On politeness and civility

by Valera

Is there an evolutionary advantage in being polite? Don't we undermine the survival of the fittest by being nice, polite and tolerant to the weak, obnoxious or annoying? Isn't the fundamental principle of good manners - the one that makes it impossible to point to others their lack of manners - extremely stifling and preventing any potential spread of civility onto hoi polloi, the great unwashed, therefore threatening its own "survival"? In other words, can, will and, ultimately, should politeness survive?

There have been studies in altruism, which tried to explain it in terms of possible genetic advantage.  Ironically, the explanation made sense only if the survivor of the situation was not the human carrier, but the altruistic gene. So, the theory goes, sacrificing oneself for the close kin only makes sense, since it maximizes the survival of the copies of the gene. But politeness seems to be a mechanism of coping with strangers, awkward and embarassing situations, and at the first glance, irrelevant to the genetic advantage.

As Benedetta Craveri wrote, politeness was indispensable if one were to "dominer la violence des instincts, élever des remparts contre brutalité de l'existence, interposer entre soi et les autres un bouclier invisible susceptible de garantir la dignité de chacun".

Here we may have stumbled on the solution to the problem - the key word is "dignity". Politeness may have emerged as the means to avoid duels, invariably lethal to at least half of the contestants. To have all the money in the world - and then having to die for the slightest hint of suspicion of a shadow of intent to malign one's honour! O, cruel world! Strangely enough, the closest inheritors of that obsession with dignity are the dispossessed - the poor member of the modern inner city gangs, which have developed extremely rigid codes of securing "respect" (my apologies to the Northeastern WASPS).

Nearly all Eastern Europeans coming to the U.S. for the first time feel urge to comment on excessive American habit of fake smiling and shallow politeness. The American underclasses experience the same unease around the representatives of upper classes. Cultural and class distinctions closely correlate with starkly diverse ideas of honor, dignity and the code of conduct - yet, all people agree that a certain set of rules, codifying behavior is absolutely necessary to simplify the, eh, intercourse. This is not I, this is "Daisy Eyebright" in her "Manual of Etiquette":

How to diminish friction; how to promote ease of intercourse; how to make every part of a man's life contribute to the welfare and satisfaction of those around him; how to keep down offensive pride; how to banish the rasping of selfishness from the intercourse of men; how to move among men inspired by various and conflictive motives, and yet not have collisions -- this is the function of good manners.

to be continued...