Calling a spade a spade does often get people in deep trouble, and could cost you some friends as well. However, the pleasure and peace that unloading a truth brings, simply by articulating it, is tremendous! Whether the end justifies the means, is the question.
Is speaking ones mind synonymous with being abrasive? Is the truth always bitter? Does being liked entail telling lies or at least half truths? Are being liked and speaking the truth mutually exclusive of each other?
Would President Bush be liked if he were to speak the truth that going to Iraq was a mistake?
Did Clinton's lying about his association or the lack thereof with Monica Lewinsky keep him in good stead with his fans? The answer to both of these questions is a very obvious, "No". Then, is it fair to conclude that telling the truth does not necessarily redeem you or place you in good light; just as the telling of lies does not guarantee loss of friends or a falling in people's eyes. In that case neither the speaking of truth or the telling of lies should be the preferred code of conduct. Thus your life can be a bunch of lies splattered with some truths every now and again, and you'll be in good company! However, this is what Harry J Frankfurt (author of "On Bullshit" and "On Truth") has to say about truth: ' Recognizing truth requires selflessness. You have to leave yourself out of it so you can find out the way things are in themselves, not the way they look to you, or how you feel about them or how you would like them to be.' That is an impossible asking so would anyone even attempt it!
A friend captured the Manhattan skyline on two different occasions but from the same vantage point; both the pictures present the Manhattan skyline. This is obviously a photographer's articulation of a reality he perceives, and he's fortunate that he doesn't have to justify the difference or have to decide which of the two is the preferred one.
However, if you were asked to choose which one of the two pictures you preferred, how and what would you decide?