Few concepts wield duplicity and simplicity with such ease as integrity. To comprehend the duplicity, it is important to begin with the literal root. Integrity is derived of the Latin “integer”. The integer is the whole or of wholeness. This sheds light to the context if its various uses. It is the principle from which successive actions are based, and as such, is a requirement for growth.

Dismissed from semantics, it’s on to the most interesting class on schedule today. Ever since “existence” was scrawled far and wide across the board, awareness of integrity cannot be, as anticipated, objective. It is the world (being integer) with which humanity (being part) must integrate.

Most excellent is it, then, that we have the tool of consciousness because it allows us to form and employ beliefs of how we can best integrate ourselves into the whole (ethics, science, mathematics).

The consequences are two-fold. The first, indubitably, is the (world-wide) anarchic display of humanity, with diverse wealths of belief mingling and clanking with one another every waking moment. This, however it may convey itself, is the least somber of the consequences. It is the moment individuals or groups of individuals become so impassioned in their beliefs, so convinced they have unlocked integrity as to coerce others into the same convictions, integrity is corrupted.

To preserve integrity, then, is to accept that even with tremendous amounts of violence and force, every individual on the planet still could not reach a consensus on the “true integrity” of existence. The reason for this is, as usual, lack of supporting evidence. Frustrating as it may be, individuals are aware there are no proven correct parameters to belief, no gauges for measuring or rating an individual’s integrity. Simply, it is not known if everything there is to know has already been acquired, or even if it is possible to acquire the missing pieces (if there are missing pieces).

It should be noted that while science and the philosophy of mathematics act upon tautology and the integrity of theories rests on consistent test results or proofs, the theories using these objective entities are designed by and tests conducted by subjective individuals. While a body of knowledge can be built around the empirical, it is possible future discoveries may contradict all-or-parts of prevailing theory, thus rendering all-or-parts devoid of integrity. Thus, humans have a symbiotic relationship with these studies. They provide us livelihood, technology, medicine, etc. Humans provide, every moment, a small amount of skepticism to what is thought to be irrevocably proven.

The simplest action an individual can take towards integrating into this preserved integrity is approaching every interaction in waking life from the agnostic until it is felt there is sufficient evidence to make a determination. Claiming triumphantly to have an answer to every solitary moment is dangerous in any line of work (and frustrating to any parent). Speaking and acting only when certain takes an incredible amount of discipline.

Doing so also lends to the argument of the certainty of certainty, a complicated task for any individual to face. When they do stand to the challenge, however, most common the feeling that swells is one of humility. It also bears perspective to the associated pressures and stresses sternly weighting every other individual on Earth, without impairing ability to make value judgments. After all, a life absent of value judgments is a life lived without value.