Honor, by American standards, is explicit. At Washington and Lee our parameters of honor are those of lying, cheating or stealing; and therefore any misrepresentation on one’s self is considered to be dishonorable. The motivations to remain honorable here are explicit. They are the fear of being caught, the fear of public humiliation, and the fear of expulsion. We remain honorable, not out of a sense of self-worth, but out of fear and an obligation to comply with certain stipulations of school and society, in order to maintain standing as a student and good citizen.... Because Americans act out of the fear of being caught, they regard the law as the code that defines good and bad, right and wrong. In contrast, the Japanese see it as their duty to do what is right, even if that means going against the law to defend their honor or the honor of someone to whom they are indebted. (MA)The concept of giri follows a Japanese person wherever they are in their community; the Washington & Lee honor code on the other hand is rarely enforced outside University buildings. In the course of a person’s social life, they are at liberty to lie, cheat, and steal to a limited degree, as reporting someone doing what is considered a minor infraction would be considered “narcing”. (CT)
It is fairly easy for a person to be aware of what is right and what is wrong, but if a person feels an obligation to someone or something, they are much more likely to actually make the honorable action. (ES)
Both giri and the sense of honor at Washington and Lee have their roots in tradition. For both, it seems like the theory of their original creation and practice was nobler than its modern applications. ... Who determines what is honorable and what is not? In both Japan and Washington and Lee, often this decision falls into the hands of the elite. In Japan the higher your position in society, the more privileges you received; although no matter how high you rose, there were still necessary obligations. At W&L, the Executive Committee, despite its student-elected nature, is sometimes accused of being unrepresentative of the student body as a whole. Predominately white, male, and affiliated with certain Greek organizations, it is only natural that their backgrounds would influence their views and decisions. How greatly this affects the application of the honor code is unknown, but unlike in Japan, the rest of the population has the power to change the individuals who have this responsibility. (JM)
...how effective is the honor system beyond the academic sphere? It is my opinion that while students take very seriously the implications of the Honor System in their academic lives and with respect to property, it has less authority over their personal lives. Obviously, few people get brought before the EC for lying to their parents, or cheating on a boyfriend. It would seem that if honor exists in a person, any violation regardless of the context should be equally as threatening to the underlying commitment to honor that is so sacred to Washington and Lee. (LH)
...it has been my experience at Washington and Lee that pride is not necessarily had in one’s own individual honor, but rather in the honor of the institution as a whole, and the sense of honor here is not directed toward a person, but rather toward the ideal of an honorable community, which is the end in and of itself. ... At Washington and Lee, I feel that students have relegated the once lofty ideal of honor to a simple phrase: don’t lie, cheat or steal. Honor does not enter into one’s mind outside of these parameters. (AM)