Integrity from the perspective of wholeness.

Having recently begun to contribute to this blog, I’d like to add my perspective on the meaning of “integrity”. In an earlier post, Paul referred to a meaning which relates to honesty and to adherence to a moral and ethical code or principles; this is generally accepted and commonly applied.

However the dictionary definitions also list additional meanings. The free dictionary definition, that Paul referred to, includes:

• the quality or condition of being whole or undivided; completeness

Another online definition, at dictionary.com, agrees and includes:

• the state of being whole, entire, or undiminished

It seems to me that this is probably a deeper issue which underpins the more generally used meaning.

As I consider how these two meanings relate to one another, a number of topics, anecdotes and stories spring to my mind; and I hope to share them in future posts. For now, there is one story that “hits home” particularly accurately.

A late friend and colleague, who had impressively high moral standards, had been manoeuvred out of some money by another person. The other person would, from time to time, try to taunt my friend about his loss. One day my friend decided to put a stop to this, and replied:

All I have lost is some money.

You, however, have lost your honour and your integrity.

And you cannot buy them back.

This put an abrupt end to the taunting; what a superb perspective to apply to that situation!

The part that is relevant to this discussion is the significance of his reference to both honour and integrity? Are they the same?

It seems to me that they are different, that integrity underpins honour, that there is more to this aspect of integrity and that this is the basis for those wholeness meanings in the dictionary definitions.

By John Lewis

• Core thought
• Musings