What do you think? Is it better to call it lying or BSing? How do you distinguish between lying and BS? – Jay
The current story of George Santos and all his lies is remarkable in that he could be elected to such a high office of leadership.
Today’s polarized and conspiracy-driven aspects of politics create an increased tendency to distort, deceive and lie. Lying includes the accusation that I don’t just disagree with you but the escalation to “you are lying!”
Manipulation or “lying” in the external world, when excessive, must contribute to fissures in one’s internal integration and self. By lying, one manipulates the world to their advantage. The subtleties of deception and lying have many levels and lead to many an arcane argument. St. Augustine listed eight types of lies, rank ordering them for their seriousness and capacity for forgiveness. Today, we must distinguish lying from just plain BS. The surprising popularity of moral philosopher and scholar Professor Harry Frankfurt’s 2005 book, On BS, hits the mark. Frankfurt states his reason for the short work, a 6” by 4” pocketbook of only 67 pages:
“One of the most salient features of our culture is that there is so much BS. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted.
Most people are rather confident of their ability to recognize BS and to avoid being taken in by it. So the phenomenon has not aroused much deliberate concern, nor attracted much sustained inquiry.”
Most people don’t lie outright, because it’s too easy to get caught, and they deceive by not telling the full story, or exaggerating and embellishing to get their way. Then, everyone argues if this deception is “lying.”
Since lying, exaggeration or B.S. certainly are primary operating mechanisms of communication in our culture, the act of lying poses a tremendous internal conflict and self-dialogue. Lying must contribute to increased deception and self-deception. That can’t be healthy for those growing up and trying to cope in a fast-paced and high-stress, media-driven world.
Written by Dr. Jay Slosar
Commentators
- Bethanie Hansen
- David Smith
- Dr. Jay Slosar, Psychologist
- Dr. Andy Johnson
- Erik Fleming
- Isola Oluwabusuyi Dr
- Jason Lewis
- Jermaine Jones
- Kay Sloan
- Lily Sanabria
- Loretta Breuning, PhD
- Marie Yvette Hernández-Seltz, PhD, MS
- Michael Warren
- Paul Levinson
- Peter K Fallon
- Todd McMeen
- Toni Quest - MAED, BFA
- Tonisha Pinckney
- Tracy Pattin
- Valerie Cartonio
I am not familiar with the book by Bok but it looks poignant. What I see is also her definition of lying and reference to St. Augustine. The impact would be the major determinant. I have at times encountered a patient who found out one of their parents was not their biological parent and they were never told.
Erik Fleming Agreed. That was my point underneath the dialect presented. Lying is normative. If lying is normative we lose touch with reality, because distortion can be the truth. Thus, in the end—What is real?
Jason Lewis Aha, a direct analysis to the work setting and organizations. The book looks really cool. But just look at the financial world. I always felt cybercurrency was a fraud and would never put money in it. The recent scandal confirmed it. The elaborate House of Cards that seems to happen is one lie building on another but if people are making money they really don’t care. Then it collapses. With regard to marketing or PR, the 1962 book by Daniel Boorstin, The Image, really captures the process which he calls pseudo-events. Pseudoevents are not considered lying.
well, self- deception within could be viewed on a continuum. On one end it can be a breakdown in reality-- on the milder side just self-deception and defensiveness. Depending how severe internal self-deception or distortion is-- it still can lead to projection or delusions--mild to severe. This can get us into paranoia. This article covers the topic: https://depolarizationdiscourse.com/ordinary-americans-technology-and-paranoia-2-0/
Intention is certainly a major determinant. BS has the more spin aspect to it.
I think there has been a lot of truth-bending throughout human history. If we blame it on things outside ourselves, we lose our power to master it.
Interesting -- a biological social aspect to survive and have status. That is interesting to me in thinking of how some people with status really really get defensive and reactive if accused of lying. I think today the social media environs is so fast and intense our brains bend the truth beyond normal standards to cope.
I remember a teacher telling me that when I was in high school--how you handle the little things --with truth--is an indicator of how you will handle the big and more important things. There is definitely some "truth" to that.
Peter K. Fallon My posting on this topic is related to my own earlier book with regard to self-deception and reality. Many people seek answers when sifting through what is truth through this intense digital environment and the political milieu. As I am in Applied Psychology and not philosophy, I am most interested in the self-deception aspect even as it relates to “normal” day-to-day defense mechanisms like rationalization, projection and outright denial (closest to lying). I made a comment that if BS today has become so normative in our capitalistic and political day-to-day processes, we accept it as truth and do not recognize the difference between BS and a lie. This would then lead to a breakdown in reality testing as we cannot discern what is true. My own conclusion is that this contributes to the delusional society today of many everyday functioning people denying obvious facts and outcomes. This endpoint, it seems, might even turn out more consequential than lying vs. BS. I would enjoy hearing your perspective and engaging further.
Great discussion topic! Which erodes our trust in a person more-a BS or a lie? Renaming lying as BS might make it easier for people to engage in lying, resulting in more dishonesty. But, I like the idea of not boxing people in a corner by terming it lying.
Dr. Peter K. Fallon You are correct. My reference to following Frankfurt’s opinion to prefer BS is not in line with his analysis as you documented. (My sentence there is glib and was more designed to generate discussion.) We've corrected my article based on your feedback. Thank you for pointing this out.
Although interesting, distinguishing the two via the use of a euphemism does not soften the impact each has on its target nor does it modify the negative short or long-term opprobrium generated, either. In my opinion, they can be used interchangeably.
Nice job, Jay: interesting to read today!
Agreed! The only kind of lying which might sometimes be permissible is so-called white lying, in which, for example, you don't tell a person that they have three months to live, so they can at least enjoy those final three months of their life. But even that kind of lie is very problematic -- the person in such a dire situation might well appreciate the time to do some necessary things in life, and would therefore be grateful to know the truth. By the way, Bok's On Lying offers a sage consideration of different kinds of lies and their impact.
Interesting! Lying has been accepted in society, especially in politics. It has been normalized to the point that you have to devote time and effort to prove it is a lie, even though the liars have an effective mechanism to discredit those who expose the lies. I believe we have reached a point of no return despite the heroic efforts of truth seekers.
We all know the difference between lying and bullshit however it’s the latter that seems to be more pervasive and dangerous in todays working environment. This is certainly the argument that André Spicer has made - what he describes as the bullshit game that plays out inside organzations evolves into a mess of shallow and misleading communication that is impossible to unravel.
I found the subject of this article thought provoking. I tend to stay away from politics but have a basic knowledge of what has been going on. When looking at bullshit vs lying, I think we have to look at what they are. Usually BS is exaggerating about something, like “the fish was this big”, or using embellishment to look better to someone else, not exactly ‘lying’ but adding exaggerated truths. My personal understanding of lying is when someone is trying to cover something up; to keep others from finding out something undesirable about you. With lying, the person might need to keep adding to their story, layering lie upon lie. This is how people get caught, because the lie becomes so complex, they can not remember what they themselves have said! The way politicians talk about each other is appalling, pointing fingers and telling stories, rather than explaining to the people what they are going to do for the people they are representing. St. Augustine said we should never lie; but who was he that we should listen to? Social Media allows us to lie to the public everyday, or is that BS?
Jay, I appreciate your point about the potential relationship between lying and self-deception. As I think about it, I wonder if self-deception--a much more unclear thing in the brain--leads into accusing another of deceit or lying. After all, if I'm operating with self-deception in my own thoughts, I might view others from a more accusatory stance. If that is the case, it the accusation of another's lying/honesty that is my problem, or my own lack of awareness about my self-deception?
So much insight packed into this shorter post. You would think that there would be some level of internal conflict in willfully choosing to deceive and/or lie, but that is not always the case. The latter may be true with George Santos. That aside, having him in such a position of authority as a "leader" certainly sets a great example of what one can accomplish by being an excellent bullshitter, even when finally called out as one.
It's better to call it lying. BS denotes a more whimsical attempt to exaggerate. Lying is blatantly promoting a mistruth or untruth.
All mammals have a natural urge for social importance. Of course we can’t score social points every minute of every day so our brain bends the truth in ways that enhance your own specialness. We easily see this in others, especially those we don’t like. We hate to see it in ourselves and our social allies. I explain the biology and history of this impulse in my book Status Games: Why We Play and How to Stop. Https://innermammalinstitute.org/statusgames
Personally, I believe we should cut through the BS and call a lie, a lie.
How we handle small things is how we handle everything…including lies. Whether we call it lies or BS, it is deceptive, dishonoring, disempowering for the originator and the receiver. Lies deplete us of our true power and potential. The truth does set us free to be…recalibrating our authenticity is a great practice.
I think you misrepresent (or misunderstand) Frankfurt's point about bullshit. He writes: "It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose."
And his ultimate point is this: "Someone who lies and someone who tells the truth are playing on opposite sides, so to speak, in the same game. Each responds to the facts as he understands them, although the response of the one is guided by the authority of the truth, while the response of the other defies that authority and refuses to meet its demands. The bullshitter ignores these demands altogether. He does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar does, and oppose himself to it. He pays no attention to it at all. By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are."
George Santos is a liar and a bullshitter. However, he is a very bad bullshitter.
Lying, exaggerating, and even BS are societal, political, economic, and criminological issues. These are a basis for Fraud. We have to stop the "little lie," forgive some but sanction other approaches to blatantly and intentionally incorrect information . Acknowledge them as what they are....fraudulent - a tool used to mislead or secure benefits that one would not likely receive. I cannot say this without acknowledging that society rewards image rather than reality. On some social media platforms, the reward for promoting an inauthentic version of oneself, polarizing and inflammatory untruths, manipulating facts to fit one's perception, and similar are rewarded with views and millions of dollars in sponsorship or ad income generation. We incentivize the liar and condemn the truth teller (whistleblower).
BS in contract law will be equivalent to puffing. After you buy a car, if a sales man says and this car can help you get many girlfriends, it's a puff, you cannot sue on the promise. A lie must be fundamental to the contract to be actionable. Maybe the car has 100,000 miles and you reset the speedometer to 10,000, its a lie that can frustrate the contract. A 'puff' is statement that is unlikely to be taken seriously. Under the law a 'puff' is not a misrepresentation. However, there can be a fine line between a statement that is obviously not meant to be taken as fact and a statement that is a misrepresentation or misleading. (retrieved on January 29th, 2003 from https://austlii.community/foswiki/ACTLawHbk/ContractLaw#:~:text=A%20'puff'%20is%20statement%20that,is%20a%20misrepresentation%20or%20misleading.)
Until recent years, lying and BSing seemed somewhat relative. Lying is an expression of untruth. BSing was, and probably still is, a diluted version on lying. One can assume most people value truth over lying in any form. Well actually, I must acknowledge that BS-ers have been given a more esteemed title – the BS artist.
In recent years, it seems truth has often been bastardized by various versions of untruth. And lying is consciously and unconsciously accepted by many. Perhaps this is because it is far easier than accepting what is often hash truth. It seems truth can require thought that may be difficult to accept, especially when the circumstances of truth often require our action to initiate change.
The need for change can cause individuals and the collective to succumb to what I call ‘sloganism’ as commonality is sought for perceived protection. Embracing the slogan can feel much like a form of safety. I can imagine it is easier for many of us the latch onto a slogan rather than delving into situations that often require us the take the focus off of our families and ourselves. A slogan can answer the need for security as we find ourselves gravitating to those who may have a common plight because as humans, we naturally prefer to go through this life with others, rather than alone. I resist the temptation to use cliché’s here, although many come to mind. Lying and BSing are versions of untruth - period.
Hello everyone! I'd value your commentary on this recent interview I conducted in London on the plight of Black folks in America and the negative psychological effects of perpetuated subjugation. (link below) Would you please post a comment with your thoughts this afternoon or tomorrow? Thanks. https://faculti.net/
I think it's best to call it lying. BSing makes it sound more innocent. In our world of rapidly growing deceptions, we need to call it out and call it exactly what it is. Just like mainstream media calling lies "falsehoods."
Why conceal a lie (which is already a concealment) by calling it "BS" -- which is again simply a euphemism? A lie is a lie. Bullshit is bull feces. As a novelist and a poet, I'm all for uses of language that are "decorative," in their way, metaphoric, etc. But not when it acts to conceal truth.