by Heath Cleaveland

Created on: March 21, 2010

"Be honest," we hear and we know of course that honesty is the best policy.  But when does being honest cross the line and become something unwelcome, something that hurts rather than helps?  Is there a difference philosophically (we ask because we love knowledge) between telling the truth and being brutally truthful?

The phrase "brutally truthful" in fact doesn't even sound right to our ears - we use the expression "brutally frank" instead.  Truth is associated with what is right and good; whereas brutality is wrong and evil.  We can be "brutally honest" so it is clear we understand that what is an honest appraisal, or a truthful perspective, can have troubling aspects.  We can say, then, that "the truth hurts"; but it hurts in a good way, making us grow through painful realization rather than wanton evil.

We have in our modern 21st century information age come to regard truth as quintessentially relevant, the basic core we seek to be able to better found our decisions.  What we have a tendency to forget is the relative perspective our individual truths (truth may be shared but is always possessed individually) represent, the fact that the beauty we find in truth is truly in the eye of the beholder.  Asking someone to be honest allows us to expect to hear the truth.  However, the honest assessment we receive isn't necessarily truth, unless we share the truth of the speaker.

It is the perspective from which the honesty is derived that establishes for us, the listeners, the possibility that we will construe what is said as brutally frank rather than purely honest.  It is easy to say that if what is said is hurtful, then it is overly frank; but that would be ignoring the widely held notion (mentioned above) that truth can be painful but positive.  Instead, we must examine what discriminates brutally frank from brutally honest.

Brutal frankness has the element of callousness in its meaning, something that is said without regard for the emotions of the listener.  We might be saying, "I don't care how this affects you AND it's fact."  Existentially, the brutality emerges from leaving someone hopeless, with no exit from the frank statement.  Without understanding that the harsh words come from a specific perspective that you do not share, you can be left devastated by them.  Frankness can be described as brutal specifically because it can cause great physical and mental anguish, either or both.

On the contrary, the brutally honest occupies a different class.  We often ask, "Can I be brutally honest?", and we mean our next statement to be accepted with reservations, to protect the person we have asked.  More like tough love, being brutally honest is something we do carefully to offer assistance with truths that are hard to hear.  Typically, we'll feel others share our opinion; the inaugurated process is one of growth rather than decay.

Finally, although English speakers are familiar with the expression, "the truth hurts", we consider that also as honesty, because it is meant to be constructive criticism.  In this case, it is our fault if we do not understand the good intent.  Since being honest is telling the truth, we cross the line from honesty to brutal frankness when we do not give our friend ample opportunity to see their way clear of the truthful (but unappreciated) perspective we have shared.  Frank is the unemotional side of honesty and truth is relative.  Adding brutality to cold words makes us shiver that much more; hence, the negative connotation.

Learn more about this author, Heath Cleaveland.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.