Full resolution (JPEG) - On this page / på denna sida - XIV. The difference between the English and Russian point of view upon duelling
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
102 PROBLEMS CONFRONTING RUSSIA
Not so with duty. Here the opinion of others does not
matter. If a man acts from motives of duty, every
consideration of the opinion of others must be lost sight of, in
order that the idea of working for moral good, which he
conceives to be his duty, can be accomplished. Moral duty
is superior to the judgment of the multitude. Morality is
derived from the yearning of the soul towards the good, and
the obligation which is felt towards that which is recognised
as good. The man who is conscious of his duty has the one
aim in view that his action shall correspond with the moral
principles which he recognises as obligatory. The result of
doing one’s duty is self-respect, while the enjoyment of
" honour" assures respect on the part of others. Thus
duty and honour complement one another, being different
in their essence. The difference between them is not
apparent so long as the carrying out of duty assures at the
same time the esteem of others. But as soon as duty and
honour come into collision, it becomes apparent which of
them stands higher from an ethical point of view. The
confession of the Italian priest-astronomer, E pur si
muove (" And still she moves "), was heroic, inspired as he
was by the holy duty of faithfulness to personal convictions,
but none the less only brought to him dishonour, hatred, and
excommunication. On the other hand, lack of duty often
does not interfere with a man’s honour or the place which
he occupies in society. Honour, on the whole, is far more
easily satisfied than duty, which has for its judge the
inexorable tribunal of the conscience. In the light of duty,
duelling appears particularly petty and insignificant.
It is good to defend one’s honour (not by fighting duels,
but by legal and social means), but it is even better to realise
that duty stands higher than honour.
The conclusion to be drawn, therefore, is that duelling is,
like a dangerous rudimentary organ in the human body, a
pernicious anachronism in the body politic and social of
modern life. It is objectionable from the point of view of
the law ; it is contrary to reason and common sense : it is a
cataclysm which, far from repairing any injury, adds another
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
