Sunday, June 10, 2007

communication is worthless

if it is not honest communication.

According to the student standard of conduct,


There is no more fundamental ethical value than honesty. We associate honesty with people of honor, and we admire and rely on those who are honest. But honesty is a broader concept than many may realize. It involves both communications and conduct.

Honesty in communications is expressing the truth as best we know it and not conveying it in a way likely to mislead or deceive. There are three dimensions:

Truthfulness. Truthfulness is presenting the facts to the best of our knowledge. Intent is the crucial distinction between truthfulness and truth itself. Being wrong is not the same thing as lying, although honest mistakes can still damage trust insofar as they may show sloppy judgment.

Sincerity. Sincerity is genuineness, being without trickery or duplicity. It precludes all acts, including half-truths, out-of-context statements, and even silence, that are intended to create beliefs or leave impressions that are untrue or misleading.

Candor. In relationships involving legitimate expectations of trust, honesty may also require candor, forthrightness and frankness, imposing the obligation to volunteer information that another person needs to know.

If the person with which you want to communicate; will not agree to communicate honestly; what is the point of communicating?

The leadership of the APS refuses to be held honestly accountable to any standard of conduct that requires them to communicate honestly.

What is the point of any communication with the leadership of the APS?

What is it that you expect to gain from the communication?

Do you expect them to communicate honestly
about their historic refusal to communicate honestly?

No comments: