‘What Is A Lie?’
CAERS Substack Article #76
How often do you think people lie to you? Unless you regularly hang around with individuals who might qualify for terms like ‘sociopath’ or ‘psychopath,’ I am going to guess that you are seldom told outright lies. Having said that, I suspect that on a very regular basis you are told partial truths. Is there a difference, and if so, why? Which is more dangerous?
Alfred, Lord Tennyson, stated: ‘A lie which is half a truth is ever the blackest of lies.’ What would make him say that? Utter lies, so-called ‘bald-faced lies’, are often easy to detect and for that reason may be less problematic. They can be so preposterous that they simply cannot be believed, or so suspicious in nature that we question them without hesitation. The person telling such a lie often gives enough clues through various elements of body language, such as lack of direct eye contact, that our antennae are immediately aroused. However, those on the psychopathic end of the human spectrum are often very clever and have so little conscience that they can tell such lies very convincingly. Even the most seasoned among us can get conned from time to time, especially when our emotions are preyed upon.
When examining the nature of lies, it is important to remember a few things about human nature. First, all other things being equal, we prefer good news to bad news. We find someone who provides us with ‘happy talk’ more appealing than someone who does the opposite. This is especially true if someone first gives us bad news but then provides a happy solution that is attractive because it seems attainable and risk-free. Second, every single one of us at a deep level is insecure because at such a level we know how fragile life can be and our powerlessness to do much about it. That is why we are often tempted to use denial and avoidance to deal with unpleasant realities. We learn this very early in life: when we are two years of age, we squat in the corner of the room facing the wall to fill our diaper assuming that if we can’t see the others in the room then they can’t see us doing our business. And when asked if we need a diaper change, we will resist despite the obvious aroma pervading the room.
So, we often learn to become masters of self-denial and self-promotion, and we are attracted to people who are very confident and good at self-promotion. The more there is at stake and the more we are invested in a certain outcome (almost invariably a happy one for us), the more optimistic we can be no matter how unrealistic such a perspective may be.
On the other hand, some of us have been fed personal narratives that are the opposite: we have been convinced that we are fundamentally no good and undeserving and it is hopeless to think otherwise. We can readily fall into the trap of accepting self-defeating prophecies.
Which means that assessing ourselves objectively and then being completely honest about it can be difficult and painful. We have an innate tendency, based on the narrative that we have developed, to ‘spin’ our self-view to one extreme or the other: unjustifiable self-confidence or equally unjustified self-loathing. It is the binary thinking of our lower, reptilian brain to which we are all prone that is mostly responsible.
And that carries over to how we see the rest of the world as well. We have a difficult time trying to see both sides of an argument because we become so invested in certain perspectives and ideologies. We don’t necessarily tell outright lies, but we will promote those parts of our favoured worldview that work to our advantage more than those that are less self-serving. We tell ourselves and others only the parts of the truth that benefit us; we tell half-truths.
You have probably noticed in life that whenever someone is trying to convince you of something, they seldom explore all aspects of the topic equally. If they are promoting a product or service, for example, they highlight the upsides and avoid mentioning the downsides or at least minimize them. Of course, sometimes that is because they may not be aware of the downsides, but it may also be that they really didn’t go looking for them either. They tell you a half-truth because that is all they care to know as well. We can easily convince ourselves that if we don’t know a particular downside then we are technically not lying if we fail to mention it, even though one could argue that we should have at the very least searched for it.
We all do it. How many of us on a first date will be completely candid about ourselves if we see the potential for a long-term relationship developing? Will we be totally forthcoming during an interview for a job we desperately want? Is it common for us to immediately take our full responsibility when things don’t turn out well and not look for excuses or others to blame?
That is why I really don’t think most of us tell bald-faced lies very often; we tell the truth as we see it or want to see it, even if we suspect or even know that it is not wholly accurate. It is wise to always keep this in mind. It can be beneficial to be skeptical about whether the full truth is on display, while at the same time avoiding the cynicism that says that there is no element of the truth on display at all.
Which is why it is important to insist on transparency and to be open-minded at all times. We are prone to being selective about what we speak, and also about what we hear. No matter our ideologies or affiliations, no individual or group has all of the answers for all occasions all of the time, and that includes experts and political parties, for example.
There are a lot of complex issues in the world today (digital currency, global warming, international diplomacy, etc.) and I have found that it is very difficult to find sources that present all aspects of an issue (the good, the bad and the ugly) equally well. It is certainly likely that there are times when bald-faced lies are being purposefully told, but often it is our reluctance to research and reveal the whole truth from all angles that is at work. We may expect it of others, but we don’t always follow the moral imperative of complete transparency on our part, especially when we are emotionally invested in a specific outcome.
Have you seen evidence during the pandemic of half-truths? Times when those promoting the inoculations, or those opposed, have been selective about what they present, for example? Has it left you disheartened, as though you are being lied to, even though it may be mostly half- truths? Have you found yourself wondering who you can trust?
Maybe that is simply the nature of being human, and the only defence is to understand and accommodate for it by being respectful but also skeptical, asking questions and demanding the transparency and truth-telling that ethics focuses on. Above all, we ought not give up hope. Understanding complex issues well takes work and time, but it reaps rich rewards. Unlike every other species on the planet, we have the ability to do so. Let’s not waste it.
J. Barry Engelhardt MD (retired) MHSc (bioethics)
CAERS Health Intake Facilitator