In these days of political
correctness, the idea of respect is important. The idea of respect is also
often unclear. In this posting I want to examine what we mean by respect. It
seems clear that respect must play some useful part in our lives or else it
would simply cease to exist. In the past respect was linked to etiquette which
played an important part in our lives by gluing society together. Etiquette
encouraged inequality and stratification. In this posting I will consider
respect free from etiquette and will argue that there are two important types
of respect serving different purposes. I will argue that there is recognition
respect which defines our domain of moral concern and appraisal respect which
defines what we approve of. We can respect someone for what she is
and who she is. I will proceed to argue it is damaging to conflate
these different types and that sometimes we should express less respect.
We can respect a wide
variety of things from persons, to institutions such as schools, to virtues
like courage, to nature. This diversity suggests there are different types of
respect. According to the Oxford Dictionary respect is “is a feeling of deep
admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or
achievement.” If we accept this definition, then respect must involve our
affective states. Not all philosophers would agree. For instance, someone might
object a pupil’s respect for her teacher is not based on deep admiration; it is
based on the norms of education. I would argue such ‘respect’ is not true
respect for but merely the acceptance of these norms out of habit or for
pragmatic reasons. In what follows I will assume that all types of genuine
respect must involve our affective states. I will also assume that all forms
of genuine respect must affect our behaviour. It seems nonsensical to hold
we can respect something but that this respect does not constrain how we behave
towards that we respect.
However, I am not concerned
with all forms of affective respect which alter our behaviour. We might for
instance I might respect the sea by fearing it and by only going swimming on a
safe beach with a lifeguard. Fear is an affective state and it affects my
behaviour by causing me to only to swim on a safe beach. In this posting I am
not concerned with respect for inanimate objects. We might also ‘respect’ a
gang member by fearing him. Indeed, gang members might demand such respect.
However once again I’m not sure such ‘respect’ is genuine respect. I would
suggest genuine respect must be freely given. Regardless of whether the
above suggestion is correct or not in this posting I am restricting my
discussion to respect which is freely given. Such respect might take two
forms, recognition and appraisal respect. For instance, we may
respect someone simply because she is a person but we may also respect her
because she is a doctor, which required determination and dedication on her
part qualities we approve of. Respect for persons, as the kind of creatures who
can determine their own future and for whom we should feel some empathy is
recognition respect and should be universal, such respect need not involve any
appraisal of someone’s attributes. Appraisal respect need not be universal and
must include a positive appraisal.
Let us accept that we
should always respect someone by recognising what she is, a person. This
respect need not involve any admiration. When we respect someone for who she is
then respect must involve admiration. For instance, if someone is a thief
preying on old vulnerable people we should only respect her by recognising her
to be a person. However, if she is a doctor we might respect her as a person by
admiring her for who she is and what she has achieved. I now want to argue if
we conflate the expression of recognition and appraisal respect, then we limit
the usefulness of respect by sending a confusing message.
In order to make my
argument I need to differentiate between the uses of recognition and appraisal
respect. Recognition respect defines who and even perhaps what we regard as
members of our society; defines the domain of a society. Recognition respect is not useful in binding
society together. If we fail to see someone as the same kind of creature as
ourselves who can determine her own future, then we simply do not see that
person as part of our society. All persons are owed recognition respect. Not
everyone is owed appraisal respect, appraisal respect has to be earned. Appraisal
respect always includes a positive appraisal such as admiration. If our
appraisal was negative, whatever we felt it certainly wouldn’t be respect.
Appraisal respect for someone means admiring her and responding in ways which
are appropriate to our admiration. However simply admiring someone’s
characteristics and responding in an appropriate fashion is not a sufficient
condition for appraisal respect. We might admire someone’s strength and act
appropriately, but such admiration and appropriate action aren’t respect. They
might be envy and envy certainly isn’t respect. I would suggest that appraisal
respect is of necessity linked to admiring someone’s character. This admiration
need not be limited to someone’s moral character but includes any character
traits which aid someone to flourish, character traits such as wisdom or
courage. It might be objected that by suggesting appraisal respect is of
necessity linked to character I am contradicting myself as suggested above
someone might respect her doctor. In response I would point out anyone who
wants to become a doctor must cultivate wisdom and determination, character
traits which enable her to flourish. Appraisal respect aids flourishing and if
we believe flourishing should be encouraged then appraisal respect should also
be encouraged. Let us consider flattery. Flattery might appear to be a form of
admiration but in the long term flattery damages relationships because it
doesn’t represent our true feelings. The same is true if we conflate
recognition and appraisal respect. Consider someone who has a character we
don’t admire. Of course we should respect her as the kind of creature who can
determine her own future. However, it does not follow that we admire her
character. Moreover, if we conflate recognition with appraisal respect then
this is precisely the message we are sending to her. This false view, like
flattery, is likely to damage our long term relationship with her because it is
based on a misunderstanding.
What conclusions can be
drawn from the above. First we must be careful about how and how often we
express our respect. I would suggest that in most normal contexts there is no
need for us to explicitly express recognition respect. We should express
recognition respect simply by our behaviour, simply accepting people as members
of our moral community. We should do so by accepting how others live and
letting them explicitly express their views even if we believe these views to
be mistaken provided their lifestyle and beliefs do not harm others. I would
further suggest that in most normal contexts it is a mistake to explicitly
express recognition respect. By doing so others might sometimes mistakenly
believe we respect rather than accept their character, their lifestyles. In addition, because our character is related to our beliefs others might sometimes
mistakenly believe we respect their beliefs rather than simply accept their
right to express them. It seems to me that if we are careless in expressing our
respect we might be expressing too much respect leading to misunderstandings
which can damage society.
I