Are we living in an age of extremes? Has our patience become too short to accommodate another person’s perspective? Do we communicate more through reaction than response?
The vocabulary and unique modes of expression employed by Gen Z have taught the world a great deal while also leaving behind several questions. Their language, humour, memes and unconventional expressions reflect changing social and cultural values. But they also raise an important ethical question: Where should we draw the line between freedom of expression and responsibility?
Freedom gives us the right to express ourselves, but responsibility reminds us that our words can affect another person’s dignity. This distinction is particularly important in an age of instant communication, where a reaction can travel faster than reflection.
From reaction to response
One of the important ethical lessons emerging from contemporary communication is the difference between a reaction and a response.
A reaction is often immediate and emotional. A response involves thought, restraint and an awareness of consequences. Ethical communication requires the latter.
This does not mean that young people should abandon their distinctive ways of expressing themselves. Terms such as “delulu” and other expressions have created a new vocabulary of social interaction. They demonstrate creativity and a desire to communicate on their own terms.
🚨 Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for August 2026. Share your views and suggestions in the comment box or at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.com🚨
However, freedom of expression cannot become a justification for profanity, humiliation or abuse. The ethical principle is simple: expression should not come at the cost of another person’s dignity. This responsibility applies equally to every generation.
Listening across generations
The debate around Gen Z is often framed as a conflict between the young and the old. But perhaps the real issue is not age; it is the failure to listen.
Young people may feel that older generations do not understand their anxieties, aspirations or changing social realities. Older generations, meanwhile, may perceive new forms of communication as disrespectful or irresponsible.
Both perspectives deserve consideration.
Ethical communication requires empathy, which means attempting to understand another person’s experience before judging it. It also requires tolerance, because disagreement is inevitable in a diverse society. The responsibility, therefore, is mutual. Gen Z must recognise that freedom comes with accountability, while older generations must avoid dismissing young people merely because their vocabulary, humour or social behaviour differs from their own.
Mansplaining and infantilisation
The evolving language of Gen Z has also brought greater attention to concepts such as mansplaining and infantilisation.
“Mansplaining” gained prominence following Rebecca Solnit’s 2008 essay Men Explain Things to Me. Solnit described an incident in which a man attempted to explain a book on a subject to her without realising that she herself had written the book. The episode became a powerful illustration of how assumptions about gender and authority can silence another person.
The ethical concern here is not simply about the word “mansplaining”. It is about equality, dignity and the right to be heard. When we assume that another person is inherently less knowledgeable or capable because of their gender, we undermine their agency.
Similarly, infantilisation refers to treating an adult as though they lack the maturity or agency to make their own decisions. It can involve excessive protection, patronising language or treating someone as incapable of understanding or deciding for themselves.
Both concepts raise an important ethical question: Are we communicating with people, or speaking down to them?
Youth and shared aspirations
This discussion becomes particularly relevant in the context of International Youth Day. The United Nations’ 2026 theme, “Different Contexts, Common Aspirations,” emphasises that although young people live in different social and economic circumstances, they share aspirations for dignity, opportunity, participation and a better future. The UN also highlights critical thinking, empathy, resilience and digital literacy as important future-ready skills.
This is significant because the ethical challenge before young people is not merely to find new ways of speaking, but to use their voice responsibly.
Non-violence begins with communication
The idea of non-violence is often associated with the absence of physical violence. But it can also be understood as an ethic of everyday communication. Words can create bridges, but they can also deepen divisions. Insults, humiliation and deliberate provocation can turn disagreement into hostility. Conversely, empathy, patience and respectful dialogue can prevent conflicts from escalating.
Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy of non-violence reminds us that the means are as important as the ends. If we seek a peaceful society, the manner in which we communicate must also reflect peace.
This is particularly relevant for a generation growing up amid social media, information overload and instantaneous reactions.
Freedom with responsibility
The ethical challenge before Gen Z, therefore, is not to abandon its creativity or individuality. It is to ensure that freedom does not become unbridled licence. Similarly, the responsibility of older generations is not to impose their modes of communication on the young, but to engage with them with patience and openness.
For civil servants, this becomes an important lesson in administrative ethics. Public administration requires communication with citizens who may have different languages, cultures, opinions, social backgrounds and expectations. An administrator who reacts impulsively may escalate a conflict; one who responds with empathy and restraint can build trust.
Thus, communication becomes an ethical skill.
Reaction seeks to win the moment. Response seeks to preserve the relationship.
Perhaps this is the larger lesson emerging from the changing vocabulary of Gen Z. Every generation has its own language, but the enduring values of respect, empathy, tolerance, accountability and non-violence remain universal.
The challenge is not to decide which generation communicates better. It is to learn how different generations can communicate better with each other.
(The writer is the author of ‘Being Good’, ‘Aaiye, Insaan Banaen’, ‘Kyon’ and ‘Ethikos: Stories Searching Happiness’. He teaches courses on and offers training in ethics, values and behaviour. He has been the expert/consultant to SAARC countries, UPSC, Central Bureau of Investigation( CBI),National Judicial Academy, ATI, RAKNPA, Haryana Institute of Public Administration, ISA MountAbu, National Centre for Good Governance,Competition Commission of India (CCI), etc. He has PhD in two disciplines and has been a Doctoral Fellow in Gandhian Studies from ICSSR. His second PhD is from IIT Delhi on Ethical Decision Making among Indian Bureaucrats. He writes for the UPSC Ethics Simplified (concepts and caselets) weekly.)
Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.
Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – Indian Express UPSC Hub, and follow us on UPSC section of The Indian Express on Instagram and X.
For your queries and suggestions write at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.com
PREVIOUS ARTICLES ON UPSC ETHICS SIMPLIFIED:
IAS Tukaram Mundhe | Beyond the officer, study the ethical issues
Can development come at the cost of safety?
Can fear of punishment create an ethical society?
CJP protest: Why responses to protests are an ethics case study
Railway linen theft : A Case Study in everyday ethics
Can ethics stop the next fire tragedy?
How can India’s civil services and governance rebuild Gen Z’s trust?
The ethics of communication: exercising freedom of expression while preserving dignity, empathy, respect and social responsibility. (AI generated image) 
Share
