Boethius

Does Honor equal True Happiness' The argument that I am choosing from Boethius’ The Consolation of Philosophy, is the argument that honor doesn’t equal happiness as told by Boethius. He is trying to explain that just because a person holds a certain position or office that doesn’t make them happy just based on the status of their position. He is trying to explain that happiness should be sought after in different ways rather than just to get as much acclaim as possible. An individuals search for true happiness isn’t found through glory and praise. The premises for Boethius’s argument include: If you are publicly honored your faults or personal problems will probably be revealed, and then you will be hated on because of the public honors that you received like being the president. We have to keep in mind that we can not judge these people with praise and honor just based on the fact that they do hold a important position or the awards that they have won. Virtue is its own honor and people who posses virtue automatically posses that honor. True honor cannot just be given to people receiving all the credit and high praise for their actions; it isn’t earned through public acclaim. If a person, who is looking for honor and praise, decides to run for an honorable position to achieve some sense of honorability, he is going at in the wrong way. You won’t achieve that honor or praise you are looking for just by holding that position. Its what you do in that position that will earn you a well thought perception from your peers. We also have to remember that honor is thought of differently in different cultures, for example our president visiting a Middle Eastern country isn’t going to receive as much praise as he does in America. You have to separate honor from office. They do not come as a packaged deal. These are separate things. Office positions can also lose their honor. For instance the Royal family of England. They surely aren’t considered the same influential force that they were thirty years ago when they were all powerful figures. Then came all the divorces and other events happening which led to changing opinion of the queen to being thought of as just a figurehead who says what her people want her to say. All of these premises lead up to conclusion of Boethius’s argument; Honor is not the true good and it isn’t the way to find the true happiness that you are looking for. This argument has five solid premises, which I believe to be true. Since all the premises are true that leads the argument to be a valid one, and a good one at that. The first premise of the argument states that if you are publicly honored your faults or problems will be revealed and your name will be disgraced. I think that this true even in today’s world, and especially back then. When an individual receives a position of power certain people can become jealous. They will try to make that individual look as bad as possible to get them out of their position. An individual with a position of power is constantly being judged on how they perform their duties. Take a look at the perception of George Bush and his public opinion of him through the polls. He is constantly being judged everyday. With less media attention back then the main way to accuse someone was with word of mouth. Very quickly the way people thought of you would get around and any mistake that you made would be scrutinized. Your name will be disgraced and your public perception will be at an all time low. You will be known for your actions rather than as an individual. The second premise states that we can’t automatically respect people just because they hold a position of power or posses many honorable awards toward their name. You have to judge them based on their actions in that specific role. There have been many terrible kings and rulers throughout the years that have led their countries to downfall. The people who were serving under these rulers were supposed to honor these rulers' There have also been kings and presidents impeached or overthrown like King Louis or Tricky Dick. People usually follow this premise pretty well. If a leader isn’t performing up to par, honor isn’t just thrown his way. The third premise states that virtue has it own honor and only people who posses virtue achieve true honor. There are so many people who don’t hold high status positions that are thought of as very honorable. The position isn’t the key to true happiness. Its your pursuit of Virtue and wisdom. A local townsmen with no money to his name, can be extremely helpful to many people and be though of as the honorable local townsmen with no money. Mother Theresa has helped out millions of people throughout her time and hasn’t received a office of high power. There aren’t many people out there that posses a more honorable name than Mother Theresa. The fourth premise says that true honor can’t be attained through having an office or being the president. If you look at politicians, the general consensus of them as people is that their pretty shady individuals who took other people down to achieve measures of success such as getting a political position. Politicians often lie and try to make their opponents seem as inhumanly as possible to win the spot of office. A person with true honor and virtue wouldn’t do these things to hold a position of power. Now not all presidents or leaders are dirty people, just a few who succumb to these measures. A person can be nominated to lead because they are thought of as honorable and virtuous. A perfect example of this is President George Bush. He isn’t considered a very honorable man and he holds the most powerful position in the world. The fifth and final premise states that honor is thought of differently in other places and offices can lose their honorable attainment through the acts of individuals who hold that position. If a ruler goes to a different country that is opposed to that rulers country he will not be thought of as a honorable and virtuous man. Kids are raised to hate that man. The honor and the office are two separate entities. Once you leave that office, your on your own as how your perceived as honorable or not in different places. Offices can also lose their appeasement as well like I stated before with the royal family of England. If a person doesn’t serve a honorable campaign, and this action is repeatedly done over a period of time, that position will be thought of as a less honorable position. The conclusion of this argument states that honor is not the true good and it isn’t the way to find true happiness. If you are trying to find happiness and you decide to run for an office to achieve honor, which you think will lead to happiness. You will not automatically receive happiness through that position. You can be a happy leader who is thought of as an honorable man, but it is what you do when you’re in that position that makes you happy, not the honor. You can’t strive for praise and honor your whole life or you probably won’t be happy.