Looking Beyond Labels

Emerson wrote in one of his essays: “I am ashamed to think how easily we capitulate to badges and names…” It is undeniably true that we often accept things for what they seem to be on the surface. We are sometimes so impressed with names that we may not look closely enough at the man. Sometimes we accept a person merely because of the company he keeps. Perhaps it is generally true that people can be judged by the company they keep, but it is not invariably true, not is it invariably a fair or adequate or safe judgment. We cannot always accept a man simply because he belongs to what seems to be acceptable society, no can we always condemn him simply because he doesn’t. If we accept the wolf in sheep’s clothing, we still have a wolf and not a sheep. This isn’t true only of people; it is true also of actions, of things, of virtues and vices. An unworthy act isn’t good merely because it is performed by a man who has a reputation for goodness. And a worthy act isn’t bad merely because it is performed by someone who is held in poor repute. All of us have our faults, and all of us have our virtues, and we must not expect our faults, and all of us have our virtues, and we must not expect our faults to be condoned merely because they travel with our virtues. To go back to Emerson’s idea, it is hazardous to be too much impressed with names and badges and labels an to accept thing or people merely because they are traveling with others who are accepted. Every man has a right to be, and must expect to be, judged on his own merits. Badges don’t make men; names don’t change the nature of things; vices don’t become virtues simply because they travel with virtues. If we accept a poisonous fungus simply because it is traveling with edible mushrooms, we are in trouble. It isn’t safe to accept people, or things, or ideas simply because they are traveling in what seems to be acceptable society. Everything should be considered for itself.