Silence Is Golden; Speech Is Also Golden, Its A Matter Of Wisdom

Something happened in the Bible which present great wisdom for consideration. Five daughters of a man named Zelophehad, took bold step to voice their protests which resulted in an amendment of an existing law. It was a custom that if a man dies without a son, his possession was to be given to his brothers and not his daughters. These daughters were bold enough to confront Moses for their father’s inheritance and was granted to them. What would have happened if they had kept silence? Another example was Eli, his silence on the evil conduct of his children resulted in severe tragedy.

Silence is golden, which means, “it is better to be silent than to speak” has restrained many people from genuinely expressing their grievances. Plato once quoted, “Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.” Plato did not underscore the need for silence nor speech but rather the application of wisdom to do so.

It should be noted that this world would not have come this far if people kept silent on certain issues. Great impacts have been made in this world through men and women like, Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, Nelson Mandala, Martin Luther King, Mikhali Gorbachev, William Wilberforce, Olaudah Equiano, Rosa Parks, Desmond Tutu, Thomas Clarkson, Mary Wollstonecraft, Susan B. Anthony, Mahatma Gandhi, who spoke against discrimination, racisms, slavery, unequal treatment, and many social injustices. If these men and women kept quiet and believed in the notion that silence is golden, I strongly believe we would not have come this far. The same applies to people whose speeches caused grave calamities and disasters toward the development of nations.

Speech and Silence are equally good and none supersede the other. Many believe that speech is silver while silence is golden, rating silence above speech. Silence has caused harm so is speech and silence has earned a lot so is speech. What we need to do is to learn how to balance them and the key is the application of wisdom.

The problem is that many have not considered that speech and silence need a thorough analysis before a choice is made. There are situations where silence is the better option than speech and vice versa. Before making a choice among speech and silence, first of all, we need to measure the impact of our speech and silence. Several questions need to be asked in order to help us measure the impact of our speech and silence. What would be the impact of our choice on future generation? Would our choice bring liberation, solve issues and enhance development? Is our choice self-centered or focused on the best interest of the country or group? These questions need to be asked. Secondly, we need to consider the platform if speech is chosen. The question, “would the platform be the better place to voice and cause a change? What are the appropriate structures to be followed? These are what to be considered before deciding on silence or speech.

To illustrate, using the recent allegation by Ken Agyapong against the EC Boss, a lot of wisdom need to have been applied. Assuming Ken had evidence to prove his point, what benefit would it achieve toward national development? Would generation applaud him for such an act? Did the method he used to communicate the best method? Was the platform the best place to relay the message for positive impact? What about if he had no evidence, don’t you think silence was the best option? Answers to these questions would have helped Ken to make the right choice between speech and silence.

On the part of EC Boss, is her choice of being silence the best option for national development? Would generation praise her for her actions? What would have been the best option if the allegation against her was false? Don’t you think if she uses an appropriate action to disproof the allegation, would do much good to this country and further future false allegation against women? With respect to organized associations who came out with comments to condemn the actions, were their actions appropriate to solve the problem? What if they urged the EC Boss to use appropriate channels to redeem her image? Won’t that have done good to this country than focusing on the one who made the allegation? You are the best judge.

In conclusion, when we focus on actions that would do good for the future of this country, positively influencing lives of current and future generation, we would see the wisdom of what to choose, whether to remain silence or to voice out. If speech becomes the best option, appropriate channels and platforms should be used to achieve maximum impact.

Jeffery Amo-Asare