Lying

[jordanz]

Moved from http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/in...ost&p=44436

I, too, never lie. I never say an intentionally false statement.

Ppppptht. See post 259

My statement was in the context of everyday living. In emergencies, I believe it's morally acceptable to lie. In normal interaction with others, however, I believe that lying is a type of fraud. In order to achieve values we must be able to identify the facts of reality. In a social context, this requires that others not intentionally try to mislead us. Otherwise, I would have no way of determining reality when dealing with others.

Snicker if you like, but I really do never say anything that I know to be untrue. I haven't always been this way. It is a moral habit that I've inculcated over the last 10-15 years. If someone asks me something that I don't want to reveal, I say that I don't want to reveal it.

Honesty is not a social duty, not a sacrifice for the sake of others, but the most profoundly selfish virtue man can practice.

-Ayn Rand - http://www.aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/honesty.html

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Jordan,

The weirdest darn thing just happened. Your post just showed up as moderated. I checked your status to see if there was a glitch and there is no restriction. I have no idea what happened.

Anyway, here it is. I am not sure "Tips for Everyday Living" is the best place for it, but neither is a TAS thread or Ron Paul thread. So I will leave it here for now.

Later I might group all of these posts into a single thread an put them in "Ethics," or at least start a thread and copy them there.

Michael

[Barbara Branden]

Jordan, if a friend suggests you get together a particular evening, and you're simply not in the mood to see him -- do you tell him so? If an acquaintance suggests it, and you don't particularly like him or find him interesting and therefore you don't care to spend an evening with him -- do you tell him so? If someone you've met says "We must get together soon," but you have no intention of ever seeing him again -- do you tell him so? If a date says, "This has been a wonderful evening. Did you enjoy it, too?" -- and in fact you were bored stiff, do you say so?

Barbara

[Ellen Stuttle]

Guys, if you do start a thread about "lying," might I ask if you'd "define your terms"?

Not because I think there's some "essential" "correct" definition of a term, but because I have noticed that participants on various threads where "lying" came up were not using the same definition and thus could argue from now till Doomsday without understanding one another.

In my own usage "lying" means a deliberate attempt to convince someone else of something one believes isn't true. Thus I think of "lying to oneself" as a contradiction in terms. Attempting to "deceive" oneself by trying to avoid awareness of what one would believe if one were aware of it -- O'ism calls this "evasion" -- I think is a real phenomenon. But literally "lying" to oneself, as I think of the meaning of "lying," is an impossibility.

Also, referencing a comment Shayne made on one of the threads, I think of "lying" "unintentionally" as a contradiction, since I think of "lying" as entailing intent.

Ellen

___

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Ellen,

Choosing a value over reality is an intent. It's a choice.

EDIT: This is actually an interesting perspective. How does one define blowing up a bridge? Intending to, placing explosives and detonating them? What if one merely wanted to stop someone from crossing and didn't give two hoots about the bridge? He merely, er... hmmmm... "did something" in order for the person not to cross. That "something" was placing explosives and going KABOOM as one alternative among many. Is that a mere detail because he didn't really have designs on the bridge one way or another, or did he actually blow up a bridge?

I see lying as the same.

Michael

[syrakusos]

I highly recommend Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life by Sissela Bok. She dissects the problem quite well.

Julian Jaynes in explaining the creation of consciousness in the collapse of the bicameral mind points out that in the Illiad, men speak of outside spirits that motivate them or of inner expressions, but never of "mind." On the other hand, in the Odyssey, our hero keeps a hidden agenda in order achieve a long-range goal, "clever Odysseus" is a liar.

Long ago, in those famous "Basic Principles" lectures, Nathaniel Branden said on the subject of honesty: When asked by the police of a dictatorship what your political views are, you have the right to lie your head off.

(Well, I guess, if you lie well, you don't really lie it off, but get to keep it. )

On the matter of evasion, the theory is that starting as evasion, the habit becomes blanking out. Suppression become repression. Discussions of family dysfunctions -- an alcoholic parent or spouse -- use the image of the elephant in the living room that no one wants to acknowledge. Beginning with denial as a premise, the logic demands that obvious facts be reinterpreted into acceptable meanings.

I believe that we see a lot of this in Objectivism. (Not that we are so special -- this is just human action -- but being close to it, we can examine it within our closed and established context of discussion.) Of all the many issues (painting, music, etc.) I believe that it is easiest to demonstrate in politics. People have emotional reactions to current events and then use Objectivist discourse to justiify their feelings to themselves first and then in discussion on boards to others. We argue meta-ontology or whatever, but we are really arguing feelings... which no one will acknowledge to themselves first and certainly not to others. This is especially important to us who define feelings as the effect of thoughts. If you have the wrong feelings, then you must have the wrong thoughts. Some Objectivist cannot admit to that, so we go around and around.

[Wolf DeVoon]

Snicker if you like, but I really do never say anything that I know to be untrue. I haven't always been this way. It is a moral habit that I've inculcated over the last 10-15 years. If someone asks me something that I don't want to reveal, I say that I don't want to reveal it.

Honesty is not a social duty, not a sacrifice for the sake of others, but the most profoundly selfish virtue man can practice.

-Ayn Rand - http://www.aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/honesty.html

Okay, Jordan. I understand. I did something similar in my 20's, went to prison for it. I did it again in my 40's, got slammed and then shunned. Attempting to be completely honest on OL these days, gonna end up looking like a nut. Barrel o' fun being truthful. If I had a job, how long do you think I (or anyone else) would be employed, if I told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

W.

[jordanz]

Jordan, if a friend suggests you get together a particular evening, and you're simply not in the mood to see him -- do you tell him so? If an acquaintance suggests it, and you don't particularly like him or find him interesting and therefore you don't care to spend an evening with him -- do you tell him so? If someone you've met says "We must get together soon," but you have no intention of ever seeing him again -- do you tell him so? If a date says, "This has been a wonderful evening. Did you enjoy it, too?" -- and in fact you were bored stiff, do you say so?

Essentially, you're asking about honesty and the necessity of being rude, mean, impolite, etc. It's an important question. I do not think that being honest requires me to be rude. In my experience, there is always a gentle way to tell the truth.

If a friend suggests you get together a particular evening, and you're simply not in the mood to see him -- do you tell him so?

Yes, I do. I say it in a way that I know they will understand and not be hurt by.

If an acquaintance suggests it, and you don't particularly like him or find him interesting and therefore you don't care to spend an evening with him -- do you tell him so?

No, I don't tell them that I don't like them. I tell them that I can't make the date they propose and hope they get the message. If they persist, however, I will have to find a way to tell them that I'm not interested.

If a date says, "This has been a wonderful evening. Did you enjoy it, too?" -- and in fact you were bored stiff, do you say so?

Here I would find a gentle way of saying that I didn't enjoy myself. After all, if the point of the date is a potential romantic partner, honesty is paramount from the beginning.

[jordanz]

Guys, if you do start a thread about "lying," might I ask if you'd "define your terms"?

I'm using this definition of lie: an intentionally false statement.

[jordanz]

If I had a job, how long do you think I (or anyone else) would be employed, if I told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

My dictionary defines honesty as being free of deceit and untruthfulness; sincere. This is not the same thing as the legal oath required in a court of law.

[Brant Gaede]

Personally, I NEVER tell the truth.

--Brant

[Laure]

Personally, I NEVER tell the truth.

--Brant

Well, thanks for telling us; this way, at least we know... oh wait...

[jordanz]

Personally, I NEVER tell the truth.

--Brant

Wasn't there a Star Trek episode where Kirk tells a computer something like that and the computer blows up?

[Wolf DeVoon]

Personally, I NEVER tell the truth.

--Brant

Wasn't there a Star Trek episode where Kirk tells a computer something like that and the computer blows up?

It's a textbook logic problem, originated by medieval schoolmen, I think. "I am lying" (if true, false; if false, true; an abuse of language).

W.

[Wolf DeVoon]

ON LYING

Since I have told more lies than any five people here, I thought it would be appropriate to explain why. In a previous post I explained that I hired people to help me fabricate my personality. Politicians and TV people do this routinely, as a matter of professional development. Every speech is preceeded by a videotaped rehearsal. Staff or management sit with the star, play the tape over and over to discuss what's inappropriate and what works.

However, I'd like to explain something a bit different, which is the necessity of lying in the workplace. Mine was show business, and I hereby certify that no movie was ever made without buckets of lies and half-truths, all told deliberately and more or less in disregard of morality. If you ever wondered why celebrities go nuts and do incredibly bizarre stuff, it was an overdose of lying. Consider the high rate of drunkenness, drug use, suicide, and disfunctional serial marriages among show people. Some of our best were the weirdest and least honest: John Belushi, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Freddie Mercury.

On the set, directors lie. In the corner office, producers lie. Writers tell stories about the human condition and 'man at his best' with no experience or justification, often resorting to heavy doses of schmaltz masquerading as creativity. The only thing creative about a nephew is his conception as a vested industry problem and subsequent unemployability as anything other than an associate producer or co-star.

Generally, anything said at a Hollywood party is false or misleading. Most production agreements are bald lies about financial provisionns that will not happen and are not intended to happen. Jim Garner had 10% of the net on Rockford Files. The primetime show ran five years, played in syndication forever, and never made a penny of profit for Garner to share some.

Most good actors are liars. Barbara Stanwyck, certainly one of the best in her day, famously trembled and vomited every time she had to go on stage or do a scene in a movie. Performers are under tremendous pressure. Neurotics and mystics abound, wreaking havoc on the whole industry. Warren Beatty's sister's hairdresser became president of Columbia Tri-Star and ran it into a ditch. This was reasonable and prudent management compared to David Begelman.

Anyway, it isn't restricted to show business. Used car salesmen and advertisers are generally viewed with suspicion. Cops routinely lie in court under oath. Single men and women go out of their way to conceal the exact truth of who they are and what they want from a partner temporarily or in the long run. I don't think we should fault anyone for being dishonest. Evil requires the sanction of the victim. Although I think it's honorable and selfish for Objectivists to aim at candor, most people can't do it. They stretch the truth on tax forms, pledges of eternal friendship and fealty, war aims -- you name it.

Is it bad to lie? No, not on the set of a motion picture, when success is on the line and this actor has to believe that his/her performance was brilliant, let's do another take for protection. I believe in this project. It's wonderful. It's hilarious. Good job. Well done.

W.

Edited January 15, 2008 by Wolf DeVoon

[jordanz]

However, I'd like to explain something a bit different, which is the necessity of lying in the workplace.

-big snip-

There is no necessity to lie at the place I work nor I have ever found it to be a necessity anywhere else. That there is a lot of lying in Hollywood maybe true, but that doesn't make it acceptable.

[Barbara Branden]

Essentially, you're asking about honesty and the necessity of being rude, mean, impolite, etc. It's an important question. I do not think that being honest requires me to be rude. In my experience, there is always a gentle way to tell the truth.

If a friend suggests you get together a particular evening, and you're simply not in the mood to see him -- do you tell him so?

Yes, I do. I say it in a way that I know they will understand and not be hurt by.

If an acquaintance suggests it, and you don't particularly like him or find him interesting and therefore you don't care to spend an evening with him -- do you tell him so?

No, I don't tell them that I don't like them. I tell them that I can't make the date they propose and hope they get the message. If they persist, however, I will have to find a way to tell them that I'm not interested.

If a date says, "This has been a wonderful evening. Did you enjoy it, too?" -- and in fact you were bored stiff, do you say so?

Here I would find a gentle way of saying that I didn't enjoy myself. After all, if the point of the date is a potential romantic partner, honesty is paramount from the beginning.

Jordan, I'm not suggesting that one should be rude or mean or cruel. Anything but. I'm suggesting that when one frames one's responses to these questions in a kinder way than one thinks them, one is surely at least skirting the truth. For instance, when you say "I can't make the date you propose" to a man you don't care to see, now or ever, you are suggesting something that is not true -- that is, that if you could make the date, you would. And to the boring date who asks, "Did you enjoy the evening" -- a "gentle way" of saying you didn't enjoy it sounds to me like an impossibility. My point is that it often would be cruel to say what one thinks, and that when we shade our actual reasons, when do not tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in these sorts of instances, we are being quite properly kind.

Barbara

[Brant Gaede]

Jordan, if a friend suggests you get together a particular evening, and you're simply not in the mood to see him -- do you tell him so? If an acquaintance suggests it, and you don't particularly like him or find him interesting and therefore you don't care to spend an evening with him -- do you tell him so? If someone you've met says "We must get together soon," but you have no intention of ever seeing him again -- do you tell him so? If a date says, "This has been a wonderful evening. Did you enjoy it, too?" -- and in fact you were bored stiff, do you say so?

Since this was addressed to Jordan I sort of skipped over it, but I see the discussion was continued and that brought me back here.

The first question, yes I would tell her so, this way: I'm not in the mood to see you, I feel ... I think because ... etc. After I share my feelings with her I might feel differently, especially if a back and forth conversation results. This is, after all, my friend.

The second question, I'd ask him why he wanted to do that and give him the courtesy of talking it out. After all, he might actually turn out to be interesting.

The third question, I'd ask him what he had in mind.

The fourth question, I'd say I'm glad you enjoyed it, but I didn't. Then I'd say why.

Kindness as a primary is a dead end. In fact it is no kindness at all.

--Brant

[jordanz]

Jordan, I'm not suggesting that one should be rude or mean or cruel. Anything but. I'm suggesting that when one frames one's responses to these questions in a kinder way than one thinks them, one is surely at least skirting the truth. For instance, when you say "I can't make the date you propose" to a man you don't care to see, now or ever, you are suggesting something that is not true -- that is, that if you could make the date, you would. And to the boring date who asks, "Did you enjoy the evening" -- a "gentle way" of saying you didn't enjoy it sounds to me like an impossibility.

I would say that you shouldn't skirt the truth. In practice, I haven't found that I need to skirt the truth. I have rarely met someone that I would never see again under any circumstances. If I did meet someone I never wanted to associate with again, I would let them know that.

My point is that it often would be cruel to say what one thinks, and that when we shade our actual reasons, when do not tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in these sorts of instances, we are being quite properly kind.

I think we're in agreement here. I don't believe that "never lying" requires the whole truth. It merely requires not saying something you know to be untrue.

[Ellen Stuttle]

That there is a lot of lying in Hollywood maybe true, [...].

"Hello," She Lied -- the title of a book about movie industry parties, so I've heard tell.

Ellen

___

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

There is an old term, white lies...

Michael

[John Dailey]

MSK:

~ I do believe that this subject belongs in the 'ETHICS' sub-forum.

~ Really, it's the question of "When, if ever, is it morally-allowable to lie/state-a-believed-falsehood?"

~ But, there's an implicit question in there: "To 'whom'?" - To one's self? Absolutely 'NO'; one's just asking for self-made probs there, as most people (nm 'O-ists') know; granted, that knowledge doesn't prevent such, but...that's another subject. - To 'others'? Hmmm...here there be 'social ethics' conundrums.

~ Indeed, I've found myself having to analyze this subject regarding raising my 13-yr old. SOME people deserve dis-honesty, but, who, and in what situations? Some 'extremes' are obvious, (Nazis-asking-about-Jews, anonymous telemarketing (presumably!) attention-manipulators, etc.), but, the in-between spectrum for placing 'lines' on is a bit problematical...especially with nosy 'friends.'

LLAP

J:D

Edited January 17, 2008 by John Dailey

[Mike11]

Hello, I have some deep thoughts from my shallow brain to share with you guys because I am in love with my own voice, so:

And this is going to include some partially understood and badly phrased Post Modern ideas. You've been warned

1. It is problematic in human relationships to tell the truth in a constant way avoiding false statements, I say this for a few reasons.

A ) Asking "Do I look fat in this dress?" is not the same as asking "What are 2 and 2?"; responding "No" is not the same as replying "5". Interpersonal communication entails a large degree of context, subtext, and multiple simultaneous meanings of which each participant is going to pick and choose portions of that meaning to respond to. In this example the question could mean anything from "Do I look fat in this dress?" to "Am I cuter than Sally?", you have to choose a level of meaning to respond to.

Barbara Branden pointed to this earlier by talking about "Do you want to go to the ball game" versus "Are we still friends?"

B ) It would follow from A that meaning of this kind - art, conversation, religion, emotion etc - is Never fully present in our mind. Take the guy wearing the dress in example A (Yes, its a guy now as I find it funnier that way), does he know the full scope of what he means when he asks if the dress makes him look fat? Think about it, when someone asks, "Do you love me?" or "How do you feel since your mother died?" does a fully complete meaning come to mind, or only some particular piece of meaning? If the guy in example A were met with the reply, "Yes, it does make you look fat." would he just see this as a physical statement or would the meaning of his first question suddenly shift into a more emotional gear and assume the entire exchange was about self esteem, love etc and forget the original question? We all had mothers, girlfriends or wives here, so admit it, you know how meanings can change even after the words are uttered.

The idea of telling a perfect truth I find impossible to believe, simply because its not possible to begin with.

2. Art is a lie.

Our society is very peculiar in intellectual history having opened up a whole context in which lying is not only permissible, it is encouraged, we just choose to see it as a special, privileged sphere, arbitrarily protected from laws of truth and falsehood - this sphere being "Art". There was a beautiful sequence on this in a movie called "Chosen" about 2 Jewish kids in WW2 New York but since I can't simply youtube the scene I have to make a coherent argument.

A ) Art has been seen by many as inherently dishonest as it attacks our ability to reason; emotion has been seen as a sphere open to lies, reason as open to the truth. For example, in the West Plato saw its power as corruption clearly and advocated certain arts be wipe out completely, with other, milder ones strict slaves to state ideology (Link ). Other cultures like Islam and Judaism made similar observations. Anyone advocating absolute honesty would have to address the problem of art's power to spread lies and the very meaning of being completely honest whilst trying to reduce another's critical faculty.

Can music with a negative message be endorsed simply for its musical component for example?

B ) Much of art is about falsehoods, about stating lies. John Galt and Wesely Mooch for example did not exist yet Rand used these lies with huge amounts of emotional rhetoric to state her philosophical claims, is this not a lie? What about story telling, "I had a friend with your problem and this is how he pulled through it." If the content referred to in the metaphor is true and real, is it still a lie? Is there something inherently dishonest in using a story? For a good example of this moral question of story telling I highly recommend the one or two people stil reading this to watch the following -

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=FT234Vo0rrE&...feature=related

In this example we see a demo of story telling geared specifically at undermining another's rational faculty to send a clear message to another, this kind of dishonesty is after all, what all artistic parables have been built for.

If Art is still essentially honest than how is saying "I'll go to the ball game some other time" or "I don't mind your singing", a lie?

On to the Nazis and Anne Frank.

1) In Objectivist ethics, unlike Kantian ethics, honesty (to others) is not a virtue in itself but flows rather for what is needed for man's survival "Qua Man". Outside the Hallowed Halls of Oism 99% of philosophers agree that honesty is not an absolute, universal virtue. If you can tell a lie that will make Hitler blow his brains out it is immoral Not to do so.

Edited January 17, 2008 by Mike11

[Matus1976]

Jordan asked

My statement was in the context of everyday living. In emergencies, I believe it's morally acceptable to lie. In normal interaction with others, however, I believe that lying is a type of fraud.

And Barbara asked

Jordan, if a friend suggests you get together a particular evening, and you're simply not in the mood to see him -- do you tell him so?

I agree with Jordan here, my personal feelings on this have evolved toward being annoyed at people who I feel compelled to lie to, and generally to begin to remove these people from my life. If I have a friend who wants to hang out, and I don't want to, the fact that I would feel inclined AT ALL to LIE to them, means they do not fundamentally respect me as a individual sentient being with my own wants, desires, preferences, and instead just a audience for them. I should be able to say I am just not in the mood. It's my life, as a friend, they ought to respect that, as I would for them.

Now I only have one friend that I ever feel inclined to say "I am busy" or "I am not feeling well" or something to that effect, because he is insulted or hurt often, and we (me and my other friends) are always very annoyed that he is so childish and immature about this, so I just hang out with him very rarely now. With every one of my other friends we have a perfectly agreeable relationship and routinely say to each other that we just don't feel like hanging out, something that comes from a fundamental respect of that person.

Because this attitude of feeling obliged to hang out with someone is so prevalent, I always try to phrase my invites to other people with 'easy outs' so they won't be put in the difficult position of having to make up an excuse. I certainly don't want someone hanging out with me who doesnt actually want to. Usually I would say "If you don't all ready have plans we are thinking of doing this" where most often people say "what are you doing Friday" putting the person on the spot, lie to make up plans, or say he has none then feel obliged to hang out or have to come up with an excuse. The easy out is better all around.

The only problem area I have had integrating this is with my parents.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

~ I do believe that this subject belongs in the 'ETHICS' sub-forum.

John,

I agree, but I am leaving a link behind.

Michael