Is honesty an inherent part of language? Is it, inextricably, built into the structure of language?
Well yes kindof… but not exactly. Language is built to convey meaning, the goal is utility first and foremost. People agree upon certain concepts to mean something distinct in world, and then use those conventions to be able to communicate about those things. When used correctly you are honest, when misused you are dishonest.
So insofar as the original goal of language is to communicate things accurately, you could say honesty is tied to language. But there is not really anything in the “structure” of language itself that automaticly leads to honesty. Honesty, or dishonesty, it’s about how you use language (not because anything in language itself).
I would define honesty simply as the awareness of making an indicative statement about something in the world one believes is true. This isn’t a linguistic entity like a word or a grammar function, so I wouldn’t call it part of language.
And I don’t think people are hardwired to be honest. It was at that point when man realized misleading others in his group (or an enemy) could be very advantageous that man became dishonest.
Before that he was not aware of the utility of purposely giving false information to another person, so his honesty was not something mediated or intended; he did not yet know how to be dishonest and his honesty was by default.
Definitely not. At the age of 3-4 years children take over their language as a free tool to be used for any purpose they will. Lies and jokes are markers of this developmental stage.
Honesty is independent of language.
Is deception built into language? Sure. But one can also deceive with gestures, pictures, numbers, sounds, facial and physical expression.
All communication can be used to convey factual information, or sincere feelings, or earnestly held convictions. It can also convey falsehood and misdirection, incomprehension, commands, indecisions, threat, query, conjecture, entreaty, seduction, argument; it can be embellishment, fictional narrative, drama, rhetoric, song or comedy. The truth-content od communication varies from 0 to 98% - since nobody knows the whole truth about anything.
I would say no as to both “inherent” and “inextricably”.
Language is a tool a marvelous tool for communication (which IS inherent in language) and knowledge but that tool can only be as real and honest as is the individual using that tool.
It is the individual and his/her mind and purpose and intent which lends honesty or not to language.
I think of honesty as a ‘learned’ attribute not an inherent part of language.
Of course I may be wrong here but this is what I think.
BTW, I do believe that this kind of post from you is more in line with your intelligence.
But that’s just a part of my personal aesthetic.
April: I don’t need everything we have here, I don’t care where we live. I mean, who made these rules anyway? The only reason we moved out here was because I got pregnant. Then we had another to prove the first one wasn’t a mistake, I mean, how long does it go on? Frank, do you actually want another child? Well do you? Come on.
Tell me. Tell me the truth, Frank. Remember that? We used to live by it. And you know what’s so good about the truth? Everyone knows what it is no matter how long they’ve lived without it. No one forgets the truth, Frank, they just get better at lying. So tell me. Do you really want another child?
Revolutionary Road
from the novel by Richard Yates
Yet often the surest way to convey misinformation is to tell the strict truth.
So, does it really matter either way, truth or lie.
Honesty can be an overrated virtue. Silence, or keeping it to oneself, in many a case, would be far more honourable in many instances.