Mischaracterized

It's not hard to come across a lot of people writing about character; about how "character is what people do when they believe no one is watching," or how "when everything else fades, character is what remains." Perhaps this is just the cynic in me, but I think that most people's discussions of character leave out what may be its most important trait: that it's built on trust.

People speak of character as if its rules are expressions of high virtue, rather than simply an imposition of authenticity. Because for many people, their "character" comes out when they aren't afraid of being judged for what they do... or who they are. At the root of a number of dissertations on character is the simple idea, as Professor of Business Psychology Dr. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic noted in an article on leadership, that there is an "obligation to others overrides the right to just be ourselves."

And I suspect this is why when so many people name names when it comes to those they find to be of bad character, the people they call out are those who have come into a position where they no longer need to have obligations to others. They can indulge their authentic selves because the society around them isn't in a position to punish them for it. And so character stops being an expression of principles; rather it's a recognition of one's interests.

Because the demands of character aren't simply those of the law; they are also those of propriety. It's about people "adjusting [their] behavior to meet situational demands and gratify others." And there is nothing wrong with conforming one's actions and demeanor to those of the people around them. When in Rome, doing as the Romans do, is not a crime. But I find the lack of willingness to speak about the demands that it makes on people to be insidious.

Sure, there is an assumption of moral realism built in to the concept of character; the idea that the norms one ascribes to the concept are genuine facts about the universe, and not mere conventions born of the arbitrary nature of society. But I think that there's also a level of fear there, a worry that those who understand that they need not follow the rules (those who are unafraid of others) will be unconstrained in a way that places one at risk. It's a fear that's overblown, I think, born of a tendency to worry about those who don't worry about what one thinks of them. In that sense, letting go of a focus on character may be a worthwhile step in seeing, and accepting, people for who they really are, rather than who one may want, or need, them to be.