This word. "LIAR" Could be a descriptive one, however most of the time when we hear it used and from the time that we learn it, it comes with an emotional halo. Or should I say emotional horns.
I was at a friends place for dinner and someone there was talking about another person "who just lies all the time" and I knew the dance I was meant to join. I was meant to join them in thinking badly about the other person.
The liar: The person who doesn't or didn't tell the truth.
I just don't see it as that black and white. We are all liars at some level.
So where is the line?
"How was your day?" and you answer 'Fine'. It's a lie. The truth would be closer to 'I'm grateful for some things being easier today, but I'm dreading the week ahead because I have overdue tasks to get through from last week. And I am still not well after the last two months of illness, but I'm better, but overwhelmed. So, I'm fine I guess'
 |
| Fork in the Road by Sharon Murdoch https://tiaki.natlib.govt.nz/#details=ecatalogue.1030738 |
As this is considered a socially acceptable lie and linked to understanding that people don't really want to know much about us when they ask 'how are you?'. In fact, this is a social expectation which is considered polite when done by agreement, because if you both stood face to face and chose not to say anything, that would be considered not social and awkward and even making things difficult. OK. So this is acceptable lying.
Knowing that people find sharing feelings either too intimate or even disorienting, I will tend to ask for an appropriately distanced fact - "Has it been a busy day for you?" or "Has your day gone to plan?". For those people I can see feel comfortable in a topic loop, sure, I'll ask "Do you like the heat/cold/rain?". These questions, while not in the realm of invasive, at the least offer an exchange of truth only because it is not perceived as too demanding or personal. And for me, no lies needed and that is a step in the direction of alignment and health.
What about when you're talking about something, and you state something to the best of your knowledge eg "The shop opens at 9.30am" and your friend calls the next day and said "I had to wait half an hour. They opened at 10am". While their frustration is understandable, especially if they were trying to work to a schedule, if they focus on accusation and blame this would result in two main choices, correction/defensiveness ("you could have checked before you went") or deflection/withdrawal ("ah commercialism it drags us all in!"). What if they also said "I had to wait half an hour. I just can't trust you not to lie". Would we class this as a lie? there certainly wasn't a deliberate intention to mislead. So was it not a mistake? When information is shared, mistakes can happen especially if checks are not made or wrong information is available (yes, search engines do not always reveal all that is correct!). By definition though, and depending on the mindset of the recipient, they might categorise that person as a liar. Especially when we move into the next category of storytelling.
You overhear some people talking with their friends at a table close by. You hear "Well, what can you expect from them - they are such a liar. You can't believe a word they say. I mean they aren't ever ready when they say they will be and other times don't even turn up or make contact. Add to that, they said they were sick and then I saw them at the festival with their other friends." and the choreography and emphasis in this story is clear. 'they' are the villain and the person story telling is the victim, at worst, or an impacted observer, at best. With a story, there is usually a message or a purpose, and I believe that that is true of all lies, regardless where they fall in the spectrum.
 |
| Lies! Truth! Belief! Illusion! misia.com.au |
And as with most human efficiencies, when repeated often, habitual responses can become social norms, acceptable or even expected, regardless of the purpose.
"I am a liar" and "I am not a liar" can both be true at the same time. The problem isn't in the word 'lie', it is in the emotional weight that people attach to it. When used among friends, in the media or film or in our minds, the definition no longer matters - it is the choreography that is meant to dominate.
On the spectrum or venn diagram of 'purpose of lies', which ones are considered acceptable?
Is not a lie, a known untruth? An untruth deliberately given to mislead. As opposed to any other unknown untruth or a mistake.
Some of these lies are found to be acceptable or necessary and even named 'harmless' or 'white', and even someone telling many of these types of lies could be considered polite or socially easy to have around. Someone who won't directly say "I think it is aesthetically unpleasant as well as too expensive" because that will potentially cause discomfort, but rather lie and give the impression that they feel the same way as the owner by saying "It's cute. Good that you bought it". Being seen to keep people happy and not 'rock the boat' is seen as being friendly. In some cultures, like Japan, staying with the untruth is beyond expected, it is necessary to be seen as safe. In Rizzoli and Isles, Maura is beautifully autistic scripted and cannot lie, but will often find a way to balance honesty with other social demands. Herein lies a theme, the lying which is often seen as acceptable falls in the category of comfort. Making or keeping comfort in a way which is considered acceptable in society. These lies are therefore either necessary or 'just the way it is' and don't make someone a lier.
So, this brings us to the grey area. Beyond the white lies, the harmless lies and mistakes as well as the lies which provide the social lubrication needed for people to feel happy, calm and comfortable, we head towards the grey. The untruths which are not as easy to wave away as harmless. They are tainted, questionable and less acceptable because they can cause discomfort or could turn out to be used to cause a person harm. If this were a venn diagram, and don't we all love venn diagrams! Lies of omission sit between the white and the grey. Lies told in silence speckle the void. On the one hand we can be glad to not know and the tv shows and cop dramas will usually make at least one reference to 'what you don't know can't hurt you'. Allowing people to tell the truth because they don't know it. And yet if asked, they would know that something is known, just left out.
Is it easier to refrain from judging people when they say less or nothing? And yet, are we not all entitled to privacy and choosing what we share and when?
The grey zone is where convenient truths live. They are the truth, but through omission, they are a lie too. A little further down this spectrum, you will find selective truths. Story telling, movie making or even just someone talking about their break up, will be filled with emotion and a need for people to connect to a specific message, narrative or believe a certain thing. Even most documentaries and investigations with journalistic integrity would fall into this shaded category. Truths and so many, as long as you continue to believe what we are saying.
How far can this selective truth telling be stretched, until it becomes decorated or have alternative imaginative elements added to fill the gaps. How often does this happen before it becomes a lie? How many truths must something contain to continue to be the truth. How many lies or embellishments can it contain before the truth is compromised? And which truths matter? Who determines this? A movie can be made and be 'based on the true story of ...." and only have one key event and characters. And yet, we don't shout from the rooftops that the movie director is a liar.
What about David Attenborough? Again, due to the sheer quantity of nature discoveries and sharing with the world, no one calls Sir Attenborough a liar. However, over the course of a long natural history career in tv and film and sitting on the periphery of science, lies were told. Recounts or reconstructions were prepared in order to evoke sympathy, shock or stimulate interest and learning. Items were picked from one space and placed in another all for the breathless and well recognised voice saying "we might be able to see here, just under this rock, the rarest beetle pausing before changing form for the winter". Was it all a lie? No. But that part was, a creation? a recreation? a story? a lie?
And then, as we move further across the spectrum of lies, the colours fade and darkness falls. These are the lies which are considered self serving, malicious and are told consciously. They harm and destroy lives and relationships. The category of cons and organisations and people who make a living out of lies "Hello, I am calling from ** insert name of large telecommunications company here** and we are calling about your internet connection". This is the land of lies no one argues about, because the social understanding is that this is 'bad'. There is no good in this space. We make references to people who speak with forked tongues or at split purposes and want to entangle or trap you. This is a malicious zone. It is dark and deadly.
But wait! What about the lies that are malicious, opportunistic and ignore all others for personal gain but are not questioned? The stay at home person who says they are busy and tired, however, doesn't want to talk about the details because that is too invasive. The full time worker who hasn't told their partner about their gambling debt, because they keep thinking that this weekend it will get sorted out. The reality radio show which entertains regularly by lying to a caller, only to reveal to them after 7 minutes of air time that the lie they were telling was all a joke. White and harmless? Grey and not really a big deal? Dark and distressing?
What about the person who says 'i don't have any cash to spare' when asked to donate at the street corner. Harmless and socially kind, just a way of saying 'no, no cash, and I don't want to be rude to you'? It could be grey and diplomatic, even if there are a few coins jiggling in your pocket or they actually are offering EFT tap and go donations but it was a lie which helped you avoid being harsh and saying "i don't believe in your cause. I don't think donations to your venture are worthwhile and honestly I'd rather buy an iced matcha this afternoon on the way home". Or, just because it is not the truth, it is dark, dirty and at the end of a day, just another lie of many that are told without thought. Again two things can be true - all money can be spared AND a person can believe that none of their money can be spared.
As I see it. When a lie is told whether through conscious construct or through allowing a story to form by omission, there is a purpose. Every person could be accused of being a liar. The question I have when I hear someone want me to join them in believing or accepting that someone is a liar is "Why do you need me to believe this?"
If I have contact with someone who doesn't share information because they know it will complicate things or consciously adjusts the truth or uses imagination to create new stories, my main thought is "What purpose does this serve?"
What is it you want me to know, do or feel? Lying is a skill, it is part of human development of thought, even people who pride themselves on their honesty and telling of truth, may still be part of a lie if they don't learn to face truths which come their way. Living with authenticity is spoken about more often in these times of wellness, however having integrity doesn't mean there is no lie. In fact, if a person only looks to judging others, seeing them as less than because of their lies, they may as well turn the finger of blame towards themselves and say "I am a liar"
In order to learn about lying, we need to learn to lie and to recognise what lies are.
In order to learn about lying, we need to have experienced them as well as potentially tried and tested different flavours. This includes learning the choice we have and the times which are more nurturing of truth vs a lie.
The act of lying serves a purpose. In our relationships with people, it doesn't call for much maturity to attack people because you see or hear about a lie. It is no different to me pointing out 'cow' when I drive into the countryside. I can keep pointing at cows. At some point, even I would ask myself, Why? Why do I need to keep pointing out these cows? A toddler can do this and usually it is to show knowledge, share excitement of recognition and nurture connection, because someone will respond with "yes, a cow". As we get older, we do this with other topics "XX is stupid" "I hate this song" and alot of this pointing out, is not any different in purpose to our toddler selves who want to share our experience, see who is our comrade and paying attention to us and enjoy a stirring of emotion which comes with recognition. This moves from favourite artists to clothes and jargon which is 'cool' all the way to bonding with others who share our political views. The purpose of connecting and finding comrades, and not feeling alone is very powerful and this can extend into what we find acceptable in behaviour, shared truths and shared omissions.
Family units have this - topics which are not mentioned or talked about. It can be as far as fantasy, fantastic apocryphal stories told often enough and long enough that they are believed by some to be the truth. It can be for the purpose of maintaining peace and 'not causing trouble' or because the abusive family dynamics do not have a pathway for light or truth. The change would be too much and a family would fall apart and disconnect over the sides of alliance, control and the multitude of feelings which have now become fact and cannot be questioned.
All because no one was offered space, exposure nor the room to practice saying "I made a mistake" or "I have come to believe something different". These types of statements come with awareness, realisation and a degree of acceptance that what you did think, did know or did believe, is now different. But there is danger in sharing truth. There is risk in sharing realisations. These sentences place us on the edge of what many feel is a chasm. Vulnerability, is the hand holding between exposure/being seen and truth. Throwing facts at others is not vulnerability - it can be closer to a form of aggression and yet, is safer and as evident by how our media works and many dominant family members, this is what most people learn. State feelings and beliefs as facts, and the confidence and illusion of stability it throws out will be attractive to others who just want to feel connected, safe and free to follow on with their life preferences. Ideally in comfort. Dependant on the environment - saying "I made a mistake" or "I now know that wasn't true" can be a dangerous thing to do. In business, in families and in society, the risk is that the first reaction will be "So you admit you're a liar". Which takes us right back to the benefits of denial and avoidance and highlight that it is the challenge of accountability, intimacy and vulnerability which needs to be overcome if we are to move the bell curve of social normality to a healthier space.
If we do not offer the significant people in our lives, the chance to practice saying "I made a mistake" or "I realise, what I thought, was wrong", then how is anything other than deflection, lies and attachment to beliefs what we as a society are nurturing.
When someone says "Oh, I made a mistake" or any variation of accountability to knowing or learning something different. Make room. As a responder, you are at the fork in the road. You can be titillated and drawn into a drama, unhealthy practice done for all time and repeat the lines of the accusors and limiters of growth "so you lied!" or ego, "I told you so" .... and savour the persons discomfort.
OR you can look to the trees, and see that this is where growth and change and health have a chance, if you let it. Reply with an invitation, 'ok. Tell me more" or "What changed for you?". The more that we can show each other that reflection, honesty about new learning or mistakes can be safe and that we all can be better people for it, the more chance we have of experiencing and expanding humanity and human-kind.
NOTE: The words apocryphal (adjective) and apocrypha (plural noun) are in use to either describe a noun or a type of text/writing. The word apocryph is not currently in use, however with all the changes in the English language, where the word skibidi or rizz can be used and understood all thanks to a head in a toilet graphic, I will unapologetically use the word apocryph as an alternative to lie, if it suits me. :)
