Category: Honesty

Introduction

The history of modern states was either formed through conquest or imperialism. For example, many states in Africa came as a result of European expansionism. The main purpose of the conquest was political, economic, or social self-empowerment by the conquering states. History has recorded the worlds most powerful empires such as Roman Empire, French empire to have expanded their territories through military capability. Powerful political figures such as Napoleon, Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great possessed various political skills and mechanisms that enabled them to maintain their empires and remain in power. Many scholars and philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, and Niccolo Machiavelli studied or wrote on many issues concerning how rulers should rule their subjects. This paper is going to look at how Machiavelli gives numerous examples of flexible terms of compassion, honesty, and liberality in his demonstration of amorality as a necessity to be a successful prince. The examples of the flexibility given will demonstrate the inappropriateness nature of the examples in the role of being an effective ruler.

His views on compassion

The idea of flexibility uses the term compassion by Machiavelli who, through his experience in the management of the government, came up with controversial political ideas. He believed that effective leaders should be uncompassionate if they have to rule and maintain political power. He believed that people only became good when mistreated and that doing good to people yields low returns due to the complexity of human nature. As a result, he advised that for a leader to be effective in his governance, he should only embrace those ideas that are of his interest and not mind about other peoples interests (King 36).

Despite this approach, Machiavelli does not advocate for the mistreatment of subjects by leaders. This is especially true for those who uphold the principle of democracy in their system of government. As it is known, the principles of democracy embrace the issues of freedom of speech, equality, justice, and respect of human rights. Thus, he purports that an effective leader should not embrace a dictatorial form of governance. Such a dictatorial form of government will violate human rights and fundamental freedoms of the citizens, therefore, discouraging competitive politics in the state. Therefore leaders will become ineffective because the principles of good governance will be undermined in the sense that morality will not be the order of the day hence poor leadership leading to failed states (Skinner 68).

His views on honesty

Moreover, Machiavelli argued that political leaders were not supposed to be honest in the management of their government affairs. This clearly showed that for one to be effective he should never respect the promises he pledged to the electorate. Such a political leader who is not honest should not lack a strong reason as for why they did so and Machiavelli gave his famous quote to back the statement which states that A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise (King 35). Thus Machiavelli clearly showed that the political leaders were needed to possess some leadership qualities to handle some political situations for them to remain in political power.

But he further contravenes his statement by saying that having such qualities and practicing them is harmful to the political leader. Thus he advises the leaders to do the contrary of what is required of them. For example, a political leader may not condone corruption but may defend his closest political ally implicated in the corruption scandal in the government. Therefore those leaders who embrace this notion compromise the principles of good governance thus becoming ineffective in their political leadership. This goes against the governance ethics of a government that is focused on good governance. Machiavelli further discourages political leaders from honoring the words of their mouth since such words would be measured from issues to do with justice, humanity, sincerity, religious morality by the people who are keen on following what the political leadership stated (Femia 63).

Machiavelli advised that for a political leader to be effective, he should concentrate on conquering and maintaining the new territories no matter what means he uses. This can bring honor to him by the people or add ranks in his leadership and this is highly supported by his famous quote which went like this It is not titles that honor men, but men that honor titles (Bernad 26). He gave an example of a prince who preached the issue of peace and humanity but he never upheld what he was saying and in the end, he was a public enemy. This principle becomes questionable. In contemporary society, political leaders need to uphold ethics of governance such as respecting the supreme law of the land and serving the citizens who elected them. The political leaders should be of high integrity that should address the issues affecting the lives of the people who elected them without undermining the matters of national interest for their selfish industry. This can be achieved by using the right means to achieve the result without compromising the moral fabric of society. From these those leaders who may usher in the views of the Machiavellian political thinking will become inappropriate in their leadership bearing in mind that the modern world is politically cultured (Bernad 27).

His views on liberality

Finally, the flexible use of the term liberality by Machiavelli by the prince thought that for leaders to sustain their government, some liberal economic structures must be set up. He was of the view that for the government to be maintained, leaders should pave way for maintaining government expenditure. Consequently, he proposed that when the economy is shaky and weak, political rulers should not overtax the subjects beyond their capacity. He further states that as the subjects improve their economic condition taxes should be raised accordingly to enable the government to maintain the heavy expenditure associated with the maintenance of large armies like those of the Roman Empire under Emperor Julius Caesar. He stated that a prince who was too liberal on his subjects and collected low taxes perished during the war period because of inadequate funds to maintain government expenditure and maintaining the armies. Such a prince failed in his roles as an effective leader and he gives us an example of Pope Julius II who never taxed his subjects and failed militarily when he declared war on the king of France. As if not enough Pope Julius campaigned without taxing the people which also forced him To reduce the expenditure of his papacy until he was aided by the king of Spain. Machiavelli championed that the prince need to tax his citizen to protect himself from poverty. If political leaders embrace to a greater extent the views of Machiavelli concerning the tax issue without bearing in mind the economic status they may increase poverty to the masses due to over taxation. Also, they may become too corrupt hence misusing the public resources meant to develop the economy especially if the leaders have selfish interests. The leaders may end up burdening the public through heavy tax to fund their political campaigns to remain in power. The fear of poverty by the political leaders in the public may lead them into corrupt deals and this leads to inappropriate leaders who are not effective (Femia 43).

Conclusion

In conclusion, if leaders were to embrace the Machiavellian school of thought as has been discussed in the paper above, morality would be at peril. To a large extent, Machiavellian views cause controversy hence his flexible use of the terms such as honesty, liberality, and compassion propagate amorality. Therefore if leaders were to become effective, they should turn a blind eye to his views.

Works Cited

Bernad, John. Why Machiavelli Matters: A Guide to Citizenship in a Democracy. New York: Praeger, 2008. Print.

Femia, Joseph. Machiavelli Revisited. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2004. print.

King, Ross. Machiavelli: Philosopher of Power. New York: Harper Collins, 2004. print.

Skinner, Quentin. Visions of Politics, Volume II: Renaissance Virtues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. print.

Canadian literary culture is considered to be rich and famous around the world; and in spite of the fact that some works were sold in a few copies only, their significance and their necessity is quite noticeable nowadays. As for Me and My House is certainly one of the most distinctive ever to come out of Canada (Stouck 27).

Its author, Sinclair Ross, made a wonderful attempt to describe social, natural, and even spiritual forces, which were able to destroy marriage. The work is based on the notes, which were made by Mrs. Bentley in her diary, so, Mrs. Bentley performs two functions in the story: as one of the major characters and as the narrator of the story.

The peculiarity of this story is ambiguous approach of Mrs. Bentley to her life, her relations with her husband, and to her role in the small town.

While telling the story, its narrator, Mrs. Bentley, cannot be regarded as a reliable and honest source of information because of three reasons: first, she is unfair and dishonest to herself, second, she tries to hide the lack of love in her life by means of needs for some material issues, and finally, the majority of her actions are aimed at clearing up or proving something but not at achieving certain satisfaction and enjoyment.

Each literary work has its own significance for many people: for the author, critics, readers, and even for some other writers. As for Me and My House is the story that combines several rather important for this life issues: the desire to be a hero for the others and for yourself, the ability to maintain family relations safe and sound, passion to new people of the opposite sex, fleetingness of personal desires, and failure of own dreams because of personal laziness. Rosss novel under consideration is a unique collection of everyday life of the family with its own demands, needs, and opportunities.

The problems of the relations between the main characters, the Bentleys, are grounded on their own inner conflicts with each other. During their lives, they have to make certain decision, have to sacrifice own dreams, and have to think over their dreams, taking into consideration current conditions and abilities. All these numerous sacrifices have a considerable impact on Mr. and Mrs. Bentleys relations with other people and with each other. &just two people in the house.

They become sensitive to each other a sullen or irritable mood always communicates itself (Ross 19). The beginning of the story provides the reader with an opportunity to guess that Mrs. Bentley is not satisfied with her role of the ministers wife. In spite of the fact that she has already left too many things and people in her life, she still regrets about them and always has something to blame on or just take offence at her husband.

As a rule, in order to present a sensitive and captivating story, the narrator has to correspond to certain standards. This correspondence should help the narrator to attract readers attention, to convince the reader about his/her personal opportunities and thoughts, and to make the reader believe in everything that is told by the narrator.

In the book As for Me and My House, Mrs. Bentley performs the role of the narrator, however, her own uncertainty and discontent of the world she lives in make the reader and me personally doubt in her sincerity and honesty. Yes, her living conditions and earnings are good enough in order to eat, drink, and wear everything she wants.

But still, I cannot believe that she really enjoys such opportunities. The town seems huddle together, cowering on a high, tiny perch, afraid to move less it topple into the wind& Its the disordered house and the bare walls that depress me (Ross 4). She tries to persuade everyone around that her position and her life are really great.

Can it be possible that all her thoughts and words in the diary are really true? She is so upset with everything that around her, but still she does not have enough powers and enough desire to leave everything up or at least change something. If she is so unfair and so dishonest to people around, whether she can be truly honest to herself and to us, her readers. Such variety of questions makes me doubt about her honesty, her reliability, and even her intentions.

One of the cherished dreams of each woman is to be loved and love in return. In the story, the main character is deprived of the opportunity to enjoy her emotions and the feelings of her husband to herself. Mrs. Bentley admits that it is better for a while to walk my spirits back (Ross 36).

She makes numerous attempts to run far away from her own house in order to find some support and some care, but the town she lives in cannot provide her with such a chance, this is why she has nothing to do but come back home and continue her daily routines.

This woman has so many thoughts, doubts, and tears inside, and, at the same time, she lives so close to her chosen man, and he does notice nothing. Maybe, the major point still lies in Mrs. Bentleys attitude to people around her, in Mrs. Bentleys dishonesty to these people, and in Mrs. Bentley inability to represent her discontent in a proper way.

These inabilities of a woman to represent her wishes and demands may negatively reflect on her disabilities to introduce the material to other people as a narrator. This very point may serve as one more reason to doubt in narrators honesty while telling this story.

Of course, everybody lies; but these lies should be perfectly covered, so that a person can hardly guess about false information. In the story, the reader comprehends from the very beginning how crucial the role of the narrator is; and almost from the very beginning, unreliability of this narrator is observed.

The last point that tells a lot about the nature of the narrator and her abilities to describe the events is all about irony that is so perfectly used in the story. Friendship that happens between Mrs. Bentley and Judith is a good example of how irony influences the perception of the story. I think Im going to like Judith (Ross 16)  the narrator cannot even guess how captivating the development of the events could be.

First of all, Mr. Bentley was attracted by Judith, and Mrs. Bentley was able to catch this honey couple, and secondly, Judith was the woman, who left her child to the Bentleys before her death, and this way, she helped to realize this familys cherished dream. I cannot believe that Mrs. Bentley has positive attitude to Judith all the time: her desire to discover something wrong about this person makes her forget about personal life and concentrate more on Judiths life and preferences.

However, Mrs. Bentley does not make a hint on such goals and continue to admire Judith style of life. On my opinion, the character of Mrs. Bentley may be regarded in two different ways. On the one realistic way, the actions and thought of Mrs. Bentley are rather negative and dishonest to other characters and to the reader.

On the other symbolic way, Mrs. Bentley looks differently and even a bit pity. She may seem stupid, corrupt, and confused. These qualities can easily make her judgments wrong and unfair. And if her judgments are wrong, she cannot be a reliable and honest narrator, because inner doubts and uncertainty confuse the narrator and make her weak in the eyes of the reader.

In general, As for Me and My House is the story about relations and the ability to trust people around. Mrs. Bentley serves as a good example of a person, who faces many challenges while judging people because of own uncertainty and fears. Telling the truth, it is a bit useless to criticize Mrs. Bentley style of writing and its content, because it is just a diary, the reader can read aloud.

There are no concrete rules, which prove that the writer has to present reliable facts. It is a god chance to analyze the condition of the main character, her emotions, and attitude to different situations and different people. This story helps to notice the weaknesses of the woman and learn on her mistakes in order to make own life better and more successful.

Works Cited

Ross, Sinclair and Kroetsch, Robert. As for Me and My House. Toronto, Ontario: McClelland & Stewart Ltd, 2008. Print.

Stouck, David. Sinclair Rosss As for Me and My House: Five Decades of Criticism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1991. Print.

Introduction

Academic dishonesty encompasses a collection of purposeful but intolerable behaviors that are in opposition to the scholastic rules and regulations of any institution or a given course policy well affirmed in its course outline (Tadesse and Getachew, 2009).

It covers three broad areas: writing, miscellaneous group and use of visual or oral communication methods. Miscellaneous method involves the use of programs gadgets like calculators, mobile phones, hiding books and lecture notes in toilets.

Writing methods cover the use of copy notes, writing on individuals body, clothes and other hard objects while visual method include: copying of other students assignments or works, requesting for answers from other students and having a fake student write your exam.

However, plagiarism is the common most form of academic dishonesty while exam cheating being the least in rating. Dishonesty devalues educational standards, lowers learners individual identity, universitys reputation, mission and its offered qualification as educational validity depends on truth and principle of equity.

Trends, historical precedence

Since its first evidence in 1940, academic dishonesty has since gained a lot of attention. Nevertheless, the complexity of academic dishonesty has since increased and shortchanged many institutions and researchers. According to McCabe 2005, the percentage of students reported of not being allowed to work in partnership increased from 1963 levels of 11 percent to 49 percent in 1993.

He concluded that there was faculty reluctance in following the institutional policies which they claimed on no enough time and effort, tedious and challenging tasks in its documentation, individual resistance to official penalties, and perspicacity of the faculty becoming the defendant as an alternative to the concerned students.

He concluded that academic dishonesty is on the rise and students perceived that most institutions and faculties had failed to institute a strong culture of integrity. It can, therefore, be concluded that cheating rate ranges between 60-80 percent with most American students both in high school and mid-level colleges admitting that cheating is their usual practice. In fact, McCabe acknowledges that over 75 percent of college students have cheated at least once in their education lifetime; nevertheless, more than a half does not consider it as wrongdoing.

In fact, one online term paper writing center received over 80,000 clients per day (The Center for Academic Integrity, 1999). It can clearly be concluded that this device is at the pick and will continue to increase to eternity. At Simon Fraser University, academic integrity is considered a serious issue and result in expulsion of the concerned student.

The institutional strategy in promotion of academic integrity is well in grinned in the university code of academic integrity and good behavior, university board on student discipline, senate committee on disciplinary appeals, principles and procedures for student disciplines.

These values support this university mission of providing quality education, promotion of scientific progress and as a foundation for vibrant academic life within and after the college (The Center for Academic Integrity, 1999).

Literature review

In Ethiopia, Tadesse and Getachew, 2009 on analyzing faculties perception and Responses to Academic Dishonesty acknowledged that even though the rules were very clear on dishonesty, students still involve themselves in cheating. In Addis Ababa University, the control measures in handbook included: written reprimand, detection and by instructor and finally probation and suspension while in Jemma University only simple warning, denial of total marks and expulsion was recommended.

They concluded that teachers knowledge of the institution academic rules and regulations, failure to discuss course policies, recognition of effectiveness of rules enforcement, cruelty of penalties for violation and low levels of awareness of incidences of academic dishonesty were the major factors contributing to this menace.

To alleviate this menace, they recommended a strict enforcement of rules and regulation, improved communication of these rules, serious penalties on victims, education structures quality improvement and finally providing tutorial services to students.

Additionally, they recommended that academic rules and regulation of any institutions be revised to be more reactive, increase the level of education for academic staff and students. Finally, faculty administrators should be more responsible with clear communication of rules and standards of academic conduct.

The changing job market and stiff competition for limited vacancies is a strain on graduate students performance. These pressures make students to resort to unethical behaviors like cheating. McCabe, Trevino and Butterfield 2001 on a study of academic cheating amongst the U.S. institutions acknowledged that the prevalence of cheating was greater now than 30 years ago.

They suggested that both individual and contextual factors were the major influencers of cheating. However, contextual factors like students perceptions on their peers behavior was rated the topmost influencing factor. Moreover, they noticed that institutions academic integrity programs and policies like honor codes also had a significant influence on students behavior.

They recommended a dialogue between students and academic staff and during such meetings, the contents of code rules and regulations be revisited, excellent interworking relationship between faculties and academic unions and strong messages be sent to student concerning the consequences of cheating.

Information technology has revolutionized education system through its distance learning initiatives. These initiatives have improved financial and infrastructural capabilities of most academic institutions in the areas like classroom allocation, parking, and faculty utilization.

To students, online classes offer minimal travel time wastages, greater flexibility and enjoy education at the comfort of their homes without any geographical hindrance. However, Lanier, 2006 on a study to determine whether previous studies of cheating can foretell who will cheat in the online class observed that cheating was a common practice in online classes than in traditional classroom environment.

He observed that online education was gaining more attention due to its cost-saving function and improved access by target population. Secondly, constrained budgets and local needs facilitate decision to increase on line investment in education. However, quality of education was the least considered of all the factors.

The common models of online delivery include: a videotape method and interactive television coupled with web-based instructions. The classes are of the two types: web-based where internet is used and secondly a mix media which requires class attendance added to an online instruction.

He, therefore, concluded that gender, age of students, race and ethnicity, the GPA levels and type of course whether social science of not of students were the main factors affecting cheating levels in institutions. He added that to curb cheating, apprehension and deterrence were necessary. In addition, researchers should increase explanatory variables to gain correct prediction and explanation on academic dishonesty.

Academic integrity is grounded on the principle of honesty, fairness, trust, responsibility and respect. Several universities build on cultures supporting guanine research and teaching.

According to Camilla and Hai-Jew 2009 on a study of Issues of Academic Integrity at Kansas State University noted that the university has honor code supported by the K-State Honor and Integrity System, a clear student judiciary system, and an integrity course for students involved in the act.

They noted that academic identity was essential to learners identity, university mission achievement, reputation and the qualification it offers to its learners. They accepted that causal factors of democracy can best be understood from two perspectives: external and internal factors.

They also noted that the use of multimedia was influential in increasing students participation in this online exercise. They recommended that such initiatives are essential to universities approach to curtailing academic dishonesty, thereby increasing the learning processes.

References

Camilla, J. and Hai-Jew, S. (2009). Issues of Academic Integrity: An Online Course for Students Addressing Academic Dishonesty. Web.

Lanier, M. M. (2006). Academic integrity and distance learning. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, vol. 17(2). Web.

McCabe, D. L. (2005). It takes a village: Academic dishonesty and educational opportunity. Liberal Education, Summer/Fall.

McCabe, D. L., Trevino L. K. and Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics and Behavior, vol.11 (3): pp. 219232. Web.

Tadesse, T. and Getachew, K. (2009). Faculties perception and responses to academic dishonesty of undergraduate students in education, business and economics. Ethiopian Journal of Education and Science, vol. 4 (2). Web.

The Center for Academic Integrity. (1999). The Fundamental Values of academic integrity. Web.

Introduction

In this research paper, I have selected honesty as my topic of discussion. I chose honesty due to the importance of this virtue in our daily lives, both in and out of school. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines honesty as an uprightness of character or deeds or observance of the laid regulations (Merriam-Webster, 2011). The following questions will be vital in having a deeper understanding of this important virtue.

• What is the importance of honesty in our daily lives?
• Is honesty intrinsic or acquired?
• If honesty is acquired, how then can we acquire it?
• Why do most people advocate for honesty, yet few practice it?
• Can we change the current state of dishonesty?

Honesty is the recognition of the fact that insincerity in action, deeds or utterance is dissolute, that love, fame, or material wealth received through fraud has no value, and that an attempt to obtain a value through insincere means is not morally right. It refers to an aspect of moral character and signifies positive, moral traits that include integrity, truthfulness, and sincerity along with the lack of deceit and theft. The concept of honesty is applicable in all facets of our lives. For example, while we are in school, it is vital that we exhibit honesty in all academic and non-academic activities, lack of which can lead to penalties such as deduction of marks or a suspension from school. We must strive to embrace honesty despite the consequences, as this can be beneficial in the long-term.

Acquired or Intrinsic?

Behavioral studies show traits such as honesty, laziness, courage or humility are not intrinsic; instead, they are acquired by engaging in the acts repeatedly, for example, a person becomes hard working by adopting the trait as a child and practicing it all through to adulthood. A person adopts a trait that he believes in. These beliefs can be instilled by parents, friends, religious teachings, or teachers at school. One important point is that fear only motivates honesty to a certain degree, therefore, educationists must not instill fear upon students as this will only make them act honest when the teacher is around but when he leaves, do the reverse. Honesty is best acquired when it comes from within a person.

Academic Honesty

Academic dishonesty is very rampant in most educational institutions and typically involves any form of cheating in an academic exercise. There are many forms of academic dishonesty, these include plagiarism (adoption or use of another persons ideas without giving him/her appropriate credit), fabrication (use of invalid data or information), or cheating (obtaining or giving unfair assistance in an academic exercise). Studies show that nearly 70 percent of all college graduates have cheated at least once in their academic work while 20 to 25 percent admit having cheated more than five times (Pope, 2007), these statistics point to a growing trend of dishonesty in our schools. Academic honesty among students can be inculcated by including ethical studies in school curricula and introducing the students to such studies at an early age.

Few People Practice Honesty

In todays society, many people advocate for one line of thought, but practice the reverse: honesty is no exception. Despite the fact that most, if not all, people recognize that honesty is an important element of integrity, only a few people practice it (Gallozzi, N. d). A possible explanation of this occurrence is that in todays world, our actions seem to be controlled by others. A person may question himself about how others will view his action(s) of honesty, this happens since we all live in social and organizational contexts that judge each of our actions. For example, during a meeting, a staff member may decide to express his honest thoughts about the organizations management, an idea that his colleagues may shoot down despite its legitimacy, or, in a worst case, lead to his dismissal. Therefore, dishonesty persists because society decides what is right or wrong, to which we must conform.

Secondly, lack of honesty persists in our society because of the fear of punitive measures or negative aspects of honesty. Dishonest acts go on all around us, from small ones such as cheating in exams or to massive ones such as Bernard Madoffs Ponzi scheme that swindled investors of their millions, and frankly, out political system. These activities continue unabated due to our own fear of receiving reprisals for opposing or exposing such acts. A student cannot report that his friend cheated in exams as this may cause others to shun him. In organizations, dishonest activities frequently come with financial gains and any attempt to interfere may cut off the gains. In summary, our lack of honesty is heavily influenced by our own fears (Johnson and Phillips, 2003).

How do we Change this?

As earlier mentioned, honesty is an acquired trait. For us to change the society, we must first change ourselves, this means that we must be honest with ourselves before trying to instill the same value onto others (Brenegar, 2010). As we reach out to others with the notion of honesty, we will begin to have an urgent desire to instill the value on our friends, and our relationships grow stronger. This growth leads to a matching growth in the level of honesty among our friends and this marks the first step towards reforming our society.

References

Brenegar, E. (2010). Honesty. Web.

Gallozzi, C. (N. d.). Importance of Honesty. Web.

Honesty. (2011). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Web.

Johnson, L., and Phillips, B. (2003). Absolute honesty: building a corporate culture that values straight talk and rewards integrity. New York: AMACOM.

Pope, J. (2007). Higher Education sees Rise in Dishonesty. The Washington Post. Web.

To me, Integrity is the practice of being honest and showing a consistent and uncompromising adherence to strong moral and ethical principles and values. In ethics, integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or accuracy of one’s actions. It is perhaps the most important principle of leadership and dependent on integrity because it demands truthfulness and honesty. Integrity means telling the truth even if the truth is ugly. Better to be honest than to delude others, because then you are probably deluding yourself, too.

People do not hold themselves to the standards they should. They choose to take the easy way out instead of taking responsibility for themselves. Not only have people lost integrity, but America has too. This very nation was built on standards of integrity. Without the Founding Fathers willingness to stand against prejudice people; America would not have the very same freedoms it portrays now. They are a prime example of integrity, individually and together as one. Each person had ideas and spoke freely about them until as a group, they all came to an agreement on one sole purpose and idea. People and groups of today are not willing to put forth the effort to ensure peace and contentment, which is what integrity should uphold. Too many people feel pressure to conform to standards and values that are not of their own. People settle for sloppy seconds when they can put effort and desire in, to gain and achieve integrity. “You make the best of the situation, no matter the cost, and move forward.” says Gordon B. Hinckley. To develop integrity for the future America needs to look back at their roots to see what went wrong.

Honesty is a key characteristic of a business because it sets the tone for the kind of work culture that you want to create, provides consistency in workplace behavior, and builds loyalty and trust in customers and prospects. Having integrity means you are true to yourself and would do nothing that demeans or dishonors you. Honesty is when you speak the truth and act truthfully. Many children think honesty means you ‘don’t tell a lie’ and that is definitely part of being honest. But honesty means more than not lying. A more complete definition of honesty shows that an honest person doesn’t do things that are morally wrong. It’s about being real with yourself and others about who you are, what you want and what you need to live your most authentic life. Honesty promotes openness, empowers us and enables us to develop consistency in how we present the facts. Lying is probably one of the most common wrong acts that we carry out, so it’s worth spending time thinking about it.

Most people would say that lying is always wrong, except when there’s a good reason for it which means that it’s not always wrong! But even people who think lying is always wrong have a problem. Consider the case where telling a lie would mean that 10 other lies would not be told. If 10 lies are worse than 1 lie then it would seem to be a good thing to tell the first lie, but if lying is always wrong then it’s wrong to tell the first lie.

Master critical thinking, strong reasoning and analytical skills. The knowledge and skills gained from studying law facilitate students to analyse both sides of complex situations or problems and to devise the best solution based on strong reasoning and critical thinking. Your public speaking skills will also be tested time and time again as a law student. Building excellent communication and public speaking skills is an essential part of your success as a future lawyer. It’s also important to be able to write clearly and persuasively. All of this should be needed to make a good law student because law is a very important program and this program can help you in life. I chose this program because I wanted to be a civil citizen and know my rights to protect myself against others who do or don’t know their rights.

That’s why the law program is very important, and is why you should be a good student in that program. While it is true that most lawyers have a basic awareness of their country’s laws, the idea that any lawyer could know every law verbatim is impossible. This means that legislatures write general law, and judges interpret those laws in specific cases, thereby creating rules for subsequent matters to follow. Lawyers are in a unique position to help individuals, groups, and organizations with their legal problems and further the public good. Public interest lawyers champion legal causes for the greater good of society and help those in need of legal assistance who might not otherwise be able to afford a lawyer.

A lawyer seeks a result advantageous to the client but consistent with requirements of honest dealings with others. As an evaluator, a lawyer acts by examining a client’s legal affairs and reporting about them to the client or to others. There is, however, no rule that requires a lawyer to know what the truth is. The client tells the lawyer his version of the facts. Lawyers shouldn’t lie, but they don’t have to fact-check their clients. The lawyer is skeptical of the client’s story, but he’s under no obligation to fact-check the client. The judge is biased in favor of the lying lawyer and/or lawyer’s client. The judge accepts the lie because by doing so it allows the judge to find the lie to be a “fact” upon which the judge can issue the ruling the judge desires to make. The judge doesn’t care about being lied to.

Nothing I write is legal advice. If you are asking whether a lawyer lying is a crime, no, it generally isn’t. If you are asking whether a lawyer may lie to you and trick you in a case, no, they may not. Regardless, lawyers are, under the ethical rules, required to be honest in their communications, as lawyers. My own definition of integrity is doing the right thing, to be honest and honor your values and morals. Having integrity helps you become a better person and have a healthy lifestyle. As humans it is in our nature to be tempted to do the wrong things such as lie, cheat, and steal. But why do we do these things? Because it is the easy route. As humans we have become lazy looking for the easiest way to make money then we lie to protect ourselves or the ones we love. We cheat to make our lives easier. That’s why we can not trust one another because we know what we are capable of doing. We come up with all these insecurities and questions. Are we good people? Can I trust my co-workers? Questions like this can be avoided if people had integrity if they honored their word if they did the right thing and not be corrupted by other that lack discipline. As a soldier Integrity is one of the army values it means to do the right thing all the time even when no one is looking and even when you are not at work.

Honesty, an often-discussed yet seldom-understood virtue, is pivotal in shaping our character and guiding our interactions with others. It transcends merely telling the truth, encompassing authenticity, integrity, and fairness in our thoughts, words, and actions. This essay seeks to delve into the concept of honesty, explore its importance, and illuminate its multifaceted role in our personal lives and the broader society. Through this exploration, we will unearth how honesty, in its profound simplicity, lays the foundation for trust, character development, authenticity, societal harmony, and self-realization.

What is Honesty?

Honesty is a foundational virtue that defines our character and directs our interactions in all facets of life. It is a fundamental moral principle, embodying the commitment to telling the truth and behaving truthfully in all circumstances. While the term is often reduced to simply ‘not lying,’ the depth of honesty is far more expansive and profound.

Honesty is not merely an act; it’s a lifestyle, a reflection of an individual’s integrity, and an unwavering dedication to reality. It implies the courage to accept and express the truth, irrespective of the consequences. It’s about refusing to deceive oneself or others, either in actions, words, or even thoughts, a commitment that requires a high degree of moral strength and self-awareness.

In essence, honesty involves two critical components: truthfulness and sincerity. Truthfulness implies factual correctness, that is, saying things as they are without any distortion or misrepresentation. It involves presenting facts and situations accurately, without embellishment or deceit. Sincerity, on the other hand, refers to the purity of intention behind our actions and words. It is about being genuine, acting without pretense, manipulation, or hidden agendas.

The scope of honesty also extends to embody other related virtues like fairness and respect. An honest person not only speaks the truth but also upholds fairness in their dealings, displaying an understanding and respect for the rights and dignity of others. They refrain from cheating, stealing, or any form of deception, reinforcing their commitment to ethical living.

Lastly, honesty also involves self-honesty. It calls for acknowledging our feelings, admitting our mistakes, and accepting our limitations. Self-honesty requires a high degree of self-reflection and the courage to face our vulnerabilities, fostering personal growth and development.

Honesty is a comprehensive and complex virtue that reflects a commitment to truth, authenticity, fairness, respect, and self-awareness. It is an assertion of reality in one’s thinking, speaking, and acting, underpinning the quality of our character and the authenticity of our relationships. It is more than a virtue; it is a way of life.

Importance of Honesty

Honesty is not just a moral obligation; it plays a pivotal role in individual and societal development. The significance of honesty can be appreciated from various perspectives, each underlining its crucial role in our lives.

Building Trust: Honesty cultivates trust, an indispensable component in any relationship, be it personal or professional. When we are honest, we give others a reason to trust us and build a strong foundation for lasting relationships. Lies and deceit, on the other hand, can quickly erode trust and damage relationships, sometimes beyond repair.

Character Development: Honesty is integral to character development. It forms the core of our ethical and moral framework, shaping our actions, decisions, and interactions with others. Being honest instills a sense of pride and self-respect, enhancing our self-esteem and personal development.

Promotes Authenticity: Honesty encourages authenticity. It enables us to present ourselves as we genuinely are rather than wearing a façade. Authenticity, in turn, breeds respect and acceptance from others, fostering genuine connections.

Fosters Societal Harmony: On a broader level, honesty contributes to societal harmony and stability. It discourages corruption, promotes fairness, and ensures accountability, creating a just and equitable society.

Role of Honesty in Life

The role of honesty in life is multifaceted, affecting both our personal lives and the communities we live in. Here are some key ways in which honesty plays a pivotal role in life:

Self-Realization: Honesty allows for self-realization. It encourages introspection and helps us understand our strengths and weaknesses better. By being honest with ourselves, we can identify areas of improvement, set realistic goals, and work towards personal growth.

Strong Relationships: Honesty builds and maintains strong relationships. Honesty fosters understanding, mutual respect, and genuine affection in personal relationships. Professional relationships encourage open communication, collaboration, and mutual trust, contributing to productivity and a harmonious working environment.

Ethical Decision-Making: Honesty is instrumental in ethical decision-making. It ensures that we act with integrity, upholding moral and ethical standards. In challenging situations, being honest can guide us in making the right choices, even tough ones.

Social Responsibility: Honesty plays a significant role in fulfilling our social responsibilities. Being honest citizens, we contribute to social welfare by promoting fairness, discouraging corruption, and upholding justice. This, in turn, reinforces social cohesion and harmony.

Conclusion

In conclusion, honesty is a pivotal virtue that forms the bedrock of our character, relationships, and societies. Its importance cannot be overstated, with far-reaching implications for our personal development, relationships, decision-making, and societal well-being. Being honest reflects our commitment to truth and reality, shaping our lives profoundly and significantly. As Mark Twain aptly said, “Honesty is the best policy. If I lose my honor, I lose myself.” Indeed, honesty is embracing the authentic self, a commitment that enriches our lives and the world around us.

Base on my research honesty is a moral character such as integrity, truthfulness, and straightforwardness, including straightforwardness of conduct, along with the absence of lying, cheating, theft, etc. Furthermore, honesty means being trustworthy, loyal, fair, and sincere.

But for me, honesty is all about people around you because honesty is about trusting people or someone that close to you. Honesty is good because you know to your self that you can trust this people, but too much trusting is also can cause betrayal. And betrayal can break your relationship with others.

When i was 13 years old i have a group of friends. I trust them because i feel so comfortable . When i have a problem i always tell them. We shared sadness and happiness together. One day i experience one of the biggest struggle i have. My mom and dad fight with each other because of jealousy. At first my mom trust my dad because she think that my dad is honest about his word. But when my mom caught my dad her trust went broken and it cause to break our family. I tell this problem to my friends because my mind said they will comfort me. But the next day i found out that me and my friends are not the only one who knows my personal problem, and i know that its one of my friends who spread my story. I confront my friend about being betray but she didn’t admit it . I asked one of those person who receive the news about me and it say that its really her.

After one week my dad make his apology and my mom forgive him. I asked her why did she forgive my dad and she answer that he love my dad although he break my mom’s trust because of not being honest she cant deny that she still love my dad. And a lesson formed in my mind and heart. Yes my friend betray and lie on me but still she’s my friend and we share a lot of things. So i decided to forgive her but i wont trust her anymore.

I conclude that honesty is not just about trusting someone and telling the truth. Its also has a negative side that can break your friendship, families or any relationship with others. Honesty is all about scars that you will left with the people around you. Yet you can forgive them but that scar will never erased.

The Apology by Plato is a statement of the speech Socrates made at the trail in which he was condemned to death. Socrates was charged and accused of not recognizing the contemporary Gods, inventing how own deities, and for corrupting the youth of Athens- influencing them in ways that could one day lead to the student’s betrayal of Athens.

In contrast with the modern meaning of the word “Apology,” the speech Socrates delivered on that day was by no means an apology. The “Apology” Plato is referring to in his statement comes from the Greek work “apologia,” which translates as a defense or a speech made in defense. In the Apology, Socrates is not seen to be speaking in an apologetic tone. Rather, he is merely representing a defense against the charges posed against him. He addresses the audience in a very plain, conversational manner as he explains that he would like to speak in the manner in which he is used to which is direct and honest.

Socrates starts off this piece by declaring the accusations against him to be lies. He says that he will speak the truth without deceptive “elaborate” lie’s like his accusers. Instead, he will speak off the top of his head. Since this is the first time he has been asked to speak formally in a court at age 70, he does not want anyone to cause a disturbance because of his unprofessional language that he would use in places. In this statement, Socrates is communicating to the jury that he does not wish to waste time embellishing his words, but that he will state his testimony simply and truthfully. To clarify,what he is being accused of and by whom, Socrates differentiates between his first group of accusers (the countless he has upset) and his second group of accusers (Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon). This is necessary because it was the influence of his first group of accusers who created misconceptions of his wisdom and work that caused his second group of accusers to bring him into court on charges. His first accusation claims that he is guilty of studying new scientific-minded theories and teaching others that they are true. He refutes this first by stating that his jury serves as a witness that his discussions never touch such content. Second, he clarifies he never claims to teach, talks without a fee and he is not the first to attract the company of youth. Third, he identifies his accusations as the traditional default job at philosophers, in place of antagonism rooted in his occupation. He explains his bad reputation as a philosopher. He tells the story of Delphi. He explains his friend from youth who is now dead, Chairophen, went to Delphi to ask the Oracle if any man was wiser than Socrates. The Oracles responded by saying no one was wiser than Socrates. Socrates was surprised at the response. He did not think was the wisest. He went around and evaluated those that he considered wise. He then realizes that he is the wisest because, as opposed to others, he is conscious of his ignorance in many areas. His second accusations and the charges he was being tried for was of corrupting the youth and not believing in the Gods the city believed in. Socrates tried to defend that he does believe in God despite being a questioning man. Additionally, Socrates wanted to make sure people understand that he did not teach for a fee and that his new accusations were false as well as the old ones.

During Socrates’ defense, he talks to the jury about the different punishments they could give him. He mentions paying a fee, but that would be meaningless because of his poverty status. He acknowledges Meletus suggestion of death penalty by saying, “what should I fear? That I should suffer the penalty Meletus has assessed against me, of which I say I do not know whether it is good or bad?” Socrates is saying that he is not afraid of dying. When it was put to vote, he was ultimately sentenced to death. After this sentencing, he explains why he is still winning. Socrates told the jury “… either the dead are nothing and have no perception of anything, or it is, as we are told, a change and a relocation for the soul from here to another place.” This means he is either put to a peaceful rest for eternity or he is relocated to continue teaching philosophy to another realm. Before he died, we warned the jurymen who sentenced him to death that they hurt themselves by silencing him. He warns them that he will not be the last one to question them of their knowledge and lives.

Some people tend to assume things like “Will she like me for be the person or will she not like me cause I’m portraying this person she wants in life?” Being yourself is a true factor of being who you supposed to be. Don’t change who you are for someone who wants something else besides what they get. This also one of the traits in the play “The Importance of Being Earnest” by Oscar Wilde. This play is about two men, named Jack and Algernon, who change who they really are for the one they love. They change so much it gets out of hand; they find out who they really are (not really because they already know who they really are for real.) The other trait that is being shown in the play is the lack of honesty. The whole point of loving someone is the trust and honesty shown to one they want to show it to. The similarities of Jack and Algernon is somewhat intriguing; The differences about them is not that much intriguing. So, in “The Importance of Being Earnest” by Oscar Wilde, the honesty is been something that Jack, Algernon, and some others can’t really show to anyone, not physically.

Most people would eventually own up to their mistakes, not add on to them. Jack and Algernon, they both wanted something they couldn’t have, the women. Some may say that they are somewhat similar, and here is how. They both want to escape their normal lives and expand to new horizons. The plan of being someone else worked until they get so caught up in their newly found lives, that they forget why they did it in the first place. Jack Worthing created his fake, elaborate deceptive brother in the city but also reinvents his whole self. However, his deceitfulness leads to him being completely honest with himself and finding a true love. There one would see the gulf in Jack, or as he’s known in the city, Ernest Jack does not admit to being a “Bunburyist,” even after he’s been called on it, while Algernon, he is not only acknowledging his wrongdoing but also revels in it. Algernon’s joy at his own cleverness and ingenuity has little to do with contempt for others. Due to all this madness, part of their lives seems a bit complicated; the other part of it is even more outrageous than this.

Act 1, 2, 3 are somewhat adding some weird components to the play. Jack is so certain that he will marry Gwendolen, and that he doesn’t care what Algernon has to say nor her mother. He gets the opportunity to bend on one knee and proposes to her. Lady Bracknell starts her “investigation” to find out whether Jack was suited for her little prodigy. She start with the most basic line “Do you smoke?” then he said “Well yes, I must admit that I do smoke”. And if that isn’t bad enough she said, “I am glad to hear it. A man should always have an occupation of some kind.” If have cancer is what a hobby is suppose to be then sure let your daughter marry a cancer loving man. Algernon tries to pursue Ms. Cecily; he portrays Ernest and gains her love and affection, then gets the rejected phrase “I don’t forgive you.” All hope is lost for Algernon as he just acts like nothing was wrong when she found out about the “plan” and that Jack was in on it too. She and Gwendolyn “forgave” them by staring at them and christening( getting married with the other by changing the wife’s name to the husbands) them. Cecily and Gwendolen feel as though their fiancés’ reasons for deceiving them are just. Algernon says that he pretended to be Ernest so that he could meet Cecily. Jack agrees that he pretended to be Ernest so he could frequently go to town and visit Gwendolen. The women also think that Jack and Algernon are making a great sacrifice to be christened that afternoon and renamed Ernest. This is how it went down: Jack and Algernon did not pay any of the women some attention. Then they express indignation that the men are staring at them because they stood in front of a window with binoculars, watching them eat crumpets. Just as Gwendolen and Cecily went from instantly liking to instantly disliking, now that they have the common enemies of the men, they are close and loving again, like sisters, mostly because they have both been mislead by the men. Wilde is most likely making fun of human triviality, particularly, maybe, the triviality of the privileged societies who characteristically base a considerable lot of their own connections on attributes inconsequential to the next individual’s character. The marriage between Algernon and Cecily is kind of worrisome. Lady Bracknell worries that if she lets them marry, her bloodline would Soo decrease. In any case, in light of the fact that Cecily has a fortune of 130,000 pounds, Lady Bracknell trusts her to have “particular social prospects.” Lady Bracknell gives her agree to Algernon’s commitment, yet Jack promptly protests as Cecily’s watchman. He says that Algernon is a liar and records all the falsehoods he has told. But what is catching the culprit without some evidence, also what about the “honesty” that is shown throughout the play.

Honesty is a significant quality; the significance of being straightforward is shown different occasions all through The Importance of Being Earnest. With this characteristic being something that individuals of contrasting societies can comprehend as a generally accepted fact, understanding the significance of the title as well as the story itself gets simpler. Honesty is the best approach for the explanation that without trustworthiness, individuals wouldn’t have the option to depend on you. The angle that constructs dependable and solid connections has an inseparable tie to trustworthiness. In case you’re straightforward with your companions and certain connections, you’re demonstrating to them that you can be trusted. Jack show his by owning up to his self and by telling Gwendolen everything that was true. His name (is)n’t Ernest, his a orphan and doesn’t know his birth parents ( Miss Prism and General Ernest), and that Cecily isn’t his aunt but his ward. She takes it all in and says the story of his childhood has stirred her and declares her undying love, whatever happens. She asks Jack for his address in the country and Algernon listens in, jotting it down on his cuff. Jack exits with Gwendolen to show her to her carriage, and Lane comes in with some bills, which Algernon promptly tears up. He tells Lane he plans to go “Bunburying” the next day and asks him to lay out “all the Bunbury suits.” Jack returns, praising Gwendolen, and the curtain falls on Algernon laughing quietly and looking at his shirt cuff. It is sad to finally hear the truth from him and sad that he has to leave to go “Bunburying” but, it just was meant to be for them to marry. And Algernon finds out that Cecily is actually eighteen years old but, they still get married.

In conclusion, Genuineness activates a satisfying, loose lifestyles. Genuineness isn’t always pretty much coming clean. It’s tied in with being actual with your self in addition to different humans approximately what your identification is, the issue which you want and what you need to stay your maximum proper lifestyles. But the principle element is to be trustworthy closer to your self. On the off risk which you misinform different humans or maybe you cheat them, they might not reflect onconsideration on it. Be actual closer to your self, it manufactures your confidence. We misinform defend ourselves from the ache and repercussions we’re going to stumble upon from their sentiments or maybe our very own self-judgment. Being honest with ourselves in addition to different humans calls for a potential to assume and experience concurrently to absolutely coordinate a tough stumble upon and kill any enduring pessimistic energy. To be trustworthy with some other person, we need to understand ourselves. We want to recognise our opinion and experience approximately our popular surroundings. Regularly all through regular lifestyles, we’re both impacted with the aid of using or adjusting to a development compelled on us with the aid of using society, mainly the manner of lifestyles interior our organization of source. We may also get hitched at the grounds that everyone our age is ‘settling down.’ Or we may also decline to attract close to to anyone in mild of the truth that our oldsters by no means were given along.

Abstract

The overall purpose of my research was to look into the use of swearing by facilitators during group sessions as a method of improving group members’ engagement with session materials and examples but also helping them more fully understand and internalise the learning. To do this I have looked mainly for studies which have been carried out by psychologists and industry professionals using the scientific method. Whilst there is some dissenting opinion, the overall consensus among those is that swearing adds value to speech in a way that euphemisms cannot (using the work “fuck” vs “f-word”). The study of swearing as a psychological question is a new one. There are four main areas that are currently being looked at: Swearing as a method for managing pain, Swearing dexterity as a predictor of dementia, Swearing as a way of making a point both logically, but also emotionally understood, and finally, as a way of engagement through mirroring and being at one with the pack. This report will concentrate mainly on the final two of those subjects as they are the most beneficial to the question posed.

Introduction

I am of the opinion that the feedback from the auditors at NOMS regarding the use of swearing by facilitators is wrong. It feels like a throwback to 1964. The time of the Clean-up TV group and Mary Whitehouse where those that swear are “the Devil Incarnate” and “responsible for the moral collapse in this country” [1]. Though their argument that the group members will mirror this role modelling. Their conclusion that this is detrimental is incorrect. Using references from the scientific peer-reviewed reports and journals, I will argue that not only is there little to no negative impacts from swearing whilst facilitating groups but that there is a clear benefit that will help in the areas of; attrition, understanding and risk management, group management, engagement and retention.

Swearing and emotional connection

One of the key roles of a facilitator is the ability to convey information in a way that can be clearly understood and internalised. Fundamental to this is finding a way to engage the diverse group members, and make the information relevant, compelling and personal.

A large part of all programmes that we run is for self-understanding, especially in the area of emotions. Men stereotypically find it difficult to understand and express emotions “trapped in the confines of a socialization process that tells them it’s unmanly to cry. To hurt, or to express the myriad other emotions we all experience as a result of living fully as human beings” [2]. At this point, you may be asking what this has to do with the subject matter. Understanding, memory, language processing and emotions are inextricably tied. To fully and clearly understand and internalise information there needs to be an emotional element. To connect the words to the world, to ground them in a person’s reality and to make people care. Professor Timothy Jay of Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts has forged a career investigating why people swear. His main Thesis is that “swearing is not, as is often argued, a sign of low intelligence and inarticulateness, but rather that swearing is emotional language. In his words: ‘Curse words do things to sentences that non-curse words cannot do” [3]

Research by Bowers and Pleydell-Pearce at Bristol University in 2011 researched the use of swearing as it relates to Linguistic Relativity. This is the principle that the structure of a language affects its speaker’s worldview or cognition. “Thoughts are produced as a kind of internal dialog using the same grammar as the thinker’s native language.” [4] An example of this in action would be to use the word ‘Friend’ English people can process the word without having to consider gender, whereas Spanish speakers would have different conceptualisations due to there being two words ‘amiga’ for a female friend and ‘amigo’ for a male. Bowers and Pleydell-Pearce examined the emotional responsiveness to two different forms of words which carry the same overall meaning. They used both ‘cunt’ and the euphemism ‘c-word’ and ‘fuck’ and the ‘F-word’. What they found was that participants exhibited greater autonomic arousal when the full word was used, indicating an increased emotional impact. This argues that swearing may access emotional centres of the brain without mediation by higher-level cognitive systems. This means that they can effectively bypass attention control, and cognitive inhibition, and most importantly avoid working memory going straight into long-term retention.

In “The Stuff of Thought” Steven Pinker, a cognitive scientist and a professor at Harvard, listed a few of the functions of swearing. Emphatic swearing, which is used for highlighting a point, and dysphemistic swearing, which makes a point provocatively. The difference here is important. Facilitators should be encouraged to use emphatic swearing for linguistic relativity purposes, however, dysphemistic swearing may cause group management issues by causing offence of over–stimulating the emotional response. It will be important for facilitators to be aware of this difference and ensure that they do not stray from Emphatic swearing.

Figure 1 – The method of memory

As figure 1 above shows, there are 2 main types of memory, Declarative memory is the conscious, intentional recollection of factual information, previous experiences and concepts. [5] Nondeclarative memory is acquired and used unconsciously and can affect thoughts and behaviours. It is this that the programmes we run aim to target, to ‘de-programme’ the brain from old unhealthy automatic responses and replace with pro-social ones. It should therefore be no surprise that one of the pathways of Nondeclarative memory is through the Amygdala which not only manages memory but also decision-making and importantly emotions and emotional response. It is this that swearing targets.

If one considers that psychology is the study of people, and if one agrees that people are emotional beings, then understanding swearing, as the language of emotion, can improve our understanding of people. Although he’s a comedian rather than a scholar Richard Dooling makes the point concisely that four-letter words are “inextricably bound up with almost everything”[6] and therefore to remove or curtail them for the sake of sensibilities diminishes a vital conduit for learning.

Swearing for connection, mirroring and role-modelling

One persistent argument that surrounds swearing is one of the impacts it has on others through the mirroring of traditionally ‘rude’ and ‘immoral’ language. It comes from those expecting that society will collapse if children are not protected from swearing and that swearing shows a lack of intelligence and creativity within language. Dr Timothy Jay states “this is the ‘poverty of vocabulary’ myth that people swear because they lack the right words due to impoverished vocabulary. Any language scholar knows otherwise”. [7] In his research paper volunteers were asked to take part in a Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) in 3 areas. The first was to give three letter words starting with the letters F, A, & S. The second to name animals and the third to list swear words and slurs. The experiment proved the ‘Fluency is Fluency’ hypothesis by showing a direct positive correlation in all areas. As a side note, it was shown that even though they were alone in a room talking to a tape recorder the incidents of slurs being used were largely outnumbered by both taboo expressive (e.g. Fuck) and general pejoratives (e.g. Fucker).

There has been research between swearing and honesty. A study published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science [8] explored this. When Rhett Butler told Scarlett “Frankly my dear I don’t give a damn” in Gone with the Wind there was outrage and the film was fined $5000 ($92,570 accounting for inflation) for violating the Motion Picture Production Code. That said, the quote profoundly conveys Butler’s honest thoughts and feelings. Until 2017 and Dr Jay’s study there was no scientific study on this, with the internet rife with heated discussions on the topic (debate.org has many comments on the issue with a 50/50 tie between the two views).

As mentioned in the previous section profanity is commonly linked to emotions, with the spontaneous use usually the unfiltered genuine expression of emotions (think stubbing your toe, or crashing your car). When used in a more controlled sense the use of profanity often helps to convey world views or internal states. To insult an object, view or person. “Speech involving profane words has a stronger impact on people than regular speech and has been shown to be processed on a deeper level in people’s minds” [9].

The empirical investigation carried out in the report showed in all areas, using direct questionnaires as well as using Facebook status updates, that there was a strong correlation between the use of profanity and honesty. It also showed that men tended to be more dishonest than women matching with other literature with similar findings. [10]

Emma Byrne on her book Swearing is good for you, states “peppering our language with dirty words can actually help us gain credibility and establish a sense of camaraderie” which would clearly help group members buy into the message and skills that facilitators are trying to convey. In one study [11] by psychologists from Penn State University showed that an audience were more receptive to a message when swearing was used. This was done using different versions of a speech on lowering tuition fees. “The students who saw the video with the swearing at the beginning or in the middle rated the speaker as more intense, but no less credible, than the ones who saw the speech with no swearing,” “What’s more, the students who saw the videos with the swearing were significantly more in favour of lowering tuition fees after seeing the video than the students who didn’t hear the swear word.”

I hate to use him as a positive example, but Donald Trump is often categorised as “telling it like it is” by his fans. He often uses both propositional swearing and non-propositional, to lift his rhetoric and separate himself from the politicians in ‘the swamp’ and more as a man of a similar type to his fans. This is backed by research by Dr Began who states “Lots of people hide their emotions for lots of reasons, we infer that from someone swearing that they are not doing that. They must be conveying their emotional stance. If you want people to think that you’re telling the truth, then swearing may help with that”.

“In group settings, swearing can serve as a connector. Every generation and group has its own slang, which includes profanity. When you use that language, it’s almost like a password that gives you access to people hip to it.” [12] So, by tapping into this Facilitators can hope for better co-working with group members as it will be felt that they are talking on the same level as them, rather than the complaint that facilitators don’t know what it’s like and are only reading from a manual. By using common language as the group members would in daily life, and being ‘let in’, a barrier is removed and allowed group members to be more honest and open mirroring this realistic approach.

Just because profanity is being used it does not discount role-modelling in other ways. Presenting a pro-social attitude towards life, offending and co-facilitation do not break down with the use of foul language. It also does not encourage group members to swear more themselves, it only gives them permission to use the language that they are comfortable with outside of probation.

References

1. en. Wikipedia.ord/wiki/Mary_Whitehouse#Television_and_war
2. Psycoholgytoday.com How to crack the code of Men’s Feelings by Barbara Markway PhD
3. Thepsychologist.bps.org.uk Swearing – The Language of Life and Death by Richard Stephens
4. Trabant, Jürgen.’How relativistic are Humboldts ‘Weltansichten’?’ in Pütz & Verspoor 2000
5. En.wikipedia.org/wiki/explicit_memory
6. Bet your life by Richard Dooling 2006
7. Jay, K.L., Jay, T.B., Taboo word fluency and knowledge of slurs and general pejoratives: deconstructing the poverty-of-vocabulary myth, Language Sciences (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2014.12.003
8. Frankly, We Do Give a Damn: The Relationship Between Profanity and Honesty
9. Gilad Feldman, Huiwen Lian, Michal Kosinski, David StillwellFirst Published January 15, 2017, Research Article https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616681055
10. Jay, T., Caldwell-Harris, C., King, K. (2008). Recalling taboo and nontaboo words. The American Journal of Psychology, 121, 83–103.
11. Childs, J. (2012). Gender differences in lying. Economics Letters, 114, 147–149
12. Indecent influence: The positive effects of obscenity on persuasion Cory R. Scherer &Brad J. Sagarin Published online: 21 Aug 2006
13. What the F by Benjamin K Bergen Published 2016