Many people avoid saying the truth because they want to keep things calm. They call this kindness. I think this is a misunderstanding.
Kindness is about caring for the other person’s well-being. Avoidance is about protecting yourself from discomfort.
I believe you can be honest and kind at the same time. Honesty does not require cruelty. It requires clarity and intention.
For example, not telling someone about a problem because you fear conflict might feel peaceful in the moment. But later, that same silence can create confusion, resentment, or bigger emotional damage. In that case, silence was not kind. It was just easier.
I am not arguing that blunt or harsh honesty is good. Rudeness is not honesty. But avoiding the truth entirely often shifts the cost to the other person.
From my perspective, clarity is a form of respect.
There's a time and place for everything.
Let's say my friend is dealing with a particularly hard breakup. It just happened 5 minutes ago and they immediately called me for support.
It is clear that they played a major part in the reason for this breakup. They are at fault due to their behavior. But they're hurting right now, and not really in a place to hear that from me.
Wouldn't it be kind to keep the peace and just be there for them? That doesn't mean I won't have the discussion about their role in the breakup with them later on. It just means I don't think it would do any good to have it right now.
Avoiding honesty to keep the peace can be kindness if part of the reason for doing so rests on a plan to be honest at a later point in time when the audience will be more receptive to that honesty. Knowing when to provide feedback or criticism is just as important as knowing what feedback or criticism to provide.
Absolutely, context matters. I agree there are times when holding back temporarily is the kind choice, especially if the person isn’t ready to hear it. My point is more about people avoiding honesty altogether, not strategically delaying it. True kindness is knowing when and how to be honest, not just avoiding it to stay comfortable
trouble is, people who like to talk about how honest they are almost universally preemptively justifying cruelty that they'll later pretend was just honesty for the benefit of whoever they were bullying
This is a solid take but I think there's still a difference between strategic timing and just avoiding the conversation altogether
Most people who say they're "keeping the peace" never actually circle back to have that harder conversation - they just hope the issue resolves itself or the moment passes. That's not kindness, that's just kicking the can down the road
Your example works because you're actively planning to address it later when your friend can actually process it. But let's be real, how often do people actually follow through on that plan vs just letting it fade into the background
I get what you mean timing matters a lot being kind in the moment does not block honesty later it just means you pick the right time when it can actually land and help instead of adding pain
You can also be dishonest and kind at the same time.
You can be rude and honest at the same time. You can also be rude and dishonest at the same time.
Polite/impolite really have no inherent relationship to truth/dishonesty.
What cost are you referring to? People lie all day long and it doesn't cost the other person anything. Sometimes it spares them.
Cashier: How are you?
Customer: My mammogram had something weird on it, I was late to work again and was written up and I sure hope my credit card isn't declined for this purchase because I'm broke and am close to maxed out. Also, I'm probably drinking too much.
vs.
Cashier: How are you?
Customer: Fine.
You're making the mistake of assuming that other people always want honesty. They don't. Often they don't care what you think at all.
I get that politeness and honesty aren’t always connected, and not everyone wants full honesty. My point is about avoiding truth when it actually matters—doing so can harm trust, relationships, or outcomes. Small lies are one thing; consistently avoiding important truths isn’t harmless.
"I'm not talking about any of the circumstances where my view doesn't apply, only those circumstances where it does apply!"
You're running headfirst into a tautology.
So basically, your view is a tautology:
In cases where avoiding truth is harmful, avoiding truth is harmful.
Is that the controversial position you're staking out?
Does every truth need to be shared? I can see where you're coming from as it relates to things of significance. If your partner is doing something dangerous/unethical/whatever, having an honest discussion with them is important to establish expectations and boundaries.
Many truths aren't significant, though. They're not worth breaking the peace over, because there is little benefit to either person in sharing and addressing that truth. Being honest about an intrusive sexual thought, a colleague's emo aesthetic, or your friend's taste in music don't produce value - they produce just conflict and negative feelings. Sparing someone of this unnecessary harm certainly is kind.
Yeah not every truth matters. My concern is people avoiding honesty when it truly counts. True kindness sometimes requires sharing the hard truths responsibly.
To that, I'll say that avoiding honesty is often kind in the short term. While you're entirely correct in saying that we need to share hard truths responsibly, part of responsibly sharing truths is timing. This isn't to say that you need to wait for the perfect moment - that never comes - but rather, take into consideration the overarching impact that sharing the truth will have on the recipient.
Is the issue here with the methods or the goal? There are many times I can think of where I have avoided the truth to "keep the peace" where the only person who benefits from not keeping the peace is me.
1) when the person to whom I would be telling the truth is worse off than me in some way, I would rather not tell them they are deluded just because their delusion annoys me. Because, to my mind, this would only cause them stress and not solve any problems for them, just a minor problem for me. I'm keeping their peace, not mine.
2) when not keeping the peace would similarly solve my problem with a person, but not their problem with everyone else, and "everyone else" has to deal with the fallout instead of me. I'm keeping "everyone else's peace," not mine.
In both of those cases, I actually DO believe I am doing a kindness.
I agree that executive dysfunction is real, and I’m not saying people can just “power through” it with willpower alone. That’s not my point.
What I’m questioning is how and when honesty is delivered, not denying that some people have structural limits. Sometimes softening the truth isn’t about dismissing someone’s struggles. It’s about asking whether blunt honesty actually helps them in that moment, or just adds pressure without offering a solution.
My argument isn’t that determination fixes everything. It’s that honesty exists on a spectrum, and context matters. Being accurate and being kind aren’t mutually exclusive.
This is a big problem with my church denomination. They are polite to a fault but also dishonest because they keep their true feelings hidden and disguised. Eventually those come out and people feel hurt and betrayed.
You’re describing the long-term cost of avoiding honesty. Politeness can delay conflict. It doesn’t resolve it.
When feelings stay hidden, trust erodes. People don’t feel hurt because of honesty. They feel hurt because honesty came too late.
I’m not arguing for cruelty. I’m arguing that silence and disguise aren’t kindness either.
Do you think earlier, imperfect honesty would have caused less damage than polite dishonesty over time?
Those who felt hurt and betrayed mistook politeness for kindness when in fact the politeness was a just a disguise meant to obscure true feeling and attitudes that were clearly unkind.
You’re describing the long-term cost of avoiding honesty. Politeness can delay conflict. It doesn’t resolve it.
When feelings stay hidden, trust erodes. People don’t feel hurt because of honesty. They feel hurt because honesty came too late.
I’m not arguing for cruelty. I’m arguing that silence and disguise aren’t kindness either.
Do you think earlier, imperfect honesty would have caused less damage than polite dishonesty over time?
There are many possibilities.
Can you give a clear example to demonstrate what you are talking about?
Is there nuance to your view, ie can you understand why sometimes simply remaining quiet rather than being cruel can be an advantage?
For example, if a colleague keeps missing deadlines, staying silent avoids conflict but causes bigger problems later. The silence isn’t neutral—it’s a negative choice that harms both the person staying quiet and others. Honest, kind communication upfront prevents long-term issues.
But in that scenario remaining silent isn't kind, it's avoiding helping a colleague.
Yes, silence seems easier, but it often harms others. True kindness is being honest while caring.
So do you want to change your view on kindness? On silence?
Do you know what view you want to believe precisely here?
The view I’m presenting for discussion is: Avoiding honesty to keep the peace is not necessarily kindness. I want to explore whether people truly see silence as kind, or if clarity and honest communication even when uncomfortabl is actually the more compassionate approach.
I understand the view you currently hold, I'm asking what you'd like to have it changed to.
I want to change my view from thinking that silence can sometimes be kind, to believing that true kindness often requires honest communication, even if it’s uncomfortable.
I don't understand the difference, isn't that what you already believe?
You can be honest, but still temper your words to soften the blow. For example, say someone you know is going through a breakup that's partially their fault for not being a supportive listener. Here are two potential responses:
"They left you because you're a bad listener"
vs.
"Maybe they felt they were having difficulty communicating with you?"
Both responses are true, but one is a little kinder than the other. Like most things in life, there's a spectrum. You have to adjust to the person you're talking to. Different people will respond in different ways, and if they're in a highly emotional state being brutally honest could drive them away. You have to know who you're talking to and figure out the best way to respond, which is admittedly very difficult. You may get it wrong. But I do think people aren't always ready to hear the truth.
Exactly, it’s about timing and understanding the person. Honesty can be kind if delivered thoughtfully.
Re:OP I use to think the same but there are certainly circumstances where a lie is preferable.
If you lived in German in 44 and the Gestopo asked if you knew if any Jews were around, and you knew that your neighbor was hiding a family. Would it not be kindness to lie?
Ok ok that’s a cheap example. I remember listening to a couples therapist talk about her Latin American colleagues on this issue and they all said you have to lie, lie like hell sometimes because the truth no matter how it is presented can get someone injured or killed. Specifically a situation where infidelity is not known to the husband. In some places where the husband to find out, it would lead to violence. So for the safety of the women, if a therapist is aware of infidelity, morally they should not tell the husband.
Now this isn’t the case normally in western societies to have that fear. But an argument can be made that honesty can be destructive to the point of no return in the relationship.
For instance a husband telling his wife he fell out of love with her because she is fat. There is no way of truly softening that fact that wouldn’t almost certainly spiral the relationship into a breakup, but this is a very common thing in relationships today. Rather the goal of a therapist is hear the issues and rather than rely them, help the couple to see if they can rekindle their relationship.
Some relationship can move forward, but the hatred, resentment, and anger from that kind of truth is like a emotional shotgun blast to the face. A person has to process that in a moment and didn't have the luxury of developing that thought over time and after reflection.
Meanwhile the husband in this case feels better having unburdened himself through honesty of a issue he has had to deal with privately, that even though he expects a verbal lashing, after, he will feel better. Almost absolved of his own guilty burden.
Now neither is in a state to move forward, and the spiral will likely occur.
What do you mean by "truth"? Do you mean, "Well she's fat so it's better I tell her so she can fix it" or do you mean truth like your personal feelings or things about you etc?
Sometimes “keeping the peace” is literal. Some people are human powder kegs, and that conflict you speak of could manifest in actual violence.
Knowing a person’s mental health status, what they can realistically handle, and withholding certain things that might trigger them, is in fact kindness. Some people have to be protected from themselves.
Do you have any concrete examples you can link to or reference of people confusing the thing you're talking about here with kindness? I don't see any empirical basis for your view here.