LIES, LIARS, AND LYING

[dada]

It seems the discussion of lies tends to turn toward the question of moral relativism.

What is this postmodern moral relativism we're supposed to be so frightened about? The idea that one individual's morals may be different from another's. A context-based morality, to be judged on a case-by-case basis, like king Solomon would go about it. To me, this sounds like plain old morality.

Plain old morality is a challenge and a threat. To whom, you ask? The state doesn't like it. To lie for the state is a moral act, according to the state. To me, this sounds like amorality.

I won't even get into what it is that believers in an authoritarian god are afraid of. I think that's something that needs to be unpacked in psychoanalysis, not internet discussion.

[Burnt Hill]

Reminded me of this -

The Epimenides Paradox

‘Epimenides the Cretan says, “All the Cretans are liars”, but Epimenides is himself a Cretan; therefore he is himself a liar. But if he be a liar, what he says is untrue, and consequently the Cretans are veracious; but Epimenides is a Cretan, and therefore what he says is true; saying the Cretans are liars, Epimenides is himself a liar, and what he says is untrue. Thus we may go on alternately proving that Epimenides and the Cretans are truthful and untruthful simultaneously’. So, if a Cretan states all Cretans are liars, is he being truthful or untruthful? ‘Tis the question, readers.

This is a brilliant paradox from the mind of Cretan philosopher Epimenides of Knossos. ‘Epimenides was a Cretan who made one immortal statement: “All Cretans are liars”.’ But from this arises a paradox of self-reference. Has Epimenides spoken the truth? If so, he is a liar. But if he’s a liar, what he said isn’t true, and all Cretans are truthful. But Epimenides was a Cretan, ergo what he says must be true. If you’re not a liar, you’re truthful. But if we believe that it is true, then what he says must be untrue. You see? This could go on for a while.

Contiued............https://tocontriveandjive.wordpress.com ... s-paradox/

[seemslikeadream]

Marcy Wheeler "Anatomy of Deceit"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3f6Kky8KTk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jEoEL814As

[Elvis]

I found this useful. Can be listened to without watching, not much visual info in the video; slides used but not seen on camera can be found here: https://www.slideshare.net/digiday/form ... lideshow=1

Former CIA Officer Will Teach You How to Spot a Lie


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pni_kDv9BsU

In this participatory session, you will learn how to tell when someone is lying. Really. As a former CIA Officer with more than 20 years of experience in interviewing, interrogation and polygraph examination, Susan has seen her share of truth avoiders. She has, in fact, developed behavioral screening programs that are used by the federal government. Don’t miss out on learning her methodologies in spotting deception. Speaker: Susan Carnicero, Author of Spy the Lie and founding partner, Qverity

[dada]

Susan has seen her share of truth avoiders.

No doubt. She worked for the company.

I've seen this video. If I remember correctly, she's honest about it, says you can make an educated guess using checklists and averages, but you can't really tell for certain. Shows some videos, 'spot the liar.' The audience makes guesses who is the liar in the videos, learns that it isn't as easy as just following a checklist. I seem to recall that she implies intuition plays a big part of it, and it's a skill that gets better with training. Like anything else.

So the text under the video is kind of false advertising. But if you want to catch your spouse or your kids lying, can't hurt to give her method a shot. Although if you want to catch your spouse or your kids in a lie, I think you're kind of messed up, yourself. I think there are probably better ways to go about things with loved ones.

Not that I would know, I don't have loved ones.

[minime]

Not that I would know, I don't have loved ones.

Only if you don't love anyone.

[dada]

Yes, that's what I meant, minime, thanks. I don't love anyone. Ain't got no twitter-heart to give away.

But let's not get sidetracked, this isn't the love, lovers and loving thread. And as we all know, love has nothing to do with lies.

You know, if we beat everyone over the head enough with the idea that truth is 'just the facts,' maybe we can erase love forever. Let's try it.

[minime]

Yes, that's what I meant, minime, thanks. I don't love anyone. Ain't got no twitter-heart to give away.

But let's not get sidetracked, this isn't the love, lovers and loving thread. And as we all know, love has nothing to do with lies.

You know, if we beat everyone over the head enough with the idea that truth is 'just the facts,' maybe we can erase love forever. Let's try it.

damn, damn, damn...

And you were doing so well. Your change in persona inspired me to post. That'll teach me to reach out.

See you in June.

[dada]

I think you may have misunderstood me, minime. And I know it's a failure on my end. I just don't do green text for sarcasm. Never got the hang of it. If the sarcasm is very dark, should I use a darker green? If it gets too dark, won't it be indistinguishable from black?

I considered just err-ing on the safe side, typing in green all the time. But what if I'm mixing forms, should I use different colors, then?

Besides, I simply don't like rainbow fonts. Call me old school, but I prefer basic black. I tried emoticons, but I gave that up. Bad habit.

[thrulookingglass]

Yes, that's what I meant, minime, thanks. I don't love anyone. Ain't got no twitter-heart to give away.

But let's not get sidetracked, this isn't the love, lovers and loving thread. And as we all know, love has nothing to do with lies.

You know, if we beat everyone over the head enough with the idea that truth is 'just the facts,' maybe we can erase love forever. Let's try it.

I love you darling dada. Thank you for sharing your honest opinion with me. I have no friends anymore in this life. All my personal relationships have turn to shit. Truths can be cold and I have learned many I wish I could unlearn. True love is the only thing that can relieve us of our misery. Its a shame no one practices it anymore. I can and do entirely empathize with you. I'm sorry you feel as awful as I do.

[dada]

Thanks, thru. It's nice to be understood. And your words help me see myself clearer. Like looking in mirror, or maybe even through it.

For some reason, something Bill Burroughs said keeps popping into my head. "It is necessary to travel, it is not necessary to live."

Take heart, and keep moving.

[82_28]

Yeah, thru, hang in there. Trust me, I feel the same fucking way and am trying to staunch it where I can. I personally have revived my love of Carl Sagan by getting all his books and the Cosmos series out of storage. And yeah, I don't know if it is "fully helping", but it does remind me of what once could be and also can still be! But I dunno. But I hear ya.

[82_28]

Oh and everybody else! Everyone hang in there. I have had the weekend FROM FUCKING HELL traveling. Just awful. I will probably be relaying snippets of it in the future. But please, everyone take care. Sorry to get so sappy. I totally "dreaded" logging in tonight and having something awful having happened here. LOL. But true.

Yet nothing did. Thanks for everyone's contributions. Interesting reading.

[dada]

Thinking about something Phil K Dick said, "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

I have to doubt that what he meant by the phrase was that just physical objects, or some impersonal objective universe is the only reality. Phil experienced things that he didn't necessarily believe or disbelieve.

I think it's simple enough to test this theory. I find that If I don't believe in myself, I don't go away. Which is valuable in itself, because it clarifies the distinction between 'believing in yourself' as this saying is commonly understood, and believing in yourself in the sense of a purely scientific perspective. In this way, "believing in yourself" in the common understanding is strengthened, the energy isn't dissipated because of a lack of clarity of meaning. "Believing in yourself" is commonly understood as cheering yourself on, standing with yourself, loving yourself. (Loving yourself in the 'care for yourself' way, not a worshipful, 'I love me so much I could eat me,' way.)

What I'm saying is, you don't have to believe in yourself, to believe in yourself.

[dada]

"technically true if potentially misleading."

Quote from an article in the Surveillance thread. Referencing how when you turn off location tracking on your phone, it is still storing tracking information. When you deactivate location tracking, the pop up says, "No tracking info will be stored in your apps" or something. Technically true, but misleading.

But I think the statement is useful to point to the difference between truthiness and truth. Just because a news source is truthy, "just the facts," doesn't make it true. It just makes it technically true.