Role of Education
Character Education Programs: Hudson underscores the importance of character education programs that teach young people the value of integrity. By instilling these values early, society can cultivate individuals who prioritize ethical behavior and contribute to a more civil community.
Conclusion
Chapter 3 of "The Soul of Civility" by Alexandra Hudson emphasizes the fundamental role of integrity in maintaining a civil society. By exploring historical, philosophical, and contemporary perspectives, Hudson illustrates how integrity builds trust, fosters ethical behavior, and ensures the stability of social and political systems. Through detailed examples and practical advice, she provides a comprehensive understanding of how integrity can be cultivated and sustained in both personal and public life.
Quotes
1.) Modern society is based on “spectacle” or “public show” and not real authentic relationships.
“In his 1967 work The Society of the Spectacle, French philosopher
Guy Debord contended that we’ve exchanged authentic relationships for
false, intermediated ones. Our word “spectacle” derives from the Latin
spectaculum, which means “public show,” and spectare, which means “to
watch, view, or behold.” Debord thought appearances—and merely viewing others—were all we cared about. “All that once was directly lived has
become mere representation,” he wrote.
2.) Edmund Burke said manners are more important than laws.
“Manners are of more importance than laws. Upon them, in a great
measure, the laws depend. The law touches us here and there, and
now and then … [manners] give their whole form and color to our
lives. According to their quality, they aid morals, they supply them,
or they totally destroy them.”
3.) The Happy Hypocrite tells of how pretending to be a good person may actually make one a good person eventually.
“Max Beerbohm’s 1897 The Happy Hypocrite: A Fairy Tale for Tired Men, is
basically the inverse story of Oscar Wilde’s 1890 novel The Picture of
Dorian Gray, and reveals to us a path of less hypocrisy, more integrity, and
greater harmony of society and the soul.”
4.) Charlatans were those who pretended to be philosophers by adopting the outward appearance of one without actually having the training of one.
“In the Greco-Roman world, hypocrisy was exemplified by the charlatan.
Charlatans were philosophical pretenders who wanted the social esteem and
cachet of a philosopher without doing the hard work of really being one. In
the ancient world, philosophers exhibited recognizable attire and
mannerisms.
“Charlatans adopted the mannerisms and appearance typical to
philosophers—spurning social norms and doing outrageous things—but
they did so purely to get attention, not because they held any principles that
informed their disregard for convention. They pretended to love wisdom,
but they really loved only pleasure, money, and fame. They did not care
about improving the lives of their students through learning, as true
philosophers did. They used the disguise of a philosopher to enrich
themselves at their students’ expense. This is what made them hypocrites:
their inauthenticity was self-serving.”
Chapter 4: Freedom, Democracy, and Human Flourishing
In Chapter 4, the author explores the interconnectedness of freedom, democracy, and human flourishing, and how civility plays a crucial role in sustaining these elements.
The Role of Civility in Democratic Societies
Hudson begins by addressing the temptation of public leaders to impose civility by force when faced with societal incivility. She cites Mayor Michael Bloomberg's early 2000s campaign against rudeness in New York City, which included fines for inconsiderate behavior. These efforts, however, were neither welcomed by citizens nor effective. This example illustrates that civility cannot be imposed through external measures but must be cultivated from within society.
In the early 2000s, the city of Paris launched a campaign to improve politeness and courtesy among its residents and visitors. The initiative was a response to widespread perceptions that Parisians were often rude and unwelcoming, particularly to tourists. The campaign aimed to enhance the city's image and improve social interactions by encouraging more polite behavior.
Implementation and Strategies
Slogans and Advertising: The campaign included slogans and advertisements promoting polite behavior. Posters were displayed around the city with messages encouraging people to say "hello," "please," and "thank you," and to be more considerate in their interactions with others.
Public Awareness: The initiative sought to raise public awareness about the importance of politeness and how it contributes to a more pleasant and harmonious social environment. By highlighting the benefits of courteous behavior, the campaign aimed to motivate Parisians to adopt more civil habits.
Impact: The campaign had some success in achieving long-term changes in behavior.
The Necessity of Integrity
Integrity is highlighted as a fundamental component that builds trust, which in turn builds social capital. Social capital supports freedom, democracy, and civil society. Hudson argues that these elements cannot be mandated by government policy; instead, they must arise organically from the voluntary cultivation of civility and integrity. The internal disposition of civility and integrity must be fostered by individuals for society to truly benefit.
Trust and Social Capital
Trust, built through civility and integrity, is essential for a healthy democracy and a thriving market economy. Hudson points out that civil societies rely on norms and courtesies that create a civilized society. When people trust one another, they are more likely to cooperate, innovate, and solve societal problems. This trust fosters a sense of community and mutual respect, which are vital for democratic governance.
Civility and Human Flourishing
Civility is presented as the bedrock of human flourishing. It promotes freedom by enabling individuals to control their baser instincts and act in a manner that respects others' rights and dignity. This self-regulation is crucial for maintaining personal freedoms and preventing the need for external enforcement. Civility also supports the democratic process by encouraging respectful discourse and the peaceful resolution of differences.
Building a Culture of Civility
Hudson emphasizes that building a culture of civility requires changing societal values. Instead of focusing on appearance, charm, and spectacle, society should value substance and virtue. Praising and rewarding individuals who demonstrate character, integrity, and civility can help shift cultural norms towards these values. This change can create a broader social culture of integrity and civility(Alexandra Hudson - The …).
Practical Steps to Foster Civility
The chapter concludes with practical steps to restore trust, civility, and civil society:
Nourish Bonds: Recognize that bonds of civility sustain democracy and must be nurtured through everyday actions.
Engage with Neighbors: Get to know neighbors and maintain regular contact to build a sense of community.
Create Third Spaces: Establish places for building relationships and community, such as front lawns, parks, or living rooms.
Accept Hospitality: Be open to accepting and giving hospitality, learning from others’ experiences and ideas.
Acknowledge Personhood: In public interactions, acknowledge others' personhood and dignity with simple gestures like eye contact and smiles.
Assume the Best: Avoid assuming the worst about others; instead, tell stories of exoneration rather than condemnation.
Nurture New Connections: Foster new relationships by connecting people with similar interests and encouraging community building.
Conclusion
Chapter 4 underscores the importance of civility in supporting freedom, democracy, and human flourishing. By fostering integrity and trust, civility helps create a stable and cooperative society. Hudson's practical suggestions provide a roadmap for individuals to contribute to a culture of civility, which is essential for the health and vitality of democratic societies.
Quotes and Principles
1.) Unrestrained exercise of freedom will actually lead to less freedom in what is called the “Antinomy of liberalism.”
“Our selfishness poses a problem for our freedom. If we cannot individually control ourselves, others, including our political leaders, will impose controls upon us. Sociologist Edward Shils called this dynamic “the antinomy of liberalism”: within a free society, we have the freedom to undermine our freedom.”
2.) Only a virtuous people are capable of maintaining freedom.
“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become
corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” - Ben Franklin
3.) True civility lies in how citizens choose to act when the law is not forcing them to be good.
“John Fletcher Moulton, a nineteenth-century English barrister,
mathematician, and judge, observed that there exists a middle ground
between the realm of the things we do with unrestricted freedom and those
things we do because they are prescribed by law. He called this domain the
“obedience to the unenforceable.” This is where our actions are influenced
by a sense of what we view as good, moral, and proper—our unofficial
code of duty to our families, friends, and fellow citizens and persons.
For Moulton, this code is where “the real greatness of a nation, its true
civilization,” lies. The more society relies on self-regulation—and the less it
relies on law, coercion, conflict, and litigation—the freer it is. The more
often people choose to respect and care for their fellow citizens and persons
—especially the weak and the vulnerable—the more civilized they are. A
free society depends on its citizens deciding to do the honorable and
virtuous actions even when they have the opportunity not to do so. Moulton
was neither the first nor the last thinker to make this observation.”
“Where the manners of a people are gone, laws are of no avail. They
will refute them, or they will neglect them. —James Burgh,”
4.) While laws govern the body, custom governs the heart.
“Lord Kame argued that wise and humble lawmakers must recognize that not everything can be corrected by law and policy, and that they should stick to their own lane: echoing John Locke, he wrote that while laws govern the body,
custom governs the heart—the motivation, the disposition—of a citizen,
and that a ruler has no business legislating matters of the heart. He argued
that it is bad practice to try and change by law what should be changed by
custom.”
5.) The word morality is related to the idea of the “old ways” or unwritten customs that allowed society to function well.
“Ancient Roman society did not have a written constitution, and
instead relied on standards of custom, morality, and manners that
they called the mos maiorum—or the “old ways.” Most are
etymologically related to our concept of “morality,” and also give us
our word “mores,” or social norms. The old ways were an unwritten
code of conduct, the lifeblood of the civic and moral norms that
animated their republican system of government and allowed it to
survive.”
Chapter 5: Civil Society
The Nature of Civil Society
In Chapter 5, the author delves into the concept of civil society, exploring its importance, the historical context, and the mechanisms that sustain it. Civil society is described as the web of associations and relationships that exist between the individual and the state. It includes voluntary associations, community groups, churches, and other organizations that bind people together through shared values and norms.
Historical Perspective:
The chapter begins with a historical overview, noting that the concept of civil society has roots in the classical world. Greek philosophers like Aristotle discussed the idea of the polis, where citizens engaged in collective decision-making and civic life. Similarly, Roman thinkers emphasized the importance of civic virtue and participation in public life .
The Role of Civic Associations:
Hudson emphasizes the importance of civic associations in fostering social trust and cooperation. These associations provide a space for individuals to come together, discuss common concerns, and work towards shared goals. Alexis de Tocqueville, in his seminal work "Democracy in America," observed that Americans' propensity to form associations was a key strength of their society, fostering a sense of community and shared responsibility.
Social Capital:
The concept of social capital, popularized by sociologist Robert Putnam, is central to understanding the importance of civil society. Social capital refers to the networks, norms, and trust that enable people to work together effectively. Communities rich in social capital tend to have higher levels of trust, cooperation, and overall well-being. Putnam's research, particularly in "Bowling Alone," highlights the decline of social capital in contemporary society and its implications for democracy and social cohesion.
Norms and Informal Institutions:
Hudson discusses the distinction between formal and informal institutions. Formal institutions include laws and regulations enforced by the state, while informal institutions encompass the unwritten rules and norms that guide social behavior. Informal institutions are crucial for maintaining civility and order in everyday interactions. They include norms of reciprocity, trustworthiness, and consideration for others.
Challenges to Civil Society:
The chapter also addresses the challenges facing civil society today. These include increasing polarization, the decline of community organizations, and the rise of individualism. The author argues that these trends weaken the social fabric and undermine the capacity for collective action and mutual support. The erosion of social capital makes it more difficult to address common challenges and maintain a healthy democratic society.
Rebuilding Civil Society:
To rebuild civil society, Hudson advocates for a renewed focus on civic education and engagement. This includes teaching the importance of civic virtues, encouraging participation in community organizations, and fostering a culture of mutual respect and cooperation. By investing in the institutions and practices that build social capital, society can strengthen the bonds that hold communities together and promote the common good.
Quotes and Principles
1.) The architecture of a society can hinder of help in developing civility.
“In a seminal essay for the Palimpsest, Richard H. Thomas documents how
during the half century beginning in 1890, Americans began to change the
architectural arrangement of their homes: porches moved from the front of
the home to the back, becoming the modern patio. Thomas argued that the
home is a personal and cultural statement about the way a society and
culture is organized and oriented, and that this architectural shift—from
front porch to patio—tracked a social one: a move from the communal to
the individual, from a focus on public life to a preference for the private.”
2.) Tocqueville attributed American success to the “spirit of association” and the “philanthropy” or love of mankind that pervaded the culture.
“The most significant influence on modern thinking around civil society
is Alexis de Tocqueville, whom we met in Chapter 3. Tocqueville helped
place the “spirit of association” at the center of American identity. During
his visit to America from France, he noticed that Americans held a general
affection for mankind—they were filled with philanthropy, or “love of
mankind,” in its truest sense—an attribute that he thought classical cultures
lacked. He wrote, “In democratic ages men rarely sacrifice themselves for one another; but they display general compassion for the members of the human race.”
“The American philanthropic spirit expressed itself in many ways. For
example, Tocqueville saw Americans solving problems together
themselves. They didn’t wait for or depend on the government to resolve
them, as he claimed was typical in England and France. Instead, Americans
formed “civic associations.” He noted that civic associations were essential
in a democracy, because they counterbalanced the power of political
institutions.”
3.) When the government gets too powerful, civic spirit begins to die.
“Aristotle worried that communities that became too large would undermine
the trust needed for civil society. Ibn Khaldun and Adam Ferguson worried
that commerce and luxury would corrode civic virtue and modern human
community. Tocqueville worried that government overreach would do the
same. He compared American civic life and local governance to a muscle
that strengthened with exercise. When the government took over, that
muscle of civility, self-governance, and spirit of association—so essential to
the democratic project—atrophied.”
4.) Anomie is a state of normlessness related to the idea of sin, or choosing what is right and wrong for ourselves. This plagues modern society.
“In his 1897 book, Suicide, Durkheim argued that the rise of anomie was to blame.
Anomie is often rendered as “normlessness.” It derives from the Greek
word anomos, or “lawlessness.” In Christian history, early translations of
the New Testament translated “sin” as “anomia.”8 It is a state where each
person decides what is right for him or herself, with social alienation
resulting from the breakdown in the horizontal contract governing human
community.”
5.) Robert Nisbet believed a “Centralized territorial state” would lead to the death of community and thus civility.
“For Robert Nisbet, the greatest threats to community were a “centralized territorial State,” ideology, and war. He wrote The Quest for Community in 1953 as the world was recovering from the trauma of the Second World War. Nisbet worried that the newly consolidated nation-state and globalization had displaced our loyalties from those around us to the anonymous outside world, leaving us
personally and culturally impoverished. He posited that the nation-state
married with ideology and expansionism—as the totalitarianism of
communism and Nazism had just shown—was the death knell for family,
church, and neighborhoods, as well as the bonds that supported them.”
6.) Robert Putnam documented the decline of the “spirit of association” Tocqueville praised in America which si partially attributable to the Television.
“In his 1995 essay “Bowling Alone”—published as a book in 2000—
Robert Putnam also argued that communal life was in peril. Americans
weren’t doing things together anymore, and the spirit of association that
Tocqueville had praised—that democracy depended on—was dying.
Examining the 1950s and 1960s through the early 1990s, Putnam looked at
a number of metrics—from membership in Rotary Clubs to voting rates to
philanthropic gifts to volunteering and more—and showed that Americans
were decreasingly engaged with their neighbors and their communities.
Putnam argued that in its citizens becoming less engaged with those around
them—in turning inward by doing things alone, not volunteering, not
voting, and giving less—American democracy was at stake. For Putnam,
the rise of the television was to blame for this inward turn toward the self.”
7.) Aristotle believed a thriving society should not be too large as that would interfere with the trust needed to maintain it.
“Aristotle offers us a helpful framework for thinking about how our duties to others differ according to our relationships with them. He distinguished between three circles. First, the oikos—or family household, and the origin of our modern word “economics,” which literally means “household management.” The oikos is the level at which we have the most interaction, know best, and also, generally speaking, trust the most. Second, the village is the level of society that we don’t interact with daily, but still depend on for our needs. We might compare this level to a modern neighborhood. Third, as we’ve already learned, is the koinonia politike—the societas civilis in Latin, “civil society,” and polis—the larger, more anonymous, association of families and villages living in community.
For Aristotle, a thriving polis must not be too large. For effective selfrule
among equals, a polis required a basic trust and familiarity among cocitizens. We daily interact with countless anonymous others, both digitally and in person. This is a necessary part of being in a modern, interconnected, and cosmopolitan world. We don’t need to know every person we buy or sell from personally and intimately.
8.) The Stoics believed in Oikeosis or the duty to be benevolent to all mankind.
“The Stoics of antiquity describe this dynamic with their doctrine of oikeiôsis—meaning “appropriation” or “endearment.” Oikeiôsis held that, while we have duties to those closest to us, we also have a duty of benevolence to all human beings.”
Chapter 6: Equality
In Chapter 6, the author discusses the complex and often contradictory nature of equality, emphasizing the balance between promoting equality and respecting individual differences.
The Ideal of Equality
Thomas Jefferson's experiment with "pell-mell etiquette" in the early 1800s serves as a historical backdrop for the discussion on equality. Jefferson sought to eliminate social hierarchies by ensuring that all who entered the White House were treated equally, regardless of rank or status. This attempt, while well-intentioned, often led to social faux pas and offended the sensibilities of those accustomed to traditional hierarchies .
Tension Between Equality and Precedence
The chapter delves into the inherent tension between the human desire for equality and the simultaneous desire for precedence or superiority. This duality is rooted in human nature and manifests in various societal and political contexts. The author argues that while societies strive for equality, individuals often seek to distinguish themselves and gain advantage over others, leading to persistent social inequalities .
Historical and Literary Insights
Hudson draws on historical and literary examples to illustrate the challenges and consequences of pursuing absolute equality. She references Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron," a dystopian tale where attempts to enforce equality lead to oppressive measures and a loss of individuality. Similarly, L.P. Hartley's novel "Facial Justice" explores a society where the government enforces physical equality, resulting in a bleak and dehumanizing environment .
The Role of Civility in Promoting Equality
Civility, according to Hudson, is crucial for balancing the desire for equality with the need to respect individual differences. Civility promotes social equality by encouraging individuals to recognize and affirm the inherent dignity and worth of others. This recognition helps mitigate the negative effects of social hierarchies and fosters a more inclusive and respectful community .
Practical Steps for Fostering Equality
The chapter concludes with practical steps to promote equality through civility:
Recognize Equal Moral Worth: Emphasize the inherent dignity of every individual, avoiding actions that create feelings of superiority or inferiority.
Heal Inner Deficiencies: Address personal insecurities that may lead to looking down on others.
Resist Disparagement: Avoid criticizing others for not adhering to social norms of propriety.
Acknowledge Inner Battles: Stay aware of the ongoing struggle between self-love and love for others.
Transcend Social Class: Strive to be like William Penn, who focused on relationships and community over social status .
Conclusion
Chapter 6 emphasizes the complex interplay between the ideals of equality and the realities of human nature. By fostering civility, individuals can help bridge the gap between these ideals and the practical challenges of living in a diverse society. Through historical examples, literary references, and practical advice, Hudson provides a nuanced perspective on how to promote equality while respecting individuality.
Quotes and Principles
1.) Jefferson tried to create a sense of equality through is “pell-mell” etiquette.
“When Thomas Jefferson was President of the United States, he had a zany idea for how to manifest the “all men are created equal” creed that he had penned a few decades earlier. Determined that British aristocratic norms of social deference would never take root in America, he resolved that under his presidency, all manners that acknowledged rank or status would be abolished.
Jefferson outlined his “pell-mell etiquette” in an 1803 “Memorandum on Official Etiquette” to his Cabinet.1 Anyone who entered the White House had to leave all notions of superiority at the door.2 Congressmen, judges, lords, foreign diplomats—all were equal in the Thomas Jefferson White House. A laudable attempt to align ideas and practice, the effort was something of a disaster. The unintended effects of his new code of etiquette —namely, offending the snobbish manners police of his day—were a feature of his system of manners, not a bug.”
2.) Attempts to create perfect equality ironically creates more inequality and represent failed attempts to achieve “utopia” or “no place” that exists.
“The vision of a perfectly equal, classless society is a “utopia”—a word
invented by English statesman and philosopher Thomas More that literally
means “no place.” An impeccably equal society will never exist. Attempts
to realize complete human equality are misguided, harmful, and, ironically,
frequently create more inequality in the process. Attempts to erase social
differences entirely are dehumanizing and dystopian.”
3.) “Kurt Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron” demonstrates that absurdity of trying to seek perfect equality.
“Kurt Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron” memorably shows how this pursuit of equality means treating people terribly unequally. “The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal,” the short story begins. The world of Harrison Bergeron is a world where the “United States Handicapper General” is all powerful. This Cabinet-level role ensures that everyone is equal in every way—in appearance, capabilities, intellect, and all. For example, those with above-average intelligence must wear an earpiece that makes horrid noises every twenty seconds, which prevents them from “taking unfair advantage of their brains.”
4.) L. P. Hartley’s novel Facial Justice takes the idea of perfect equality to its absurd conclusions.
“L. P. Hartley’s novel Facial Justice explores the “prejudice of good looks” in a future world not unlike our own. Government plastic surgeons remedy inequalities of appearance. But instead of making everyone beautiful, they make everyone plain.”
5.) Constantly changing rules of etiquette are really just class distinguishers meant to uphold the superiority of the elite rater than timeless rules that polish social interactions.
“The rules of etiquette often exist to keep people out, which is underscored by the frequency with which they change: as class markers become well-known, everyone starts to follow them, which makes it difficult for them to serve their distinguishing function, and it thus becomes necessary to adopt new rules, and so on.”
“Switching forks from left hand to right was en vogue on the Continent, but when everyone started doing so— including “vulgar” Americans—Europeans reverted to not switching.”
“The rules of politeness have been, and continue to be, used to divide and oppress. They are often a means to maintain a position of power. But civility has long been a tool of promoting greater equality among persons.”
6.) Montesquieu distinguished between civility and politeness and said civility was much more important.
“Civility is … of more value than politeness. Politeness flatters the vices of others, and civility prevents ours from being brought to light. It is a barrier which men have placed within themselves to prevent the corruption of each other.” —Montesquieu
7.) Etiquette was often used by the upper classes as a tool of social control.
“William Penn, the Quaker writer and founder of Pennsylvania, was a
free-spirited youth prone to rebellion. When he turned eighteen his parents
sent him off to the court of Louis XIV to become acquainted with the
customs of the “civilized.” Penn’s parents hoped he would learn the
importance of following the rules and deferring to superiors. His time with
Louis’s courtiers had precisely the opposite effect. What Penn saw was a
despot who provided an almost comical example of how those in power use
etiquette to preserve the status quo and solidify their positions of superiority
over other, less powerful people.”
It may have been Penn’s experience in France that prompted his conversion to Quakerism, a Christian sect that practiced radical egalitarianism and consciously disobeyed deferential social norms of the day.
8.) In modern culture, many suffer from “status anxiety.”
“Americans, for instance, are in a constant state of status anxiety. Focusing on the rules of politeness only adds to that anxiety. The people who are most insecure and status-conscious are the ones most likely to weaponize etiquette, using it to foster delusions of grandeur.”
The British sitcom Keeping Up Appearances illustrates this truth.
9.) Political Correctness is a form of gatekeeping to ensure the superiority of those who follow it.
“It’s tempting to make social status—measured by wealth, success, possessions, social tastes, and mores—the sole criterion of one’s worth as a person. When people cling to these things, they transform themselves into snobs who are constantly worried about their own self-worth and whether their taste or possessions adequately confer and reflect their value to the world. Like Hyacinth and Anthony Merry, they become obsessed with “correctness.”"
10.) Those who are most obsessive about etiquette are often the most uncivil.
“The snob insists that there is a “right” way and a “wrong” way for
everything, and such status-conscious people are constantly monitoring
themselves and others for breaches. They are quick to point out the flaws in
the conduct or taste of others because it makes them, in comparison,
superior. Excluding the outsider or newcomer makes the status-anxious
snob feel like they belong. Mrs. Bucket shows a paradox: those most
punctilious about polite manners can often be the rudest people.”
11.) True courtesy and civility often overlooks faux pas in others.
“True courtesy will instinctively check faddish manners at the door
in the interest of kindness—which is the root from which the entire
family tree of civil behavior springs.” —Tamar Adler
“Once, at a state dinner, Queen Victoria broke the rules of politeness and did
the unthinkable: she lifted up her finger bowl to her lips and drank from it.
Why? Her guest, the Shah of Persia, had done so first. This story is told elsewhere with different protagonists, including Eleanor Roosevelt, and is enduring because the message behind it rings true: civility places others—relationship and community—above blind compliance with rules that can divide us.”
“There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true
nobility is being superior to your former self. —Ernest Hemingway”
Chapter 7: Civil Disobedience
Chapter 7 explores the concept of civil disobedience, examining its role as a fundamental aspect of civility and citizenship. The author argues that civil disobedience is not only compatible with civility but is often a moral necessity in the face of injustice.
Historical Foundations
The chapter begins by discussing the influential work of Henry David Thoreau, particularly his essay "Civil Disobedience." Thoreau contended that individuals have a duty to resist government actions that are morally wrong, such as slavery and the Mexican-American War. He believed that individuals should prioritize their conscience over their obligations to the state. Thoreau's philosophy emphasizes that true justice often requires disobeying unjust laws and that a government's legitimacy depends on the moral integrity of its citizens.
Influence of the Bhagavad Gita
Thoreau's ideas were significantly influenced by the Bhagavad Gita, an ancient Hindu scripture. This text, which Thoreau studied deeply, advocates for righteous action and moral duty, even in the face of challenging circumstances. Thoreau's integration of these teachings into his own philosophy underscores the universal nature of the principles underlying civil disobedience.
The Concept of Satyagraha
Mahatma Gandhi further developed the idea of nonviolent resistance, or satyagraha, which means "holding firmly to truth." Gandhi's approach to civil disobedience was profoundly influenced by Thoreau and the Bhagavad Gita. He believed that nonviolent resistance was not only a tactic but a moral imperative, rooted in the respect for the inherent dignity of every individual. Gandhi's campaigns against British colonial rule in India exemplified how civil disobedience could be a powerful tool for social change.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s Legacy
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. drew inspiration from both Thoreau and Gandhi in his fight for civil rights in the United States. In his "Letter from Birmingham Jail," King articulated the necessity of breaking unjust laws to uphold higher moral laws. He argued that civil disobedience is a duty when laws are unjust and that such actions are a profound expression of respect for the rule of law, as they seek to correct legal and moral wrongs.
The Role of Civility in Protest
Hudson emphasizes that true civility sometimes requires disobedience. While politeness might demand conformity and silence in the face of injustice, civility demands action and truth-telling, even if it disrupts social harmony. The chapter highlights the difference between mere politeness and genuine civility, which involves moral courage and the willingness to challenge unjust systems.
Contemporary Examples and Practical Advice
The chapter provides contemporary examples of civil disobedience, illustrating how ordinary citizens can engage in civil protest to address modern injustices. Hudson also offers practical advice for determining when civil disobedience is warranted:
Assess the Justness of Laws: Determine whether a law aligns with moral and natural law. If a law degrades human dignity, it is unjust and may warrant disobedience.
Respect for Human Dignity: Ensure that acts of protest respect the dignity of all individuals, even those who uphold unjust laws.
Nonviolence: Emphasize nonviolent methods to maintain the moral high ground and avoid perpetuating cycles of violence and injustice.
Willingness to Accept Consequences: Those engaging in civil disobedience should be prepared to accept the legal consequences of their actions to demonstrate their commitment to justice and the rule of law.
Quotes and Principles
1.) Edward Coles confrontation of Jefferson over his slave-holding was impolite but deeply civil.
“Civility, not politeness, affirms that the inherent equality and dignity of
each person is essential, which is why it speaks truth to power in word and
deed. Coles’s example can encourage us to recommit our own lives to living
out ideals of equality and respect, ideals that are indispensable to
democracy and human flourishing, and which civility both embodies and
enables.”
2.) Shadrach, Meschach and Abednego are examples of Civil disobedience.
“As Dr. King wrote in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” throughout
history people have challenged prevailing laws in loyalty to a higher, moral
law. From Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego’s rejection of the laws of
King Nebuchadnezzar, to early Christians who were willing to face the
lions rather than renounce their faith, to those who participated in the
Boston Tea Party, protest and civil disobedience have been shown to
illuminate the soul of civility.”
3.) It can be a duty to disobey unjust laws that violate the moral law.
MLK in Birmingham Jail: “He wrote in his letter, “How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a manmade code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law or norm contradicts moral law.” He continues, “An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.”
4.) Civility means respecting the worth of those we are disagreeing with and never taking steps to harm them.
“When advocates for justice and equality take to the streets, lead protests, and write editorials or public letters against people in power hiding behind an unjust status quo, as long as they do so with the end of respecting the human dignity of those they criticize—and do not intentionally harm them—they are being civil.”
5.) Henry David Thoreau advocated our duty to be civil to all men comes before our submission to unjust laws. Men must be ruled by conscience first so Government may remain limited.
In his “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau explores the duties that citizens
have to protest and resist their government when it acts, or calls on them to
act, unjustly. Thoreau’s views on civil disobedience—as well as Gandhi’s,
as we’ll explore shortly—were formed by the Bhagavad Gita, the Hindu
sacred text we learned about in Chapter 2. Thoreau even took a copy of the
Gita to Walden Pond! He was specifically concerned with the evils of
American slavery and the country’s war with Mexico (1846–1848)
following America’s annexation of Texas. We should be men first, Thoreau
argues, and subjects—or citizens—second. By this, he means that our duty
is to honor our fellow man first and foremost, and to pursue peace, equality,
and justice.
Thoreau thought that the best government is one that can rely on the
conscience of individual citizens, and as a result can stay limited in nature
—a theme we explored earlier. He opens his essay, “I heartily accept the
motto, ‘That government is best which governs least.”
6.) Ghandi advocated for satyagraha or non-violent resistance based on a firm grasp of truth.
“Gandhi developed the concept of satyagraha—a notion of civil, nonviolent resistance—as part of his efforts to lead India’s independence from the British Empire. Satyagraha is derived from the Sanskrit words satya, or “truth,” and āgraha, or “holding firmly to.” Gandhi believed that “truth [satya] implies love, and firmness [āgraha] engenders and therefore serves as a synonym for force.”7 He understood that truly loving someone does not mean coddling them in their wrongness or smoothing over important differences, as politeness does.”
7.) “Means are everything.”
“Gandhi said it well: “They say, ‘means are, after all, means.’ I would
say, ‘means are, after all, everything.”
8.) Passivity and violence are too extremes to avoid but civil disobedience balances the two.
“In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” Dr. King rejected the two extremes of passivity and violence, the “‘do nothingism’ of the complacent” and “the hatred and despair of the black nationalist.”
9.) William Wilberforce saw the abolition of slavery and the increase of civility as inextricably linked.
“English abolitionist William Wilberforce wrote, “God Almighty has set
before me two great objects, the suppression of the slave trade and the
reformation of manners.” In essence, opposing slavery and promoting true
civility are cut from the same cloth: both respect the fundamental dignity of
others, and consider others as oneself.”
10.) Politics is war by other means.
“The inverse of military theorist Carl von Clausewitz’s famous formulation, “War is politics by other means,” is that politics is war by other means. The political realm exists so that disagreements can be resolved without violence. Normal political disagreements can and should be resolved through normal political means. In deciding in advance what is out of bounds, what tools and means must never be resorted to—for example, violence—the temptation to act irresponsibly is removed from the calculation.”
Chapter 8: Polarization and Tolerance
The chapter opens by describing the year 1995 as the peak of incivility in American history. During this period, political leaders and philanthropists mobilized significant resources to address the growing political and social divides. This effort included the organization of Bipartisan Congressional Retreats, sponsored by the Pew Charitable Trusts, to foster civility among members of Congress. It was largely successful for a period of time until the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
Historical Context and Montesquieu's Insights
Drawing on Montesquieu's "The Spirit of the Laws," the author explains the adverse consequences of both excessive freedom and excessive constraint. In totalitarian regimes, people are deprived of the freedom to speak the truth, while in overly free societies, individuals are enslaved by their own biases and prejudices. Hudson parallels this with the current state of polarization, where social media and modern news culture amplify personal biases and hinder genuine engagement with differing perspectives.
Tolerance as a Measure of Civility
Hudson emphasizes that tolerance is a fundamental aspect of civility. True tolerance involves respecting others despite profound disagreements. This respect stems from the recognition of our shared humanity and status as citizens in a democracy. Tolerance requires humility, as it involves acknowledging the limits of our own knowledge and being open to learning from others.
The Role of Civility in Promoting Tolerance
Civility helps bridge differences and fosters peaceful coexistence. Hudson argues that civility demands that we engage with others respectfully, even when we disagree. This engagement starts with listening and attempting to understand others on their terms. The chapter underscores that civility is essential for navigating the inevitable differences and disagreements in any human community.
Practical Steps to Promote Tolerance
Hudson provides practical steps for promoting tolerance and reducing polarization:
Recognize the Dignity of Every Person: Respect individuals' inherent worth, regardless of disagreements.
Acknowledge Common Humanity: Focus on shared human experiences and values.
Listen Actively: Engage in conversations with the intent to understand, not just to respond.
Avoid Public Shaming: Resist the urge to shame or belittle others, especially in public forums.
Form Cross-Difference Friendships: Build relationships with people from diverse backgrounds to foster mutual understanding.
Distinguish Civility from Politeness: Understand that true civility involves honest and respectful discourse, not just superficial politeness.
Promote Justice and Healing: Encourage leaders to use their platforms to promote justice and reconciliation rather than division(.
Quotes and Principles
1.) For civility to be maintained one must dine regularly with the opposition.
“Nineteenth-century English statesman Sir William Harcourt wrote that a functioning polis depends on “constant dining with the opposition.” Personal familiarity makes democratic political life possible. It allows vigorous, reasoned disagreement to end at the issues, and not be carried over into the personal realm.”
2.) The Spirit of liberty must be maintained in the hearts of the citizens otherwise no law or government will be able to maintain it.
“Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. —Judge Learned Hand, twentieth-century American jurist”
3.) If difference is an accident of birth it ought to be respected rather than hated.
“Difference is the essence of humanity. Difference is an accident of birth and it should therefore never be the source of hatred or conflict. The answer to difference is to respect it. Therein lies a most fundamental principle of peace—respect for diversity. —John Hume, twentieth-century Irish statesman and Nobel laureate”
4.) The more liberty there is the more division there will be. Too much freedom has costs just as too little freedom does.
“In The Spirit of the Laws, a book that was highly influential among the
American founding fathers, Montesquieu observed that too much freedom
had the same adverse consequences as not enough freedom. In totalitarian
regimes, he wrote, people lack the freedom to speak their truths and their
minds. In a society of complete freedom, people lack the will to speak the
truth. They aren’t enslaved to a despot; they are enslaved to their own
biases and prejudices.”
“In extremely absolute monarchies, historians betray the truth because they do not have the liberty to tell it; in extremely free states, they betray the truth because of their very liberty for, as it always produces divisions, each one becomes as much a slave of the prejudice of his faction as he would be of a despot.” - Montesquieu
5.) Civility simply involves always recognizing and respecting the humanity or inherent dignity and worth of those we disagree with.
“Reasonable minds will disagree on important subjects. Civility means
that even unreasonable minds deserve some level of respect. This is
because our disagreement does not negate our irreducible value as persons.”
6.) Civility means refusing to reduce people to some of their erroneous beliefs.
“Our current culture views the world and people through a cheapened
simplicity. Everything, and everyone, is either right or wrong, good or evil.
We define people based on one thing they’ve done or said, sometimes even
if it occurred years or decades ago, and “cancel” them for it. This view of
the world and people is reductive, essentializing, and degrading to the
diversity and beauty of the human personality.”
7.) Forgiveness is crucial to maintain civility in society.
“Forgiveness flounders because I exclude my enemy from the
community of humans, and exclude myself from the community of
sinners.” - Miroslav Volf, Croatian Protestant theologian
8.) John Stuart Mill saw freedom of speech as encompassing an attitude of openness in a populace.
“John Stuart Mill worried about social barriers to free expression, which
he explored in On Liberty. According to Mill, the gravest threat to free
speech was social “tyranny of the majority,” or the tendency of an audience
to economically and socially punish speech and speakers it did not like.
Legal freedoms alone were not enough to protect free expression. More
important was a society that was open to dialogue even on topics that
engendered disagreement.”
9.) When we encounter differing opinions they are either wrong, partially right or entirely true.
“Mill said that when we encounter a new idea, there are three options:
it’s either wrong, partially right, or entirely true. Discerning between these
possibilities can help us. Edmund Burke agreed: encountering opinions that
we disagree with challenges us to think more deeply about why we hold the
beliefs we do, and helps to refine our thinking.”
10.) E Pluribus Unum teaches us that we all share a common humanity underneath our differences.
“Our national motto is e pluribus unum. “Out of many, one.” We must
see one another as persons first—connected and unified by our common
humanity—and care more about common decency and kindness than about
which fork to use.”
Chapter 9: Citizenship in a Digital Age
The Tower of Babel and Modern Communication
Chapter 9 begins with a reflection on the story of the Tower of Babel from the Hebrew Bible. This ancient narrative illustrates how a single, unified language enabled humanity to attempt great feats, but also how pride and miscommunication ultimately led to division. The story is used as a metaphor for modern digital communication, which has the power to unite and divide us in unprecedented ways.
The Impact of Digital Communication on Civility
Hudson explores the profound impact that digital communication technologies, especially social media, have on our ability to practice civility. While these platforms can foster connection and community, they also amplify polarization and incivility. Anonymity and physical distance can embolden people to say things online that they would never say face-to-face, leading to a degradation of civil discourse.
The Role of Social Media in Polarization
The chapter highlights how social media algorithms often prioritize sensational and divisive content, which can deepen political and social divides. This phenomenon, known as "echo chambers," reinforces existing beliefs and diminishes exposure to differing viewpoints. Hudson argues that this contributes to a more fragmented and polarized society.
The Challenge of Maintaining Civility Online
Maintaining civility in the digital age requires deliberate effort. Hudson emphasizes the need for individuals to engage in respectful dialogue, even when online interactions make it easier to dehumanize others. She advocates for the application of the same principles of civility in digital spaces that we would use in face-to-face interactions.
Promoting Digital Civility
Hudson provides practical steps for promoting civility in digital interactions:
Mindful Posting: Think carefully before posting or commenting online. Ensure that your contributions are respectful and constructive.
Engage Respectfully: Approach online discussions with the same respect and empathy that you would in person.
Avoid Anonymity's Temptations: Resist the urge to use anonymity to engage in negative or harmful behavior.
Fact-Check: Verify the accuracy of information before sharing it to avoid spreading misinformation.
Promote Positive Content: Share content that fosters understanding, cooperation, and respect across differences.
The Role of Leaders in Fostering Digital Civility
The chapter also discusses the responsibility of public leaders in setting the tone for digital interactions. Leaders have a significant influence on public discourse and can either contribute to or mitigate polarization and incivility. Hudson calls on leaders to model respectful dialogue and to use their platforms to promote unity and understanding.
Building a Digital Public Square
Hudson concludes by envisioning a digital public square where civility prevails. This requires collective action from individuals, leaders, and tech companies to create environments that encourage respectful and meaningful interactions. By fostering a culture of civility online, society can better navigate the complexities and challenges of the digital age.
Quotes and Principles
1.) Civility is the Grammar of Conduct.
“Jane Austen’s principles [of civility and manners] might be described as the grammar of conduct. Now grammar is something anyone can learn; it is also something that everyone must learn. —C. S. Lewis
2.) Social media allows an anonymity that is equivalent to the Ring of Gyges that encourages bad behavior.
3.) Eye Contact is an important deterrent of tyranny and injustice.
“In his book On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century, Timothy D. Snyder writes that making eye contact as often as possible is an important prevention against totalitarianism. Eye contact—along with a firm handshake—is a way to communicate trust, to help those you meet feel seen and respected.”
4.) Pentecost is the answer to Babel.
“The story of Pentecost answers the problem of Babel, and of the duality of language—verbal, as well as the unspoken language of our social norms. Language can foster unity or promote division and discord, an expression of a fallen human condition and self-love. The digital interconnectedness of our modern era means that one individual’s decision to weaponize language can now harm countless others on heretofore unknown scales.”
5.) We need to distinguish between truth, probability, possibility and lies.
“We can consider taking a page from Thomas Jefferson’s playbook on
how to curb “fake news.” He once proposed that editors divide and
expressly label news into four categories: truth, probability, possibility,
and lies.”
Chapter 10: Hospitality
The Importance of Hospitality in Civility
In Chapter 10, the author delves into the role of hospitality in fostering civility and building community. Hospitality is presented not just as a social nicety but as a crucial practice that can bridge divides, create bonds, and promote understanding among individuals and groups.
Historical Context of Hospitality
Hudson begins by tracing the historical significance of hospitality across various cultures and epochs. In ancient Greece, the concept of xenia, or guest-friendship, was a sacred bond of hospitality that entailed respect and protection for guests. This practice was not just a personal virtue but a societal expectation, ensuring that travelers and strangers were treated with dignity and kindness.
Similarly, in many religious traditions, hospitality is a core tenet. The Bible, for instance, contains numerous exhortations to be hospitable, such as in Hebrews 13:2: "Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares." In Islamic tradition, hospitality is also highly valued, with the Prophet Muhammad emphasizing the importance of caring for guests and strangers.
Hospitality as a Means of Building Community
Hudson emphasizes that hospitality goes beyond mere politeness. It involves welcoming others into one's space, sharing resources, and creating an environment where people feel valued and respected. This practice can break down barriers and foster deeper connections between individuals, contributing to a more cohesive and compassionate society.
The author highlights that in today's fragmented and polarized world, the practice of hospitality is more important than ever. By opening our homes and hearts to others, we can counteract the alienation and division that often characterize modern life.
The Role of Hospitality in Healing Divisions
Hudson provides examples of how hospitality can be a powerful tool for healing social and political divides. She discusses initiatives where people from different backgrounds and political perspectives come together over meals to discuss their differences and find common ground. These acts of hospitality create a space for honest and respectful dialogue, helping to humanize opponents and build mutual understanding.
The chapter also touches on the concept of "third places"—spaces outside of home and work where people can gather and build community. Examples include cafes, parks, and community centers. These spaces are vital for fostering social interaction and building the bonds that hold communities together.
Timeless Principles of Homeric Hosting:
Proactive Generosity: Good hosts immediately invite strangers into their home, offering them comfort, food, and drink without hesitation.
Unconditional Giving: Hospitality is extended without knowledge of who the guest is or expectation of repayment, valuing the personhood of the guest above all else.
Respect Guest's Autonomy: Guests should be free to leave when they choose. Holding guests against their will, as Calypso did with Odysseus, is seen as discourteous and unacceptable.
Send Off with Gifts: When guests depart, hosts provide practical assistance and gifts to aid them on their journey, ensuring they leave in a better state than when they arrived.
Homer’s Timeless Guidelines for Good Guesting:
Wait to be Offered: Guests refrain from taking from their hosts until hospitality is first extended. This mirrors the host's promptness in offering comfort and sustenance to guests.
Adapt and Appreciate: Guests should adapt to their hosts' customs, refrain from insults, and express gratitude for what is offered, ensuring harmony and respect in unfamiliar surroundings.
Express Gratitude: Properly thanking hosts is essential. In The Odyssey, failure to do so can result in punishment, while sincere thanks are rewarded.
Respect Departure Limits: Guests avoid overstaying their welcome. As hosts should not detain guests against their will, guests should not abuse hospitality by lingering excessively.
These principles reflect a mutual expectation of respect and generosity, emphasizing the importance of fostering positive human connections and community through hospitality.
Conclusion
Chapter 10 underscores the profound impact that hospitality can have on fostering civility and building community. By practicing hospitality, individuals can help bridge divides, create bonds, and promote a more cohesive and compassionate society.
Quotes and Principles
1.) Eumaeus in the Odyssey is a great example of hospitality.
“Few stories better explore the duties of hospitality, and the timeless principles of civility that govern the guest-host relationship, than Homer’s The Odyssey. Among my favorite vignettes in the ancient Greek epic is the story of Eumaeus, a slave who lived on the island of Ithaca in the Ionian Sea. Eumaeus had little in the way of material possessions, but when he saw a poor, aged, dirty beggar, someone who appeared to have even less than he did, he immediately invited the stranger into his home, fed him, offered him clothes, and shared an evening of conversation with his downtrodden guest. Eumaeus showed this kindness to the stranger without knowing that the stranger was really his beloved master Odysseus in disguise.”
“The Greek word for hospitality is xenia, which means both “stranger” and “friend,” reflecting the way in which showing openness and warmth to others can transform a stranger into a friend.”
2.) Civility is the obligation to treat strangers like they were our own kin.
“Civility is the obligation we have to treat the “other”—including the stranger—with the decency we accord to those closest to us. This high standard of conduct is, as we’ll recall from earlier in this book, kindness in its literal sense: treating strangers and visitors with the benevolence with which we would treat our kin, the etymological root of kindness. Being kind means treating a person with the benevolence one would if they were family even if they aren’t.”
3.) Hospitality is the virtue of a great soul.
“[Hospitality is] the virtue of a great soul that cares for the whole universe through the ties of humanity. “—Louis de Jaucourt
4.) The word “Companion” meant someone with whom we have shared a meal.
“The Latin word from which we get “companion” literally means “a person with whom one shares bread.” To dine is to celebrate life and togetherness. To cease dining is to cease to communicate, which is in turn to stop understanding one another.”
5.) Toasting originated as a demonstration that one’s drink was not poisoned.
“The customs around hospitality and communal dining have endured
because they promote trust and community. For example, the custom of
toasting originated with the host’s pouring wine from his own glass into his
guests’ and then back again, thereby demonstrating that the wine was free
of poison. Our clink, santé!—in which the edges of our glasses touch
(though usually without exchanging their contents)—pays homage to that
tradition.”
6.) Justice means doing no harm to others while beneficence means actively doing good to them.
“In his Theory of Moral Sentiments, Adam Smith distinguished between
“justice” and “beneficence.” Justice is the minimum we owe to others, and
refers to our negative duties to “do no harm.” It’s what allows a community
or a group to simply coexist in peace. Beneficence is an old word for
“active goodness”—a sort of “above and beyond” maximal civility. The
word describes the things we do for others that help us thrive as a species. It
encompasses the actions that go above and beyond the ordinary morality of
not harming others, the “positive” or active things we do to improve others’
situations. It is the “second mile” ethic called for in the Christian Gospels,
or the hospitality that The Odyssey celebrates—a theme that we will explore
in greater depth later in this chapter. Justice is necessary for a human
community to survive. It can subsist without voluntary acts of generosity,
hospitality, civility, and kindness. Beneficence is essential for it to flourish.”
Chapter 11: Education
The Importance of Early Education in Civility
Chapter 11 focuses on the critical role that education plays in fostering civility. The author begins by highlighting the work of her mother, known as Judi the Manners Lady, who established The Manners Club in 1997 to teach children and their parents about manners and character. This initiative underscores the belief that cultivating civility must start early in life, with parents playing a pivotal role in reinforcing these values at home(Alexandra Hudson - The …).
Manners and Character Education
The Manners Club offered a curriculum that combined lessons on manners with character education, emphasizing the importance of self-control, respect, and empathy. Hudson’s mother recorded an album with original songs to help parents reinforce the lessons taught in the club. This approach highlights the significance of consistent and engaging methods in teaching civility to children(Alexandra Hudson - The …).
The Role of Parents and Schools
Hudson underscores that while parents are the primary educators of manners and character, schools and other societal institutions also play crucial roles. The collaboration between parents and teachers is vital for creating a culture of civility. By reinforcing the principles of character and self-control, these institutions can help shape a more civil future(Alexandra Hudson - The …).
The Fragility of Civilization
The chapter also reflects on the fragility of civilization and the importance of remembering historical lessons. Hudson argues that civility and basic respect for personhood are essential for maintaining social harmony and preventing the decay of society. The rise and fall of dictators and empires throughout history serve as a cautionary tale about the dangers of forgetting the principles of civility(Alexandra Hudson - The …).
Historical Wisdom and Innovation
Hudson advocates for drawing on the wisdom of the past to address contemporary challenges. She suggests that by comparing our era with those of the past, we can better understand the timeless challenge of human self-love and identify effective solutions. The chapter emphasizes the need to innovate while repurposing timeless wisdom to meet the unique needs of the present(Alexandra Hudson - The …).
Personal Responsibility and Agency
Hudson stresses the importance of personal responsibility in cultivating civility. She uses the metaphor of civility and civilization as a garden, where individuals must distinguish between the seeds (positive and negative influences) sown in their formative years. By nurturing the right seeds through habits and resources, individuals can contribute to a thriving society(Alexandra Hudson - The …).
Practical Steps for Cultivating Civility
The chapter concludes with practical steps for promoting civility through education:
Early Education: Invest in teaching children manners and character from a young age.
Parental Involvement: Encourage parents to actively participate in their children's moral and character education.
School Collaboration: Foster strong partnerships between parents and schools to reinforce lessons on civility.
Historical Awareness: Learn from historical examples to understand the importance of civility and avoid repeating past mistakes.
Personal Agency: Emphasize individual responsibility in cultivating civility and creating a positive impact on society.
Conclusion
Chapter 11 emphasizes that education is fundamental to fostering civility and ensuring the stability and flourishing of society. By starting early, involving parents, and drawing on historical wisdom, individuals can contribute to a more civil and harmonious community. The practical steps outlined provide a roadmap for integrating civility into educational practices, ultimately promoting a more respectful and empathetic society.
Quotes and Principles
1.) Good manners are about making those around us feel easy.
“Good manners is the art of making those people easy with whom
we converse. Whoever makes the fewest persons uneasy is the best
bred in the company.” - Jonathan Swift
2.) In Ancient Greece Education was about crafting the soul in virtue not teaching information.
“In ancient Greece and Rome, education was understood as “soul craft.”
It was a process of ordering our loves and priorities. It was not merely a
process of memorizing and regurgitating facts for a test.”
“Our modern word “ethics” derives from the Greek word ethos—
which means “character.” This supports the reason why, across
history, education has been viewed as the process by which ethics
are taught and character is formed.”
3.) Education used to be about “liberating” a person from their baser instincts so they could live productively and freely in society.
“The liberal arts curriculum, which exposed students to different
disciplines—literally the liberating arts—liberated us from our baser
desires, and freed us from the uglier aspects of human nature. Today,
“liberal arts” is often used interchangeably with “humanities.” The “liberal
arts” is an apt term: in liberating us from our ignoble instincts, liberal arts
enable us to become more fully human, and more humane. The liberal arts
and the humanities were the modes of education that made a person free and fit for citizenship. They did this by cultivating love of virtue and the polis, and by promoting the reason and self-governance that allowed people to move beyond being dominated by their own passions..”
4.) The word for education meant to “bring out” or cultivate the best in a person.
“Our word “education” comes from the Latin wood educere, which
means “bring out, lead forth.” True to the original meaning of education, the
humanities and liberal arts aimed to cultivate—or bring out—a student’s
humanity to the fullest.”
“Humanitas is the communal fellow-feeling that acts as a brake on the
natural impulse to advance our purely private interests.1 As noted, paideia
was often rendered as humanitas in Latin. Humanitas was also used to
translate the Greek word philanthropia, which literally means “love of
humanity.” That is because paideia, philanthropia, and humanitas all have a
common aim: to restrain the base aspects of our nature, and to help cultivate
in us a love of our fellow humans, a trait we are not born with, so that we
might flourish personally and communally.”
5.) Erasmus wrote Colloquia which was used in education for two centuries.
“Erasmus of Rotterdam—whom we met in Chapter 2 and have encountered throughout this book—the educational project was explicitly social. His Colloquia—a word that means “dialogue”—was the most important educational book in Europe for two centuries.”
6.) The word “idiot” stems from the word for private or individual. AN idiot is one who is disconnected from the social world around him.
“The opposite of the Greek word polis is idiótes, which means “private” or “individual” and which gives us our modern word “idiot.”
7.) Great hearts academies is a network of Charter schools dedicated to providing a classical education.
“Great Hearts, a network of classical charter schools, operates within the public school system. They differ from most public schools in some important ways. Primarily, as classical schools, they seek to revive the humanizing elements of the classical Greco-Roman world and apply them to their educational model today. Great Hearts aims to reorder the loves, as St. Augustine would say, bringing about a fundamental reorientation of our priorities. We must counter our self-love by practicing the habit of putting others, our fellow humans, before ourselves. In other words, as we’ve just discussed, the network aims to revive paideia, philanthropia, humanitas, and civility.”
8.) C.S Lewis said a good education teaches us to rule our bellies with our heads and through our hearts.
“The Great Hearts schools follow C. S. Lewis’s formulation of education. Echoing Plato and Aristotle, Lewis argues that the aim of education is a well-formed soul, which is in balance when “the head rules the belly through the chest.” The head, or wise part of the soul, must oversee the belly, or appetitive part, through the chest, or courageous part of the soul.”
9.) Education should be about behavior and not information.
“Education does not mean teaching people to know what they do not
know; it means teaching them to behave as they do not behave.” - John Ruskin
10.) The opposite of civility are words that describe a state closer to nature: mean, vulgar, brutish, savage, coarse and uncouth.
“The etymology of civility’s synonyms—including “urbane,” “refined,”
“suave,” “sophisticated,” and “courteous”—also capture the image of
creating something better with concerted effort. Their opposites—words
such as “mean,” “vulgar,” “brutish,” “savage,” “coarse,” and “uncouth”—
all describe states of being closer to nature, and suggest under-cultivation
and under-education.”
11.) The opposite of polite is “rude” which means raw and unrefined.
“The word “politeness”—from the Latin word for “polish” or “make
smooth”—follows this same pattern. Its inverse—“rudeness,” which comes
from the Latin rudis, meaning “raw” or “rough”—also connotes a lack of
cultivation. Again, it invokes the image of taking raw material and polishing
it to make it appear better.”
Chapter 12: Misplaced Meaning and Forgiveness
Chapter 12: Misplaced Meaning and Forgiveness
Babette’s Feast: A Story of Love, Beauty, and Forgiveness
In Chapter 12, Hudson draws on the 1987 Danish film Babette’s Feast, based on Isak Dinesen's novel, to illustrate themes of love, beauty, and forgiveness. The narrative revolves around an austere Protestant minister in Denmark who imposes a life of self-denial on his two daughters. After his death, they continue to lead the community he left behind, which eventually becomes characterized by internal bickering and bitterness.
Babette’s Arrival and Generosity
A French woman named Babette, displaced by civil unrest, seeks refuge with the sisters, offering her services as a housekeeper. Despite the town's austere lifestyle, Babette is grateful for their hospitality. When she wins a lottery, she decides to spend her winnings on a lavish meal for the sisters and the community as a gesture of gratitude. Despite their initial reluctance, the townspeople agree to the meal, resolving not to enjoy it to avoid temptation.
The Transformative Feast
The feast Babette prepares becomes a turning point, showcasing the transformative power of generosity and communal sharing. As the townspeople partake in the meal, they begin to reconcile and heal old wounds, demonstrating how acts of kindness and generosity can foster forgiveness and community renewal.
Forgiveness: Key Themes and Concepts
Forgiveness and Gratitude: Hudson emphasizes that forgiveness is often easier when one remembers the forgiveness they have received for their own misdeeds. This awareness fosters gratitude and enables one to forgive more freely.
Forgiveness and Accountability: Forgiveness does not imply forgetting or allowing repeated harm. It involves accountability and personal responsibility, including confronting the harm done by others and addressing one's own hurt.
Forgiveness and Healing: Efforts to reconcile help individuals heal and move forward with greater inner strength. Forgiveness frees one from bitterness, which Hudson describes as a poison that depletes the soul.
The Power of Anger: Hudson reflects on how anger can feel empowering but ultimately drains one's energy. She shares personal insights about finding life-giving outlets for frustration and the importance of forgiveness as the ultimate solution to eradicating the root cause of hurt.
Misuse of Woundedness: Hudson critiques how people often use their wounds to justify lashing out at others, which harms both themselves and others. True healing requires letting go of this destructive behavior.
Living at Peace: Hudson draws inspiration from the Apostle Paul's advice to "live at peace with everyone" as much as possible, emphasizing the control one has over their emotions and responses.
Historical and Philosophical Perspectives
Hudson weaves in historical and philosophical perspectives on forgiveness, citing figures like Adam Smith, who warned against the corrosive effects of hatred and anger on happiness and composure. She also references William Blake's poem "A Poison Tree" to illustrate how unchecked bitterness can fester and cause harm.
Civility and Forgiveness
Hudson argues that civility is essential for fostering forgiveness and reconciliation. Civility enables constructive communication and honest conversations necessary for healing. It requires showing grace and forgiveness repeatedly, despite differences and conflicts.
Conclusion
Hudson concludes that reclaiming civility and forgiveness is crucial for addressing the serious issues of our time. By nurturing our interior lives with activities that bring joy and meaning beyond politics, we can engage in public life with greater grace and effectiveness. Hudson emphasizes the need for pursuits and values like curiosity, friendship, humor, and beauty to sustain democracy, freedom, and human flourishing.
Quotes and Principles
1.) Babette’s Feast is a story that teaches us how sharing a good meal can help heal wounds.
“Babette’s Feast reminds us of the theme that we began this book exploring: peaceful coexistence is challenging and fragile. It requires vigilant nurturing.”
2.) “Civility doesn’t require us to check our convictions at the door. It simply requires that we keep the personhood and equal moral worth of others front of mind—including that of those with whom we vehemently disagree.”
3.) To love others is risky and may lead to tragedy but the alternative to love is damnation.
“To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly be broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact, you must give it to no one and nothing, not even an animal. You must carefully wrap it round with hobbies and little luxuries and routine and avoidances of entanglement, and then lock it up in the casket or coffin of your own selfishness. And this means that in the long run, the alternative to tragedy, or at least to the threat of tragedy, is damnation, for in that casket—safe, still, and unventilated in the darkness—it will go bad; not broken, but finally unbreakable, impenetrable, resistant to all good and joy.…”—C. S. Lewis
4.) “Unbundling” people means viewing parts we don’t like in view of the whole dignity and worth of the person.
“We must remember to “unbundle” people—to separate the person from their harmful view or deed. We don’t have to approve of every aspect of another person, or agree on every public policy issue, in order to be friends with them. Unbundling people means resisting the urge to essentialize and define others based on one aspect of who they are, and countering our tendency to see everything in terms of black and white, right or wrong, good and evil. Instead, unbundling others allows us to embrace the diversity and beauty of the human personality. It means choosing to see the part of a person in light of the whole, or seeing the things that bother us or that we disagree with in light of the dignity they hold as persons. It can be challenging to think in these nuanced terms—to hold multiple things to be true at once, and to see the virtues in others alongside their vices. But a tolerant society, and flourishing friendships, depend on trying to do so with a bit more frequency.”
5.) Encountering the sublime which evokes in awe in us and creates the “overview effect” can help put our own egos in check and view other humans correctly.
“Recent research recommends pursuing daily doses of awe in order to help us harness the benefits of the sublime, from lowering stress levels to increasing creativity and overall well-being.4 There are personal benefits—both physical and emotional—to encountering the sublime and the beautiful, and there are social ones as well.”
6.) There is a unity to truth, goodness and beauty so that when you get on you get the others.
“The ancients argued that there is a unity of beauty, justice, goodness, and truth. If that is the case, as Scarry contends, it makes sense that if we get more of one, we get more of the others.”
7.) The essence of civility is choosing not to take offense or retaliate when we are mistreated.
“Someone despises me. That’s their problem. Mine: not to do or say anything despicable. Someone hates me. Their problem. Mine: to be patient and cheerful with everyone, including them.” —Marcus Aurelius”