Samuel Johnson’s definition of honor focus not so much on honor that comes from being ethically excellent but instead on honor that comes from power, from being royal or famous.

theory

Global surveys have shown that many corporate logos like the golden arches are more famous than any celebrity or other symbol. So technically speaking, the greatest honor as far as becoming famous and globally known, might simply be to become a fast food mascot?

Not all honorable people get honored. How does a grand recognized public act made possible by being at the right place, at the time ,with the right opportunities, compare to the honor of merely being the best person you can be? A good citizen, a mother, a father. In otherwise unrecognized person who is noneless an amazing hero to a few: Your family, your friends, that one person who really needed you.

Is recognition merely an accident of luck, a snowball effect, an accumulation of advantage? People who stand out when they are young are often giving access to more opportunities, which then leads to more opportunities later on. Accumulating overtime like snow on a snowball that eventually becomes an entire bolder of snow, only the original snowball of which, was the original person.

“A heroic imagination:
A hero in waiting who thinks social-centrically, not egocentrically.”

 

Philip Zimbargo says, most heroes are everyday people who emerge as heroes in particular situations, so a fair argument can be made that simply knowing you did the right thing when presented with the situation involving virtues and strengths is the greatest honor possible, the most honorable life. Now wether or not that honorable behavior is recognized, well, Cato the Elder questioned the value imported by physical awards by simply saying:

“After I’m dead
I’d rather have people ask
why I have no monument
than why I have one.”

(Words from Michael Stevens – Vsauce) Watch the video here

 

A coin for your thoughts: