Honesty vs. Integrity vs. Authenticity

I'm going to go on record as saying that we humans think too highly of ourselves. I blame the Romantics for this, Whitman, Wordsworth, Coleridge, Longfellow, and many others. One of the major aspects of the Romantic movement was the heightened role of the individual, the increased importance of the person over the community. It was about personal dreams and goals, our inner experience, our imaginations and creativity. It all sounds like a beautiful philosophy. And it is, especially coming from an era during which everyone had to work as a single body in order for the community to survive. But, like everything else in modern society, we've taken it too far. As a high school teacher, I feel like I witness on a daily basis the full force of the Me Generation, a group of people who are interested solely in their own wants and needs, who dismiss without a thought those with age and experience, who have no concept of respecting others, who are, in a very literal sense, addicted to social media and getting "likes" and "views." There are of course anomalies and varying degrees of this, but I speak in generalities for argument's sake. (It strikes me as funny, somehow, that every generation says this of the younger generation, even going back hundreds of years.)

As a product of how obsessed we are with our own senses of worth and accomplishment, we lie to ourselves many times a day about our motives, our actions, and our responses to others. If our self views are colored by these lies, however innocent they may be, how can we possibly be authentic with others? We are able - at an ever-increasing rate - to create ideal selves online. Mediated communication, by definition, is the exact opposite of face-to-face communication. It is the basis for all social media sites and apps, dating apps, etc. This form of technology allows us to create the person we want others to see in us. And we do it in lots of ways we wouldn't normally consider as self-defining: that inspirational quotation or video we posted on Facebook, for example. We tell ourselves that we just want to inspire others, but there is a perception that the person who posted it lives by its precepts. We want people to think that, anyway. Every time we click "like" we are painting our self-portraits for others. 

Living in a society like this, is there even room for authenticity? for true honesty and integrity? Are these merely relative terms? Is anyone immune from the egocentrism that pervades modern life?

Honesty. Integrity. Authenticity. Three terms that I hear tossed around a lot these days. If I formed a sort of composite statement, based on the many people I know, people I've heard give talks and speeches, and Facebook posts I've seen, it would sound something like this: "I just do my best to live my life honestly and authentically. I think that integrity is probably the most essential attribute a person can have."

But there is a problem with these statements; namely, that I look at the actions of most of the people who speak these words, the ones I personally know, and think, that isn't something an honest person would do or I've seen that person do plenty of things that can't be remotely considered to be authentic. But I believe that people are innately good; or more specifically, I believe that each person truly believes in his or her heart and soul that he or she is good and is doing the right thing.

Basic psychology tells us that we are always more apt to notice others' faults while missing our own because we see our own words and actions, understandably, through our own lenses of goodness, logic, and sensibility. In other words, we all see ourselves basically as saints. It is every other driver on the road who doesn't know how to drive. It is every other person in the world who has no concept of common decency. We are each a genius forced to live in a world populated with complete imbeciles. Moreover, we need to publicly point out the shortcomings we perceive in others in order to bolster our own self-images and egos, to convince ourselves of and solidify our own goodness and rightness.

So what's going on then? Do we just have different definitions of honesty, integrity, and authenticity? different interpretations of the same definitions? different understandings? Or are we just that blind to our own actions?

I've known people, and Lord knows I've done it myself plenty of times, who "string" others along in order to keep the other person from getting his or her feelings hurt. We are, at the time, utterly convinced of our altruism: "I keep talking to him so that he won't think I'm ignoring him or brushing him off," we say. "I let him take me out on a date just so he will find out on his own that we aren't right for each other," we say. "I let him continue to send me gifts because I don't want him to feel rejected," we say. We tell ourselves we are sparing the other person. In my dating hay-day, I stayed with many a guy longer than I should have because I was "afraid of hurting his feelings." When I eventually broke things off, I tried to convince him that this was the only way, the only logical course of action. I told him I still wanted to be friends, that there was no reason that we shouldn't be friends just because we aren't compatible romantically. What if we were truly honest in our dealings with others? "I'm sorry," we might say, "I know you have feelings for me, but I cannot let you buy that concert ticket for me because I know that your motives behind taking me are not the same as mine would be in accepting the offer."

But are we really afraid of hurting the other person's feelings? Really?? What we are worried about, really, are our own frail egos, our senses of self that are so dependent upon how others perceive us. We are worried that the other person will think we're a jerk. We're worried the other person might say bad things about us to their friends. We're terrified that we might be seen as anything less than a perfect, kind, selfless person. Never mind what is on the inside, what we know to be there, because it is all about external reinforcement. 

Is there automatically integrity in honesty? Do we speak truths with good intent? "I think those glasses look really weird on you. I'm just being honest." There are a whole lot of people I see today who are completely honest and who also lack every semblance of integrity.  Some people use honesty as the pedestal on which they stand in order to be mean to others. And many times, we think that confessing to things, unburdening our souls, is always the right thing to do. We rarely consider the feelings of others in these acts, whether or not we preface our confession with, "I don't mean to hurt your feelings, but..."

My first college English professor once asked the class what the difference was between honesty and integrity. We all sat there, silent. (I don't recall how this subject came up.) She then gave us an example: "What about a man who is on his death bed? He is taking his last breaths, and his wife of 65 years is sitting there with him, holding his hand and crying softly. Just before he dies, he tells her that he had several long-tern affairs during their marriage. Was this necessary at that point? What good came of this honesty? Did this man act with integrity?" My mind was kind of blown. (She worded it much better than I have here.) It gave me a new perspective on truth and whether it is more important to be honest or more important to have integrity.

Since "truth" as a metaphysical concept, as almost any philosopher will say, is non-existent and totally relative, is there any integrity in trying to convince others of our own set of truths? Arguments are not based on one person's need to BE right, but to be PERCEIVED as right. These are two vastly different things. If we were all content in our set of truths, be they philosophical or religious, then there would be no need at all to convince others that they are "wrong." There is no integrity in arguing about politics or religion. We just want to win. We just want to have that feeling of superiority over another person. 

That is not to say that there are not times when convincing someone else of a truth is not necessary. When someone's rights are being threatened, as they are by the ignorants who want to deny gay people equal marriages and adoption rights, then the ignorants need to be educated. The blind cannot lead the blind. It's just too bad that so many egos get in the way and that so many blind people wholeheartedly believe that they can see and that it is the rest of the world that is blind.

So what about authenticity? What does it mean to be "authentic"? What does it mean to live "genuinely"? If you read my previous blog post you know that I believe in being true to ourselves and our natures. But I realize, like many opponents of the philosophy of authenticity, that finding this "true" self can be difficult since so much of our internal ideas and perceptions come from external sources (like how we were raised) and cultural expectations. For example, during a self-identity unit I will ask my students, "Would you still love country music if you had been raised by parents who played in a rock band? Would you still be an avid hunter if you were raised by vegan parents? Would you be so passionately against the death penalty if your family wasn't so socially liberal? Would you have such a fervent faith in your religion if you had been born in Iran to an Islamic family?" The truth is, we are all pretty gullible and malleable. Many of the things we hold nearest and dearest are just products of our individual environments. True, some break free: for example, my parents are pretty conservative, while I am anything but. But then again, if we truly love country music, does it matter where that love came from? Does it make it less authentic because we grew up listening to country music? Is it totally fair to say that only those things that are different from our early family, school, and church environments are authentic? And are not we able to evaluate our surroundings, as Erich Fromm suggests, and come to at least some of our own understandings and conclusions about how we will act and believe?

Since so much of modern life is little more than performance, how can we live authentically? I am not out to my students. The image I project to them is neither completely honest nor authentic. I am made painfully aware of this each time a student says something like, "I bet all the ladies swoon when you speak French to them." or asks, "Do you have a girlfriend?" Is it necessity that keeps me in the closet at work? Is it self-preservation? Is it fear of parent backlash? fear of rejection by students who, right now, seem to think I'm pretty cool? 

And in a broader sense, because I am not inside anyone else's mind and have not lived the life someone else has lived, is it really up to me to decide how authentic or inauthentic he or she is being? That question being asked, I suppose it is up to each of us to decide for ourselves how authentic we are. But to do that we have to be able to be honest with ourselves about who we are and what we want out of life. But since we are such frail creatures, is complete self-honesty really a possibility??

I am finding, writing being the generative process that it is, that I am no longer so certain of the conclusions I had about things when I began this post. The seed for this post sprouted because of people I saw around me being "fake" or saying/doing things only for validation from others. I feel like the conclusion I've come to is that I can only (and should only) be responsible for myself, and while true and utter self-honesty may not be possible, it is my duty to be, both with myself and in my dealings with others, as honest as I possibly can. 

What do you think? How do you define these concepts? In what ways do you strive for honesty, integrity, and authenticity? I would love to learn about others' interpretations of these things.