Integrity

Integrity
Integrity is one of the most important qualities that define a man’s character. Lack of integrity is in fact a serious character flaw. When it comes to integrity there are not gray areas, there are not “if” or “but”. There are not measuring scales and there are not descriptors such as “high”, “low”, “higher” or “lower”. Integrity is defined as a steadfast adherence to a strict moral or ethical code. In essence, you either have integrity or you don’t.


Many people will find excuses or gray areas in order to justify behavior that otherwise will challenge his values and integrity. Listen, gray areas are created by society and individuals as a way (right or wrong) to justify certain actions. That is why integrity is either white or black. You cannot justify lack of integrity.

Are you a man of integrity?
If you do to another person what you don't want another person doing to you then you lack integrity.

How can you really test if a person have or lacks integrity? The best way to measure this is by putting you in a shoddy situation in which NO one will ever find out. For instance, if you could steal $100K from your boss knowing that NO one will find out. Or if you could cheat on your wife knowing that NO one will find out. If you could take 5 days off from work without claiming vacation time knowing NO one will ever find out.

If you answer "yes" to any of the examples above then you lack integrity. There is a difference about not bending your principals out of a fear of getting caught and not bending your principals out of integrity.

In conclusion
Finding "gray areas" that allow you to bend your principals so you can sleep peacefully at night does not make you a man of integrity. No one is perfect. Many times we will be faced situations that will test our character. If you do something that tests the principles that define integrity, the best thing you can do is take accountability for your actions and make sure you accept and learn from that mistake. Justifying lack of integrity in fact diminishes accountability. And we all know that accountability is another important quality that defines a man’s character.

Note: I can see people coming with extreme situations in order to debate my point. Let me put that argument to rest. Yes, there might be extreme situations in which a man might have to betray his principles. A man might be forced by kidnappers to steal in order to save the life of his child. In an extreme situation of war and great depression, a man might have to steal bread in order to feed his family. And do you know what? Even during those extremes and moments of despair, a man with integrity will intuitively exercise every single option that does not betray his principles in order to safeguard his life and the life of his love ones. Why will this be an extreme? Because if you take away this man's life or the life of his loves ones...well...this is self-explanatory.

Are you a man of integrity?

If you do to another person what you don't want another person doing to you then you lack integrity.

Click to expand...

There's hardly a single person alive that doesn't or isn't breaking this rule. In order to follow this rule more closely you have to see gray areas. You see gray areas as justifications to do wrong. But in reality gray areas can be just as much about seeing a situation from different angles to do right.

How can you really test if a person have or lacks integrity? The best way to measure this is by putting you in a shoddy situation in which NO one will ever find out. For instance, if you could steal $100K from your boss knowing that NO one will find out. Or if you could cheat on your wife knowing that NO one will find out. If you could take 5 days off from work without claiming vacation time knowing NO one will ever find out.

If you answer "yes" to any of the examples above then you lack integrity. There is a difference about not bending your principals out of a fear of getting caught and not bending your principals out of integrity.

Click to expand...

Unless and until the person is actually in this situation and acts you cannot say what you'd do nor test for integrity by simply stating what you would do if you were in that situation.

I have a friend who is a counselor - she is a "relativist"(as most secular counselors are)
She preaches the following doctrine to her clients who are in marital difficulties .
" Behavior is OK if both sides FEEL that is it OK " . She scoffs at the notion that INTEGRITY is valuable and descibes moralists as "all or nothing" brickheads . I regard this philosophy as fashionable and convenient - expedient, and lacking in commitment to any ideals.
She and I have numerous debates about this because I believe that appaling behavior is universally UNDERSTOOD if we get our heads out of our faddish, liberal a$$es and find the courage to condemn and banish destructive behavior .

INTEGRITY,to me, is demonstrated by being willing to act and live rigidly in accordance with one's moral code even if those actions are likely to bring pain, loss or disadvantage.

ketostix said:

There's hardly a single person alive that doesn't or isn't breaking this rule. In order to follow this rule more closely you have to see gray areas. You see gray areas as justifications to do wrong. But in reality gray areas can be just as much about seeing a situation from different angles to do right.

Click to expand...

Ketostix, hand-in-hand with integrity, comes strength of character. By living a life of integrity, requires, and tests, this strength...pretty soon it grows inside you. You don't worry about the gray areas anymore.

You become a rock. You make solid decisions with your life, and you look people in the eyes. You sleep easy at night knowing you are out there making a difference with your life, and the lives of people around you.

People respect you, and start asking for your advise.

You become a man of honor.

Pretty f*cking great way to live a life, if you ask me.

Originally Posted by ketostix
See that's just it, to really test integrity of a person they have to be put in a situation that they can most likely get away with. Short of setting up a sting operation and entrapping the person you won't be able to test them like this. My point is most people will compromise their own integrity at certain times and situations.

Click to expand...

A man’s character is not for compromise. A person knows if he has integrity or if his actions are based out of fear of being caught. I can tell you right now that I will not steal even if nobody would find out about it. I found a wallet with over $100 and several credit cards. That wallet had a driver license and an address. I went out of my way and called information to see if I can get a phone number. That failed, so I stopped by the police station and returned it.

What would I say to a man that say “hey, there is no way you can know if I truly lack integrity”. My answer would be; “It is your character…not mine. The only person you are fooling is yourself”.

Originally Posted by STR8UP

Hmmmm....sounds like there might be some "gray" area after all.

No, gray area is only for "justification".

You do see just how little sense you are making, don't you

Click to expand...

Str8up wrote the above after I stated that depending of the culture or society men having several women (wives, mistresses, etc.) might not necessary lack integrity.

Here is the thing, we don’t live in Africa or some South American nation or some Asian nation. What we might consider immoral or unethical as a society, those other cultures might consider moral and ethical. I wanted to make that clear because I know people from different nations visit our website. I did not want to be pretentious and push our societal code of ethics to anyone.

But I am sure that STR8UP was born and raised in the U.S.A. In fact, I know he still lives in the U.S.A.

Originally Posted by STR8UP

Women are not "property" and thus cannot be "taken" from another person. I did not break a commitment to another person. I do not believe that my actions were "wrong", and I don't care if our collective society says otherwise. I did not break an oath too myself or any other human being. I remained true to my principals.

Click to expand...

That was in relation to sleeping with a married woman.

Not accepting that his actions were wrong under our societal code of ethics is a clear indication you lack accountability. Lack of accountability is a serious lack of character. Here is why…when you integrity is put into test and you fail…the only thing that can help you regroup is ACCOUNTABILITY.

On the issue of “cannot be taken from another person”. Listen, you claim to be a “deep thinker”. So…let’s think a little “deeper”. By cheating with a married woman you are contributing toward taking from another man. You are contributing toward lost of his financial stability as in a divorce MOST men loses 50% of their brute salary (meaning that before taxes, he loses about 50% to his wife for a total of 60-70% after taxes). You are also contributing toward that man losing 100% access to his children. And consequently, you are contributing toward a vicious circle of children raised by single mothers.

If you feel that is NOT wrong…then you have a serious character flaw. It is called “lack of accountability”.

If you admit that is wrong under our societal code of ethics, but your personal morals are such that you can sleep at night after the deed…then there is nothing I can say. You are accountable…you are not making excuses…and I am not in a position to preach personal morals to anyone.

ketostix said:

There's hardly a single person alive that doesn't or isn't breaking this rule. In order to follow this rule more closely you have to see gray areas. You see gray areas as justifications to do wrong. But in reality gray areas can be just as much about seeing a situation from different angles to do right.

Click to expand...

You cannot justify lack of character. Integrity and for that matter accountability are two of the most important qualities that define a man's character.

There are people with integrity out there. Few? Of course! That's why I say that there are very few DJs out there too.

Listen, I never said that it is EASY to be a man of character. It is not. That's what make this special.

Unless and until the person is actually in this situation and acts you cannot say what you'd do nor test for integrity by simply stating what you would do if you were in that situation.

Click to expand...

If the person has a character flaw...it is his character flaw. Not mine.
The sad thing is that a person with a character flaw will eventually be exposed.

jophil28 said:

I have a friend who is a counselor - she is a "relativist"(as most secular counselors are)
She preaches the following doctrine to her clients who are in marital difficulties .
" Behavior is OK if both sides FEEL that is it OK " . She scoffs at the notion that INTEGRITY is valuable and descibes moralists as "all or nothing" brickheads . I regard this philosophy as fashionable and convenient - expedient, and lacking in commitment to any ideals.
She and I have numerous debates about this because I believe that appaling behavior is universally UNDERSTOOD if we get our heads out of our faddish, liberal a$$es and find the courage to condemn and banish destructive behavior .

INTEGRITY,to me, is demonstrated by being willing to act and live rigidly in accordance with one's moral code even if those actions are likely to bring pain, loss or disadvantage.

Click to expand...

You are right.

And do you know what? Your friend will always find gray areas in order to lower the bar and justify what it is indeed a serious character flaw.

I would never expect a man to lack accountability as this is an important quality in a man's character.


Gray areas are designed to provide justification. That's fine. But lack of integrity cannot be justified. Neither is lack of accountability.

Latinoman said:

A man’s character is not for compromise. A person knows if he has integrity or if his actions are based out of fear of being caught. I can tell you right now that I will not steal even if nobody would find out about it. I found a wallet with over $100 and several credit cards. That wallet had a driver license and an address. I went out of my way and called information to see if I can get a phone number. That failed, so I stopped by the police station and returned it.

What would I say to a man that say “hey, there is no way you can know if I truly lack integrity”. My answer would be; “It is your character…not mine. The only person you are fooling is yourself”.

Click to expand...

I wrote this in the other thread, in regards to "testing" integrity:

It isn't about what others think or witness. It is about YOU.

Integrity is between you... and you.

A religious person would say it is between them and god.

To me god is just another word for your own personal higher power (there is god in all of us). So yeah, it is between you and you, or you and god. That is why the true test is when you are ALONE, what choice would you make. The only witness is you. The only person who matters is you. And the only person who is affected... is you.

Latinoman said:

Gray areas are designed to provide justification.
.

Click to expand...

Exactly -and this is one of the "relativists" favorite ploys.

It must be a great life life of convenience being convinced that restrictive "moral rules" or those bothersome "ethics " can be designed to order, or just as quickly discarded by trumping up some 'feel good' justification.

You gotta love the loonie left. don't you ?

jophil28 said:

Exactly -and this is one of the "relativists" favorite ploys.

It must be a great life life of convenience being convinced that restrictive "moral rules" or those bothersome "ethics " can be designed to order, or just as quickly discarded by trumping up some 'feel good' justification.

You gotta love the loonie left. don't you ?

Click to expand...

Hahaha.

Relativists will find a ploy to avoid their cryptonite: Accountability.

Dude, dude, dude, I friggin' love it...you're one to talk about "integrity". Did I not point you out last month in the thread about "living with parents" in which I demonstrated that you lacked integrity, to which you agreed and called yourself "low"? Please man, the last this board needs, is to have you lecture on what's right and what's wrong, because with you, what's "right" is "wrong" and what's "wrong" is "right". No need to corrupt the weak-minded on here. I only read the first 2 introductory paragraphs of your opening post in this thread, which doesn't specify what's right or wrong, so I'm not saying your post glistines with integrity or not(I can probably only imagine though), I'm just referring to a few of your past posts, which quite shamefully, lack integrity.

Latinoman said:

Str8up wrote the above after I stated that depending of the culture or society men having several women (wives, mistresses, etc.) might not necessary lack integrity.

Here is the thing, we don’t live in Africa or some South American nation or some Asian nation. What we might consider immoral or unethical as a society, those other cultures might consider moral and ethical. I wanted to make that clear because I know people from different nations visit our website. I did not want to be pretentious and push our societal code of ethics to anyone.

But I am sure that STR8UP was born and raised in the U.S.A. In fact, I know he still lives in the U.S.A.

Click to expand...

American society tries to preach to me that smoking marijuana is wrong, yet consuming alcohol is ok if you are over the age of 21. It's NOT RIGHT if you are 20 years and 364 days old, but it's fine as soon as you hit 21. Want to pay for a BJ? Not in America, but you can go to Amsterdam and smoke hash till you fall on the floor (I saw it happen) and fukk 10 different hookers in a single night, and REMARKABLY, the people who live there are kind, cultured, well spoken, and DO NOT run around practicing sexually deviant acts in the middle of the street, contrary to what most Americans probably think. So which society's morals and standards are "right"?

Be a sheep. Let society dictate the way you should live your life. Society has also manufactured a plethora of AFC's.

Yeeeeeaaaaaaa.....society is what I want to be following.

Between morals and ethics and integrity and any other word you can conjure up that tries to define, constrain, label, control, or whatever, ANYONE can be "good" and plenty of people can call them "bad" and not a goddamn one of them is right or wrong. This is what a few of us here understand and the rest are really struggling with.

edger said:

Dude, dude, dude, I friggin' love it...you're one to talk about "integrity". Did I not point you out last month in the thread about "living with parents" in which I demonstrated that you lacked integrity, to which you agreed and called yourself "low"? Please man, the last this board needs, is to have you lecture on what's right and what's wrong, because with you, what's "right" is "wrong" and what's "wrong" is "right". No need to corrupt the weak-minded on here. I only read the first 2 introductory paragraphs of your opening post in this thread, which doesn't specify what's right or wrong, so I'm not saying your post glistines with integrity or not(I can probably only imagine though), I'm just referring to a few of your past posts, which quite shamefully, lack integrity.

Click to expand...

I know, we have the people, and no offense intended, who have the least integrity lecturing us the most about integrity and character. They wouldn't know integrity if they saw it. Latinoman says it's all right to do xyz, such as having mulitiple wives etc., as long as it's approved by society. Then he says he agrees with Jophil about how off the mark moral relativism is. What complete and under BS, contadictions and hypocrisy!

Maybe I'll go through the post later on but I'm thinking what's the point when someone's posts is a jumble of sound good but utterly incoherent contradictions.

ketostix said:

I know, we have the people, and no offense intended, who have the least integrity lecturing us the most about integrity and character. They wouldn't know integrity if they saw it. Latinoman says it's all right to do xyz, such as having mulitiple wives etc., as long as it's approved by society. Then he says he agrees with Jophil about how off the mark moral relativism is. What complete and under BS, contadictions and hypocrisy!

Maybe I'll go through the post later on but I'm thinking what's the point when someone's posts is a jumble of sound good but utterly incoherent contradictions.

Click to expand...

It's always going to be the folks who espouse ideals that are congruent with popular opinion who get the standing ovation, and the ones who uncover the unpleasant truth will always find their heads on the chopping block.

Me and you and a few others will never get the standing ovation because we are the messengers of the unpleasant truth.

48 Laws of Power Law #32-

Play to People's Fantasies

The truth is often avoided because it is ugly and unpleasant. Never appeal to truth and reality unless you are prepared for the anger that comes for disenchantment. Life is so harsh and distressing that people who can manufacture romance or conjure up fantasy are like oases in the desert: Everyone flocks to them. There is great power in tapping into the fantasies of the masses.

Click to expand...

jophil28 said:

I have a friend who is a counselor - she is a "relativist"(as most secular counselors are)
She preaches the following doctrine to her clients who are in marital difficulties .
" Behavior is OK if both sides FEEL that is it OK " . She scoffs at the notion that INTEGRITY is valuable and descibes moralists as "all or nothing" brickheads . I regard this philosophy as fashionable and convenient - expedient, and lacking in commitment to any ideals.
She and I have numerous debates about this because I believe that appaling behavior is universally UNDERSTOOD if we get our heads out of our faddish, liberal a$$es and find the courage to condemn and banish destructive behavior .

INTEGRITY,to me, is demonstrated by being willing to act and live rigidly in accordance with one's moral code even if those actions are likely to bring pain, loss or disadvantage.

Click to expand...

Jophil I agree with you totally, but no one is following a moral objectivist's life that is necessarily moral. I'm just going to come out and say it and probably piss some people off. The only way you can totally meet this requirement of moral (and even then I'm ignoring the means to the end) in regards to male/female dynamics is to find the right girl marry her and fvck her and stay together till death do you part. Almost no one is doing this and for maybe good reasons. But the point is virtually everyone is living in gray areas. They're fvcking someone else dream girl(s) who they care nothing about and on and on. Rollo as far as I know is about the only person on here who is actually living a life of integrity regarding that, and he's not the one shouting about integrity. I think that's telling.

I'm all for moral objectivism but it all depends on where you are setting your objectives in the first place. Just because you follow your objectives doesn't mean they are really "moral" in the first place. I didn't mean to make this sound like I was pointing at you jophil. I'm not, and I don't consider you one of the people this is aimed at really.

ketostix said:

I'm all for moral objectivism but it all depends on where you are setting your objectives in the first place. Just because you follow your objectives doesn't mean they are really "moral" in the first place. I

Click to expand...

I agree with both of your points here.
My "morality "is a simple collection of guidelines which are predicated on that old biblical principle "do unto others .."
I have many uncomplicated "rules'' which I apply to myself and others EQUALLY (or try to, as far as my human fallibility will allow) equally.

However, morality is objective to the extent that profoundly destructive human behavior is destructive across cultures and time and space . A cheating wife will wreck a marriage in every country and in every century. It will never be OK just because some liberal therapist suggests that "marriage should allow the partners to explore their sexual growth and needs to whatever extent they seek.."

I do not sleep with married women because I believe that it is morally wrong and secondly I would not like it done to me if I had a wife. Simple rule- simple decision.

My 2 cents.

Morality and integrity is a personal choice. People choose to have both or neither. I think maybe integrity is the more hardwired trait, that influences morality. Thats why certain people will never "get it". Neither has anything to do with society or social constructs.

Morality and integrity is what allowed certain individuals the ability to see past social contrivances of their era, and know that slavery was wrong and should be abolished. For example.

They knew this as human beings, as men - and not as a member of society.

If they were going by what society deemed right, then they would never had went against society, because what good did it do them as individuals?

It was all about integrity as a human being.

jophil28 said:

I agree with both of your points here.
My "morality "is a simple collection of guidelines which are predicated on that old biblical principle "do unto others .."
I have many uncomplicated "rules'' which I apply to myself and others EQUALLY (or try to, as far as my human fallibility will allow) equally.

However, morality is objective to the extent that profoundly destructive human behavior is destructive across cultures and time and space . A cheating wife will wreck a marriage in every country and in every century. It will never be OK just because some liberal therapist suggests that "marriage should allow the partners to explore their sexual growth and needs to whatever extent they seek.."

I do not sleep with married women because I believe that it is morally wrong and secondly I would not like it done to me if I had a wife. Simple rule- simple decision.

Click to expand...

I actually totally agree with you and how you set your objectives. I have no problem or disagreement with a single person drawing the line at the status of the other person being married no matter what. But as far as judging someone else I see a gray area that I've explained previously. And also the point that just because someone draws the line at marriage that doesn't alone make their moral objective more moral than anothers. Basically, what you are saying is different from what a few others who are touting integrity are saying.

iqqi said:

Morality and integrity is a personal choice. People choose to have both or neither. I think maybe integrity is the more hardwired trait, that influences morality. Thats why certain people will never "get it". Neither has anything to do with society or social constructs.

Morality and integrity is what allowed certain individuals the ability to see past social contrivances of their era, and know that slavery was wrong and should be abolished. For example.

They knew this as human beings, as men - and not as a member of society.

If they were going by what society deemed right, then they would never had went against society, because what good did it do them as individuals?

It was all about integrity as a human being.

Click to expand...

Well this was one of my counter points to Latinoman-what is right (or wrong) is right regardless of society and public opinion. My point was basically it's easy for someone to say, "I won't fukk a married woman no matter what, so that makes me a person of integrity" but they will do a lot of other things that are probably just as bad if you really look into it the dynamics, whether it be fukking their buddy's GF or whatever.