Civil Spaces: Dignity, Respect, Justness, and Human Flourishing

• In Event: In-Between: Exploring Social Spaces and Interdependencies

Short Description

This research looks at civility throughout the ages through the lens of Eastern and Western worldviews. The presenter will share insights on how leaders can embody civility to promote the discovery of common ground, encourage mutual respect and justness, and foster individual liberty and the common good.

Detailed Abstract

This author suggests that the noble and honorable pursuit of seeking to conscientiously lead for global change and identifying what we share as common reality would benefit from a driving force of garnering a vision that draws others to a similar shared vision. Civility perhaps is one of the underpinning virtues that may contribute to building those relationships that affect a shared common vision of wise global change. Leaders who are civil to one another and foster civility within their sphere of influence may be vital to global change in an environment of significant value and norm differences. It is an ideal not only important to Eastern thought, but Western thought as well. As Cantril (as cited in Christians & Traber, 1997) concluded in a study of numerous and diverse countries, personal identity….a sense of dignity, is one of the eleven basic human need similarities that people share. Bass and Steidlmeier (1998) further asserted that human dignity was a basis of Confucian and Socratic thought, and thus attributed this long standing value as a basis for individualized consideration, a facet of authentic transformational leadership. A value of human dignity perhaps is deeply intertwined with what it means to be “civil”.
Delving deeper into the concept of civility, it is no wonder that Webster’s (1986) definition of civility, the “state of being civilized”, is so important; it would distinguish whether or not someone had a “deference or allegiance to the social order befitting a citizen” (p. 413). Citing Walter Lippman, Webster further notes that civility encompasses those “liberties western man has won for himself after centuries of struggle”, which further contributes to civil rights solidarity and obligations, along with civil justice in a society (p. 413). Webster further characterizes civilization as an “ideal state of human culture characterized by complete absence of barbarianism and nonrational behavior, optimum utilization of physical, cultural, spiritual and human resources, and perfect adjustment of the individual within the social framework” (p. 413). While the first known word of the word civility dates back to 1533 and entails courtesy and politeness (“Civility”, n.d.), each age and its corresponding worldview and culture may vary in terms of the context and location within which it thrives and is carried out. At times it is worthy to note that even within a particular culture, its understanding might conflict among those in the same locality.
For example, Theodore de Barry (as cited in Bell’s review of de Barry’s book, 2005) noted that civility as a “cultural refinement that is the product of traditional social rituals” provides an example of how Confucian and Buddhist ideas of civility had clashed in China when the Mongols showed civility through a civil service examination system and sought to establish Buddhist monk credentials through testing of their scriptures; however, these religious leaders resisted by arguing that “religious truth could not be expressed in words” (p. 567). Differing views of civility challenged public leadership in China during this era. De Barry also delves into a historical view of Japan’s ideals of civility. He notes that later in Japan’s history, Japanese thinkers thought of civility to the extent of protecting its emperor with the “self-sacrificing spirit as the samurai”, but after their defeat in WWII the idea of civility would change in that it would seek to avoid the use of force to settle human affairs (as cited in Bell, p. 567).
Across the Pacific and Atlantic, however, and throughout time the notion of civility would also change as a result of its own experiences in time and finding new ways to resolve differences and uphold those deep societal values extolled in a nation. As we see, whom a society deemed civil, who received its benefits of behavior, and how it was carried out differed in each age. Yet, because each period of time interwoven with differing worldviews yield its own fruit and legacy of civility in each age, it also leaves its imprint of understanding in subsequent ages. A review of civility throughout the ages explored through the lens of various worldviews and its impact on the current day will be explored in Western and Eastern periods of time and through various worldviews. It will include the worldviews of Judaism and Christianity forming the value systems of the West, and worldviews such as Buddhist and Confucius thought, forming ideals of the East. It will also explore how ideas of civility changed due to major events in the life of some of the sampled nations. And because leaders, whether emerging or already very influential in society, influence within a particular age and culture, and because cultural boundaries continue to blur due to globalization and emigration, it is important to understand these various perspectives on civility that are taken for granted in a society.
Civility, however, if viewed as a transcending virtue and one that encourages human dignity, further requires virtuous habits that are inspired, influenced, and reinforced through one’s faith and philosophical belief system and social context. As Benjamin Franklin once stated, “…only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters” (as cited by Smyth in Allison & Skousen, 1982, p. 497). This worthy quote of Franklin could equally apply to any leader of industry, business, government, etc. For viciousness, corruption, enslavement of others is contradictory with modern ideals of leadership. In today’ global context, conscientiously thinking about civil leadership may create a collective reality that promotes finding common ground among diversity, mutual respect and justness, and facilitation of ideals of liberty and human flourishment for all persons regardless of one’s status or gender. In other words, it is hoped that this conversation on the history of civility will contribute to promoting human dignity in a global environment that desperately needs it.

Participant

• Jacqueline A Faulhaber, Johnson University