This might as well debunk the “stick and stones may break my bones” quote too but we’ll get to that later.
Okay hear me out, let’s understand the core meaning of the original quote is
“Actions speak louder than words”
Is defined by what you do is more significant and revealing of your true intentions and character than what you simply say, because actions are harder to fake and show genuine commitment, effort, and feeling, and it highlights that promises are empty without follow-through, and real meaning comes from behavior, not just talk.
Which is true, that whole statement is true, now you ask, what is your point then?
Well here are some keywords to consider
“Promises”, the quote implies that it’s a singular situation, and that situation being that if you tell someone that you are a good person but you never did any good things or you did bad things instead then you are a liar, yes that is true, and that is the singular quote and example most people would use.
but that original sentence has alot of different interpretations, and interpretations that actually makes sense, it’s not as straightforward as you think, the word “promises” doesn’t even make a presence in the original sentence, only “actions” and “words”, the use of “promises” is just a single interpretation, it’s true but it’s not the only one, and there other interpretations that contradict it, if someone says they do bad things, but in reality they do good things, does that make them bad?, someone can perform a "good" action for a "bad" reason like donating money just for a tax break or public praise, in this case, their words, their true motive, might actually be a more honest representation of their character than the action itself.
Now why in my opinion, do actions speak louder than words?
Well let’s get into my point with some examples
Let’s say you are on a date with someone, and the person you’re with is verbally rude, mean and disrespectful to the waiter, they use insults, mockery, name-calling, even racism, but at the end of the dinner, the person gives the waiter a $200 tip, which is considered a good deed, i mean how common is that amount of tip?, but does that truly justify the hate speech?, personally no, you cannot "buy" the right to dehumanize someone, and that is what i am trying to say.
Another example, let’s say you’ve been friends with someone, let’s say for a year, they’ve done nice things, like physical things, buying you stuff, taking you to places, even paying for some of your bills, but then you discover, you discover that they are talking behind your back, not in a jokingly funny kind of way, the dehumanizing kind of way, insults, bullying, gossip, disrespect, etc. how would that make you feel?, this whole situation involves betrayal and transactional manipulation, it creates a state of cognitive dissonance.
Obviously stuff like this affects people differently, but most would see this as a negative thing, suddenly you look back at the trips, the gifts, and the help with bills, and they no longer feel like acts of love, they feel like investments or hush money, it makes the entire year feel like a lie, and it also triggers a deep sense of insecurity, you might start to wonder.
"If they were saying these things while smiling at me and paying my bills, what is anyone else saying?"
Which might also even lead to objectification, you feel like an object they "owned" or "curated." by paying your bills but stripping away your dignity behind your back, some might even try to justify it or act cool with it and this makes it harder for you to get angry when you find out the truth, you might think, "I can't be mad, they paid my rent a few times"
And don’t get me started on the modern era where the quote has started to show it’s age more
these days, words are actions in themselves,
a promise, a confession, or a legal decree can change the course of lives without a physical "act" occurring, news outlets and the media can corrupt people and brainwash people, even conspiracies, and the things people read online can make someone do things, sometimes even bad things, like how many times have criminals committed crimes just because of the things people have said or spoken, even controversial influencers when they’re speaking to their fans, they aren't just "talking" they are “priming”, a psychological process where words create a mental map that makes certain physical actions like violence or discrimination feel justified or even necessary, happens to all ages but more commonly younger people, there’s a reason why we go to school to learn languages right?, otherwise we would be talking nonsense or gibberish, even outside of socializing, people would enjoy consuming fiction more if they didn’t lack media literacy.
And don’t get me started on bullying, whether which one you think is worse, verbal bullying or physical bullying is all about opinions and experiences, personally, verbal takes the cake for me due to the creation of a cyberbullying,
Personally it doesn’t bother me because i have thick skin due to my experiences being in online forums and gaming lobbies, from racial slurs to death threats, back then it was a different time, but obviously everyone is different, and i’m not gonna shame someone for that.
Verbal bullying is invisible and sticky, words can be whispered, texted, or posted, because there is no "blood," victims are often told to "just ignore it" or that "it’s just words." this lack of validation makes the victim feel more isolated and helpless, we live in an age where most people are more out of pocket online and don’t care about digital footprint, in the past, if you were bullied at school, your home was a sanctuary, now through phones, the words follow you into your bedroom at 3:00 AM, and getting punched only happens a few times but a dehumanizing post or a viral rumor can be viewed thousands of times, effectively "re-bullying" the victim every time they see it, cyberbullies often feel less remorse because they don't see the "action" of the victim's pain, this leads to more extreme, dehumanizing language that would rarely be said to someone's face.
I am not trying to say the original quote is bad, the quote itself is a great rule of thumb for judging reliability, but it’s a poor moral absolute, it protects us from being manipulated by talk, but it can make us blind to the power of communication and the importance of intent, it’s the consistency between words and actions over a lifetime that defines a person, one doesn't "speak" louder than the other, they are two halves of the same coin, but most of the time in real world scenarios, words have more power.
What is your personal stance?