Ethics: principles, theories, and contemporary applications

Government of the Tongue, Richard Allestree discusses the use of speech and how it impacts mankind's spiritual relationship with God. Allestree begins with a discussion of the use of speech. Next, Allestree details how people abuse speech. Afterwards, Allestree talks about atheistical discourse. After discussing atheistical discourse, Allestree talks about detraction, followed by lying defamation. Next, Allestree talks about other perversions of speech, including uncharitable truth, scoffing and derision, flattery, and boasting. Allestree goes on to speak about querulousness. Then, Allestree speaks about positiveness. Finally, Allestree talks about obscene talk.

In Section I, Allestree speaks about the use of speech. He begins his discussion by pointing out that man enjoys a special relationship with God, and was created superior to the animals. Therefore, so that man would not be solitary, God created an associate for him. However, lower animals were also given companions. The difference is that God gave humans the ability to be intimate with one another, so that they could share the thoughts of their minds and souls. The mechanism God gave man for this sharing was speech. Allestree then speaks about the benefits of speech, which has led to the creation of human society, and has given order to the other accomplishments of man, such as the sciences and the arts. Furthermore, speech has helped mankind overcome its inherent feebleness, by giving humans friendship, a method of sharing help and caring with one another. Furthermore, Allestree credits speech with the invention of writing, asserting that without language humans would not have developed writing. Therefore, through speech and writing, humans not only provide companionship to one another, but are also able to transmit the word of God. As a result, Allestree maintains that God gave man speech so that God could praise and magnify God. However, Allestree cautions that despite its noble role, speech can be misused and points out that people will be justified or condemned by their words.

In Section II, Allestree discusses the manifold abuse of speech. He points out that speech is extremely subject to depravation, so much so that it is described in Scripture as the force of all other depravation. Allestree backs up this assertion by demonstrating that original sin was facilitated by speech. The temptation in the Garden was not the only incidence of verbal temptation in the Bible. For example, Ham used speech to encourage his brethren to watch his parents together. Even the Patriarchs of the Bible misused speech. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Simeon, Levi, Moses, David, St. Peter, and Judas all engaged in lies or other perversions of speech, despite their exalted status. Because these exalted elders have fallen prey to the abuse of speech, Allestree cautions that all people must be careful, because their frailty proves that all humans are vulnerable.

In Section III, Allestree discusses atheistical discourse. He indicates that mankind wages war with heaven when it engages in atheistical speech. Not only do people inadvertently wage such a war, by violating God's laws, but also intentionally, by directly attacking God with speech. First, Allestree points out that Atheism does exist. Furthermore, he points out that atheism is making gains, and that the number of atheists rivals the numbers of people in established religious persuasions. Allestree believes that sensuality is one of the greatest appeals of atheism. The absence of a God to control, restrain, and punish mankind is another one of atheism's attractions for people, because it removes the threat of a future accounting for present behavior. Furthermore, Allestree believes that the desire to appear knowledgeable has also fueled atheism, because people do not want to appear foolish by demonstrating a belief in something that they cannot prove. However, even those people carry the vestiges of religion, fearing the possibility of judgment and Hell. Because of this belief, Allestree finds atheists to be unreasonable, because they embrace an idea that they fear is false. Allestree also believes that the ill deeds of atheists may provoke God's malice by trying to wield the power of annihilation that belongs to God alone. In this section, Allestree also touches on the topic of swearing, and points out that people even swear in order to emphasize truth. He emphasizes that some people misuse scripture for their own wit, which he believes is direct blasphemy. Allestree believes that the Scripture continues to speak to the present age, and should not be used in an ungodly manner.

In section four, Allestree speaks about detraction, which Allestree defines as speaking poorly of things on Earth and of ones neighbors. Though Allestree believes that detraction might properly be labeled a small sin, he does not believe that its relative size lessens its danger. On the contrary, he believes that the relative size of the sin may help tempt people to engage in the sin. Detraction refers to the impairing or lessening of a man by word, which is prohibited by people and by God.

Allestree also speaks against revenge, assuring that God will give take vengeance on behalf of His followers. Furthermore, he attributes the majority of feuds to injurious words.

In section five, Allestree speaks about lying defamation. He takes issue with people who make up falsehoods and those who spread information that they know to be false. He asserts that even in an age of vice, although people do make up falsehoods about one another, they do not admit to doing so because it combines malice and lying. He also condemns those who repeat the lies of others. Even those who unwillingly pass on lies are not exempt from guilt, because people who purport to speak the truth have a responsibility to make sure that they are indeed speaking the truth. Those who are not motivated by malice, but merely by personal interest, are not in a better position. Furthermore, he links these lies to idolatry, by stating that it demonstrates men worshipping their own imaginations over God.

In section six, Allestree talks about the uncharitable truth. He who divulges another's unknown, concealed fault is responsible for the consequences of that revelation. That is not to suggest that men should conceal the guilt of another. Therefore, sometimes justice requires a man to publish another's faults. Furthermore, the desire to be charitably conceal another's faults can be inconsistent with the idea of justice, especially when revealing those faults would benefit the public. In addition, people are not required to suffer their own defamation, simply from fear of proving another a false accuser. However, pointing out another's faults in order to make oneself appear better is a tremendous sin. In addition, envy sometimes prompts people to say things that are uncharitable to others, and those who feel shame about themselves try to cast that on others. The truth can also be uncharitable if one emphasizes only the good in another man. There are faults that are linked to the divulging of faults of others, which include the censuring and severe judging of others. In fact, Allestree suggests that people interrogate themselves about their right to judge others, when only God has the right or ability to judge others. Furthermore, he points out that people often have different standards for themselves and for others.

In section seven, Allestree speaks about scoffing and derision. Allestree makes the point that the use of wit allows hateful words to make more of an impression. In fact, he asserts that wit and sarcasm often survive both the speaker and the hearer, because such sayings are passed down in stories. However, Allestree does not wholly condemn the use of wit; he believes it a blessing when used as God intended it to be used. However, the perversion of God's blessings of ingenuity and quickness of parts is something Allestree views as a serious sin. In fact, those who are blessed with greater intelligence or insight have an obligation to use it to help those who do not share those blessings. Allestree indicates a belief that the importance that people place on humor has grown tremendously, and that too much of life is taken to feed that humor. In fact, he believes that people are trying to shame Christians out of their religion, despite Christ's denunciation of those who are ashamed of Him and His words. Allestree points out that people die in earnest, and should, therefore, not live only in jest. In addition, he warns that mocking God is very impudent and that exposing ones brethren to contempt offends and mocks God.

While Allestree has a problem with mocking, he also has a problem with flattery. In fact, in section eight, Allestree indicates that flattery is the most fatal wound of the tongue. The problem with flattery is that its injury is not apparent. Instead, flattery combines lying, servility, and treachery. There are two types of flattery: giving praise where it is not due or professing kindness that is not real. Lying is the root of both types of flattery, because if what is said is the truth, there is no flattery. Allestree indicates that flattery is a form of mental slavery and says that love and friendship are far too valuable to prostitute them. In addition, he believes that flattery is harmful because, by failing to point out a man's flaws, or by transmuting those flaws into assets, one condemns the man to continue in those faults. Furthermore, he points out that flatterers are often treacherous, because their affection ends when the one that they have flattered falls out of favor. In fact, when the formerly adored friend falls out of favor, the flatterers are often the first to point out their faults to those who are coming into favor.

In section nine, Allestree speaks about boasting. Boasting is not limited to people speaking bombastically about themselves, but also includes people who cannot hear talk on any subject without trying to turn that subject towards them. Therefore, it becomes clear that boasters are very proud, which is its own sin. In fact, Scripture refers to pride as being the vice most detestable to God. However, he points out that boasting about accidental acquisitions and natural excellencies is a sacrilege, because the boaster is taking credit for something given to him by God. One cannot snatch one's reward from God by making one's own tongue the trumpet of one's alms or the echo of one's prayers. Allestree maintains that boasting and ostentation have never brought advantage to any man. Furthermore, a man who studies only himself is unlikely to make any progress, especially when a man makes no inquiries into his own faults or defects, but only focuses his contemplation upon his best qualities.

In section ten, Allestree speaks of querulousness. He believes that boasting and querulousness can often be seen in one person, and that murmurers and complainers are oftentimes those most likely to be boastful. He finds it remarkable that every trivial fault seems to eclipse even the greatest blessings. In fact, he believes that most complaints and discontents stem from man's lusts and inordinate appetites. Furthermore, men seem to find themselves ill used by people who will not serve them, as if a person is somehow selfish if he will not make himself a slave to another's will. He believes that querulousness renders a man unpleasant company. Even if men should charitably respect another's complaints, if the audience is not concerned with the cause of the complaints, they cannot be expected to remedy them. He further points out that there is no room in heaven for complaints.

Although Allestree warns against querulousness, in section eleven he also warns against a man being over confident and peremptory. He believes that there are two types of peremptoriness: one a magisterialness in matters of opinion and speculation, the other a positiveness in relating matters of fact. He finds a man in error when he only considers his own opinion, and above reproach. He believes that some men believe that they lose honor if they change an opinion, which is a sign of pride, despite the fact that human nature is very fallible. He also cautions that personal prejudices are very forcible in biasing opinions. Therefore, confidence should not be confused with the truth. In addition to pride, ignorance fuels those who believe they are free from error; furthermore, the combination of ignorance and pride are virtually impenetrable. He also cautions against those who attest to the truth of idle vagrant reports, turning loose rumors into certainties. Furthermore, he warns that some men only converse with a lower sort of company, so that the truth of his words will not be disputed. He also warns against men swearing oaths without knowledge of the truth, because they make God a witness to trifling rumors. Finally, Allestree warns that men who are peremptory are more prone to quarrels, because they are unwilling to acknowledge the possibility of truth in an opposing point-of-view.

In section twelve, Allestree speaks of obscene talk. Obscene and immodest talk is that talk that is offensive to the purity of God. However, he does not go into a lengthy discussion of obscenity, but instead encourages the reader to dismiss the subject. He believes that uncleanness should not even be named by those aspiring to better.

After describing the various types of speech that are offensive to God, Allestree cautions that he knows that he has not covered all types of offensive speech. However, he hopes that his writing will allow people to improve themselves and strive towards becoming perfect men. He also hopes that it will allow people to see how these misuses of speech have come into common practice and are used on a daily basis. He warns against man misusing his tongue, even in innocence. He believes that men must train themselves to speak for good, because if the tongue is not speaking of good, it will be practicing upon bad. So men must try to make their tongues into instruments of virtue. The highest virtue of speech is when it is used to implant a true reverential awe of God, and thereby sow the seed of immortality.

Interpretation

Initially, it appears that there is little to interpret in Allestree's The Government of the Tongue, because Allestree's discussion of speech and how it impacts mankind's relationship with God is relatively straightforward. Allestree discusses the use of speech and how it impacts mankind's spiritual relationship with God. However, it quickly becomes clear that Allestree's writing is directed strictly at a Christian audience. First, Allestree references man's special relationship with God, based on the idea that man was created superior to the animals. Next, he mentions that speech was given to men so that they could share with one another and with God. This draws directly from Scripture and is not a point-of-view shared by all religions.

Even though Allestree's writing is directed towards a Christian audience, he makes points that are applicable to people of all religious backgrounds. Regardless of religious affiliation, few people would be likely to question the concept that speech has enabled the creation of modern human society. For example, Allestree's assertion that spoken speech led to written writing seems apparent. However, one might disagree with his assertion that speech and writing were developed for the glorification of God, or even that they were gifts from God.

Furthermore, Allestree's discussion about the abuse of speech is not merely directed towards man's relationship with God. Although he claims that he is not entering into a discussion of ethical speech, Allestree does make a strong ethical and philosophical argument regarding the appropriate use of speech. For example, he points out how speech can be misused, and these misuses are not limited to a religious context. However, he links each specific type of misuse to something in the Scripture. For example, the first abuse of speech Allestree discusses is depravation. In fact, he maintains that speech is the source of all other types of depravation. In fact, he shows that speech played an essential role in original sin, because the Serpent used speech to tempt Eve. He also highlights several instances where strictly verbal temptation led to catastrophic and ungodly outcomes in the Bible. By using these examples, Allestree makes it clear that speech can be the cause of other sins.

Allestree's discussion of atheistical discourse is very interesting. Allestree's definition of atheism is broad and appears to include any direct attack on God through speech. Allestree appears to believe that atheism is a tremendous problem, which is making gains. One of the reasons he believes atheism is making gains is because it maintains that there is no God to hold people accountable in the future for their behavior in the present. However, Allestree also discusses the sin of pride in various contexts throughout his writing. He makes it clear that he believes that pride contributes tremendously to other sins. For example, he suggests that pride plays an important role in the spread of atheism, because people want to appear knowledgeable, and fear that demonstrating faith in something that they cannot prove makes them appear unknowledgeable.

In fact, Allestree makes it clear that he finds atheism to be unreasonable. He maintains that even atheists carry the vestiges of religion in them, and fear the possibility of judgment and Hell. This point is essential, because Allestree basically links the misuse and abuse of speech with atheism, even when it is not so labeled. For example, if God has cautioned against these various misuses of speech, and people ignore these cautions, they are doing something that runs contrary to the existence of God. Therefore, any of the other abuses of speech can be described as somewhat atheist. It also appears that Allestree would even contend that such abuses of speech are somewhat responsible for the spread of atheism.

Another salient point that Allestree makes is that the relative size of a sin does not make it less harmful. For example, he labels detraction a relatively small sin. However, he also demonstrates that many people engage in detraction, perhaps because it is seen as a relatively small sin. He points out that something as small as the sin of detraction can be responsible for a much greater harm, like feuds or wars.

One of the most interesting aspects of Allestree's investigation into verbal discourse is his position on lying. It is no surprise that he finds fault with those who make up falsehoods and who spread information that they know to be false. However, he goes further than that. Allestree believes that even those who unwittingly pass along the lies of others are not exempt from liability for their lies. Although he does not go so far as to say this, Allestree seems to imply that a man is responsible for any falsehood that comes out of his mouth. In fact, Allestree's position appears to be that when a man is speaking, he is making an implied promise that he is speaking the truth. Therefore, someone who speaks without ensuring that he is speaking the truth should be responsible for spreading lies.

In fact, Allestree links lying, or failing to ascertain the truth to other abuses of speech. For example, he believes that flattery is a tremendous abuse of speech. It is initially difficult to understand why flattery would be considered an abuse of speech, because it does not seem to have any victims. However, Allestree indicates that flattery presents a unique combination of lying, servility, and treachery. Allestree correctly maintains that all flattery necessarily contains falsehoods.

His point is that if something is said in truth, it can not be flattery. This is because flattery necessarily involves praise that is not due or kindness that is not felt. Furthermore, Allestree's more salient point may be that one who flatters does not do so in order to boost up the object of his flattery. On the contrary, people who engage in flattery do so in order to improve their own position. As a result, when the one who has been flattered falls out of favor, it is oftentimes an ardent supporter who becomes a prime enemy.

However, Allestree does not believe that merely speaking the truth is sufficient to keep one from abusing speech. He points out that one of the most tremendous abuses of speech is when people speak the truth, but in an uncharitable manner. He believes that one who divulges the fault of another is responsible for the consequences of that revelation. However, Allestree places a tremendous burden on men. For example, a man should not conceal another's guilt, and may even have an affirmative duty to reveal another's faults, when those revelations would benefit the public. However, if the only point of a revelation is to boost up the speaker, then the fact that such a revelation is true does nothing to redeem the speaker. Allestree's point is important, especially because it is contrary to the modern idea of libel of defamation. For example, in modern times, one can escape liability for almost any written or spoken statement by proving that the statement was true. However, Allestree does not believe that one escapes moral liability for hurtful statements, if those statements were not made for a good purpose. He also believes that even positive truthful statements can be misused. For example, a speaker who emphasizes only the positive about a person, ignoring knowledge he has about someone's faults, is equally guilty of misusing the truth.

Allestree also finds fault with something unusual: the use of wit. Generally, even in Scripture, people are lauded for the use of wit. In fact, one cannot believe, even after Allestree's condemnation of the misuse of wit, that man should avoid using any of the gifts given them by God. On the contrary, one has to realize that Allestree only condemns the misuse of wit. Furthermore, he limits the misuse of wit to very specific situations. For example, when a person uses wit and sarcasm to belittle one who lacks the same mental and verbal skills, it is a supreme act of cruelty. In fact, he points out that speech can have the same content, but have a much greater negative impact if people use wit and sarcasm. This is due to the fact that people tend to repeat witty words, while they do not repeat the same type of insults if the original insult was not conveyed in a witty manner. Furthermore, he goes so far as to link the use of wit by the wrong people with the spread of atheism. He does this by showing that some people will even go so far as to use wit to try to shame Christians away from Christianity.

Allestree's position on boasting is perhaps the most traditionally Christian approach towards speech. One theme in Christianity is that people are to consider others when taking actions. Therefore, avoiding boasting is important. Boasting includes not only one over-inflating oneself, but also one who strives to always be the topic of conversation. It is clearly un-Christian and un-charitable to always change the topic of conversation to oneself. Furthermore, while true Christians need to engage in contemplation and self-reflection, this reflection needs to concentrate on ones faults and defects, rather than simply looking at one's best qualities.

One of Allestree's most interesting arguments centers on people being over-confident and peremptory. This is an interesting caution, especially given that so many different branches of Christianity are guilty of this exact sin. He believes that it is a tremendous problem when people believe that their opinions and understanding of the facts are beyond reproach and not subject to error. However, many different branches of Christianity believe that they have the only true understanding of Christ and the pathway to redemption. In fact, this is not a problem that is unique to the branches of Christianity, but is actually a central tenet of Christianity. Therefore, because Allestree makes it clear that he is a Christian and that he is speaking to a Christian audience; it appears that he does not believe this caution should be applied to a Christian's religious beliefs, despite his caution that confidence not be confused with truth. In fact, his argument would tend to lend itself to downplaying the importance of faith in personal opinion, because faith can be equated with confidence, and cannot be proven to be the truth. This juxtaposition is extremely interesting, given Allestree's concerns about the spread of atheism.

Conclusion

Although Allestree made it clear that he did not intend his discourse to be a general ethical discourse, but a message specifically aimed at Christians, it is impossible to ignore how appropriate his points are to life in general. In fact, in the modern world, where there is a tremendous amount of strife between religious groups, it would be a shame to limit the impact of Allestree's words merely to a Christian audience. In fact, given that three of the major world religions all share some major religious principles; it seems that his proscriptions could be equally applied to Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Furthermore, while Allestree speaks to the individual, modern circumstances make it clear that religious groups are guilty of the same type of abuses of speech that individuals commit. Therefore, examining modern social and political events from the perspective of Allestree's work, one should be able to see how the misuse of speech has greatly contributed to modern social problems.

First, if one believes that Allestree is correct and that all humans are prone to the misuse of speech, one will be more careful when evaluating speech of people in power. Allestree makes his point clear by demonstrating that even the elders in the Bible fell prey to the misuse of speech. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that one of today's major political conflicts, the war in Iraq, can directly be attributed to an intentional misuse of speech. At one point in time, the United States Congress was led to believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and intended to use those weapons against the United States. As a result, Congress voted for war against Iraq. However, time has revealed that those assertions were not true. Therefore, it is clear that the misuse of speech can have serious and grave consequences, even outside of a religious context.

Furthermore, Allestree cautions against the misuse of scripture for one's own purposes. While he specifically meant Christian scripture, this admonition is clearly applicable in today's climate of politico-religious strife. Terrorists of all religious denominations site their religious beliefs as the source of their terrorist acts. However, the mainstream members of all of the major religions denounce these proclamations, and assert that none of the major religious texts supports the idea of terrorism in the name of any god. Rather than being ultra-religious, as many individual terrorists and their affiliated groups claim to be, these terrorists would actually be closer to atheists, as described by Allestree. To misuse scripture to further one's own personal or political agenda is blasphemous. While Allestree only links this blasphemy to the misuse of Christian scripture, it stands to reason that the misuse of any holy text would be considered blasphemous in any religion.

However, the misuse of scripture for personal and political gain is not limited to terrorist groups. Unfortunately, many major modern political and religious leaders who are not affiliated with any terrorist organizations appear to use scripture, or at least the guise of religion, to further their own personal agendas. One very vivid example of this is ultra-right-wing anti-abortion activists. First, they equate Biblical prohibitions against murder with prohibitions against abortion. While these arguments appear facially valid, they ignore the historical reality that abortion was not considered taboo in the cultures forming the foundation of Christianity. On the contrary, many of those cultures not only practiced abortion, but also believed in the limited practice of infanticide, as long as it was accomplished by abandoning a child after birth and not by direct violence against the child. While these actions are obviously unconscionable in today's ethical climate, cannot find scriptural justification to prohibit those actions if one has any understanding of the meaning of scripture. Even more troubling is the fact that violent anti-abortion activists use non-existent scriptural prohibitions against abortion to justify violence against abortion providers or women seeking abortions. In fact, some have even gone so far as to commit murder in order to prevent abortions, which clearly contravenes any scriptural prohibitions against murder. This argument is not to defend a pro-choice stance, but simply to point out that scripture does not support the concept that Christians are necessarily anti-abortion. However, certain religious and political factions in the United States have gone so far as to suggest that any pro-choice person simply cannot be Christian.

Allestree also warns against detraction. What is most interesting is that several major celebrities have recently been called to task for detraction. First, Mel Gibson, who had previously been accused of anti-Semitism, went on an anti-Semitic rant when arrested for drunk driving. Next, Michael Richards used an offensive racial epitaph to respond to hecklers in the audience of his stand-up comedy routine. Then, Jackie Mason accused the group Jews for Jesus of detraction, when they claimed he was a member of their group. However, in his public statements regarding that group, Mason engaged in his own detraction, suggesting that Jesus and his followers were responsible for the same type of oppression of Jews that the Ku Klux Klan had engaged in against African-Americans. All of these people are professional entertainers who depend upon the goodwill of their audience for their very livelihoods, which means that they are probably more likely than most to avoid semantic pit falls. Therefore, the fact that these people have found themselves embroiled in disputes based on detraction makes it clear that Allestree was correct; the fact that detraction seems like such a minor offense makes it that much more alluring for would-be sinners. Even more interesting is the fact that, for an offense that may seem minor, some of these celebrities have been unable to redeem themselves after speaking injurious and hurtful words.