BS: Radical Honesty

Subject: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 01:28 AM

I found this link in my e-mail today. It's something to think about.


http://www.esquire.com/print-this/honesty0707

Stephen Lee

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: peregrina
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 05:33 AM

Alexander the Great invited the famous philosopher Diogenes to talk to him.
Diogenes had detached himself from the need for material things and so lived a life of radical freedom; instead of clothes, he used to wear a barrel.
'Do have you any requests, Philospher?' the emperor asked.
'Just move a bit to the left, Emperor, you are blocking the sunlight'.

Alexander the Great summoned a notorious pirate, recently captured, to him.
'I'm just doing the same thing you are, but on a smaller scale' said the pirate.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 06:26 AM

The article is way too fockin' long......just to be honest about it. I read maybe a third and skimmed the rest stopping on a few highlights. I could have lived without it.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: peregrina
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 07:36 AM

The article was long; but it was an interesting modern rediscovery of some points that people in ancient times pondered deeply.

They would distinguish between honesty and free speech that was transgressive and what was courageous--what we now call 'speaking the truth to power'. And there was an idea that flatterers were not friends, because friends tell the truth to each other. Now, if only more world leaders today were surrounded by truth-tellers rather than flatters...

The guy who wrote the article and the guy he was writing about didn't really seem to see a distinction between transgressive radical honesty and courageous radical honesty... But I think this would be a great topic for a song: what if one day there could be no more lying of the kind that keeps dictators in power and sustains injustice?

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Amos
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 11:16 AM

That's a great story, Stephen. I read the whole thing and I felt Spaw was being a dipshit. The questions it raises are important, and they are embedded in an amusing tale.

I once started a thread on the question "What would we be totally honest abut if we were being totally honest", and it harvested a surprising number of bits of honesty and explanations for non-honesty.

I agree that more truthiness is a Good Way to Go. ;>)

A

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 02:46 PM

Well dang Amos.......I may have been a dipshit but I was an honest dipshit. Good Lord Man, is there no honor amongst dipshits?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: alanabit
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 04:34 PM

I found the article interesting, but after a while, I got the distinct impression that he is another modern guru, who is peddling self indulgence as "self-liberation" and "enlightenment". He reminds me a lot of Louise Hay, who is popular, because she tells people what they want to hear. At the end of the day, I have my doubts about whether this is in fact honesty. Some interesting ideas, but like most extreme philosophies, it is not one which I would want to accept totally.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Janie
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 06:25 PM

Like Spaw, I found the article, the author and the character kind of underwhelming. And the notion that if the thought pops in one's head it should pop out of one's mouth is absolutely absurd, as is the implication that to not do that is dishonest. Who wants to have to deal with some one else's uninhibited id all the time? It is like making a mess and expecting some one else to clean it up.

Rudeness is not honesty - it is rudeness. Honesty does not require rudeness.   And politeness and showing respect and consideration for other people's feelings does not require lying. It is not necessary to tell 'dozens of white lies' to keep from being rude.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 08:00 PM

Wasn't it Voltaire who said something to the effect of:

"To be an ambassador it is not sufficient to be ignorant, one must also be polite"

?

John

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 08:11 PM

Sort of Tourette's as a matter of principal. It'd be a bit of a pain. No to be honest, it'd be a big bit of a pain.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Peace
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 08:16 PM

Just because you know or think something doesn't mean you should give voice to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 08:54 PM

An ex-wife of mine many years ago couldn't seem to separate the ideas of 'lying' from 'just not mentioning'. She told her mother stuff that Mom just didn't need to hear, and kept the woman in a continual huff. I tried suggesting not saying certain things, but she wanted to be 'honest'...*sigh*

Being totally honest would mean continual argument, as we'd be stating our opinions...especially about other people, and THEY'D be disagreeing. "You don't sing that very well". "You talk too much." "Your kids are loud & offensive." sure....go on..tell the truth at all times. But don't ask ME to help you patch up all the hurt feelings with your friends.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Amos
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 09:09 PM

The question it raises is not, to me, whether one should be polite. The question is the underlying mechanism of creating a veneer, which we all do, getting automatic to the point where it divides us from our own underlying truths.

Possibly what this guy teaches will not work in broad, but doing a little of it apparently does shake down the system and break up the automatic impulse to present the acceptable instead of the straightforward. The notion of speaking one's own truth more and generating fewer social falsehoods cannot be a bad idea, IMHO, but ti does not mean just blurting out rudely. There are many acceptable ways to communicate the truth.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Barry Finn
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 09:13 PM

I was singing at a sea shanty session last Tuesday eve. The just newly elected Mayor of Gloucester came in, her victory party was beng held in the next room. As she walked in eveyone was joining in on the chorus, she & her party were quie surprised & cheering at the chorus thinkn it was for them. When the song was over she cam over & shook my han & thanked me forsingin her into the place. I shook her hand & said "we weren't singing for you".

Was I being a bastard, no, I wasn't trying to bust her bubble, I just wanted her to know the truth. I hope it won't cost the Adventure any city funds. I hope I don't have to see the Doctor.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 09:26 PM

Somewhere in all of this, I think of a line from "Harvey." Explaining something of his relationship with his big rabbit friend, Elwood says......

My Mother told me, "Elwood my son, in this life one has to be oh so smart or oh so pleasant." For years I was smart......I recommend pleasant.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Amos
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 10:06 PM

Barry:

Great story. And you did the roight thing.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Janie
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 10:12 PM

As a psychotherapist myself, I was pretty appalled by Blanton. Assuming his views were accurately represented, he has perverted some key principles regarding healthy relationships. More greiviously, he completely and blatantly disregards the essential need to respect personal and interpersonal boundaries, and is basically endorsing infantile narcissism. Blanton came across in this article as being extremely narcissistic himself, so that is not too surprising.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Janie
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 10:33 PM

Barry, that was honest, and also appropriate. What Blanton appears to be espousing is something else.

White lies are also not necessary, and imho do as much damage to relationships and people as would Blanton's approach. Being false is no where. But blurting out your own unedited fantasies, or thoughts badly clouded by emotional reasoning is no more honest or authentic.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Janie
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 10:48 PM

To effectively speak truth to power, one must first have spoken truth to one's own power.

This 'radical honesty' Blanton is pushing has nothing to do with speaking truth to power. It can even be an abuse of power.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Amos
Date: 10 Nov 07 - 10:48 PM

I think ya hit the sweet spot, there, Janie! :D


A

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 03:13 AM

I've never been a believer in arse-licking for arse-licking's sake. Nor am I convinced by the "self-help" brigade who tell you to please yourself first.

I've lived and worked with 'please yourself first' people and a nastier, ruder, more arrogant bunch of solipsists can't be found.

Ecclesiastes put it best.

There is a time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; a time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to be silent, and a time to speak.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 09:45 AM

This has gotten an interesting batch of responses.

alanabit said,"I got the distinct impression that he is another modern guru". Funny. He doesn't look Guru-ish.

Now that I've gotten the cheap, stupid joke out of my system, Alan brought up a valid point. The article would appear to be trying to pass off self indulgence as enlightenment. Janie nailed it down nicely with her comment about comment about "truth to power". How we use or abuse the truth comes from and is part of how we use or abuse ourselves and other people. While most of us, here, have, at some point or another, made derisive cracks about diplomacy we understand that we almost always need to use some degree of it in most of our social and personal inter-actions.

More often than not being less than brutally honest actually aids clarity of thought and thus promotes more efficient and effective communication.

One is reminded of Douglas Adams' description of the fictitious Babel Fish.

"By effectively removing all barriers between different cultures and races," Adams wrote,"the poor Babel Fish has caused more and bloodier wars that any single force in the history of creation."

Stephen Lee

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Mooh
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 10:19 AM

How to win friends and influence people it's not. Boring and unoriginal it is. Stopped reading at the first yawn.

Gee that felt good!

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Amos
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 11:06 AM

LTS:

Exactamundo. Thanks for the nice quote. There is a time to be blunt, and a time to honor the interplay of viewpoints and feelings at work in any given situation.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 11:19 AM

So, which time is Simon Cowell living in?

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 12:31 PM

the awful truth
the bitter irony
the dirty secret
the lie worth dying for

people run from the truth as if it could break the spell of an idylic childhhod fantasy where everthing good in their lives live.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 12:43 PM

Barry's 'honesty' is commendable...and of course, there are several ways he could have said it.

"We weren't singing for you." is pretty blunt.

"I'm glad you liked it, but we were just singing for ourslves." has slightly less 'point' to it....etc, etc...and facial expression & vocal inflection can say even more.

Those who can adapt and shape the subtleties get to be diplomats.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 02:31 PM

I posted this many years ago on a very similar thread that Amos actually started. To add to your thoughts which are obviously deeper than mine, I give you the late, great Allen Sherman from his book, "The Rape of the A.P.E." on the subject of truth:

************************* WHY LIES ARE BETTER THAN THE TRUTH ************************

(A Scientific Comparison)

I. CREDIBILITY: All lies are designed to seem true. The expert liar carefully uses elements that seem probable and logical and therefore easy to believe. On the other hand, The Truth is often illogical, wildly improbable and hard to explain. Summary: Lies are more believable than the truth.

II. RELIABILITY: The Truth is spontaneous, accidental and unpredictable. Lies however can be planned in detail long in advance and are thus guaranteed to turn out just as predicted. Summary: Lies are more dependable than The Truth.

III. ECONOMY: To be The Truth, an account of a given event must be completely accurate. This requires painstaking resourcefulness, expensive research, time consuming attention to detail, complex logistics and thoroughness. In spite of all that, some people will believe it and others will not. A lie will produce the same results without all the fuss and bother. Summary: Lies are simpler than The Truth; Lies cost less than Truth in time, money, and effort.

IV. VALUE: The Truth can be found anywhere; it belongs to anyone who finds it, absolutely free. Lies are custom-made, often by experts, and the best ones are highly polished works of art. Summary: Lies are worth more money than Truth. Have you ever heard of anybody bribing a witness to tell The Truth?

V. RESPECTABILITY: A) Great fortunes have been made by selling Lies to the public. The people who sell these lies are often grateful to the gullible consumers, so they endow libraries and universities and cultural centers. B) Nobody ever made a fortune selling The Truth. First of all, as already stated, The Truth is free. The only people who will pay money for The Truth are people who are being blackmailed--and they are only buying The Truth so they can hide it before anybody else sees it. Summary: Lies lead to libraries and universities, while The Truth leads to blackmail.

VI. STABILITY: A) Take 1000 parts Truth, add 1 part Lie. Result: A Lie. B) Take 1000 parts Lie, add 1 part Truth. Result: Again, a Lie. C) Note that you can make a Lie out of The Truth, but you can't make The Truth out of a Lie. Summary: Lies are stronger and last longer than The Truth.

VII. IMAGINATION: In reporting The Truth, a person must research the precise facts and stick to them exactly as they occurred. The liar can report the same incident without doing any research, merely saying whatever comes to his mind and filling in "details" according to his fancy. Summary: Lies are more creative than The Truth.

VIII. RECOGNIZABILITY: People are accustomed to hearing lies all the time. Summary: If you tell The Truth, people will think you are lying and if you convince them you are telling The Truth, they will become suspicious. (Why is he suddenly telling The Truth? What's going on?)

IX. SUPPLY & DEMAND: In describing any given incident, only one version can be The Truth, whereas the number of Lies possible is unlimited. Obviously, Lies are in far greater supply than The Truth. Frankly, there is a great demand for Lies, if they are flattering, if they build up one's hopes, if they help one escape reality, or if they promise wealth, health, power, or potency. Nobody is very anxious to hear The Truth. The only people who demand The Truth are those who are investigating something (lawyers, etc.)--and they only want The Truth to prove somebody is lying. Summary: Lies are the acceptable medium of exchange in our society. They are in good supply and the demand for them remains strong. The Truth is in extremely short supply and even this tiny supply far exceeds the demand. Thus in our society, The Truth occupies a position identical to that of dinosaur shit.

CONCLUSION:
Lies are superior to The Truth in numerous ways. Lies are ingenious; Lies make the world seem more pleasant; Lies are less embarrassing than Truth and less frightening. Furthermore, in fields such as diplomacy, statesmanship, merchandising, advertising, public realtions, and bookkeeping, The Truth is an out-and-out handicap. In friendship, Truth is harmful; in love, it is disastrous. The Truth is that The Truth has become old fashioned. Its full of odd shaped little nooks and crannies like so many old fashioned things; some people find them fascinating, but most people find them a pain in the neck. To find all the joys that go along with handling of and handing on The Truth is a labor of love, but most of us in today's society have no time for such things.

************************************************ ********

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 06:54 PM

Spaw,

   It's been a long time since I've even thought about that book. I'l have to dig out my old copy and re-read it. Sherman points out a number of interesting things in it. He pointed out, for example, a peculiar feature of the word "euphemism". It's what we call a given thing when we don't want to use the word which more accurately describes the thing on the grounds that the more accurate description necessitates the use of a disagreeable word. This make the word "euphemism" in and of itself a euphemism for the word "lie".

Stephen Lee

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Amos
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 09:33 PM

Aha! I knew if I hung around this whacky universe long enough, someone would get that said. Nicely recounted, Stephen, and kudos to Sherman.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Nov 07 - 10:04 PM

LOL.....ANother of my favorite lines! I re-read sections of that wonderful work every now and again. I dearly lovre "Short Chapter, Long Footnote" where the chapter is one word long and the footnote runs 20 pages. As he describes all the euphemisms for fuck, the one that always cracks me up the most is......

"She succumbed to his blandishments." She died but he went right on blandishing."

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Nov 07 - 08:19 PM

Myself I think there's a lot to be said for the art of misdirecting unwelcome inquiries without actually lying. That may reflect my Jesuit education...

And I think that tailoring the way we speak truth so as to make it less likely to provoke an angry and overhasty response can also make a lot of sense. Differences of opinion and disagreements about what should be done don't always have to turn into fights.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 12 Nov 07 - 09:19 PM

McGrath has raised a valid point. As many have said before,"It is possible to disagree without becoming disagreeable."

Stephen Lee

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Wolfgang
Date: 13 Nov 07 - 07:03 AM

"Barney, what I always wanted to say to you is that you're a complete idiot too often. The way you laugh makes me cringe, in particular the high frequencies. I hate it when you pick your nose and get rid what you found under your table....

But the worst of all was all those things you said to me last week, about how I stink and why all women laugh about me and that you'd sometimes like to strangle me.

See, I always thought we were not exactly friends, but fairly good working partners and buddies, as good as it gets between colleagues. Can you imagine how painful it was to hear of your contempt for me since ages. You just have no respect for me and I had thought there was a bit of caring for each other, just a bit I mean."

"How was the weekend with Blanton, Slim, beside all that?"

"How do you know?"

"Well, I was there the weekend before. That's why. So this is your week now. I promise I'll try to forget everything you say this week about me.

And then, next week, could we just try to be buddies again, like it was before? Sometimes a pain in the neck for each other, but mostly someone who's more good than bad to be around?"

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 14 Nov 07 - 03:24 AM

now, THAT'S worrisome.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: PoppaGator
Date: 14 Nov 07 - 04:27 PM

When you lie, you have to remember what you fabricated. I can't do it, not well enough ayway.

I don't think that Blanton is all that crazy or off-base. I did feel more empathy for the article's author than for its subject, though.

Complete balls-to-the-wall "radical honesty" is probably impossible to sustain ~ a certain measure of considerate white-lying cannot and should not be completely avoided.

However, I think we're all guilty of just a little too much prevarication, and we'd be much less neurotic as individuals and as a society if we'd all be considerably more candid with each other.

Subject: RE: BS: Radical Honesty
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Nov 07 - 10:19 PM

It's hardly ever necessary actually to lie in order to avoid telling the truth when that doesn't seem such a good idea. And it puts a lot less strain on the memory than actually lying.

But I agree that being open ought to be our default position, where there isn't a genuine reason to keep shtum. I get told off for that sometimes - generally unless I've been told something is confidential I don't treat it as such. But I don't think I have ever accidentally let out something I had been explicitly told in confidence, or in a situation where confidentiality was involved. That's where an ability to prevaricate can be useful.