4 ms·

"Some amount of dishonesty is required if you want to avoid being an awkward social pariah." Actually that's not true. It is possible to be completely sincere

by nocman 8y ago

"Some amount of dishonesty is required if you want to avoid being an awkward social pariah." Actually that's not true. It is possible to be completely sincere, yet tactful. And you can do it in a way that doesn't come off as self-righteous. I will grant you that it is definitely more rare than it should be, but that doesn't make the opposite a requirement.

learc83 8y ago
>Actually that's not true. It is possible to be completely sincere, yet tactful I completely and utterly disagree with this. There are too many social interactions centered around a shared expectation of dishonesty. If your partner's grandmother asks you how the food was, if you answer with anything less than "great", regardless of how tactfully you do so, there will be negative social consequences. Even in the rare case that the grandmother wants your honest opinion, the rest of the family have expectations about how you are supposed to respond.
- nocman 8y ago
  Avoiding answering a question directly does not make you dishonest. If my wife's grandmother had asked me how the food was (assuming the food was awful), I might say "it was very much appreciated" -- and I could say that with 100% honesty, because she would have put a lot of effort into it, and even if she failed, I appreciate that she tried. Or let's say she didn't try very hard (which would have been unlikely for either of my wife's grandmothers), I could answer with "thank you for making it", or something else like that, and my response could be 100% sincere. I think the fundamental argument being had in this portion of this thread is that if you don't say everything you think about something then you are being dishonest. I and many others in the thread totally disagree with that assesment. Your statements can be 100% truthful, and yet not reveal all of your thoughts about a subject or situation. Having a filter doesn't make you dishonest. Some of your thoughts are unkind, some can be even downright evil at times. The fact that you don't reveal these things is often a sign of self control. Words have power, and they affect others around you. There's a reason everyone can't hear every thought you have. Again, the fact that I don't reveal everything I think does not make me dishonest. If that's your definition of "honesty", then I'm glad I don't live in a world where everyone is "honest" -- it would be a miserable experience.
  - learc83 8y ago
    >Your statements can be 100% truthful, and yet not reveal all of your thoughts about a subject or situation. Having a filter doesn't make you dishonest. Some of your thoughts are unkind, some can be even downright evil at times. The fact that you don't reveal these things is often a sign of self control. Words have power, and they affect others around you. There's a reason everyone can't hear every thought you have. Absolutely 100% true. >I could answer with "thank you for making it" You are carefully crafting a response to the question to make everyone believe that you liked the food without directly stating that. I believe this is completely morally equivalent to leading everyone to believe you liked the food by directly stating it. I believe that neither one of these things is immoral in any way in the particular case. Let's say she doesn't accept your dancing around the question? Are you going to keep crafting answers that are technically correct in attempt to make everyone think you liked the food? I don't think it's wrong if you do so, but I do think that the effect is completely the same as if you'd just said it was great.
    - nocman 8y ago
      > >I could answer with "thank you for making it" > You are carefully crafting a response to the question to make everyone believe that you liked the food without directly stating that. NO -- see that's the problem. You're making a huge assumption that is incorrect. "thank you for making it" does not mean "I liked it". And no, it won't make everyone believe that I liked the food (especially since that would not have been my intention in the first place). People aren't stupid. Most folks I know would realize in that situation that I wasn't directly answering the question. "thank you for making it" would not have been dishonest, and it would not mean "I liked the food". > "Let's say she doesn't accept your dancing around the question? Are you going to keep crafting answers that are technically correct in attempt to make everyone think you liked the food?" Firstly, you are wrong in your assessment that I would be attempting to make everyone think I liked the food -- in that situation that would not be my intention at all. Secondly, if I was pressed I might try to move on with the conversation in a different way (without answering) -- which, again would not be dishonest. Not wanting to answer a question is not the same thing as dishonesty. I am not required to tell everyone what I think about everything in order to be honest. If she kept pressing the question, I might try to answer the question nicely, like "It wasn't my favorite", or "I didn't care for it". Both of those answers would be honest. Being kind is not dishonesty, either. Even if it was one of the worst meals I'd ever eaten, both of those statements would be truthful. "the effect is completely the same as if you'd just said it was great." -- No, I totally disagree with that. "It was great" would be a lie, "thank you for making it" expresses genuine gratitide for the effort made toward the meal. You make it sound as though it is impossible to be tactful and truthful/honest at the same time. I disagree. [ edited to remove a typo ]
- bookofjoe 8y ago
  >Actually that's not true. It is possible to be completely sincere, yet tactful Concur. I was asked for a reference on a graduating anesthesiology resident who was terrible in terms of his attitude, yet competent enough to practice safely; my reference letter, in its entirety: "He worked here."
  - learc83 8y ago
    Is this satire? This isn't tactful at all. It comes across as a completely passive aggressive. Communication is more than just the literal meaning of the words you write. Most people reading this are going to interpret is a "Do not hire this guy under any circumstances, he is terrible" I think complete honesty--"Terrible attitude, but competent"--would have actually been more tactful than what you wrote.

by nocman 8y ago

learc83 8y ago

>Actually that's not true. It is possible to be completely sincere, yet tactful I completely and utterly disagree with this. There are too many social interactions centered around a shared expectation of dishonesty. If your partner's grandmother asks you how the food was, if you answer with anything less than "great", regardless of how tactfully you do so, there will be negative social consequences. Even in the rare case that the grandmother wants your honest opinion, the rest of the family have expectations about how you are supposed to respond.

nocman 8y ago
Avoiding answering a question directly does not make you dishonest. If my wife's grandmother had asked me how the food was (assuming the food was awful), I might say "it was very much appreciated" -- and I could say that with 100% honesty, because she would have put a lot of effort into it, and even if she failed, I appreciate that she tried. Or let's say she didn't try very hard (which would have been unlikely for either of my wife's grandmothers), I could answer with "thank you for making it", or something else like that, and my response could be 100% sincere. I think the fundamental argument being had in this portion of this thread is that if you don't say everything you think about something then you are being dishonest. I and many others in the thread totally disagree with that assesment. Your statements can be 100% truthful, and yet not reveal all of your thoughts about a subject or situation. Having a filter doesn't make you dishonest. Some of your thoughts are unkind, some can be even downright evil at times. The fact that you don't reveal these things is often a sign of self control. Words have power, and they affect others around you. There's a reason everyone can't hear every thought you have. Again, the fact that I don't reveal everything I think does not make me dishonest. If that's your definition of "honesty", then I'm glad I don't live in a world where everyone is "honest" -- it would be a miserable experience.
- learc83 8y ago
  >Your statements can be 100% truthful, and yet not reveal all of your thoughts about a subject or situation. Having a filter doesn't make you dishonest. Some of your thoughts are unkind, some can be even downright evil at times. The fact that you don't reveal these things is often a sign of self control. Words have power, and they affect others around you. There's a reason everyone can't hear every thought you have. Absolutely 100% true. >I could answer with "thank you for making it" You are carefully crafting a response to the question to make everyone believe that you liked the food without directly stating that. I believe this is completely morally equivalent to leading everyone to believe you liked the food by directly stating it. I believe that neither one of these things is immoral in any way in the particular case. Let's say she doesn't accept your dancing around the question? Are you going to keep crafting answers that are technically correct in attempt to make everyone think you liked the food? I don't think it's wrong if you do so, but I do think that the effect is completely the same as if you'd just said it was great.
  - nocman 8y ago
    > >I could answer with "thank you for making it" > You are carefully crafting a response to the question to make everyone believe that you liked the food without directly stating that. NO -- see that's the problem. You're making a huge assumption that is incorrect. "thank you for making it" does not mean "I liked it". And no, it won't make everyone believe that I liked the food (especially since that would not have been my intention in the first place). People aren't stupid. Most folks I know would realize in that situation that I wasn't directly answering the question. "thank you for making it" would not have been dishonest, and it would not mean "I liked the food". > "Let's say she doesn't accept your dancing around the question? Are you going to keep crafting answers that are technically correct in attempt to make everyone think you liked the food?" Firstly, you are wrong in your assessment that I would be attempting to make everyone think I liked the food -- in that situation that would not be my intention at all. Secondly, if I was pressed I might try to move on with the conversation in a different way (without answering) -- which, again would not be dishonest. Not wanting to answer a question is not the same thing as dishonesty. I am not required to tell everyone what I think about everything in order to be honest. If she kept pressing the question, I might try to answer the question nicely, like "It wasn't my favorite", or "I didn't care for it". Both of those answers would be honest. Being kind is not dishonesty, either. Even if it was one of the worst meals I'd ever eaten, both of those statements would be truthful. "the effect is completely the same as if you'd just said it was great." -- No, I totally disagree with that. "It was great" would be a lie, "thank you for making it" expresses genuine gratitide for the effort made toward the meal. You make it sound as though it is impossible to be tactful and truthful/honest at the same time. I disagree. [ edited to remove a typo ]
bookofjoe 8y ago
>Actually that's not true. It is possible to be completely sincere, yet tactful Concur. I was asked for a reference on a graduating anesthesiology resident who was terrible in terms of his attitude, yet competent enough to practice safely; my reference letter, in its entirety: "He worked here."
- learc83 8y ago
  Is this satire? This isn't tactful at all. It comes across as a completely passive aggressive. Communication is more than just the literal meaning of the words you write. Most people reading this are going to interpret is a "Do not hire this guy under any circumstances, he is terrible" I think complete honesty--"Terrible attitude, but competent"--would have actually been more tactful than what you wrote.