The study of value, axiology, provides a useful and applicable methodology for teasing out the concepts to include within honor as a comprehensive conceptual category that structures society and accounts for its evolutionary maintenance and revision. At its core, axiology is divided into two main theoretical paradigms: objectivism (“value belongs to objects independent of whether they are desired, enjoyed or valued by people”) and subjectivism (“value arises from the relation between the valuing subject and the value object”).2 It becomes a semantic argument to defend the incommensurability of the paradigms rather than accepting both perspectives as overlapping horizons.3 In an eff ort to provide conceptual clarity and bridge the paradigms, I suggest using the term “quality” to refer to what has previously been called an objective value that, once refl ected upon by a subject, becomes a “value,” which has previously been called a subjective value.