This is an idea I've been playing around with in order to incorporate into the monstrosity I'm creating. Every relationship dissolves at some point due to some form of dishonesty, usually personal but often between the two parties. This makes me think about how incredibly romantic and novel the idea that two people are one is, not two halves of a whole but really one entity.
It is not the same to be honest as it is to be truthful. To be an honest person is to act in accordance with your heart and head, to have a consistency of action. To be truthful is to never lie. An honest person makes no excuses for their actions, takes ownership for who they are, and is ‘true’ to what they hope to be. This conflicts at times with truthfulness. In ideal circumstances an honest person would not need to lie, but situations at times put this into contention:
Hypothetical: You are a native of New York City, but currently reside in Portland. You are taking your Polish Catholic great aunt Betty to church with your father on Christmas. A few years back you relinquished your belief in Catholicism (for whatever reason). Now your father indicates that you should go with Betty and take Communion as it would please her greatly, she doesn’t know of your change (they’re your beliefs afterall).
An honest person who prioritizes family, either as an ideal or their father in particular, would acquiesce to the request (not to say it would be easy). An individual prioritizing truth would decline (also not to say it would be easy). A person asserting that their highest value is family but that they would not take communion is misguided; they either are guilty of hubris, see themselves as the most important member of their family, or actually value truth over family (in which case they’re ignorant of themselves or a dirty dirty liar). There is an assumption that really valuing family means possessing and exercising your capacity to love them; we’re essentially substantially indebted to our parents if they so happen to raise us without being too damaged, love would almost dictate such a small concession to them in this scenario.
The problem I have with truthfulness and what it truly means comes subsequently:
There is an issue that I believe comes from our perception of others. You can speak honest words to someone, even say the exact truth, precisely what you mean to say, and they might believe something else. At a certain level, or at least understanding, you become aware of how other people hear your words; there is a distinct difference between your words and what people actually think you have said. More simply, it is the reverse of knowing what someone is trying to say when they're not quite spitting it out. So is it up to the individual to speak in a way that will get one to understand? Is there some responsibility to show truth even though the words would be muddled in achieving that end? The flaw stems I think from the lack of precision in how we are taught to speak, and by extending that reasoning forward a bit, how we think; language after all is thought. So if I understand what you will believe I have said, I contend that it is up to me to make sure you comprehend fully what I mean when I speak things of import. I believe fully if one understands what another will hear and comprehend, within their ability it is up to them to make sure the other fully comprehends; otherwise a lie has been performed. And that, a most vicious type of lie; you push another to lie to themselves.
Many will contend you are not at fault for what other people believe; this is fucking bullshit. You are the god of this evil. You have created it. You have set it into the world and you damn well know what it will do. In these situations they are simply catalyst for evil.
Reason is a sword, and this double-razoredged weapon doesn't cut its brandisher. And, that is essentially its flaw. You have to be willing to impale yourself on it or you run the risk of being one of the worst kinds of monsters. A type of monster that will never see itself as flawed, as wrong, one that always makes the right decision; if a situation arises in which their righteousness is put to test another’s argument and that person for that matter are dispassionately hacked to pieces. These people have truly lost a degree of empathy that matters, they have put their own worth too far above other people. Believing yourself to be fallible, having some degree of uncertainty in your actions keeps you, well, human. I guess I would argue that an element of perfection is the belief in self-imperfection, paradoxical I know, but perfection in humanity is something unattainable, it cannot be touched only approached.
