X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Please note: Previously subscribers used a 'WebID' to log into the website. Your subscriber number is not the same as the WebID. Please ensure you use the subscriber number when you link your subscription.

Ancient and modern

Aristotle on Entwistle

17 November 2012

9:00 AM

17 November 2012

9:00 AM

George Entwistle accounted himself ‘honourable’ as he resigned his position as head of the BBC, and Lord Patten joined in the applause. It was as if Entwistle thought he deserved it. Ancient Greeks would have been baffled. You cannot honour yourself. Only others can do that. The man had failed. Did he have no shame?

Aristotle analysed shame much as we do: it is a feeling ‘connected with disrepute in the eyes of those whom a person holds in high regard’. Such a person ‘takes account of those who admire him and whom he admires and by whom he wishes to be admired; he feels more shame at things done in the open before such people’s eyes, especially if those people are with him and watch him, or are inclined to tell others, or are themselves not liable to the same accusations…’.

[Alt-Text]


But Aristotle took it still further, arguing that a person would feel shame for failure even if it was not his own fault, because those who were unaware of the circumstances would almost certainly conclude that he had been lacking e.g. grip or energy. As Aristotle pointed out, ‘we are ashamed of all such deeds as are seen to be disgraceful’. For example, he goes on, it was a cause for shame not to be educated to the same level as one peers, ‘even more so if it is one’s own fault’. Herodotus illustrated the point perfectly. When king Croesus, fearful for his son’s life, ordered him to stay at home and not go to the hunt, his son pointed to the shame he would feel: surely people would think him a coward?

In other words, while we regularly give people the benefit of the doubt for failure — especially if we are aware of the circumstances — Greeks less charitably tended to see a person not as a moral agent but as serving a particular function. They felt no reason to value people who were not up to the job, whatever their good intentions. So Entwistle’s sanctimonious appropriation of ‘honour’ and Patten’s smug agreement would not have amused them in the least. But in the BBC one thing can be guaranteed: dismal failure will generate endless self-righteous bleating about its value to the world. A little shame would not come amiss.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close