A Gentlemanly Experiment in the “Loose, Vague, and Indeterminate”

“The student is expected to conduct himself at all times, both on and off campus, as a gentleman and a responsible citizen.” This is the ONE rule, yes, only one, that is given to students of Wabash College, which is a small, all-male, liberal arts college in Indiana. Whenever I have told people about the rule the immediate knee jerk reaction is almost always, “That’s it? That won’t work! Too vague!” Even the college webpage for the Gentleman’s Rule has the heading, “Just One Rule of Conduct?” Well, yes! And while this is the real world and not The Lord of the Rings, it does appear one rule to rule them all does seem to work, not perfectly, but mostly. In my article, “The Impartial Wally,” in Cosmos + Taxis, I explain that Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments (TMS) provides an excellent explanation as to why this one rule  mostly works. 

In TMS Smith argues that justice is like grammar. Some rules will be “precise, accurate, and indispensable.” Knowing how to speak and write well in a language does require knowing specific and inflexible rules but it won’t teach you how to write and speak with elegance and grace. For that, you will need “loose, vague, and indeterminate” rules that allow for flexibility and the deeper understanding of a language. Languages are, after all, not designed by anyone but products of a spontaneous, or emergent, order. Human action but not of any human design. Justice is similar, yes, we want specific rules that are precise, accurate, and indispensable, like do not murder. But many rules are really a product of our interactions. Some rules are tacit and only understood through the interaction of individuals through society. 

In my paper, I argue that Wabash College’s Gentleman’s Rule is leveraging, through the formal Gentleman’s Rule, many loose, vague, and indeterminate rules that constrain student behavior. The main mechanism that achieves this result is sympathy. Smith defines sympathy as a “fellow-feeling with any passion whatsoever.” In its simplest form this just means that we care not only for ourselves but for others. Therefore, when we act, we are likely to respond to the responses of our fellows because we desire to be in accord with them. But, that is not all. Another important point is how we see the appropriateness of their response given the context it took place. This is what Smith called propriety. Actions are socially judged based on the “…suitableness or unsuitableness, in the proportion or disproportion which the affection seems to bear to the cause or object which excites it." Thus, what a proper or just response is, is socially created. Both of these create a back and forth that lead us to a social equilibrium of appropriate behavior. For example, if I get stuck in traffic and then rant and rave to my friends, while this is important to me, it might be seen as over the top by my friends. Their reactions let me know that my actions need to be tempered. At the same time, my response to their apathy may make them think, “hmm he seems to really care about this, maybe I should show more concern back next time.” Smith uses a musical analogy. Our sympathetic back and forth will never create exact harmony but it will move us to concord with one another. 

This is a powerful but limited tool. Sympathy works better locally. We have spheres of sympathy, with sympathy working best in our more intimate orders rather than in our extended orders. We will care most about our family and friends. The further out we go the less power sympathy will hold. The Gentleman’s Rule seems to work at an extremely small college like Wabash but would be very difficult to gain traction at a large university like Indiana University. A small community will have less strangers, your reputation is easier to monitor. It’s not a panacea but it is a powerful example of self-governance in action. Just and proper behavior should not be dictated from “men of the system” outside and removed but rather it is learned through the interaction of many individuals through this symphony of sympathy. 

Want to read more?
Daniel B. Klein's Propriety in Smith
Edward J. Harpham's Conscience and Moral Rules in Adam Smith
Lauren Hall's Adam Smith, Sympathy, and Spontaneous Social-Moral Order