anotherfailure

Here is a mini-essay that I have written about honesty. I look at it not so much as a moral question, but instead as a question of utility. Please tell me what you think about it, if you would.

Honesty
Looking at the current state of the world, it is apparent that things have gone wrong. One might even say that things have been irreversibly changed for the worse. However, the same social problems that we experience nowadays have been dealt with ever since humankind gained sentience. The same dysfunctions of the human nervous system were manifesting themselves during the agricultural revolution as are being battled today. The numerous relationship problems that we encounter are attributed to multifarious psychological conditions. This is the wrong approach to the problem, I contend. Indeed, the only problem that I see with human relations is the lack of honesty we show towards one another.
By "honesty", however, I am not necessarily implying a moral imperative. Most cultures place honesty in a high position within their respective value systems. This is a natural reaction to the realization by philosophers and leaders that honesty was, and is, pragmatically, the only way of keeping the fabric of society intact. If no one felt compelled to be honest at all, virtually all communication and human relations would lose meaning. Indeed, honesty seems almost an innate characteristic in the human psyche; ie. it is implicit in us to maintain order and increase survivability, and we instinctually know honesty is the final and ultimate means toward this end. Therefore, I categorize honesty simply as the best technique of avoiding pain and keeping order. Ethics and morality have no place in it.
Throughout time, the basic human need for survival has been met in many ways. The ways in which we meet our respective needs are at the core of honesty. If a man is marooned on a desert island, all things lose importance except for those which further his attempt to survive; ie. he will not be worried about escaping until he has found immediate safety. This is the epitome of honesty; it is the point at which all extraneous variables are eliminated and the animal drive for life becomes key. In this mode of thought, the superficial issues of day to day life are discarded, and the individual has no choice but to be brutally honest with himself. It is the purest form of human existance. And it is the place to which we must return if we ever hope to save ourselves.
I contend that all social problems can be solved through simple, clean honesty. Just be straight with people. Tell them how you feel. Although no one can completely ascertain your emotional status, it is important that people understand that their own situation is at least analogous to your own. Presently, this is the only way that we humans can really communicate with one another at a level deeper than the aesthetic. And this kind of communication is, of course, the only way to resolve certain deep emotional conflicts. Until the information age is in full swing, and the human race becomes a single organism, this is the best we can do. Therefore, my goal is to develop my social awareness to the point of near caveman levels, while maintaining the sentience of modern man. This, as I see it, is the only way to completely prevent emotional trauma and problems.

Blake

Hi there, anotherfailure. I just wanted to let you know that I'm thinking about your post, though I'm not sure how to articulate my response yet.

Thanks, Blake

echidna

A few thoughts ...
I can’t agree with this as a blanket statement. Such generalisations need strong qualification since by many objective measures things are actually better (believe it or not) than they were a few decades ago.
Unfortunately honesty alone is not sufficient. Firstly to be constructive, presumably there must be a positive thread to those interpersonal attitudes. For example, “I think you’re a dickhead & if you died tomorrow I’d laugh”, might be perfectly honest, but hardly constructive. Many times we repress our true feelings because to express the truth would only be further destructive.

Secondly one must also be able to assure the perfect, or at least achieving very good empathy with that other person. Language, gestures, there are so many ways to misinterpret a message. This is no easy task & is why close friendships are usually so rare, that real interpersonal understanding is something which usually takes years and even then is far from perfect.

Thirdly, perfect honesty requires 2-way trust and reciprocation. Please don’t be offended if I don’t disclose my bank details to you.
Please, save us from this. Personally I’m quite attached to my individuality, for better or worse.

sweep

perhaps 'constructs' are the bridge between honesty and truth. So, in order to express the truth we have to honest with ourself, as in this example. I know that it takes two to tango, and dickheadedness is not a phenomenon unto itself.

Say the guy where I work is calling me a bitch and a slag; cursing and exhibiting vulgarity. first I have to construe him as 'clean' before I can get anywhere close to the truth. Offering my best, I bring the best out in others, since in my experience, when you treat people like shit they become so. Not that I have to talk to anyone only that if I have to deal with something, better to 'shape it' (work with it) than to shun, or to sweep it under the carpet. laziness is one of the biggest problems I see most of the time.

another failure stated:

anotherfailure

Actually, I believe that as the human race grows larger, the focus on individuals, and thus the self actualization of each person, decreases in value. There's no way for me to offer concrete evidence of this, but it seems to be at least mathematically valid. All parts of a system being equal (like humans), the larger the number of parts, the less important each part is. A stack of two bricks is dependent on each brick. But a larger stack can sacrifice a few bricks and remain standing.

Quote:

Unfortunately honesty alone is not sufficient. Firstly to be constructive, presumably there must be a positive thread to those interpersonal attitudes. For example, “I think you’re a dickhead & if you died tomorrow I’d laugh”, might be perfectly honest, but hardly constructive. Many times we repress our true feelings because to express the truth would only be further destructive.

I am not talking at all about being constructive. All I care about is the individual. Also, that comment cannot be proven to not be constructive. If you call me a dickhead, this may lead to my examination of my bad habits, ie. what makes me a dickhead, and this may lead to me reforming and becoming a more constructive member of society. I believe that, because truth is relative, its constructive or destructive nature depends on how you take it.

Quote:

Secondly one must also be able to assure the perfect, or at least achieving very good empathy with that other person. Language, gestures, there are so many ways to misinterpret a message. This is no easy task & is why close friendships are usually so rare, that real interpersonal understanding is something which usually takes years and even then is far from perfect.

Empathy, I contend, is achieved through honesty. True empathy, anyhow. And if the relationship breaks up because of the honesty, then true empathy was not possible in the first place. By being completely honest and saying what we mean, we are able to avoid misinterpretations to the greatest extent possible.

Quote:

Thirdly, perfect honesty requires 2-way trust and reciprocation. Please don’t be offended if I don’t disclose my bank details to you.

Your bank details may have nothing to do with your being honest to me. If this conversation has no bearing on your bank details, how are you dishonest by not bringing them up? Don't mistake honesty for achieving a single organism between two or more minds. This is the extreme of involuntary honesty, and is not what I advocate.

Quote:

Please, save us from this. Personally I’m quite attached to my individuality, for better or worse.

How do you know you would not prefer complete amalgamization over individuality? You have no basis for comparison.

Sabine Grant

[QUOTE]Originally posted by anotherfailure
I am not talking at all about being constructive. All I care about is the individual. Also, that comment cannot be proven to not be constructive. If you call me a dickhead, this may lead to my examination of my bad habits, ie. what makes me a dickhead, and this may lead to me reforming and becoming a more constructive member of society. I believe that, because truth is relative, its constructive or destructive nature depends on how you take it.
QUOTE]
Hello Anotherfailure... the principle you presented here which may lead to self reforming would fail with children. I cannot think of any modern pedagogy which encourages any parent to use the "dickhead" principle. There are words that heal and words that hurt. IMO healing honesty is the individual goal.

The nature of a careless " hey little dickhead" thrown by mom or dad to a 5 year old remains destructive to the 5 year old no matter how he or she is supposed to take it.

Honesty IMO has no value in society if it promotes actions and words which do not contribute to the betterment of oneself and others. How can the individual "honestly" have a sense of any accomplishment as he or she contemplates the negative consequences of their words or actions on another individual?
If I follow your reasoning... should there be no difference in the way a physician gives a terminal diagnosis to an anxious patient?
( which is NOT a relative truth but a reality).

It is certainly easier to make a blunt and bold statement to another individual than it is to think of ways to present that statement so it will edify.

beastmaster

I agree that honesty should be the default rule.

But sometimes dishonesty is the best policy. Why tell a shameful, hurtful truth when nothing can be done? And isn't it a little condescending to treat people with your "honest opinion" all the time? Oh, thank you, font of wisdom.

Moreover, empirical evidence suggests that dishonesty is unavoidable, since billions of people lie every day, and a lot of humor fudges the line between honesty and dishonesty.

The trick is developing an ethic that tells us when it is appropriate to lie vs. tell the truth.

99Percent

You can't.

The only situation that lying could be appriopiate if you were in a state of violence, ie, your life or the lives of others is immediately at stake. But in this case you have no option, no free will, so morality is a moot point.

Our consciousness is dependant on the truth. The moment you intentionally lie, for whatever reason or gain, you are undermining your own consciousness and that of others. That is why intentional lying is the ultimate immoral act - its a denial of your own existence and that of others.

If everyone were more honest, specially with themselves, we would definitely live in a better world.

anotherfailure

If you choose to be hurt by someone who is calling you a dickhead, it is your own fault. I would take it to mean that they find some quality or behavior of mine undesirable, and from there I would decide if the person means enough to me to make me change that quality or behavior in order to appease them. This is, of course, assuming that there is a reason that I am being called a dickhead, and that it is not a random name calling.
No, actually, if the word is used from infancy, and therefore has no connotation, the child will accept it as normal. Further, if the word is simply used, as I contend, as a way of letting the child know that their behavior is unacceptable, there should be no problem. You talk to your children about acceptable and unacceptable behavior, correct? So you should have no problem calling them dickheads, provided the connotation of the word has been explained to them.
I do not advocate that we should ever care about anyone else more than we care about ourselves. We should care about them equally as much. And since we have no choice but to be honest with ourselves, it follows that we should be completely honest to our fellow humans. Bullshitting people so that they feel better about themselves hurts them in the long run. If you see a dysfunctional behavior in someone, let them know, so that they can maybe try to correct it before it embeds itself further in their psyche. Being honest with people is truly the only option if you really care about them.
Yes. I would rather be told to my face that I am going to die within a few weeks, so that I may try to come to terms with it and to enjoy my last moments on earth than have some doctor trying to skirt the issue and make me feel better about it. It is mine to deal with, and he is in the way of that if he is being dishonest with me.
Presenting a statement in any other light than the one in which it truly resides is dishonest, and, according to me, will lead to nothing but more trouble. It is always best to bluntly state your feelings, when they are applicable.

Oh, and it's 'anotherfailure', not 'Anotherfailure'.

anotherfailure

My essay dealt with the utility of honesty. If nothing can be gleaned from it, there is no reason to say anything at all. However, if there is some dilemma or problem being resolved, honesty will always be best, because it is the only way we can truly confront the problem and resolve it.
Actually, I would think that dishonesty would be the more condescending route. To think that you can't be bothered to lower yourself to my level by telling me the truth. If you think I can't handle it, you are being condescending.
This has no place in the argument whatsoever; just because people kill others every day, does that mean we should stop trying to curb the murder rate? Also, explain the humor part. I don't follow.
I say there is no such ethic, as lying always furthers the problem being resolved. Honesty confronts the problem from the get go and resolves it as soon as possible, thereby eliminating the chance for further problems to arise.