8 ms·

I think shamelessness is a useful concept, but not really in isolation. Related topics include: the incentive structure around the strategy and whether the focu

I think shamelessness is a useful concept, but not really in isolation. Related topics include: the incentive structure around the strategy and whether the focus of the shame is a morally good or bad thing. My personal moral code is that lying is bad; this is an article of faith for me, a central tenet of my religion. I find it incredibly disturbing that shameless lying is increasingly a successful political strategy. Lying has always been associated with politicians, but the shameless aspect seems newer to me. If you were to talk about shame a few decades ago, one of the first things that would come to mind is sexual morality. Yet, some of the people I admire the most from that time are shameless homosexuals like Larry Kramer, who were incredibly effective advocates not only for AIDS health issues, but also for gay rights in general. And attitudes have indeed shifted, remarkably quickly. The fact that a strategy is successful tells you more about the incentive structure around the strategy than it does about the person executing the strategy. And the incentive structure around lying in particular is just broken - the most effective liars are celebrated for their skill, the "owning" of their more reality-based opponents. In this incentive environment, it is inevitable that people and institutions will adapt. I don't have a solution, but I do know that digital media in its current form is not it. When I was younger, I was idealistic about the idea that free and convenient access to the truth would make lie-based narratives harder to sustain, but now we're seeing the opposite. I personally would focus on that rather than the particular mechanism of shame and shamelessness.

qwantim1 6y ago
> My personal moral code is that lying is bad; this is an article of faith for me, a central tenet of my religion. Do you believe truth can be known by humans, or that as a human you should try to be truthful, with truth as an ideal or as an entity that could act as a god/deity but may or may not be able to interact clearly with our world? I think of truth as an ideal and concept that also could be an entity or related to the essence of an entity, but that knowledge of it is sparse.
- raphlinus 6y ago
  Speaking for myself, I believe that some truth can be known by humans, but my faith is more about the ideal to strive for it. My Quaker faith speaks of "continuing revelation," particularly in contrast to originalism. But when I use the word "lying" I am very specific about an intentional act of deception. You don't have to get deep into philosophy or theology to figure that out, though there are always shades of whether the deceptive person believes their own lies.
bonoboTP 6y ago
What is lying exactly? I find that most people claim to have a moral rule against lying but have idiosyncratic definitions of what that is. I saw a lecture video the other day where the speaker told an anecdote about how he got to work at a fancy place with a person he looked up to. To get a chance at talking to him, he said he'll be in town next week for a conference and they could grab lunch together one day. The conference was a lie, he just didn't want to look so desperate that he'd fly in just for this chance at a lunch discussion. Had he laid his cards bare, maybe the important person would have felt more pressure that if he accepts the lunch invitation then he already owes him something because the guy went through all the trouble to fly in. So by lying, our guy took pressure off the situation and got a relaxed discussion and eventually the gig. This is just one example. How about negotiation strategies? How about lying implicitly by misrepresenting yourself through clothing or otherwise? How about downplaying your romantic interest a bit, to avoid scaring away or overwhelming your desired partner? How about lying by omission? It just isn't socially feasible to be always reporting true statements of fact without some hint of "manipulation". I mean even just putting up a poker face while you're very nervous is a form of misrepresenting your inner state of mind. Selling anything, including yourself in a job interview or at a date requires downplaying weaknesses and emphasizing strengths in a very partisan and totally not neutral and balanced factual way. Outright lying is for losers. You can achieve the same goals and more by just being good at technically not lying or lying in socially acceptable ways. (similar to how crime is for losers and the big players get laws written according to their interests). People protect their self image with so many patterns like: "I would never X (lie, cheat on a partner,...)" "How about that time when" "well, that doesn't count, it's complicated, I had reasons" etc. There aren't any hard and fast rules.
- dragontamer 6y ago
  What is lying? You are overcomplicating things. Insinuating that Obama was born in Kenya was a lie. It's nowhere as hard as you are making it out to be. That a politician can launch a national campaign on such a lie is proof of the disfunction of our system.
  - bonoboTP 6y ago
hammock 6y ago
Have you read any Stephen Covey? If not I suggest it. There is a distinction between Character and Personality that he elucidates very well. Shamelessness would be Personality trait, it is orthogonal to whether or not you are actually lying (Character). I guess you would agree with me that lying is not a long term winning strategy. That doesn't exclude shamelessness, tactically employed.
Bakary 6y ago
What do you make of people who see religion in general as a "lie-based narrative"? I am asking this non-sarcastically and non-confrontationally, as when I was younger I expected religious belief to decrease with added information creating too much cognitive dissonance. To some extent, that has been the case but not in the way I envisioned it.
- raphlinus 6y ago
  Speaking personally, I do my best to reconcile a spiritual practice and spiritual beliefs, which I believe are separate from empirical truth, with an intellectual rigor about the latter. Again, this something I apsire to, not always achieve. This is a complex topic, and I think a little orthogonal to the main point I was making, and also Nadia's essay. For some reason, the story of the Mormon archaeologists such as Thomas Stuart Ferguson comes to mind - they had to struggle to reconcile these two poles (which were in strong tension), and for the most part ended up keeping their cultural ties to the church while feeling a loss of their personal religious faith.

qwantim1 6y ago

> My personal moral code is that lying is bad; this is an article of faith for me, a central tenet of my religion. Do you believe truth can be known by humans, or that as a human you should try to be truthful, with truth as an ideal or as an entity that could act as a god/deity but may or may not be able to interact clearly with our world? I think of truth as an ideal and concept that also could be an entity or related to the essence of an entity, but that knowledge of it is sparse.

raphlinus 6y ago
Speaking for myself, I believe that some truth can be known by humans, but my faith is more about the ideal to strive for it. My Quaker faith speaks of "continuing revelation," particularly in contrast to originalism. But when I use the word "lying" I am very specific about an intentional act of deception. You don't have to get deep into philosophy or theology to figure that out, though there are always shades of whether the deceptive person believes their own lies.

bonoboTP 6y ago

What is lying exactly? I find that most people claim to have a moral rule against lying but have idiosyncratic definitions of what that is. I saw a lecture video the other day where the speaker told an anecdote about how he got to work at a fancy place with a person he looked up to. To get a chance at talking to him, he said he'll be in town next week for a conference and they could grab lunch together one day. The conference was a lie, he just didn't want to look so desperate that he'd fly in just for this chance at a lunch discussion. Had he laid his cards bare, maybe the important person would have felt more pressure that if he accepts the lunch invitation then he already owes him something because the guy went through all the trouble to fly in. So by lying, our guy took pressure off the situation and got a relaxed discussion and eventually the gig. This is just one example. How about negotiation strategies? How about lying implicitly by misrepresenting yourself through clothing or otherwise? How about downplaying your romantic interest a bit, to avoid scaring away or overwhelming your desired partner? How about lying by omission? It just isn't socially feasible to be always reporting true statements of fact without some hint of "manipulation". I mean even just putting up a poker face while you're very nervous is a form of misrepresenting your inner state of mind. Selling anything, including yourself in a job interview or at a date requires downplaying weaknesses and emphasizing strengths in a very partisan and totally not neutral and balanced factual way. Outright lying is for losers. You can achieve the same goals and more by just being good at technically not lying or lying in socially acceptable ways. (similar to how crime is for losers and the big players get laws written according to their interests). People protect their self image with so many patterns like: "I would never X (lie, cheat on a partner,...)" "How about that time when" "well, that doesn't count, it's complicated, I had reasons" etc. There aren't any hard and fast rules.

dragontamer 6y ago
What is lying? You are overcomplicating things. Insinuating that Obama was born in Kenya was a lie. It's nowhere as hard as you are making it out to be. That a politician can launch a national campaign on such a lie is proof of the disfunction of our system.
- bonoboTP 6y ago

hammock 6y ago

Have you read any Stephen Covey? If not I suggest it. There is a distinction between Character and Personality that he elucidates very well. Shamelessness would be Personality trait, it is orthogonal to whether or not you are actually lying (Character). I guess you would agree with me that lying is not a long term winning strategy. That doesn't exclude shamelessness, tactically employed.

Bakary 6y ago

What do you make of people who see religion in general as a "lie-based narrative"? I am asking this non-sarcastically and non-confrontationally, as when I was younger I expected religious belief to decrease with added information creating too much cognitive dissonance. To some extent, that has been the case but not in the way I envisioned it.

raphlinus 6y ago
Speaking personally, I do my best to reconcile a spiritual practice and spiritual beliefs, which I believe are separate from empirical truth, with an intellectual rigor about the latter. Again, this something I apsire to, not always achieve. This is a complex topic, and I think a little orthogonal to the main point I was making, and also Nadia's essay. For some reason, the story of the Mormon archaeologists such as Thomas Stuart Ferguson comes to mind - they had to struggle to reconcile these two poles (which were in strong tension), and for the most part ended up keeping their cultural ties to the church while feeling a loss of their personal religious faith.