Today’s post may be obvious to many people out there, but it certainly was never obvious to me. In fact, I’m still pretty confused about the whole thing. But I think, recently, I’ve made some progress in clarifying what it might be all about.

To borrow an idea from linguistics studies, a name “picks out something in the world.” That is, a named object is directly associated with a very specific entity that exists in the world. For example, Donald Trump, the 45th President of the United States, refers directly to one, and only one, individual who currently exists in the world. There has never been any other entity that can occupy this role, and likely never will in the future either. In fact, for this name to be a good name, it must not refer to any other entity. It is a direct reference to exactly one entity.

The first rebuttal to this sort of suggestion is to raise fictional entities. For example, Santa Claus is a name that refers directly to exactly one entity, but that entity does not exist (as far as I know). Thus, the name is still referring to precisely one entity, but the entity in question may or may not actually exist. The name, however, does conjure up an image or idea of who or what the named entity is in my mind upon its usage. So perhaps that is an important feature of a name; the ability of the name to conjure in my mind an idea about a very specific entity that may or may not exist.

There is plenty of study and debate about names and what exactly they are and what they are used for, but I would like to raise another issue that I recently realized about names. I was considering aristocracy and how it works. It seemed to me that aristocracy is deeply rooted in names, and in inter-generational cooperation. This is what I want to discuss today.

First I need to make clear what I understand to be aristocracy. Definitions given in various dictionaries will make reference to an upper class of people in society, and perhaps that might be true, but I don’t think this tells us the whole story. I don’t think society has classes, and aristocracy is simply what we use to refer to the group that composes the upper class. I actually think it might work in reverse; that those who become aristocrats generate an upper class in society by the nature of their aristocracy. That is, this idea of an upper class, a group of people in society that are in some way above others, is not some natural state of groups of people, but an interpretation of how the groups are subdivided. That is, all those who are aristocrats in a group will generate the upper class. This is a fine distinction, and likely still confusing, so I will continue and try to clarify as I go.

What I think makes an individual an aristocrat is their name. In particular, their family name. In the part of the world where I exist, individuals have at least two names: their given name or names, and their family name. If we again talk about Donald Trump, Donald is the individual’s given name, likely picked out and assigned by their parents at birth. Trump, on the other hand, is the family name, a name that has been passed down through several generations and is assigned to this new generation of individual. Thus, the name Donald Trump describes a number of features of this individual. In part, this individual can be identified by the name Donald, perhaps used to get his attention across a crowded room. In part, this individual is part of a cooperative group of multi-generational individuals collectively known as Trumps. The name, in this case, is providing a lot more information than may have been clear at first glance.

This is where the potential for aristocracy enters into the discussion. The given names are important in identifying the individual in day-to-day life, but it is this family name that provides some indication of class or importance. To be a Trump, for example, suggests you have money, and may command some respect (though perhaps not as much now due to recent events, but I’m getting ahead of myself). To be a Trump is to be a part of an inter-generational group of individuals who have, over time, acquired property and wealth, power and recognition. But what I think is the most important feature that accompanies this family name is reputation.

I believe that reputation is the key feature of a name, especially a family name. It is the reputation that allows for the ease of acquisition of assets, the commanding of respect, and even the possible safety of walking down the street. Furthermore, it is the recognition of that name that provides all these benefits. If everyone knows that this particular individual is a Trump, then they will treat that individual with all the benefits they believe a Trump is due.

Of course, this can also work against the individual, what we might call notoriety. While a family name might suggest the individual ought to be regarded in a positive fashion, it can just as easily suggest the opposite. A name like Hitler often evokes great negativity from people, and so it is a poor choice of a name for any child (at least in this part of the world). Here we have an example of a name that is frequently associated with evil, making the individual possessing such a name likely finding themselves very unsafe while walking the street.

I find it quite interesting how much weight a name seems to have on directing the path individuals end up on. To try and make this very clear, my name is significant not because I have any say in how I am treated, but because of everyone around me and how they decide to treat me. My fate, it seems, is in the hands of everyone around me.

My parents are individuals who have names and reputations. They decide upon giving me a name when I am born, and I also inherit their name as a part of my name. In that I inherit their name, I inherit their reputation. During the course of my life, my available options are a direct reflection of the reputation I have inherited. Some options are available to me due to my name, while other options are not available to me for the same reason.

There is one other piece of this puzzle I must now discuss. I begin with my parents’ reputation, but as I live my life, I acquire my own reputation as well. Perhaps through my deeds and actions, I might improve (or diminish) my reputation among those around me. With great deeds and actions, I may gain trust and respect of my community. Perhaps due to hard work, I acquire wealth and allies to make my life more luxurious. If I am successful in doing these things, improving my reputation, then perhaps by the time I am ready to produce my own offspring, I can impart to them a better reputation than what was given to me. This, I believe, is where aristocracy comes from.

Through inter-generational cooperation, whereby each individual of each generation (frequently referred to as a bloodline) conduct themselves in such a manner that they can continue to increase their collective wealth and power, commanding increasing amounts of respect, eventually an individual will be born with the accumulated efforts of their ancestors to become a very powerful individual, even before they learn to walk. This is an aristocrat.

Unfortunately, this all works in reverse as well. If the inter-generational cooperation is lacking, or worse yet, each generation continues to make choices and follow a path of notoriety, the obstacles presented to the resultant individual will most definitely challenge them to accomplish anything in the world. In fact, such an individual is likely to be scorned and mistreated, again before they even learn to walk.

I think this paints a pretty important picture about our world and how power exists. It suggests that no individual rises or falls entirely alone. Even if you isolate yourself from all of society, trying desperately to escape all this reputation stuff, you will still have had parents, who themselves had parents, and so on. You will always be influenced by your own ancestors, on some level. It may not be through some mystical energy or ritualistic psionic power necessarily, but the choices of your ancestors reflects upon you and creates your opportunities in the world.

The hardest part of all this for me is the recognition that I cannot become an aristocrat. I have to be born into aristocracy. As I was not born into aristocracy, I can never become an aristocrat. No matter how hard I work, no matter how many good deeds I do, I will never be. The best I could possibly hope to do is increase my own reputation as much as I can, with the sincere hope to impart aristocracy to my own children.