Lying

[T00ts]

For some reason the 'woman asking how she looks' is one of the two most common questions raised as soon as the necessity for lying is called into question.

I don't think this reflects well on our personal relationships, and again would propose that the truth is best for all involved.

Really? Do you have a woman in your life? I can't help wondering at what point complete truth becomes cruelty.

If a woman asks is this dress ok, she doesn't want an analysis of it's good and bad points, she just wants an overall approval. If she didn't like it she would not put it on so the answer is - you look gorgeous darling with a genuine smile. On the other hand if you feel it isn't appropriate for the occasion the answer is 'Darling you look gorgeous but do you think so and so outfit would fit in better on this occasion. You look absolutely stunning in that too'.

[Nalaar]

Are lies always a sin? When she asks: "Does my bum look big in this?"

For some reason the 'woman asking how she looks' is one of the two most common questions raised as soon as the necessity for lying is called into question.

I don't think this reflects well on our personal relationships, and again would propose that the truth is best for all involved.

[patman post]

Are lies always a sin? When she asks: "Does my bum look big in this?" the correct reply requires a careful assessment of the enquirer — is she a follower of the Kardashian cult, or does she model herself on Naomi Campbell or Kate Moss, or is it even clear what she's after as an image?

Future happiness — or health even — can be riding on the answer or the explanation of why it was given...

[Nalaar]

If you are still telling lies that you didn't break a plate in the kitchen when you did, and everyone knows that you did, at the age of 50, that's a problem and can lead to a toxic atmosphere.

Exactly - and more to the point, if you say you didn't break the plate, and no-one knows you did, that will lead to a toxic atmosphere too.

[Barry]

Not me. Now feck off you daft auld ****  ::  ::  ::

Does your plain speech include lies when it suits you?

[Javert]

I agree with JOG's points about children, but I also somewhat agree that this is not an wide open excuse for adults to lie because children at that age cannot yet see the consequences or empathise with the other people on the effect their lies will have on them.



If you are still telling lies that you didn't break a plate in the kitchen when you did, and everyone knows that you did, at the age of 50, that's a problem and can lead to a toxic atmosphere.

[johnofgwent]

Yes, children lie.

That is not a reason for adults to lie, because we understand why we should not.

You opened with a post indicating the toxic nature of lies, but while I have shown why the ability to lie is a fundamental requirement of human development, actually I agree with you here.

[johnofgwent]

@JoG  There is something about the way you write sometimes that would persuade me that black was white and that there are unicorns over the rainbow.  :hattip  

When my Dad was terminal with 3 months to go the doctors didn't tell him. I guess in the 60s things were different. They told me and I told Mum. None of them would tell Dad the truth and I was silenced. It has always bothered me. He was a very spiritual man, my Mum not so much, and in those last week's he and I spent a lot of time together. I knew he knew, and  I am sure he knew I knew but nothing was ever said. In a round about way we talked through everything that needed to be said but it made it so much harder. He took the 'you'll soon be better' line graciously to the end.

If it helps...



My grandmother was a seventh daughter of a seventh daughter  so we have a large extended family



Had



Most fell by the wayside courtesy of the fallout from Chernobyl. Literally. It irradiated animals on the mountains that never made it into the slaughter scheme.



It got to the point I became an ACE at working the ropes through the coffin handles.



It bothered me that mum didn't let any of us attend her brothers funeral, she just refused to go and forbade us.



She refused to tell anyone dad was dying either. Oh we knew and he knew, she just would not let the bits of the family she hated have the last laugh.



She wouldn't let us tell anyone when she was going either



You can imagine how much fun it was telling my cousin and best man he had to tell his mum, shes the last of her generation



Families. Who'd have em

[DeppityDawg]

Plain speech is also unacceptable to some. We flower phrases up rather than tell the plain truth in the misguided perception that we might be protecting them from offence or rejection.

Not me. Now feck off you daft auld ****  ::  ::  ::

[Nalaar]

Far from being negative, a child lying to its parent is in fact a fundamental demonstration that the child has achieved a fundamental milestone in mental development, and has demonstrated a first attempt at using an ability to calculate their place in time and space.

Yes, children lie.

That is not a reason for adults to lie, because we understand why we should not.

[T00ts]

@JoG  There is something about the way you write sometimes that would persuade me that black was white and that there are unicorns over the rainbow.  :hattip  

When my Dad was terminal with 3 months to go the doctors didn't tell him. I guess in the 60s things were different. They told me and I told Mum. None of them would tell Dad the truth and I was silenced. It has always bothered me. He was a very spiritual man, my Mum not so much, and in those last week's he and I spent a lot of time together. I knew he knew, and  I am sure he knew I knew but nothing was ever said. In a round about way we talked through everything that needed to be said but it made it so much harder. He took the 'you'll soon be better' line graciously to the end.

[johnofgwent]

Doctors - well - doctors might choose whether to give a specific answer to a patient question "what are my chances", but often they would gauge their answer a little differently.  If they think the patient would react very badly to "your chance of survival is 20%" in a way that would actually reduce their chances because depression is not going to be helpful to them fighting the illness, they would probably instead say "it's not possible to say exactly what the chances are because each case is different" or something like that - so I guess it depends on whether you consider that a lie - technically it's in one way true.

The Code of Conduct is specific. A doctor who concludes it is in the best interest of a patient NOT to be told some matter regarding their condition on the grounds knowledge of it will seriously impair their mental / emotional state and thus impact their ability to deal with / heal from the condition may be allowed to record the condition and the decision in the notes, advise fellow workers, but NOT tell the patient. To the extent of lying if asked. And the BMA will support them in their decision all the way to the supreme court.



They should tell next of kin, but if they believe that person will not keep the matter from the patient or the reasons explained, they need not even do that.



There are cases on record of people not knowing they had medical conditions because they were judged too unstable at the time to be told of thrm. They sued and lost.



But that was when I was a practicing scientist, and maggie thatcher had not allowed lawyers to advertise. No win No fee may have changed things...

[johnofgwent]

To open with an opening excerpt from the book "Lying" by Sam Harris.







The premise of the book is a simple one - Lying is unnecessary, it is essentially an act of aggression, and yet many people will not think twice before lying to their friends, family, and loved ones, much less strangers. Consider what lies you have told (possibly even today!) and by contrast what truths you could of told.

I do not know if this is available on line, but many years ago I was a prisoner of my car for hours at a time at the start and end of the week commuting across the UK and thus paid a great deal of attention to the quality of debate  on many shows at the time.



I am starkly reminded, by your post, of Robert Winston's remarks on the development of a child.



I shall paraphrase them.



"For the very earliest part of its life, a child regards the parent as all seeing, all knowing, all powerful. But at some point in their development, and exactly when this is varies from child to child but it is almost always complete by the age of four, the child acquires a sense of itself in the world, and along with that a sense of space, and time. The child also starts to work out its limitations, and - and this is the critical bit - starts to reason that other people and other children have those limitations too.  



For most parents, this transformation, which is absolutely critical for the child's continued development as an individual, and without which the child will face multiple issues in interacting with others and the environment - manifests when the parent suddenly realises their child has lied to them.



This usually comes a a great shock, but it is fundamental that you as a parent understand what is going on.



For the earliest part of its life a child has little idea of time and spatial awareness, let alone an understanding of their interaction.



But there will come a point where you will leave your toddler alone for a moment, perhaps playing in the living room, while you go to another room, perhaps the kitchen, and when you return, something will be different, Something will have been moved, something may have been broken. The detail of what that something is does not matter. What matters is this.



When you question your child as to why they touched / moved / played with and broke whatever it is, THEY WILL ABSOLUTELY DENY HAVING DONE ANYTHING OF THE SORT.



This will come as a great shock, a huge shock to many parents, and it is key that you understand that your child has just demonstrated a grasp of a fundamental concept without which grasp they CANNOT progress as a human being and while it may not seem a good idea to congratulate your child for lying to you, you must congratulate yourself that your child is well on the way to becoming a normal, self-rationalising human being.



What has gone on is this; for some time your child has assumed that you are all seeing, all knowing, godlike if you will.



But one day they grasp the fact that as they move around their home, they may leave their favourite toy in one place, and it may, or may not be there when they get back. You of course may have tidied up. They may on another occasion watch you tidy up, so they know where the toy is. And then, one day, when they are told to stop playing and ave their meal, and when they get back and find things tidied up afterwards, they will work out that although they did not see it happen, someone tidied up the toys.



And then comes the masterpiece.



The child will now, fairly shortly, work out that just as they did not see something that was done when they were not in the room, so when you leave them to play and go to do something else, you are not the all seeing all knowing all powerful being they held you to be a while ago.



Thus when they do something out of your sight, and you ask if they did it, BEFORE they make this quantum leap they will robotically cop to it thinking you know all about it.



But once they cross this rubicon, they know that when you leave the living room to see who is at the door, or to see to the washing machine, or whatever, they know that in that short time while you are out of the room and they cannot see you, you also cannot see them and so they are nof free to play catch with the TV remote with the family dog or whatever



And CRUCIALLY, when you ask if they threw the TV remote for the dog and smashed the vase, they will LIE and say NO."





Far from being negative, a child lying to its parent is in fact a fundamental demonstration that the child has achieved a fundamental milestone in mental development, and has demonstrated a first attempt at using an ability to calculate their place in time and space.



Winston did not offer advice on how one should punish the little bugger though.

[Nalaar]

Astronauts - well the astronauts themselves obviously know about this now and as far as I'm aware, none of them have complained about it - they agreed that there was literally nothing they could have done about it from inside the capsule.  Also, there was no actual evidence that the heatshield was damaged, it was a "risk" that they chose not to communicate.  IF in the last 50 years someone had come up with something that the astronauts could have done about it in the meantime, I would agree, but up to now nobody, not even the astronauts themselves has come up with anything that could have been done.  By the time this discussion was taking place, the capsule was effectively a brick in freefall and the astronauts were passengers.

Retrospectively applying knowledge is not a good measure. What if after the Astronauts landed and where told the real situation they *did* think of something they could of done to help?



It also creates a problem where in the future if an incident happens and mission control tell the Astronauts on board that there are no further issues the Astronauts may then remember when Mission Control withheld information from Apollo 13, and consider if the same is happening to them.

Doctors - well - doctors might choose whether to give a specific answer to a patient question "what are my chances", but often they would gauge their answer a little differently.  If they think the patient would react very badly to "your chance of survival is 20%" in a way that would actually reduce their chances because depression is not going to be helpful to them fighting the illness, they would probably instead say "it's not possible to say exactly what the chances are because each case is different" or something like that - so I guess it depends on whether you consider that a lie - technically it's in one way true.

There are almost always truths to be found, aslong as the doctor is not intentionally withholding information from their patient.

[Javert]

I maintain that social interactions are better when the people involved aren't lying to each other.







This example is a very clear violation IMO. The Astronauts themselves could of had ideas or input into the situation that could of helped. Those at mission control couldn't think of a reason themselves, so chose to lie, denying the Astronauts input.







There are plenty of examples of doctors lying to patients, non of which stand up to scrutiny, as ultimately they (like mission control earlier) are denying the patient autonomy in their decision making, and input.

Astronauts - well the astronauts themselves obviously know about this now and as far as I'm aware, none of them have complained about it - they agreed that there was literally nothing they could have done about it from inside the capsule.  Also, there was no actual evidence that the heatshield was damaged, it was a "risk" that they chose not to communicate.  IF in the last 50 years someone had come up with something that the astronauts could have done about it in the meantime, I would agree, but up to now nobody, not even the astronauts themselves has come up with anything that could have been done.  By the time this discussion was taking place, the capsule was effectively a brick in freefall and the astronauts were passengers.



Doctors - well - doctors might choose whether to give a specific answer to a patient question "what are my chances", but often they would gauge their answer a little differently.  If they think the patient would react very badly to "your chance of survival is 20%" in a way that would actually reduce their chances because depression is not going to be helpful to them fighting the illness, they would probably instead say "it's not possible to say exactly what the chances are because each case is different" or something like that - so I guess it depends on whether you consider that a lie - technically it's in one way true.