Of Etiquette

In a civilized society it is expected that every one behave himself, as politeness is said to be the lubricant for communications. Certainly there is something in this opinion, as it is much more amicable to be smiling than to be poker-faced. But I cannot tell whether it still works when it is more often than not all styles without sincerity; for politeness nowadays whitewashes the truth. Of course rudeness shall not be preferred; but smiling faces are everywhere; so are complaints and grievances behind these masques. Endurance of this kind does not help, but often complicates the situation, and therefore backfires. Conversation is supposed to exchange ideas and thus reach their ends; then, that redundant etiquette blurs the view and leads the eye off course. The enduring tests his own capacity, while the endured is still at sea. Proper expression is certainly favorable, as long as it never distorts the process and is a good means.

Even as a masque, etiquette should be used with prudence, as it is a sword of Damocles. The most vital part is to demonstrate your sincerity, and prevent it from being a formality. On the one hand, airs and graces are not preferred, and he certainly expects no feigned appreciation, as long as he himself is not a formalist. On the other hand, too many false compliments, when falsely taken to be true, are often seen as a sign of submissiveness. Then it is a game well described: head I win, and tail you lose, as his assumed superiority assumes authority.

When praised, which is a common case, he should be careful with his modesty: Greater or equal competence, either in similar profession or not, demands mutual admiration, while weaker capability requires him to humble himself. Generally speaking modesty does not appreciate the depreciation of the praised himself, except for in the conversation with a junior one; for the expressed condescendence voices a veiled recognition of the incompetence of the other party. The senior can be proud of their own experience; the junior, future; the noble, veins and status; the vulgar, sincerity and frankness; the rich, wealth and honest work; the poor, work and honesty; the learned, knowledge and professionalism; the illiterate, common senses and contented minds. Hence it is hundreds of times more difficult to find a man difficult to praise, though some can be truly hard to please.

The East and the West favour different replies to praises, but there are good flatterers in both. It is even heard that western people are even better masters of this skill, as is seen by some in interviews. A collection of skills is no art. Anyway these manufactured good wishes are not to be overlooked; at least it is a sign that he is not so offended as to spout a stream of abuses. The question is whether it is morally preferable to leave him in his own corner and watch him bang his head against a brick wall, or if better, put his own head in the noose. Suppose it is right, we consequently place his current feelings over truth, and also over his own intention, and eventually deviate from his welfare. Or we may leave it for his own autonomy; but human reason is not the only determinant of correct decision-making, whereas intelligence plays the fundamental role, for how can he make the right choice when he is ill informed? And the last explanation I can think of is our own autonomy; then we are not morally obliged to do good deeds, and this goes contrary to team spirit and charity. The world is very different now; isolation is no longer a practical policy. Certainly God still helps them who help themselves; but it is not that we cannot help others before we fulfil ourselves; it is that we cannot fulfil ourselves without helping others. Therefore truth rather than liberty or autonomy should be of ultimate value; and so is reason over faith; otherwise politeness and piety are but cheats and lies.

Then it is evident that the essence of all politeness is truth and sincerity. He should be more expected to be true to himself; be true to his ends; and be true to his supposed role. That is to truly behave himself, in accordance with truth, with sincerity, and not confined to an ossified set of behavioural codes. This is also the way to preserve individual autonomy without any offence to others, or any hindrance to business. What is true is to be taken as a fact, and any fact of life shall not be blinked. It is better for him to take himself as a part of truth, and be a member of society; rather than put the whole world against himself, and take it with overpressure and overcaution.

2/27/2011