Oftentimes we hear of parents and elders admonishing children and the younger ones on how it is important to maintain a good name and to preserve that which the family has as a name. Is it that such name as known by the family or the individual is such that stands out and beautifully conscripted? Why such emphasis and the attachment to names? I'll endeavour to make a review of this erroneous emotiveness, but let's take a quick look at what broader concept of a name?
Name is as simple as it is: it is nothing more than what a person is called and what he answers to. I do not really subscribe to the believe that the name is deeper that what it is and that it has some subtle influence on the man. A man's name does not as much impact upon him as much as his person does upon the name he answers to.
For instance one may bear Chicken or Terrible; that necessarily do not make such to behave in the manner akin to a common chicken or display such attributes as terrific and horrible. And indeed we have such supposedly funny and weird names around us: Rice, Iron, names as much as one can imagine, yet such individuals are not so defined. It is to say basically that the name is the man.
Then what's a good name?
People always think of a good name as a name that's beautiful, sexy or sweet in its nomenclature and in the way that it's called. Some think of it as a name that has a wonderful, great background in philosophical and spiritual etymology and meaning. While others view it in a different perspectives that suits and fancies the sentiments and the senses in what's generally regarded as good.
That a name is good is simply a function of the behaviorism and attributes of the bearer of such a name whether or not it meets the above description. A good name, significantly, is posited by the actions and values of the person, who bears such and is so described as an individual who's worthy of honour, worthy of respect and worthy to be trusted.
So concisely, a good name is a personality; for a good name, just like a name by itself, does not stand alone but is projected by a (good) man. It's therefore chiefly a function of the personality of the carrier. A man of integrity, a man known for honesty, who has won a noble description becomes a good name when he's mentioned.
Thus, a man's goodness and indeed his good name is not basically in his nomenclatural identity. That's entirely derived from actions, the values and the virtues espoused by the individual, who by his actions has consistently caused to be confered deep meaning upon the name he bears, regardless of whether it excites our philosophical, spiritual or sensual adulations.
It is the functionality and the characteristics of the bearer that impassions and feeds the name. By so, it is to understand that a sweet, good name could go sour when mentioned and a terrific, disgusting name could inspire goodness when mentioned; all depending on the attribution and personality of the individual. The man makes and defines the name and not the other way round.
We're are admonished to pursue the good oaths, for it is by our acts and inactions that our names will be verified. The good man makes the good name. A name is good because the man has been known for value and goodness. His name, resultantly becomes synonymous to him. In the same vein, the name is evil because the man that answers it is evil and unworthy of being associated with the sublimation of goodness.
Isn't it said that a good name is better than riches. Then more significantly, that a name is good couldn't have been because it has ordinarily sweet, sexy, philosophical or spiritual etymology. But it is that the name became the individual bearing it, who is good by the reason of the expressions of his personality, his disposition, his character!
Comments
Post a Comment