A READER ASKS whether manners, as described in my JWR column (see next post), are the same as the “sensitivity” we’re constantly called to show one another. While sensitivity to others is better than insensitivity to same, I think there are three key differences between the concept of sensitivity and the concept of manners: 1) Focusing on others’ sensitivities tempts other people to thin their own skins–to cultivate their own sensitivities, to scrutinize every comment for a hidden insult, to refuse to interpret statements and actions charitably. Manners, on the other hand, require that we try to give other people the benefit of the doubt.

2) Focusing on sensitivity means focusing on something that varies widely from person to person. Manners become relative–there’s no standard by which we can say, “Look, Jane really shouldn’t have acted so sensitive–she should have given Lisa the benefit of the doubt.” And the person seeking to be sensitive has to guess and psychoanalyze to try to figure out what would irritate others, what would be seen as insensitive, which is often extremely difficult and leads to resentment on both sides. Manners offer a flexible, but not totally relative or subjective, standard.

3) Sensitivity is an emotion. Requiring an emotional response is a lot harsher than requiring a habit or a practice! Manners just require that we act right no matter how we feel. It doesn’t matter if I feel decidedly insensitive to your needs–I have to respect them anyway. Manners, like Christian ethics, focus on actions not feelings, even though we know that habits help condition our feelings.