Discussion and Journal

Discussion one

Doublespeak could be easily identified in its aim to give a false communication in the pretence of communicating but it actually does not convey the intended message. In addition double speak is aimed at veiling an evil deed as a good deed. The third characteristic is that it is simply aimed at denies or is aimed at denying responsibility for the various actions. In essence, when doublespeak is propagated it gives information but leaves the main part of the information unsaid. Hence, doublespeak is insufficient or incongruent means of communication, as it does not give the correct or adequate message, which should be conveyed.

I think his definition is correct but insufficient. Insufficiency occurs with the definition because he does not describe the presence of communication of both aspects aimed at giving a false impression. I think that double speak is communication of facts while doing or acting opposite of what has been spoken. The aim of speaking truth is aimed at giving an image of truth with an aim of distracting individuals from the real aim of an individual’s acts.

Is doublespeak moral?
When is double speak necessary?

Journal entry

I remember during an election period when the whole of my community was engaged in an election fever. The contestants for the mayor position made promises, which were aimed at wooing us, the voters. However, their words were all but doublespeak as they promised of change, but in essence, what they meant was they would serve their own self-interests. This is evidenced in campaigns when such individuals posing as righteous people when they are wretched individuals aimed at putting their individual and group interests first.

I think the means of avoiding doublespeak are simple. This can only be avoided by honesty in terms of conduct. This would ensure that what is communicated in actuality the truth and fair opinion. In addition, contradictions as evidenced by the need to have individual needs and wants. This is usually driven by greed and drive to gain wealth or positions of power. Hence, to avoid such incidences, good company could be upholded to develop good and honest character and avoid such incidences of doublespeak.

Discussion 2

Deceit is at times propagated in its various forms all with an aim of accruing individual or group interests. I think deceit is executed with different aims such as accruing personal benefits and national good. I think from a utilitarian perspective the aim of deceit or goodness of deceit is determined by the outcomes from such an act. Hence if an act is aimed at drawing utmost good in the eventually act of deceit is in essence, good. However if an act of deceit is aimed at causing more harm than good such as public lying in order to gain power and wealth could be simply termed as bad lies or deceit.

In addition, I find that the magnitude of deceit determines if a lie is of great effect or minute effect to those who are affected by the act both directly and indirectly. Some deceitful means such as concealment of facts depend on the effect of such an action. If it is aimed at hiding facts, which are material to cause harm, this makes an act of concealment or deception as necessary and equally just. Thus deceit is essentially determined by the effects and benefits accrued. This is simply a cause and effect approach in determination if deceit is necessary and is aimed at general public good. (218 Words).