Stephen L. Carter's The Insufficiency Of Honesty

What defines honesty and integrity? Is there a connection between these two words, and what does that imply? Stephen L. Carter, a law professor and writer, questions the common definitions of these words and the their moral interpretations in his essay, “The Insufficiency of Honesty”. In the essay, he makes several about the key differences between what “honesty” and “integrity” actually mean, and I agree with Carter that too often integrity is mistaken for honesty. He mentions that, “…acting in accordance with what you think is right and risking no loss in the process is a rather thin and unadmirable form of honesty”, and I concur that selfishness of that caliber lacks integrity by definition. The first difference that Carter points out is the consequence of selfish honesty and “telling everything you know”. He uses the example of an unfaithful husband confessing infidelity to his wife on his deathbed. This is a good example because it illustrates that an honest action is not necessarily an action of integrity; and while some may argue that lying is intrinsically immoral, in my opinion, there are times when not telling the truth is the most conscientious response. Also, though the husband’s confession wasn’t
There are certain complexities in determining what way of thinking is “wrong” or “right”, and Carter states that questioning strongly held beliefs is a part of “...the most basic test of integrity”, where “The question is not whether his actions are consistent with what he most deeply believes but whether he has done the hard work of discerning whether what he most deeply believes it right.” What Carter means is that integrity requires reflection on personal principles and prejudices, and honesty does not. Because of this, even a person who always says what they think with total authenticity may lack integrity, which is an assertion I agree