Competitive honor systems undermine impartial justice and cross-group trust.

Evidence

Doria shares with Hobbes the sense that the system of competitive honor undercuts the possibility of decent order. Such honor is an inherently positional, not universal value—I gain a higher level of it by besting you in some way. … Doria supposes that a society based on honor cannot respect the impartial justice that is a necessary condition of trust—or, rather, that the system of honor undercuts the possibility of trust between the hierarchically ordered groups of the society. — Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, 491

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s integration of Saramago and Hobbesian order — this is honor as a competitive, positional social arrangement that blocks the impartial justice trust requires. — connects to: Publishing awards forces conformity pressure that distorts case-by-case justice — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 4848
• DEFINE: Defines competitive (positional) honor versus noncompetitive honor systems as criteria for group inclusion.