On what is easier

This is part one of what became a two-part post.  Read the second part here.

This week we read another double portion, "Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbits" & "The Window on the West."  In these chapters, we meet Faramir, Boromir's younger, but considerably wiser brother.  I usually don't like writing about Faramir because he is too wise.  He doesn't err and he has very few faults.  From the very start he says he is not interested in Isildur's Bane (This was the line of poetry which set Boromir on his quest to Rivendell - No one in Gondor knows it refers to the One Ring).

But I hit upon an idea for how to frame thinking about him which I think is illuminating.  Faramir is living an ethical life.  Through examination of his actions we can see how to identify when we (and others) are in it for the ethics and not in it for the power.  Let's begin with Faramir's first response when he learns Frodo and Sam may have Isildur's Bane:

‘But fear no more! I would not take this thing, if it lay by the highway.
Not were Minas Tirith falling in ruin and I alone could save her, so, using

the weapon of the Dark Lord for her good and my glory. No, I do not wish for such triumphs...

War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would

devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the

arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that

which they defend: the city of the Men of Numenor; and I would

have her loved for her memory, her ancientry, her beauty, and her

present wisdom. Not feared, save as men may fear the dignity of a man, old and wise.'

And a line previous, in which he guesses at Boromir's downfall (His on-the-nose guesses are one of the things I think make him wise to the point of dullness):

‘What in truth this Thing [Isildur's Bane], is I cannot yet guess; but some heirloom of power

and peril it must be. A fell weapon, perchance, devised by the Dark Lord. If it were a

thing that gave advantage in battle, I can well believe that Boromir, the proud and fearless,

often rash, ever anxious for the victory of Minas Tirith (and his own glory therein), might

desire such a thing and be allured by it. Alas that ever he went on that errand! I should

have been chosen by my father and the elders, but he put himself forward, as being

the older and the hardier (both true), and he would not be stayed.'

But perhaps Faramir was acutely aware of his brother's weaknesses.  Maybe he saw how Boromir's desire for their father's approval, or his attraction to glory, undermined the stout-hearted man he could otherwise be.  We see here Boromir doesn't seek the Ring just because he wants its power.  He wants the Ring because he wants to be a savior.  He wants to be loved and believes saving Minas Tirith will earn him that love.  Would it?  Probably - at least for the moment.  But, as we've discussed before, it wouldn't end there (refer to the link above about power).  Either Denethor and the people's love would need to be placated again and again, to Boromir's dismay, or - if their love was permanently earned - he would seek love from others, or glory in new places.  Placing so much value on the approval of others is a great danger to Boromir.

Faramir, though, is guided by his principles. He has decided what is right and what is wrong. Maybe he is capital-W wrong about those things, but they are a defined category. He doesn't need to be seen loving what the sword defends or not slaying needlessly or declining triumphs. That's the problem of virtue signaling - not that it's bad to be seen doing good (we may inspire others to do good!) - but that we are doing good in order to be seen.

Then again - who cares why we donate to the poor, and if we get some prestige out of it what's the harm? Because eventually, as we fear for Boromir, that will not be enough. We'll need to also give away the shirt off our back, our leisure hours, our vacation plans, etc. And when those things are not enough to please the crowd, what then? Further, if we give charity for the recognition, will we be charitable when no one is watching?

Worse - and I think more realistic currently - what if those we wish to be seen by neglect to cheer? Or if the crowd has turned against charity. Then, tethered to their approval, we must find something else. Our actions, it turns out, were not driven by ethics, but by approval - and the power that comes with being seen doing good. Even if we manage to find a new group that will praise our original actions, we still seem to need the group's - any group's - praise.

Faramir has a code of ethics. If he decides to kill he will use whatever evaluation method he's come up with. Even if his method is wrong, it will be more predictable than appealing to the crowd.

This is how he's able to resist the Ring. Not just resist it, but seem invincible to it just as Tom Bombadil was! Tom is also unaffected by the approval of others, but his code of ethics is one of balance with a dash of plain kindness, whereas Faramir's seem more noble to me. Still, things end better for Tom than Boromir.

So Faramir is living for his ethics. Let's see what example he sets for the rest of us. First, an early scene with him: Sam wakes up to find Faramir questioning Frodo about Boromir, whom Frodo has said was with him when he set out on the Quest. Faramir tells Frodo Boromir has died. Frodo is surprised to hear this. The two of them put together that Boromir died the same day Frodo left. This obviously raises Faramir's suspicions. Sam, unable to take this line of questioning, runs up and stands between the two of them.

‘See here!’ [Sam] said [to Faramir]. ‘What are you driving at? Let’s come to the point before all
the Orcs of Mordor come down on us! If you think my master murdered this
Boromir and then ran away, you’ve got no sense; but say it, and have done! And then let us know
what you mean to do about it. But it’s a pity that folk as talk about fighting the Enemy can’t
let others do their bit in their own way without interfering. He’d be mighty
pleased, if he could see you now. Think he’d got a new friend, he would.’

‘Patience!’ said Faramir, but without anger. ‘Do not speak before your master, whose wit is greater than yours.
And I do not need any to teach me of our peril. Even so, I spare a brief time, in order to judge
justly in a hard matter. Were I as hasty as you, I might have slain you long ago.
For I am commanded to slay all whom I find in this land without the leave of the Lord of Gondor.
But I do not slay man or beast needlessly, and not gladly even when it is needed.’

Because he is committed to his principles, and not to getting the compliments of people, Faramir can take his time.  If Boromir wants glory for defeating the enemy, he has to be the one to do it.  That means he has to do it first, which presses speed upon him, which prevents him from being thoughtful.  But Faramir can be patient - unlike Sam who is tethered to Frodo and must act quickly if something goes wrong.  Faramir is willing to defy orders if he thinks those orders are wrong.

(While this may seem an example of being "tethered to others" that isn't necessarily wrong think it is because when Frodo gives in to the Ring Sam is unwilling to do anything about it.  Would he defy Frodo's commands if they were wrong?  If Gollum wasn't also at the Crack of Doom, would Sam have let Middle Earth burn for the sake of his friend?)

 ‘I would not snare even an orc with a falsehood,’ said Faramir.

Faramir will not lie to get his way - not even to an orc. He doesn't need to trick anybody, his principles are holding him firm enough that he is confident in a fair fight. He might still lose, and we should not be naive about that, but it is admirable nonetheless.

‘But, Frodo, I pressed you hard at first about Isildur’s Bane. Forgive me!
It was unwise in such an hour and place. I had not had time for thought.

When Faramir apologizes to Frodo it is precisely for acting too quickly and not giving the matter enough thought. He has the tools to do the right thing, but of course must consult them regularly. Our principles will rarely become our instincts.

Finally, let's revisit one of the first passages I highlighted:

If it were a thing that gave advantage in battle, I can well believe that
Boromir, the proud and fearless, often rash, ever anxious for the victory of Minas
Tirith (and his own glory therein), might desire such a thing and be allured by it.
Alas that ever he went on that errand! I should have been chosen by my father
and the elders, but he put himself forward, as being

the older and the hardier (both true), and he would not be stayed.'

Though Faramir would have been better suited to go to Rivendell, it is precisely his cool-headedness that allowed Boromir's boldness to sideline him.  Here we can see those best equipped for a task may not be willing to say so and we should be willing to advocate on their behalf when the time comes.  Those who are self-assured may be led astray by that same feeling.

Not only did Gondor fail Middle Earth by not sending Faramir, but it also failed Boromir by sending him on a mission he could not handle.  He was in it for the glory.  Better Boromir be left home, raving against father and brother for preventing a chance at praise, than to let him fall to the temptation.

I've long said ethics is doing the harder thing.  But I've continually avoided defining the obvious question - harder than what?  When I first tried to answer this I had said refraining from extremes.  I still think that's true, but I also think it's too abstract to be much use.  I think now we have a more concrete answer.

Ethics is doing the harder thing.  The easier thing is listening to peer pressure and our own desire for recognition.  Who doesn't like a kind word and a warm smile?  The hope others will speak well of us?  When those are our rewards it's easy to get ourselves to do anything.  That could mean donating to charity but it could also mean making our neighborhood Judenfrei.  To live ethically we need to resist that temptation.  We need something more predictable and stable - we need principles.  I think even wrong principles are preferable to none since one can later learn and adopt new and better principles.  It is the practice of having principles, more than the principles themselves, that is the key to an ethical life.

Having principles to refer to can shield us from the desire to please others.  Not completely, of course; we're only human!   But the sooner we can commit to a principle - any principle - the better it will be for our pursuit of an ethical life.  Attempting to live an ethical life by seeking the approval of others is like following a plastic bag blowing in the wind hoping it will bring you peace.

This had been a patreon-supported project, but that proved too annoying to maintain.  If you would like to financially support this project, drop $1.11 (or any amount, I suppose) into my Venmo!

ChatGPT contributed about 1% to this post's final version.  But it was an important 1% because I really wanted to stick the landing on that final sentence.