"Our aversion to lying is commonly a secret ambition to make what we say considerable, and have every word received with a religious respect"

Francois de La Rochefoucauld’s observation delves into the complex psychology underlying honesty and communication. He suggests that the moral repulsion we feel toward lying is not always rooted in a pure devotion to truth, but rather, is often motivated by an underlying desire for our words to carry weight and authority. The distaste for deceit is thus portrayed less as a purely ethical stance and more as a subtle strategy for self-aggrandizement through language.

People frequently cling to honesty because it sets a standard for their speech, every word spoken should be deserving of belief and respect. If we are known never to lie, then our statements become significant; listeners are compelled to accept them with little skepticism, perhaps even with uncritical reverence. The wish to be regarded as truthful becomes intertwined with an aspiration for influence and esteem. Our identity as honest people enables us to become trusted sources, and this trust elevates the status of our discourse above ordinary conversation.

Thus, Rochefoucauld exposes an egoistical motivation behind the virtue of honesty. Integrity, in this perspective, is less about upholding clarity and more about gaining power over belief. The ambition is not simply to speak the truth, but to ensure that what we speak matters, that our testimony is unassailable, our judgments unquestioned, and our declarations accepted as almost sacred. This transforms honesty from a moral obligation into a kind of social capital. If our words are always believed, we wield a quiet authority; we are able to shape opinions, command trust, and perhaps even direct actions.

Rochefoucauld’s remark ultimately asks us to consider the true roots of our values. Are we loyal to truth for its own sake, or driven by subtler ambitions, to be seen as important, credible, and above all, worthy of reverence in the eyes of others?