6 ms·

Maybe I'm off my rocker, but isn't this exactly what "white lies"[1] were invented for? You don't actually always have to be 100% truthful with everyone. (That

Maybe I'm off my rocker, but isn't this exactly what "white lies"[1] were invented for? You don't actually always have to be 100% truthful with everyone. (That will also serve you badly in other social situations, BTW.) [1] Point being that even if people eventually find out that you did tell them a "white lie", they'll actually usually be very understanding because that's the societal norm and they realize that you were just trying to "spare them" from embarassment/awkwardness/losing face/whatever.

manmal 9y ago
Very true! It's hard to argue with another person's feelings or needs though. I can always need a bit of resting (who doesn't?), so it's not even a lie if I say "Sorry I feel a bit worn out, so I can't take this right now. I have this and that task to do later and I will have to give my everything to do it properly. I hope you find a solution for your problem." The white lie would be "Sorry my foot hurts, I had an accident yesterday, so I cannot help you. I really wish I could, but you know..." Regarding your addition about white lies - I personally very seldomly lie in a detectable way, because I am very embarrassed if the other one finds out. You are certainly correct that white lies are easily forgiven, but IMO the perception of a "white liar" changes if you find out about the lie - I look at them as cowards, because they are too weak to just say no - does that make sense?
- hammock 9y ago
  Both of those sound terrible and regardless of your feelings I might tag you as unreliable. Is there a third way?
  - manmal 9y ago
    Ha, that's one of the reasons why I often do what people ask of me instead of saying "no". It might be a problem of my own making - if I would not mark other people as unreliable just for declining, maybe I would not be afraid of other people thinking the same of me. What's the effect of you marking me as unreliable? Will you stop considering me for certain tasks, or will you cease any relationship with me?
  - Swizec 9y ago
    Unreliable is great! I don't want to be relied upon for things I don't want to do. Why would I want to come off as reliable for things I don't want to be doing in the first place? That's a great way to get to do even more of the things you don't want to do. Sounds terrible. Align your interests with mine, then we can talk about reliable. In the words of one Richard Feynman : http://www.deliberate.rest/?p=685 http://www.deliberate.rest/?p=685 > So I have invented another myth for myself—that I’m irresponsible. I tell everybody, I don’t do anything. If anybody asks me to be on a committee to take care of admissions, no, I’m irresponsible, I don’t give a damn about the students—of course I give a damn about the students but I know that somebody else’ll do it—and I take the view, “Let George do it,” a view which you’re not supposed to take, okay, because that’s not right to do, but I do that because I like to do physics and I want to see if I can still do it, and so I’m selfish, okay? I want to do my physics. 90% of the time, being "reliable" goes against my best interests in terms of career and goals. My value is that I can hunker down and make stuff. My value is not "tasks".
    - lomnakkus 9y ago
      > Unreliable is great! Anecdote: It only goes so far. There are quite a lot of people who will be quite pissed off with you (passively) if you're unreliable. I mean, friends will tolerate it, but let me tell you, as someone who's quite "reliable" (punctual, do what I promise, etc.) it's quite stressful to have to rely on someone who isn't. So stressful, in fact, that I wouldn't actually interact very much with this particular person I'm thinking of right now if I wasn't forced to (via circumstances beyond my control). > [Snip Feynman] anecdote. Feynman could get away with a lot of shit that almost nobody else would have done because he was a genius (and was recognized as such by his contemporaries). Are you at "Feynman"-level? > 90% of the time, being "reliable" goes against my best interests in terms of career and goals. ^ I don't see what the above... > My value is that I can hunker down and make stuff. My value is not "tasks". ... has to do with this. Can you explain?
      - erkkie 9y ago
        There's a difference in actually being unreliable (which I'm sure Feynman wasn't) vs projecting the negative of "I will help everyone every time". It boils down to finding enough courage to focus on your priorities in life and not feeling guilty about it. Respect yourself (your time) and people will respect you.
  - galfarragem 9y ago
    Yes and without lies: "sorry, I have already other plans." Although, it doesn't work with very close people that are expecting a concrete justification unless you want to enter in white lies' territory.
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      My approach is that if close people expect some justification, I'll enter the "let's figure this out together" mode. If they're not willing to work with me in this mode, they get a clear signal that I'm not cooperating in any other way. If they complain, I point out they're showing me less respect right now than they'd show a random stranger, and we're supposed to be very close, i.e. care about each other. I try to be very consistent about it - they really can work out pretty much anything with me in a respectful and rational way, so the above is not a dismissal, it's enforcing communications protocol.
- trobayhasteman 9y ago
  No, neither would be even somewhat true. Of course it's open to interpretation as all language is, but "so I can't" heavily implies there was nothing more to be said about it, because everything else is apparent from context. With regard to the parent, that's a lie in the sense of obscuring ulterior motives. An apt phrase to describe this is lie by omission. In your sense, it's to weasel out, for lack of a better word, because it implies you are too worn out to even argue - without alleging you had ulterior motives.
  - manmal 9y ago
    Yes just replace "I can't" with "I rather don't want to". I don't know anybody who would imply hidden ulterior motives in this case in real life, since "I can't" is not necessarily as strictly interpreted as you are trying to do.
- BurningFrog 9y ago
  You can tell who the white liars are. They have so many coincidences and accidents.
StavrosK 9y ago
I just say "ooohhh, I'd love to, but I have an excuse :(". Most people don't get it, but they're confused long enough for me to escape.
- lomnakkus 9y ago
  That's quite meta, if I do say so myself.
- JacobAldridge 9y ago
  My current go-to is "I'd love to, but I can't because I'm folding t-shirts at that time". Humorous rejection for those who get it, passes the photocopier 'because' test which actually suffices for many, and achieves your confusion/escape route for most of the rest!
  - tripzilch 9y ago
    "I have to wax my cat" I have no idea where I got that line from, but it's stuck because of it's absurdist hilarity. I don't say this as a serious reply of course. It's intended to communicate that the nature of the request is such that I feel I shouldn't even have to decline it. In practice usually it just generates friendly confusion, which benefits all parties. disclaimer: I don't have a cat. Nor would I wax one if I did.
- Schwolop 9y ago
  That's almost as useful as "Look! Over there! A distraction!"
  - StavrosK 9y ago
    Very useful indeed.
- gerbilly 9y ago
  I would, but I don't want to.
vivekd 9y ago
But can't we decline politely while still telling the truth. Lying seems unnecessary in this situation. I think white lies are more for things like when someone asks you what you think of their cooking and you tell them it's delicious no matter how it tastes.
- lomnakkus 9y ago
  Well, it definitely is situational. My point was merely that it's usually better to say "Oh, I'm sorry, I can't, I have to attend [implying dullness] a party with my parents that day" rather than "No, I don't want to go on a date with you". The key is that it allows BOTH parties to avoid an unpleasant interaction and to save face. (Assuming that they both take the hint, obviously.) It's basically plausible deniability (or "denial", if you will) for social interactions... which is at the basis of most of human interaction, if you think about it. EDIT: Of course, if you're laboring under "Depressive Realism"[1] then all of this is pretty transparent, but if you buy the DR hypothesis then most people actually don't notice this type of thing going on (at the meta level, obviously sometimes they'll discover they've been lied to, etc.). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depressive_realism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depressive_realism
  - vivekd 9y ago
    >"No, I don't want to go on a date with you". The key is that it allows BOTH parties to avoid an unpleasant interaction and to save face. (Assuming that they both take the hint, obviously.) I think the key there is "assuming that they both take the hint. Which is that the other person needs to get the message that it's no, is it's not really allowing them to avoid unpleasant interactions, because they're still getting a no no matter what. It's really just allowing us to save face and avoid unpleasant interactions. Wouldn't it be much more pleasant to say something like "I'm sorry I don't think of you in that way," or "I'm sorry you're not my type" or better yet"I'm sorry but I'm not interested in going out on a date." For the other party these are not much more hurtful than "I have to attend dull party" and they eliminate the ambigiousness that might have the other party second guessing or thinking there is a chance if you lie and tell them you have other arrangements. Worse yet it will create a worse situation if they see or hear about you hanging around town on the date of your dull party.
defined 9y ago
My memory is so terrible that I dare not tell even white lies, so I am forced to tell the truth, preferably in a way that preserves the requester's dignity, not just a blunt "no." The truth is usually along the lines of "Sorry, I would like to be able to help, but I have too much on my plate right now and more keeps being added to it every day."
- Natanael_L 9y ago
  Mark Twain — 'If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.'

manmal 9y ago

Very true! It's hard to argue with another person's feelings or needs though. I can always need a bit of resting (who doesn't?), so it's not even a lie if I say "Sorry I feel a bit worn out, so I can't take this right now. I have this and that task to do later and I will have to give my everything to do it properly. I hope you find a solution for your problem." The white lie would be "Sorry my foot hurts, I had an accident yesterday, so I cannot help you. I really wish I could, but you know..." Regarding your addition about white lies - I personally very seldomly lie in a detectable way, because I am very embarrassed if the other one finds out. You are certainly correct that white lies are easily forgiven, but IMO the perception of a "white liar" changes if you find out about the lie - I look at them as cowards, because they are too weak to just say no - does that make sense?

hammock 9y ago
Both of those sound terrible and regardless of your feelings I might tag you as unreliable. Is there a third way?
- manmal 9y ago
  Ha, that's one of the reasons why I often do what people ask of me instead of saying "no". It might be a problem of my own making - if I would not mark other people as unreliable just for declining, maybe I would not be afraid of other people thinking the same of me. What's the effect of you marking me as unreliable? Will you stop considering me for certain tasks, or will you cease any relationship with me?
- Swizec 9y ago
  Unreliable is great! I don't want to be relied upon for things I don't want to do. Why would I want to come off as reliable for things I don't want to be doing in the first place? That's a great way to get to do even more of the things you don't want to do. Sounds terrible. Align your interests with mine, then we can talk about reliable. In the words of one Richard Feynman : http://www.deliberate.rest/?p=685 http://www.deliberate.rest/?p=685 > So I have invented another myth for myself—that I’m irresponsible. I tell everybody, I don’t do anything. If anybody asks me to be on a committee to take care of admissions, no, I’m irresponsible, I don’t give a damn about the students—of course I give a damn about the students but I know that somebody else’ll do it—and I take the view, “Let George do it,” a view which you’re not supposed to take, okay, because that’s not right to do, but I do that because I like to do physics and I want to see if I can still do it, and so I’m selfish, okay? I want to do my physics. 90% of the time, being "reliable" goes against my best interests in terms of career and goals. My value is that I can hunker down and make stuff. My value is not "tasks".
  - lomnakkus 9y ago
    > Unreliable is great! Anecdote: It only goes so far. There are quite a lot of people who will be quite pissed off with you (passively) if you're unreliable. I mean, friends will tolerate it, but let me tell you, as someone who's quite "reliable" (punctual, do what I promise, etc.) it's quite stressful to have to rely on someone who isn't. So stressful, in fact, that I wouldn't actually interact very much with this particular person I'm thinking of right now if I wasn't forced to (via circumstances beyond my control). > [Snip Feynman] anecdote. Feynman could get away with a lot of shit that almost nobody else would have done because he was a genius (and was recognized as such by his contemporaries). Are you at "Feynman"-level? > 90% of the time, being "reliable" goes against my best interests in terms of career and goals. ^ I don't see what the above... > My value is that I can hunker down and make stuff. My value is not "tasks". ... has to do with this. Can you explain?
    - erkkie 9y ago
      There's a difference in actually being unreliable (which I'm sure Feynman wasn't) vs projecting the negative of "I will help everyone every time". It boils down to finding enough courage to focus on your priorities in life and not feeling guilty about it. Respect yourself (your time) and people will respect you.
- galfarragem 9y ago
  Yes and without lies: "sorry, I have already other plans." Although, it doesn't work with very close people that are expecting a concrete justification unless you want to enter in white lies' territory.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    My approach is that if close people expect some justification, I'll enter the "let's figure this out together" mode. If they're not willing to work with me in this mode, they get a clear signal that I'm not cooperating in any other way. If they complain, I point out they're showing me less respect right now than they'd show a random stranger, and we're supposed to be very close, i.e. care about each other. I try to be very consistent about it - they really can work out pretty much anything with me in a respectful and rational way, so the above is not a dismissal, it's enforcing communications protocol.
trobayhasteman 9y ago
No, neither would be even somewhat true. Of course it's open to interpretation as all language is, but "so I can't" heavily implies there was nothing more to be said about it, because everything else is apparent from context. With regard to the parent, that's a lie in the sense of obscuring ulterior motives. An apt phrase to describe this is lie by omission. In your sense, it's to weasel out, for lack of a better word, because it implies you are too worn out to even argue - without alleging you had ulterior motives.
- manmal 9y ago
  Yes just replace "I can't" with "I rather don't want to". I don't know anybody who would imply hidden ulterior motives in this case in real life, since "I can't" is not necessarily as strictly interpreted as you are trying to do.
BurningFrog 9y ago
You can tell who the white liars are. They have so many coincidences and accidents.

StavrosK 9y ago

I just say "ooohhh, I'd love to, but I have an excuse :(". Most people don't get it, but they're confused long enough for me to escape.

lomnakkus 9y ago
That's quite meta, if I do say so myself.
JacobAldridge 9y ago
My current go-to is "I'd love to, but I can't because I'm folding t-shirts at that time". Humorous rejection for those who get it, passes the photocopier 'because' test which actually suffices for many, and achieves your confusion/escape route for most of the rest!
- tripzilch 9y ago
  "I have to wax my cat" I have no idea where I got that line from, but it's stuck because of it's absurdist hilarity. I don't say this as a serious reply of course. It's intended to communicate that the nature of the request is such that I feel I shouldn't even have to decline it. In practice usually it just generates friendly confusion, which benefits all parties. disclaimer: I don't have a cat. Nor would I wax one if I did.
Schwolop 9y ago
That's almost as useful as "Look! Over there! A distraction!"
- StavrosK 9y ago
  Very useful indeed.
gerbilly 9y ago
I would, but I don't want to.

vivekd 9y ago

But can't we decline politely while still telling the truth. Lying seems unnecessary in this situation. I think white lies are more for things like when someone asks you what you think of their cooking and you tell them it's delicious no matter how it tastes.

lomnakkus 9y ago
Well, it definitely is situational. My point was merely that it's usually better to say "Oh, I'm sorry, I can't, I have to attend [implying dullness] a party with my parents that day" rather than "No, I don't want to go on a date with you". The key is that it allows BOTH parties to avoid an unpleasant interaction and to save face. (Assuming that they both take the hint, obviously.) It's basically plausible deniability (or "denial", if you will) for social interactions... which is at the basis of most of human interaction, if you think about it. EDIT: Of course, if you're laboring under "Depressive Realism"[1] then all of this is pretty transparent, but if you buy the DR hypothesis then most people actually don't notice this type of thing going on (at the meta level, obviously sometimes they'll discover they've been lied to, etc.). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depressive_realism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depressive_realism
- vivekd 9y ago
  >"No, I don't want to go on a date with you". The key is that it allows BOTH parties to avoid an unpleasant interaction and to save face. (Assuming that they both take the hint, obviously.) I think the key there is "assuming that they both take the hint. Which is that the other person needs to get the message that it's no, is it's not really allowing them to avoid unpleasant interactions, because they're still getting a no no matter what. It's really just allowing us to save face and avoid unpleasant interactions. Wouldn't it be much more pleasant to say something like "I'm sorry I don't think of you in that way," or "I'm sorry you're not my type" or better yet"I'm sorry but I'm not interested in going out on a date." For the other party these are not much more hurtful than "I have to attend dull party" and they eliminate the ambigiousness that might have the other party second guessing or thinking there is a chance if you lie and tell them you have other arrangements. Worse yet it will create a worse situation if they see or hear about you hanging around town on the date of your dull party.

defined 9y ago

My memory is so terrible that I dare not tell even white lies, so I am forced to tell the truth, preferably in a way that preserves the requester's dignity, not just a blunt "no." The truth is usually along the lines of "Sorry, I would like to be able to help, but I have too much on my plate right now and more keeps being added to it every day."

Natanael_L 9y ago
Mark Twain — 'If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.'