ANST - Re:spam filters

[Timothy A. McDaniel]

Larkin wrote:
> choosing not to take offense is honorable.

To drag this back into the Middle Ages ... In period terms,
I don't think that's so.  From what I gather from Robin
of Gilwell's recent postings on the rec.org.sca Usenet
newsgroup, honor was the outward and visible reverence and
respect you get from others.  It's the modern notion
that honor is inward virtue.  In period, honor are big
titles announced for you, and resplendent courts that
you hold, and princes making much of you, and such.
(Aristotle, I think it was, said that honor is what
is given for virtue, and I think that's how the connection
was made.)

So, in period terms, choosing not to take offense is
NOT honorable.  It may be virtuous (turn the other cheek),
but I think this is a case where virtue and honor disagree.

In modern SCA terms, and in terms of simply getting along
with people, one can easily discuss whether taking offense
is prudent, right, SCA-honorable, et cetera.  I'm merely
dealing with period practice as I understand it, and
I invite correction.

Daniel de Lincolia
-- 
Tim McDaniel.   Reply to tmcd at crl.com;
    if that fail, tmcd at austin.ibm.com is my work account.
============================================================================
Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.