Skip to main content

The Problem With Lying

Lying is important in allistic conversation.  But lying confuses me.  People often lie to be polite.  But it isn't polite to lie to me.

This isn't a moral or an ethical issue.  I already have significant communication impediments, and lying adds another barrier to understanding.  It destabilizes interactions by introducing unpredictability.  I can't guess whether or not someone is likely to lie, and I can't begin an interaction if I don't know how it's going to proceed.  If someone lies once, maybe they will always lie.  Or maybe they never will again.  Or maybe whether they might lie depends on a system of factors so complex that I can't hope to understand it.  Lying to me, even to be polite, will always cause a misunderstanding.  I cannot be led along a path of lies to the truth.  I will always lose my way.  That is: I will make the wrong inference.  Knowing this, when confronted with implications I refuse to infer.  And if my interlocutor cannot elaborate honestly, the conversation simply stops.  So this isn't about lying being ethically right or wrong.  This is about lying being an ineffective way to communicate with me.

For this reason I find myself withdrawing even more.  Polite liars are by and large just as incapable of saying the plain truth as I am of seeing through their obfuscation.  And, this is key, in most cases the truth doesn't matter.  Often, the best outcome of correctly interpreting someone's convoluted intimations is the revelation of something mundane.  So it's a lot of work for nothing, at least from my point of view.  Why not then withdraw?  I don't want to waste anymore anxious energy trying to solve riddles for meaningless rewards.  I would rather be inside myself where it's safe.  At least solitude is honest.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Man Is Not Great: The Evolution of Anthropocentrism

Why do humans care whether their species is special? Why are they so invested in their specialness that they're uncomfortable with the idea that they aren't? Why is it a bitter pill to swallow that humans aren't uniquely important in the universe, that they aren't the intended end of evolution, and that their wondrous and diverse subjective experiences emerge from the same physical processes observable in "lower" animals? I think that the maladaptive human tendency to insist upon their specialness in the universe is an extension of an adaptive tendency to self-advocate in their tribes. Consider fear. The predisposition to turn around when you feel like something might be behind you is likely to save you when there really is something there. Most of the time, when you can't help but turn around on the dark basement steps, there's no threat. From an evolutionary perspective, it’s better to turn unnecessarily than to do nothing in a moment of danger. That...

The Mystery of Friendship

Friendship looks good on paper.  People appear to enjoy their friendships and to want, or at least to expect, to have friends.  I don't have this experience.  I don't want friends. It took me a long time to understand that I have no desire for friendship.  As a child I thought I had to seek friendships because everyone around me wanted them.  It was part of trying to pass; I know that now but I didn't then.  I wasn't aware that other people didn't have to try to be like each other.  How could I have been?  I had no basis for comparison besides myself so I assumed everyone was like me.  I thought I was neurotypical and this was conducive to my feelings of inferiority.  I didn't know why I was so bad at being like everyone else.  It was because they were being themselves and I wasn't.  But I wouldn't realize that until long after my formative years were over. I was a very confused child.  I had few friendships and I wasn...

The Meadow

 There is a cascade of questions: how can I live a good life? What is the value of goodness? What is the essence of value? We might assess our lives as either good or bad. We might say that good is better than bad, and that we should be good because being bad is the only alternative. But surely being neither good nor bad is an option. It must be possible to observe without assessing. This is what I want. I want to leave nothing in the world. Some will say that neutrality is simply in the bad category, and that we must want to live positive lives.  Let them say so, and let them condemn me if I live a life of non-participation. I have no interest in politics or society. I have no interest in justice or the common good. To some, saying this is the same as saying that I'm bad or that I'm at best contributing to the bad. Is appeasing critics to be my sole motivation for engaging with this evaluating system? Perhaps I should want to make the world better. But I don't believe ...