Character and Success

PUBLISHED IN THE “OUTLOOK,” MARCH 31, 1900

PUBLISHED IN THE “OUTLOOK,” MARCH 31, 1900

A year or two ago I was speaking to a famous Yale professor, one of the most noted scholars in the country, and one who is even more than a scholar, because he is in every sense of the word a man. We had been discussing the Yale-Harvard foot-ball teams, and he remarked of a certain player: “I told them not to take him, for he was slack in his studies, and my experience is that, as a rule, the man who is slack in his studies will be slack in his foot-ball work; it is character that counts in both.”

A year or two ago, I was talking with a famous Yale professor, one of the country’s most noted scholars. He was more than a scholar because he was a man in every sense of the word. We had been discussing the Yale and Harvard football teams. He said of a certain player: “I told them not to take him because he was careless about his studies. In my experience, a man who is careless about his studies will usually be careless about football too. Character is what counts in both.”

Bodily vigor is good, and vigor of intellect is even better, but far above both is character. It is true, of course, that a genius may, on certain lines, do more than a brave and manly fellow who is not a genius; and so, in sports, vast physical strength may overcome weakness, even though the puny body may have in it the heart of a lion. But, in the long run, in the great battle of life, no brilliancy of intellect, no perfection of bodily development, will count when weighed in the balance against that assemblage of virtues, active and passive, of moral qualities, which we group together under the name of character; and if between any two contestants, even in college sport or in college work, the difference in character on the right side is as great as the difference of intellect or strength the other way, it is the character side that will win.

Physical vigor is good, and intellectual vigor is even better, but character is far more important than both. Of course, a genius may accomplish more in certain areas than a brave, manly fellow who is not a genius. Likewise, in sports, great physical strength may overcome weakness, even if the weaker person has the heart of a lion. But in the long run, in the great battle of life, neither intellectual brilliance nor perfect physical development can outweigh character. By character, we mean the collection of moral virtues, both active and passive. Suppose two people compete, even in college sports or academic work. One has an advantage in character, and the other has an equally great advantage in intellect or strength. The person with the better character will win.

Of course this does not mean that either intellect or bodily vigor can safely be neglected. On the contrary, it means that both should be developed, and that not the least of the benefits of developing both comes from the indirect effect which this development itself has upon the character. In very rude and ignorant communities all schooling is more or less looked down upon; but there are now very few places indeed in the United States where elementary schooling is not considered a necessity. There are any number of men, however, priding themselves upon being “hard-headed” and “practical,” who sneer at book-learning and at every form of higher education, under the impression that the additional mental culture is at best useless, and is ordinarily harmful in practical life. Not long ago two of the wealthiest men in the United States publicly committed themselves to the proposition that to go to college was a positive disadvantage for a young man who strove for success. Now, of course, the very most successful men we have ever had, men like Lincoln, had no chance to go to college, but did have such indomitable tenacity and such keen appreciation of the value of wisdom that they set to work and learned for themselves far more than they could have been taught in any academy. On the other hand, boys of weak fibre, who go to high school or college instead of going to work after getting through the primary schools, may be seriously damaged instead of benefited. But, as a rule, if the boy has in him the right stuff, it is a great advantage to him should his circumstances be so fortunate as to enable him to get the years of additional mental training. The trouble with the two rich men whose views are above quoted was that, owing largely perhaps to their own defects in early training, they did not know what success really was. Their speeches merely betrayed their own limitations, and did not furnish any argument against education. Success must always include, as its first element, earning a competence for the support of the man himself, and for the bringing up of those dependent upon him. In the vast majority of cases it ought to include financially rather more than this. But the acquisition of wealth is not in the least the only test of success. After a certain amount of wealth has been accumulated, the accumulation of more is of very little consequence indeed from the standpoint of success, as success should be understood both by the community and the individual. Wealthy men who use their wealth aright are a great power for good in the community, and help to upbuild that material national prosperity which must underlie national greatness; but if this were the only kind of success, the nation would be indeed poorly off. Successful statesmen, soldiers, sailors, explorers, historians, poets, and scientific men are also essential to national greatness, and, in fact, very much more essential than any mere successful business man can possibly be. The average man, into whom the average boy develops, is, of course, not going to be a marvel in any line, but, if he only chooses to try, he can be very good in any line, and the chances of his doing good work are immensely increased if he has trained his mind. Of course, if, as a result of his high-school, academy, or college experience, he gets to thinking that the only kind of learning is that to be found in books, he will do very little; but if he keeps his mental balance,—that is, if he shows character,—he will understand both what learning can do and what it can not, and he will be all the better the more he can get.

Of course, this does not mean that either the mind or the body can safely be neglected. On the contrary, both should be developed. One important benefit is the indirect effect that developing them has on character. In very crude and ignorant communities, all schooling is looked down on to some extent. But today, there are very few places in the United States where elementary schooling is not considered necessary. Many men, however, pride themselves on being “hard-headed” and “practical.” They sneer at book learning and every form of higher education. They believe that additional mental training is useless at best and usually harmful in practical life. Not long ago, two of the wealthiest men in the United States publicly declared that college was a real disadvantage for a young man seeking success. Of course, some of our most successful men, such as Lincoln, had no chance to attend college. But they had such determination and such a keen appreciation of wisdom that they set out to educate themselves. They learned far more than any school could have taught them. On the other hand, boys of weak character may be seriously harmed rather than helped by further education. This may happen if they go to high school or college instead of going to work after elementary school. But as a rule, if a boy has the right qualities, additional years of mental training are a great advantage. He is fortunate if his circumstances allow him to get that training. The trouble with the two rich men quoted above was that they did not know what success really meant. This was perhaps largely because of flaws in their own early education. Their speeches revealed only their own limitations. They offered no argument against education. Success must always include, first of all, earning enough to support oneself and raise those who depend on one. In the vast majority of cases, it should also include earning considerably more than that. But wealth is by no means the only measure of success. Once a person has accumulated a certain amount of wealth, getting more matters very little to success. This is true of success as both the community and the individual should understand it. Wealthy men who use their wealth properly are a great force for good in the community. They help build the material prosperity that must support national greatness. But if this were the only kind of success, the nation would be very poorly off. Successful statesmen, soldiers, sailors, explorers, historians, poets, and scientists are also essential to national greatness. In fact, they are far more essential than any successful businessman alone could possibly be. The average boy, when he grows into an average man, will of course not be extraordinary in any field. But if he chooses to try, he can be very good in any field. His chances of doing good work are greatly improved if he has trained his mind. Of course, his education in high school, academy, or college may lead him to think that books contain all learning. If so, he will accomplish very little. But if he keeps his balance, in other words, if he shows character, he will understand what learning can and cannot do. And the more learning he can get, the better off he will be.

A good deal the same thing is true of bodily development. Exactly as one kind of man sneers at college work because he does not think it bears any immediate fruit in money-getting, so another type of man sneers at college sports because he does not see their immediate effect for good in practical life. Of course, if they are carried to an excessive degree, they are altogether bad. It is a good thing for a boy to have captained his school or college eleven, but it is a very bad thing if, twenty years afterward, all that can be said of him is that he has continued to take an interest in foot-ball, base-ball, or boxing, and has with him the memory that he was once captain. A very acute observer has pointed out that, not impossibly, excessive devotion to sports and games has proved a serious detriment in the British army, by leading the officers and even the men to neglect the hard, practical work of their profession for the sake of racing, foot-ball, base-ball, polo, and tennis—until they received a very rude awakening at the hands of the Boers. Of course this means merely that any healthy pursuit can be abused. The student in a college who “crams” in order to stand at the head of his class, and neglects his health and stunts his development by working for high marks, may do himself much damage; but all that he proves is that the abuse of study is wrong. The fact remains that the study itself is essential. So it is with vigorous pastimes. If rowing or foot-ball or base-ball is treated as the end of life by any considerable section of a community, then that community shows itself to be in an unhealthy condition. If treated as it should be,—that is, as good, healthy play,—it is of great benefit, not only to the body, but in its effect upon character. To study hard implies character in the student, and to work hard at a sport which entails severe physical exertion and steady training also implies character.

Much the same is true of physical development. One kind of man mocks college studies because he sees no immediate financial reward. In the same way, another kind mocks college sports because he sees no immediate benefit in practical life. Of course, sports are entirely bad if taken to excess. It is good for a boy to have captained his school or college football team. But suppose that twenty years later, all anyone can say of him is that he still follows football, baseball, or boxing. Suppose, too, that he still carries the memory of having been captain. That is a very bad thing. A very perceptive observer has pointed out that excessive devotion to sports and games may have seriously harmed the British army. It may have led officers and even soldiers to neglect the hard, practical work of their profession. Instead, they pursued racing, football, baseball, polo, and tennis, until the Boers gave them a very rude awakening. Of course, this shows only that any healthy pursuit can be taken to excess. A college student may “cram” to finish at the top of his class. By working for high marks, he may neglect his health, stunt his development, and do himself much harm. But all he proves is that excessive study is wrong. The fact remains that study itself is essential. The same is true of vigorous recreation. If a sizable part of a community treats rowing, football, or baseball as life's purpose, that community is unhealthy. But these sports should be treated as good, healthy play. Then they greatly benefit not only the body but also a person's character. Studying hard shows character in a student. So does working hard at a sport that requires great physical effort and steady training.

All kinds of qualities go to make up character, for, emphatically, the term should include the positive no less than the negative virtues. If we say of a boy or a man, “He is of good character,” we mean that he does not do a great many things that are wrong, and we also mean that he does do a great many things which imply much effort of will and readiness to face what is disagreeable. He must not steal, he must not be intemperate, he must not be vicious in any way; he must not be mean or brutal; he must not bully the weak. In fact, he must refrain from whatever is evil. But besides refraining from evil, he must do good. He must be brave and energetic; he must be resolute and persevering. The Bible always inculcates the need of the positive no less than the negative virtues, although certain people who profess to teach Christianity are apt to dwell wholly on the negative. We are bidden not merely to be harmless as doves, but also as wise as serpents. It is very much easier to carry out the former part of the order than the latter; while, on the other hand, it is of much more importance for the good of mankind that our goodness should be accompanied by wisdom than that we should merely be harmless. If with the serpent wisdom we unite the serpent guile, terrible will be the damage we do; and if, with the best of intentions, we can only manage to deserve the epithet of “harmless,” it is hardly worth while to have lived in the world at all.

All kinds of qualities make up character. The word must include positive virtues as well as negative ones. If we say of a boy or a man, “He is of good character,” we mean two things. He avoids doing many wrong things. He also does many things that require great willpower and a readiness to face unpleasant situations. He must not steal, drink to excess, or be vicious in any way. He must not be mean or brutal, and he must not bully the weak. In fact, he must avoid whatever is evil. But he must also do good. He must be brave and energetic. He must be determined and persistent. The Bible always teaches the need for positive virtues as well as negative ones. Yet some people who claim to teach Christianity focus entirely on the negative ones. We are told to be not only harmless as doves, but also wise as serpents. It is much easier to be harmless than to be wise. Yet for the good of humanity, it is much more important that our goodness be accompanied by wisdom than that we merely be harmless. If we combine the serpent’s wisdom with its cunning, we will do terrible damage. And if, with the best intentions, we can only manage to deserve the label “harmless,” it is hardly worth having lived in the world at all.

Perhaps there is no more important component of character than steadfast resolution. The boy who is going to make a great man, or is going to count in any way in after life, must make up his mind not merely to overcome a thousand obstacles, but to win in spite of a thousand repulses or defeats. He may be able to wrest success along the lines on which he originally started. He may have to try something entirely new. On the one hand, he must not be volatile and irresolute, and, on the other hand, he must not fear to try a new line because he has failed in another. Grant did well as a boy and well as a young man; then came a period of trouble and failure, and then the Civil War and his opportunity; and he grasped it, and rose until his name is among the greatest in our history. Young Lincoln, struggling against incalculable odds, worked his way up, trying one thing and another until he, too, struck out boldly into the turbulent torrent of our national life, at a time when only the boldest and wisest could so carry themselves as to win success and honor; and from the struggle he won both death and honor, and stands for evermore among the greatest of mankind.

Perhaps no part of character is more important than firm determination. A boy who will become a great man, or make a difference in later life, must resolve to overcome a thousand obstacles. He must also resolve to succeed despite a thousand setbacks or defeats. He may be able to succeed on the path he first chose. Or he may have to try something entirely new. He must not be changeable and indecisive. But he must not be afraid to try a new path because he has failed on another. Grant did well as a boy and as a young man. Then came a period of trouble and failure. Then the Civil War gave him an opportunity. He seized it and rose until his name stood among the greatest in our history. Young Lincoln struggled against countless odds and worked his way up, trying one thing after another. He, too, finally plunged boldly into the turbulent current of our national life. At that time, only the boldest and wisest could conduct themselves well enough to win success and honor. In that struggle, he won both death and honor, and he stands forever among the greatest of mankind.

Character is shown in peace no less than in war. As the greatest fertility of invention, the greatest perfection of armament, will not make soldiers out of cowards, so no mental training and no bodily vigor will make a nation great if it lacks the fundamental principles of honesty and moral cleanliness. After the death of Alexander the Great nearly all of the then civilized world was divided among the Greek monarchies ruled by his companions and their successors. This Greek world was very brilliant and very wealthy. It contained haughty military empires, and huge trading cities, under republican government, which attained the highest pitch of commercial and industrial prosperity. Art flourished to an extraordinary degree; science advanced as never before. There were academies for men of letters; there were many orators, many philosophers. Merchants and business men throve apace, and for a long period the Greek soldiers kept the superiority and renown they had won under the mighty conqueror of the East. But the heart of the people was incurably false, incurably treacherous and debased. Almost every statesman had his price, almost every soldier was a mercenary who, for a sufficient inducement, would betray any cause. Moral corruption ate into the whole social and domestic fabric, until, a little more than a century after the death of Alexander, the empire which he had left had become a mere glittering shell, which went down like a house of cards on impact with the Romans; for the Romans, with all their faults, were then a thoroughly manly race—a race of strong, virile character.

Character shows itself in peace just as much as in war. Even the greatest ingenuity and the finest weapons cannot turn cowards into soldiers. In the same way, no amount of mental training or physical strength can make a nation great if it lacks honesty and moral purity. After Alexander the Great died, nearly all the civilized world of the time was divided among Greek monarchies. His companions and their successors ruled them. This Greek world was brilliant and wealthy. It included proud military empires and huge trading cities with republican governments. These cities reached the greatest heights of commercial and industrial prosperity. Art flourished extraordinarily, and science advanced as never before. There were academies for literary men, as well as many orators and philosophers. Merchants and businesspeople prospered rapidly. For a long time, Greek soldiers kept the superiority and fame they had won under the mighty conqueror of the East. But the people were false, treacherous, and debased to the core, beyond any hope of cure. Almost every statesman had his price. Almost every soldier was a mercenary who would betray any cause for enough reward. Moral corruption ate into every part of social and family life. A little more than a century after Alexander’s death, the empire he had left was a mere glittering shell. It collapsed like a house of cards when it met the Romans. For all their faults, the Romans were then a thoroughly manly race, a race of strong, virile character.

Alike for the nation and the individual, the one indispensable requisite is character—character that does and dares as well as endures, character that is active in the performance of virtue no less than firm in the refusal to do aught that is vicious or degraded.

For both the nation and the individual, the one essential requirement is character. It is character that acts and dares as well as endures. It actively does what is right and just as firmly refuses to do anything wicked or degrading.