3 ms·

> This has made my life so much better. When I hear something someone says to me now I have an extra filter to run it through. It's no longer a choice just betw

> This has made my life so much better. When I hear something someone says to me now I have an extra filter to run it through. It's no longer a choice just between the person being dishonest about the facts or being dishonest about the facts. They could mean it in a different way. I'm with you, but to me, this is just operationalized dishonesty, assuming it's not a significant cognitive deficit relative to those who are capable of engaging with reality. The solution I landed on was to avoid assuming adult levels of cognition until someone proves they have it. It's much less common than you'd think, especially if you have a foot in many different social circles. I will say that your gf example touches on something related but importantly different, in my experience. The women I've dated generally met the bar I'm describing as "adult level cognition" (naturally, as that feeds into our compatibility). But they universally, by their own description, react to even mild conflict by getting emotional and irrational. I see this as a related phenomenon, but not the same. Loss of rationality in specific emotional circumstances is completely understandable, just as I can lose sensitivity to other's feelings in those moments. The solution we've landed on there is the same as yours: she can press a proverbial button that causes us to table the discussion until she calms down enough to think clearly. It takes a lot of trust on both sides to do this, but it's extremely effective. To me, people subject to these moments of impairment are importantly different from the people who don't even seem to have a mental model of what intellectual honesty looks like. I often wonder if the latter are even capable of it, in any meaningful sense.

3pt14159 5y ago
This is a great comment. And of course you're aware that I largely agree with it. So with that proviso, all I will say in response is that I think it would be helpful to consider the opposing view point: If the goal is to elicit an emotional or political response that one desires through one's actions, why should perfect, literal truth be in the way of achieving those goals? My answer to that is that it destroys good faith and good faith is never worth sacrificing. Never. I literally can't think of one instance where mutual understanding exists and I would consider sacrificing good faith. So for me that's what the kettle of fish boils down to, and quite frankly it's one of the main reasons I'm happy I no longer date the person I mentioned above, even if she was otherwise wonderful and my ticket into many fancy parties. I'd rather have someone honest.
- wutbrodo 5y ago
  Yea, agreed. In the distinction I was highlighting, the women I've dated were all operating in good faith, which is what made it possible for us to work together to overcome their temporary lapses of the ability to think clearly. I didn't see this as implying anything about their character or intelligence other than the fact that they weren't perfect. It felt like exactly the same thing as the lapses of compassion that I tend towards when arguing, where the focus on truth makes me choose my words less carefully and casually say hurtful things (this was also something we worked on together in those relationships). This is in stark contrast to the people for whom dishonesty is core to their being, who literally can't comprehend the level of honesty you and I expect from (and deliver to) those we're close with. It sounds like you're saying that your experience with that gf was closer to that than she was to the good-faith-but-imperfect type of person I was referring to. In that case, good call.
  - 3pt14159 5y ago
    I think the moment where she was capable of voicing what it was that she was doing was the moment where she should have known better. I'm still not sure if she just had a values difference from me or not, but with time to think about it, in retrospect I have higher standards now for this type of thing. But you're right that it does depend on whether or not language is just deployed in the heat of the moment or not. Even so, I think it betrays something deep seated when someone speaks falsehoods during an argument.

3pt14159 5y ago

This is a great comment. And of course you're aware that I largely agree with it. So with that proviso, all I will say in response is that I think it would be helpful to consider the opposing view point: If the goal is to elicit an emotional or political response that one desires through one's actions, why should perfect, literal truth be in the way of achieving those goals? My answer to that is that it destroys good faith and good faith is never worth sacrificing. Never. I literally can't think of one instance where mutual understanding exists and I would consider sacrificing good faith. So for me that's what the kettle of fish boils down to, and quite frankly it's one of the main reasons I'm happy I no longer date the person I mentioned above, even if she was otherwise wonderful and my ticket into many fancy parties. I'd rather have someone honest.

wutbrodo 5y ago
Yea, agreed. In the distinction I was highlighting, the women I've dated were all operating in good faith, which is what made it possible for us to work together to overcome their temporary lapses of the ability to think clearly. I didn't see this as implying anything about their character or intelligence other than the fact that they weren't perfect. It felt like exactly the same thing as the lapses of compassion that I tend towards when arguing, where the focus on truth makes me choose my words less carefully and casually say hurtful things (this was also something we worked on together in those relationships). This is in stark contrast to the people for whom dishonesty is core to their being, who literally can't comprehend the level of honesty you and I expect from (and deliver to) those we're close with. It sounds like you're saying that your experience with that gf was closer to that than she was to the good-faith-but-imperfect type of person I was referring to. In that case, good call.
- 3pt14159 5y ago
  I think the moment where she was capable of voicing what it was that she was doing was the moment where she should have known better. I'm still not sure if she just had a values difference from me or not, but with time to think about it, in retrospect I have higher standards now for this type of thing. But you're right that it does depend on whether or not language is just deployed in the heat of the moment or not. Even so, I think it betrays something deep seated when someone speaks falsehoods during an argument.