Mundus vult decipi

      “The world wants to be deceived,” writes Dr. Josef Pieper in his short book Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power, a study of how words and language are abused – misused – in order to manipulate.  More accurately, Pieper continues, the world wants to be deceived by flattery. We see it all around us... or, at least, we should.  The phenomenon is most evident in advertising:  compare the “sales pitches” of the nineteenth century to those of today!  The former actually sought to sell a product based on an accurate description of its qualities; the latter, nowadays, will portray, not the product itself so much, but the lifestyle and “happiness” it will bring. 

      But that is rather obvious, and many can, perhaps, overlook the sales pitch enough to carefully examine the proffered product and make a purchase based on the actual quality and usefulness of the advertised object.  It gets a bit more serious though in other realms, whether in politics, religion, morals, etc.  Take, for instance, the message, so politically potent, of “change.”  We hear a lot of that now, and it is appealing to most simply because hardly any of us are satisfied with the status quo; but we forget that change is not automatically for the better.  Things could actually, easily, get worse.  Yet, when pressed about change – into what? how? and at what price? – most politicians serve up a lot of words, but of little substance, words, that is, chosen and pronounced with the utmost “sincerity” and “expertise,” not so much to convey an exact and understandable meaning, but rather to evoke a certain mood that will encourage “trust” in the smooth talker. 

      It is rather sad to see this going in what is supposed to be a creedal religion:  when an Anglican bishop – speaking of the current controversies that seem likely to divide that communion – comes out with a “firm pronouncement” of “what needs to be done,” which, while reading it, one is lured into the “definite” position of carefully not taking any stance.  And it’s only after the warm glow no longer lingers that one, if he’s alert, begins to scratch his head and say, “What?” 

      As I have commented before, we see this language abuse especially evident in the sound-bite, the slogan, often appended to an automobile’s rear bumper.  This past Sunday, while on my way to offer Mass at the university, I espied a very carefully crafted slogan, its blatant contradiction “hidden” under verbiage:  “Pro-family, Pro-child, Pro-choice.”  We read the first two and nod “yes,” and with that, one is already in the frame of mind for agreeing with the third. But how does it – “Pro-choice” – logically follow?  Family, yes, a good and comforting word; who could possibly be opposed?  And a child too, yes, a very good thing indeed, precious as he or she is.  But then, “choice”?  In this context, we should know exactly what that really means:  two solid goods now mixed with another word that does not designate a solid good, but only potentially so... if someone chooses what is good.  The “choice” here, though, could very well mean killing a child, extinguishing a solid and infinite good, a human life, and in the process chipping away, if not hammering away, at the whole concept of the family.  The illogic is heartless:  let’s just cover over that third of my “pro-positions” with the very harmless word “choice,” even if it means another child dead; and since I am, by the declaration stuck on my bumper, pro-family and pro-child, I personally cannot be blamed for a bad choice, and, simultaneously, I cannot be accused of opposing a “woman’s right to choose.”  All very tidy... and contradictory.

      All over the place, words and statements have become murky, and often intentionally so.  After Plato’s demolition of the Sophists of his time, one wonders why we haven’t learned the danger; but, as Pieper points out, the danger is perennial because of the human lust for power and disregard for the truth.  Words become weapons for manipulation rather than the means of naming and communicating Reality.  A sterling example of this was that memorable 4th century contest in the Church between the orthodox bishops and the Arian bishops, an ecclesial controversy that terribly frustrated the Emperor Constantine, who commanded that the bishops of the Council of Nicaea (325 AD) come up with a formula that everyone could agree on.  He got, instead, a very clear and precise, a very definite definition (against the heretic Arius) of the nature of Christ’s relation to God the Father (that they are of one substance).  Its meaning could not be mistaken, since words were used with their exact import in mind, with the firm purpose of communicating accurately to everyone what the Church really does teach about Christ, the Son of God. 

      Our Lord’s words come to mind (He Who is the Truth):  “I have not come to bring peace but the sword.”  Division.  But along the definite boundary lines between truth and error.  And it takes words, rightly used, to make such clarifications, that do, yes, unfortunately, divide, but much more importantly avoid that sick venture into Unreality, the road to which is paved by “universally agreeable formulae” of moral compromise and fatuous evasions, designed to sound good, conciliatory or even “pious.”

      “The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion,” Edmund Burke wisely remarked.  And delusion is the goal of those, especially those in positions of power, who misuse language.  Its abuse is an abuse of power, an intentional deception, and some kind of tyranny is its fruit.  “Public discourse,” Pieper concludes, “the moment it becomes basically neutralized with regard to a strict standard of truth, stands by its nature ready to serve as an instrument in the hands of any ruler to pursue all kinds of power schemes.”  That is, “public discourse” becomes propaganda.  Whether in advertising, religious or philosophical debate, or political discussion, when there is a lack of careful and conscious effort to adhere to the truth, language is corrupted into propaganda, a tool of deception to manipulate.  Beware!