MGTOW, Man Up!

In this video I explore the command to Man Up!

Patreon
https://www.patreon.com/ground....work_for_the_metaphy

Paypal
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin..../webscr?cmd=_s-xclic

Script
http://www.gftmom.com/portfolio-item/mgtow-man-up/

It is not uncommon to hear the term “Man Up” lodged against men. When we encounter this term, it can be observed that the reaction is to universally condemn it. It is dismissed as shaming language and thought of nothing more.
However, is it the case that there are men we encounter, who, though male, seem to lack some quality by which we would feel justified in calling them men? In other words, is it true that we each encounter men who behave in such an unmanly way that we recoil in disgust and would feel ashamed to be such ourselves; men to whom we would feel justified in telling to man up? Justified in the sense that we are not attempting to shame them in the way feminists and blue pillers do, but to shame them nonetheless into behavior more becoming of a man?

Yes. These men exist and we have each encountered them. There are many who would label the entire generation of millennial men to be this very kind of man I speak of. Let me ask you a question. Are there some acts which are shameful and acts which are not shameful? There are. Ought someone feel shame having performed a shameful act while someone who had not performed a shameful act ought not feel shame? Indeed. Someone who performed a shameful act ought to feel shame while a man having not performed a shameful act ought not feel shame.
If this is true, then it follows that a man having performed a shameful act but himself not feeling shame must not know he has performed a shameful act. Otherwise he would be ashamed of the act.

Now, Socrates, in his discourse on justice put forward an argument as to the purpose of punishment. The purpose of punishment is medicinal. The criminal, Socrates says, will agree with the judge that indeed the guilty man ought to be punished, but that he himself is not guilty. For such a man, the punishment ought to take such a form as to remove his ignorance of his own guilt. This may seem confusing so let me explain.

Imagine that there is a man who has a violent temper. Let us imagine that some act or word causes this man to strike his perceived transgressor. The angry man will feel he had committed a just act as he feels he has exerted the correct reaction to his perceived slight. However, since the angry man suffers from a deficiency in fortitude, his emotional reactions were grossly disproportional to the perceived slight as would be judged by a man who did possess the virtue of fortitude. As such, the angry man committed an injustice but is himself ignorant that he has committed an injustice. Socrates would say that the angry man must be punished in such a way as to help cultivate the angry man’s virtue of fortitude so that he ultimately does come to see that he has committed an injustice. Too, in this way, the angry man, after experiencing his punishment, will be bettered for having undergone the punishment. The angry man will be more virtue as a result of the punishment.

So if we are to continue the argument we began earlier in relation to shame, we must conclude that it is just to shame a man who has committed a shameful act but does not feel shame. To not shame such a man would be unjust. The act of shaming such a man in turn would be medicinal and would lead to the man becoming more virtuous due to the shaming.

So the question ahead of us becomes: “Which acts are shameful and which are not?” More specifically, what is that quality or absence of that quality within those men who we feel disgust towards? What are these shameful acts some men commit which invoke in us a desire to tell them to man up?

Firstly, we must establish the origins of the western concept of manliness. Now, the Romans had a word for manliness; virtus. In Latin vir means man so in this way virtus becomes manliness. Virtus carries with it the connotations of valor, excellence, courage, character, and worth. Virtus also translates to the English word virtue. In Greek virtue is arête. Arete, as used by the Greeks, also means excellence. As the Romans were heavily influenced by Greek stoic philosophy, we can safely include the 4 Greek cardinal virtues of justice, temperance, fortitude, and prudence into the mix.

So in this way, manliness is synonymous with virtuousness. In turn, to be a man is to possess or pursue virtue. Let us look at some examples in which we judge a man needs to man up and how they relate to virtue.
Take the example of a man who lets others walk all over him. Such a man is a coward; he lacks the virtue of courage which in turn is subservient to fortitude. Surely shaming such a man by shaming him would be medicinal in nature as he ought to be ashamed to allow himself to suffer such acts.