To be able to decide whether it is the law that keeps people honest, it would have to be determined what constitutes honesty. If an honest person, by definition, is one who has never been convicted by the law, then it might be said that the law keeps people honest.

It might not be as simple as that, however. For all the people who have never been convicted by the law, there are thousands who do get convicted. The law, in their case, couldn’t keep them honest. Or, it may be that they were just unfortunate enough to get caught.

This leads to the question whether the people who’ve never been convicted are really honest, or just lucky enough to have never been caught. Would the definition of honesty have to be altered to say that an honest person is one who is fortunate enough never to have been caught?

All this may be nothing more than a runaround, and it may be that the real definition is to be found elsewhere. Honesty may have nothing to do with the law. Does the law actually keep people honest, or does it merely prevent dishonesty from being effectual?

The law, it may be said, is there to prevent crime, and to punish offenders. There are all sorts of crimes which do not involve honesty, just as there are offenders at law who are honest people. A person arrested and convicted for causing a disturbance is not thereby branded a dishonest person.

Similarly, other infractions of the law, such as traffic violations, do not indicate any dishonesty in the people caught by it. Yet they do end up getting convicted, and then have a criminal record. But this still hasn’t touched on the matter of honesty.

Honesty is directly linked to morality. Typical cases of a lapse in honesty are lying, cheating, and stealing. There are, of course, a lot more than just these, but they all point to some form of a fault in morality, or ethics.

The question is, does the law keep people from being immoral and unethical? Again, the same response may be given as was given to begin with, that if the definition of a moral and ethical person is one who has never been convicted by the law, then the law does indeed keep people honest (that is, moral and ethical.)

This seems to be merely a going around in circles. The essential thing is the honesty of the person. Does an honest person need the law in order to be honest? The answer might be given that honest people do not need the law because they obey a higher law, that is the law of god.

In other words, honest people are honest because they obey the moral laws of religion. But then this is just another form of law. Whether secular or religious, is it still a law of some sort which keeps people honest? Atheists would claim that they are honest without requiring any law as a guide or monitor.

Then again, how do people learn to be honest in the first place? How do people learn what honesty is, and whether honesty is better than dishonesty? The reply, obviously, is that it is the parents who teach honesty. The parents lay the groundwork, and later society takes over the task of maintaining honesty.

The parents are also a form of law. They may teach and cajole, but ultimately it is the parental authority which instills honesty and values in the child. Right from childhood, then, it is a law in some form or another which keeps people honest.

To answer the original question of whether it is the law that keeps people honest, the reply is yes, it does. But the answer has to be elaborated that if the first law, that of the parents, was properly taught and grasped, the later laws of religion and society become merely reinforcements, but are not essential to keep a person honest.

However, if the groundwork of honesty is not properly laid in childhood, later laws merely keep a person in check, but they may not suffice to keep a person entirely honest, even though the person is never caught in any infringement of the law.