https://www.livescience.com/26914-why-we-are-all-above-average.html

A great livescience article explaining why we all believe we are better than average.

Well, unless you have depression, anxiety, or you're incredibly capable. It turns out having confidence in yourself is an important measure in asserting yourself to attempt that action, even if you're not very good at it.

Me personally? Give me the truth. The scalding unyielding truth. This is not an armchair ideal either. Early in my life, I could have avoided some seriously life impeding situations had people not lied to my face about certain things. They did it so they wouldn't hurt me, or they were afraid. That hurt me more than anything else when I found out years later.

Of course, what type of truth though? It should be truth that helps you grow. Yes, you might find out something terrible about yourself, but then you can attempt to fix it. If of course you're told a truth with the idea that you should jump off a cliff and end it all, that's no good either.

Lies can be comforting to yourself and those around you, but they simply put a rug over the issue. The truth is still there, and no lie will ever deal with it properly. So we should speak truth, but we should be gentle and understanding about it. It should be seen as giving another person an opportunity to pull the rug away and clean house. We should also understand that some people will hear the truth, recognize it, and put a rug over it anyway. Its their life to manage; let them do it as long as they aren't hurting others.

To me, innocuous lies do not seem worth the trouble. The dilemma must be between the truth that may cause distress, or a lie that may cause harm. Otherwise, the question is too easy to answer. An innocuous lie, by definition, won't cause any harm. The decision between the harmful lie and the distressing truth is an important question people often grapple with. It comes up often, particularly with people you care about.

The decision to tell a harmful lie or the distressing truth can change from situation to situation. A lot of people may say, "give me the cold, hard truth", but others may be too fragile to hear the truth, perhaps at that particular time in their life (regardless of what they may tell you...perhaps they are lying to themselves about their ability to handle the truth).

I see this dilemma as having multiple factors. First, you cannot know for certain what is better for the person, either in the short term or the long term. The truth may cause short term pain, but may be of benefit to the person in the long run. Or perhaps the person may not be able to get over the truth, causing long term distress. The decision should not be made lightly.

Second, it depends on what the truth or lie is about. The more serious the topic, the more important it is to weigh the pros and cons of each option. Lies may cause unforeseen harm to a person, because you cannot know all aspects of their life or their beliefs about themselves. If telling the lie might cause temporary or ongoing harm to the person, more so than the truth, isn't it your moral duty to tell the truth? Even if the person may not be willing or capable of receiving it? Then again, see my first factor.

Third, don't discount some middle ground. A temporary lie followed by the truth when it may be more beneficial, or more helpfully received, is an option. Of course, you do risk having the person upset with you for lying in the first place, but hopefully they will understand your explanation.

How much do we disclose about ourselves and how much do others really wish to know? I frequently err on the side of not enough or too much. As someone with complex LGBTIQ issues I frequently stumble more when people expect us to be able to explain all by a tap of the switch on digital technology.
In daily life I have often been extremely honest about so many things and people have used my self- disclosed truths against me to their own ends.
What are the facts and truths about our own lives. How much is distortion of our own making or by what is projected onto us by others with their own truths and lies. Others perceived honest opinions can be the most condemning if we do not see that they perceive and judge to their own advantage.
Personal truth is a journey and while it is important to cast out self-deception, surely it is better for each individual to be tell his or own mythic story, choosing what facts to disclose and wish to omit in the spirit of creativity and truth, allowing others the freedom to do the same. Sometimes fiction is a the most free medium as it allows juxtaposition which tells the main truth which can be hidden amidst the trivia and chaos of fabrication and fact.

Philosophim, Sherry Thanks for your long comments and thorough analysis! I absolutely agree that there are various types of truths, of half-truths and of lies. The decision we often have to make about what should we do/say is not always easy and obvious. As you said, something can make one sad today, but can spare him/her much trouble and pain in the future.
If a person I love and care about has an interview for very important job for her career and I know from experience that she is not appropriate dressed, I would perhaps tell her to choose another cloth even if that would embarass or make her little sad.
The harmless lies I mention in my post are in cases where not only harm is avoided for the lie-receiver (immediately or later), but where the other alternative, i.e. the truth, would cause irreparable damage. Or, where the disclosure of the truth would not help, because it would concern non-fixable things or situations.
An example/question: Think of an atheist whose beloved, deep religious mother is dying and says that she is happy and content because she 's going to heaven, to God and she 'll meet her son again there someday in the future. And she asks him what he thinks of it. What should her son answer?

Actually, my dad, before he died used to speak of buying a ticket into heaven. What could I say? Sometimes, when not knowing what to say in precarious situations, the best solution might be to say nothing.

In my comment about saying nothing in precarious situations, I am not suggesting that we stand back like robots. Sometimes, empathy with the spirit of distress or hope can be communicated non verbally or otherwise.
I could not possibly think that you really envision the atheist portraying his beliefs to a fantasised afterlife family reunion to a parent as they are about to die. Likewise, a pretence of belief in the afterlife by the atheist would most likely be a hollow sham, and probably appear fake and unconsoling.

"Personal truth is a journey and while it is important to cast out self-deception, surely it is better for each individual to be tell his or own mythic story, choosing what facts to disclose and wish to omit in the spirit of creativity and truth, allowing others the freedom to do the same. Sometimes fiction is a the most free medium as it allows juxtaposition which tells the main truth which can be hidden amidst the trivia and chaos of fabrication and fact." -Jack Cummins

Very nice formulated and poetic!! I really liked it!

Think of an atheist whose beloved, deep religious mother is dying and says that she is happy and content because she 's going to heaven, to God and she 'll meet her son again there someday in the future. And she asks him what he thinks of it. What should her son answer? — philosophience wordpress com

"I think that sounds wonderful Mom," The situation you painted will be mine in the future. My mother is fiercely religious. I still love her. I want her last moments on Earth to be wonderful. Its not about, "Who wins". If you're an atheist, you're pretty confident that the end is the end. It would be cruel to be petty and deny her those final moments of peace.

Perhaps you (or the atheist) do not need to pretend and exaggerate . One can be kind and empathic by simply beckon with the head or just try to change the subject. An "honest" atheist would reply "I tell you one more time, mamma, therr s no heaven! Stop believing fairytales!". How cruel and how foolish!

《I think that sounds wonderful Mom," The situation you painted will be mine in the future. My mother is fiercely religious. I still love her. I want her last moments on Earth to be wonderful. Its not about, "Who wins". If you're an atheist, you're pretty confident that the end is the end. It would be cruel to be petty and deny her those final moments of peace.》 -Philosophim

Yes! Exactly!

I thought that Philosophm' s response was an exaggerated response. My own mention of my father's mention of buying a place into heaven is in the context of my own questioning of Catholicism which I shielded, partly because I did not need at a time of deep personal exploration.
I am neither a complete atheist or believer in an afterlife and I neither conceal or deny this but just approach others spontaneously, but with regard to their beliefs.
I think that you have created an interesting area of debate and you may have paved the way for all kinds of exciting possibilities for discussion.

Exaggerating or not, we all believe that a militant truth-teller is not a person we would admire, rather a person we would try to avoid...

The militant truth tellers can definitely be obnoxious and the worst to have involved in complex philosophical discussions, They often have such limited vision, distorting and curbing all genuine constructions and renditions of truth, which is about seeing beyond the facade of the limits of our own personal experience.

One can still express a brutal truth with kindness and respect. Managing a series of lies is a great deal more difficult and stressful than telling the truth. And if the lying is discovered, no matter how courteous, they indict your character.

It is also important to know when uncovering brutal truths what ends we are serving, truth, the feeling of others or ourselves? Perhaps, then, is the time for the brutal truths, as we perceive them.
Hopefully our lives and those of others are not shrouded in lies altogether and if they really are what has led to the lies?
It is also difficult talking abstractly, because although the example of lying to a dying relative opened up a discussion all facets of personal and social deception have there only intricacies.
As far as the opening discussion was concerned, how much lying and self'disclosure in personal life was the starting point at least.
This starting point is good though, because how we approach issues in our life can be broadened to a wider ethical sphere. If we can be aware of the logic of our personal lives it may give us the logic to apply to social and political dilemmas, But this is only if we can look at each issue in itself without unhelpful generalisations.

Having written this response I am aware that there are all kinds of lies and deceptions going on at a social and political level. This is probably a slightly different debate but it may be interrelated in some strange way, when historians review the lives of our political leaders, their autobiographical tuths and their agendas, even in the time of Covid_19 and the current turmoil.

Thanks for your comment! In theory it sounds perfect to have the ability to express a brutal truth with kindness. But in practice? In the example with the atheist and his mother, how would it go?
About the risk to indict our character: Not if the person understands that we didn't want to hurt his/her feelings.

If only it was perfect. I wrestle on a day to day basis about how to live my life without hurting my mother's feelings because she is elderly.
There are so many dimensions to the lying and honesty debate and probably most of us have a a complex mixture of self interest and higher motives, and at best, awareness of motives will lead to being honest with oneself.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/457915 Exactly!

... And if you would rather lie... then would you rather lie in velvet, or in white satin?

Lies in white satin will also be sweet..

Thank you for the engaging topic!

"I think that sounds wonderful Mom," — Philosophim

This comment from Philosophim is helpful because it made me realize the most virtuous choice may be neither the lie nor the truth. It really depends what is at stake. The fact he's not telling his mother the truth about his atheist point of view doesn't mean he is lying to her.

Your example of your friend being inappropriately dressed for a job interview is helpful because it illustrates that, often, there is an easy answer. There is too much at stake for her, for you not to tell her the truth. (Or, then again, maybe you know the job is a bad one, so you let her go dressed inappropriately hoping she won't be offered the position!)

Perhaps a real dilemma could be your friend asking you how the golf trip was with his/her partner, when you realize the partner used you as an alibi for an affair. How do you answer? This may be a simple answer for some people. But there is a real dilemma, knowing you will cause pain either way.

"Perhaps a real dilemma could be your friend asking you how the golf trip was with his/her partner, when you realize the partner used you as an alibi for an affair. How do you answer? This may be a simple answer for some people. But there is a real dilemma, knowing you will cause pain either way." - @Sherry

Well written!

Philosophims hypothetical answer to mamma and my "interview example" and your "golf trip example". All illustrate the fact that what is virtuous depends not on whether we tell a truth or a lie , but on whether we want to cause pain or not to others. We can often use the truth as an excuse to deliberately inflict damage.

This is probably a weird way to look at the issue but it seems to make sense at some level. The goal, as per evolution, is to survive and two critical feats must be accomplished by an individual to do that:

1. Survive predators. We know that an efficient technique for predators is camouflage - I supposs being undetected until the final phase of an attack is a highly efficent modus operandi. The essence of camouflage is deception i.e. the predator lies to the prey. Ergo, potential prey like us need to, if only to live to see the next sunrise, know the truth.

Once we became predators, apex predators at that, ourselves, we needed to learn how to deceive our prey. Hence we learned to lie.

2. Find a mate. To get a partner one needs to be sexually appealing but not everyone is created equal in that department. Some, like myself, fall into that unfortunate category of people who have a difficult, almost impossible, time finding a willing member of the opposite, or in some cases the same, sex. We're the kind who love being lied to - we don't mind, in fact appreciate, being told we're attractive, handsome, beautiful, hot, cool, etc. when the truth is we're not. Perhaps it boosts confidence to a level that improves the odds of mating successfully. In any case, to my reckoning this is as good an explanation as any other as to why lies and lying still exist as ongoing phenomena.

In essence, the choices offered, truth or lie, is that between escaping a predator or finding a mate for someone like me. It depends then what the circumstances are - am I soldier trying to figure out where the enemy is or am I hoping to score a home run with a girl?

:chin:

Thanks for your comment! Interesting thoughts! Perhaps not 100% on this topic, but still a valid analysis, I mostly agree.

Thanks for your comment! Interesting thoughts! Perhaps not 100% on this topic, but still a valid analysis, I mostly agree. — philosophience wordpress com

I was simply exploring the persistence of lies and lying despite the fact that they're valued negatively.

It appears, from my drive-by of the issue, that truths and lies are deeply connected to survival. Humans, like most other life-forms I suppose, are both prey and predator and in these roles both truths and lies seem to increase the odds of either evading predators or capturing prey. Too, the conditions that need to be met for mating opportunities are such that most of us, at one point or another, are below par and lies soften the blow to our fragile but existentially vital egos.

When we find truth damaging it's when it compromises our chances of finding prey or escaping predators and when lies are met with open arms it's because we need to cushion the blow to our fragile egos as when our amorous advances are spurned by a potential mate.

Well written again! I agree that whatever behaviour, good or bad, exists in human societies it is because evolution has favoured such a behaviour when it had increased the survival and reproduction of its bearers. I use a lot of the evolutionary theory in my blog philosophience.wordpress.com ; I would be glad if you read my articles and make similar, lucid comments even there

:ok: Thanks for the link. :up: