One of the supreme gifts of God bestowed on the human race is the ability to express oneself. People have associated the human power of expression with the human essence. This association is justified because the ability to express one’s convictions, thoughts and feelings is linked with the other essentially human attributes of observation and contemplation. The intellectual faculty of man would remain dormant and will perhaps dwindle if expression was denied to it. In reference to the ability to express oneself, some important questions arise. They must be addressed in order to make this unique ability beneficial for human beings. The questions are:
(a) How does one choose between silence and speech? Or in other words,“What are the circumstances under which one should keep quiet and in whichsituations, one must speak out?”
(b) If speech is the correct option, what ethical guidelines regulate it?
(c) Is it permissible for us to criticise people and groups of people or ideas and ideologies?
(d) Can one be offensive and what constitutes offence?
(e) Is it permissible to engage in propaganda or canvassing?
These questions have been the focus of intense debates. No one can seriously maintain that freedom of expression is absolute. But there is a lot of controversy about proper limits that must be prescribed to regulate this freedom.
IS SILENCE GOLDEN?
Children are often told to keep quiet. Sages have given this advice to adults also. The advice is indeed valuable. If we cultivate silence, we would probably be betterand deeper human beings. A person given to deep thought would often prefer silence to speech. It can also be safely asserted that a person who speaks only when he has something worthwhile to say, would be listened to with attention. A talkative person runs the risk of being ignored; his talk is regarded as being of no consequence. If we talk too much, we will not be taken seriously.
Nevertheless, there are circumstances when silence is not recommended. One such situation is related to prevention of evil; one must speak out against evils in society. Otherwise corruption would spread on earth. One specific instance of prevention ofevil is prevention of injustice. One should protest against exploitation, oppression andtyranny. Similarly, one should be willing to appear as a witness in a court of law if onehas material information about the matter under jurisdiction.
Another situation when one must speak is when a duty calls for it. Teachers, educators,lawyers, statesmen and experts must speak when there is a need to do so; silence is notan option for them. Similarly, social interaction demands exploratory conversation though a great deal of it may appear to be superficial and pointless. But it serves thepurpose of breaking the ice; people come to know one another and make informedchoices.
ETHICS OF SPEECH
We are familiar with the basic ethical guidelines: speak the truth, fulfil your promises,do not indulge in backbiting, do not use abusive language, curb improper verbal expression ofanger, do not speak harshly, do not exaggerate. All of these have to do with appropriatespeech. One must pay attention to the content as well as delivery of the words utteredby one. Out of the ethical guidelines, three emerge as the most basic ones.
The fist is that one must be factually correct. In personal matters, judgementabout people is best avoided; such a judgement is often biased or exaggerated. Inbusiness matters obviously, one must be scrupulously accurate; otherwise a lot ofcomplications may set in. In technical matters, attention must be paid to get all detailsright and factually correct.
Another important guideline is that one must be faithful to one’s conscience. To expressan opinion contrary to one’s true belief, is an act of dishonesty and cowardice.Politicians and lawyers can perhaps be accused of this dishonesty, most of the time. Thecommitment to one’s true belief may be a subjective one; nevertheless it needs to behonoured by any honest person.
The third important principle is the use of civilized language. Under no circumstances canthere be an excuse for being abusive. Choice of words must be appropriate. There areindeed words in every language which are supposed be avoided in civilized society.Conversations must steer clear of such words. Inappropriate slang should also beshunned.
CRITICISM
We as sensible beings have to evaluate ideas and ideologies. We may agree with them and express our agreement. But it is also possible that we do not buy an argument. We may find fault with it. It may be factually wrong or may not be logical. In such a situation, we may criticise the idea presented. No ethical rule requires us to avoid criticism. Nevertheless, one must strive to the ideal of honest criticism. In a system of ideas, it is possible that not all ideas are wrong; some may indeed be right. We shouldbe bold enough to point out that indeed there is an element of truth in a system of ideas;though we may disagree with the ideology, as a whole. Let our criticism be honest, balanced and logical.
OFFENSIVE SPEECH
What is offensive speech? It is possible to give a clear answer to this question by identifying offence with abusive language. Ifone’s language is proper, one is not being offensive, no matter how hard one’s criticism may be. Let the debate be open and transparent; it may even become passionate. But the boundaries of civilized discourse are to be maintained by all participants in the debate. The subjective criterion of avoiding injury to feelings is not a very helpful guide here because even proper criticism may be depicted as being injurious to feelings. Nevertheless, such criticism is to be entertained provided the language is civilized. Without such criticism, neither coursecorrection nor progress is possible in any society.
PROPAGANDA AND CANVASSING
If we are convinced about the truth of an idea or about correctness of a particular course of action, there is no harm in persuading others to agree with us. The only guideline is that we should speak the truth. We should present actual facts only to support our point of view; there should be no mispresentation. Similarly, we should avoid logical fallacies; our line of reasoning should be correct and faultless. At all times, we must be on guard that there are no loose ends in the chain of reasoning. We should also keep our presentation at the civilized level; the words and phrases used must avoid abusive overtones. Finally, while we may certainly try persuasion to bring people towards our viewpoint; it should be clear that we have no right to coerce people or to compel them by force to accept an opinion. We are of course free to present our suggestions but let us also realise that others are equally free to reject them.