In recent weeks, I have observed multiple examples (involving various individuals), of one individual saying one thing to another individual, and then contradicting their original statement by saying something completely different to a third party. I believe this is a common occurrence; and some would say, necessarily so. I would agree that this Creative Courtesy is an unavoidable and very human trait, and I believe that it can be necessary, and I believe it can even lead to learning and growth. But I also believe, (especially in the presence of excessive emotion, groupthink, and/or dogmatic inflexibility), that Creative Courtesy can lead to unnecessary and damaging divisiveness. And I believe, that in many cases, individual reflection is more appropriate than the process of verbal expression, reassurance, and one's search for justification.

To visualize these possibilities, I imagine the face of a clock, with Creative Courtesy ranging from the 4 to the 8. If Creative Courtesy is defined as saying one thing for the sake of peace and goodwill while thinking something entirely different, then my best intentions stand at the 6. From here I have three choices:

1. Stay at the 6; stay neutral; stay nice.
2. Move counterclockwise toward Nonproductive Criticism (4 to 2), and Destructive Truthfulness (2 to 12), becoming increasingly verbal, careless, hurtful, and then deliberate and intentional, as I move.
3. Move clockwise toward Productive Analysis (8 to 10), and Constructive Truthfulness (10 to 12), becoming increasingly more thoughtful, compassionate, verbal, and flexible as I move.

This is an oversimplification, in that I do not move in an uninterrupted progression. If I move, it may be a progression and/or become more predictable, because over many trials, I am more likely to develop tendencies toward one direction or the other, and/or to one extreme or another. But in every instance of movement, there are frequent interruptions, multiple layers, and a complex web of action, reaction, interaction, and overreaction, that will impact each circumstance, (even similar circumstance), differently.

In recent weeks, I have seen a fair representation of movement on and around the face of this clock. Depending on (the aforementioned) capricious influence, one does not always follow the orderly circumference, but may set out across the face of the clock, one time finding a shortcut from 7:30 to 5:30, and another time bouncing rapidly from 9 to 3; and possibly back again.

For me, it is rather obvious that I must work to move clockwise; and I must work to understand the differences between Productive Analysis and Nonproductive Criticism; and I must work to maintain a worst-case-scenario of 6. I have previously touched upon this choice of being nice vs. being truthful, and, (if memory serves), I have previously allowed productivity to determine my movement; or non-movement. The challenge with this is gauging if well-intentioned truthfulness will ultimately be constructive or destructive. This week's thought exercise has helped me to see that if I go through a process of sincere, compassionate Productive Analysis that includes a "minimize harm" component, (though my Humanity will not alllow Perfection), I can still, in good conscious, then choose to fall back to 6, or advance beyond 10, being careful that my momentum will not take me beyond 12.

Two weeks ago I espoused the idea that truthfulness is the next step leading toward justice. And I ended that post saying, "For all of Humanity, in all of existence, justice is the greatest good." Immediately preceding this, I said, "For me, in this moment, justice is a lesser evil."

It feels that much of my tendency toward judgmental, Nonproductive Criticism stems from this disconnect between "Me" and "All of Humanity." I have much difficulty seeing both myself and this "Bozo" over here, (who is taking advantage of circumstance to circumvent justice), as equitable parts of Humanity. Sure, I have performed similar maneuvering to take advantage of various circumstance, and sure, if I had their advantage, I might do the same or something similar; but I make these choices for Me. I have to. I have to get ahead any way I can, and there's a big difference between Me and them. So if and when it is not fair to me, they shouldn't take advantage.

For many of us, that is justice; even though it is not. To see this double standard, and to admit to this double standard, is truthfulness. Truthfulness has the potential to sustain and fortify skepticism, education, and focused effort. Truthfulness has the potential to close the gap between my inner Bozo and all the other Bozos as we stumble over each other competing for advantage. Truthfulness has the potential to move me further from injustice, and closer to justice. Constructive Truthfulness is the next step.