Ray Butler (@trek79) 10 years, 1 month ago

I have been thinking about the various methods of deception we use in general life. Things that we think are normal but are actually a lie about ourselves. This subject comes to me specifically on the use of spell checkers, we use them every day but why? It is our image we consider, a certain level of professionalism, that we are not taken seriously if we present error in our presentation.
I liken it to the actual physical body presentation, as make-up is using a word we know but are unsure of the spelling, making sure it is spelled correctly is like plastic surgery. I makes me think we are showing off skills that we do not really possess. This could be interpreted as either deception or O.C.D.
What do you guys think of these trends and can you offer some other examples of this deception/O.C.D behaviour that you have noticed?

August 26, 2012 at 12:29 pm
Deepak (37) (@deepak87) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

Its seems like there is a slider between FREEDOM and SOCIAL APPROVAL. Among the infinite possible ideas and personalities you could be, there exists only a finite and small set of possibilities where you receive social approval from a large enough section of people. Some people are just happy if they can get approval from a few other intellectuals. Some others are addicted to power and want approval from a mass of people. So accordingly they change their strategies.

People can use various strategies for distinguishing themselves.
– Some do it by conformity and playing by the rules of society. This is done in an effort to gain approval, acceptance and appreciation.
– Others might define themselves as intellectuals and apply critical reasoning on everything and take pride in the fact of their ability to see through illusions. For such people, they may just want to gain approval from a few people or community of individuals whom they respect.
– You could also define yourself as a rebel and just play the devil’s advocate on every single belief existing around you.

It seems like truth exists only because of deception/illusions. One cannot exist with the other or the truth exists only because there is the ‘false’. Maybe this whole game of life includes both of these aspects and we are just to enjoy it like a movie.

Manimal (2,998) (@manimal) 10 years, 1 month ago ago


Yeah, authenticity vs fake ego nonsense is of the essence here, and in most issues.
It’s not just about this “niceness” concept, but about so much other stuff, and most of the stuff people call “emotions” and even “love.”

Compassion/empathy is another classic example. What most people consider “compassion” and “empathy” are really nothing more than superficial ego sympathy. And most people only do that stuff so they can feel good about themselves and/or get other people to like them. Just like “being nice.”

Authenticity is the key to just about everything, people need to get back to being REAL, instead of creating these shields of illusions between themselves and the world.
Anything that isn’t authentic is deception, per definition.

As for the “cold hard truth” being the nicest thing sometimes… how about ALL THE TIME?
Because what are you really doing when you sugarcoat the truth? Blatantly LYING!
And how does it help anyone? It doesn’t!
We have a word for that where I come from, we call it “björntjänst,” meaning “bear favour.” Doing someone a “bear favour” means doing something with (false) “good intention” which really only leads to misery.

This stuff is pointed out by just about every branch of eastern philosophy, especially buddhism, and it’s pointed out in many western branches of philosophy as well. In the teachings of many native cultures as well.

It’s also explained in the beginning of the bible, when “Adam is hiding from God.”

People need to BE REAL. I’m sick and tired of all this fake bullshit, and so is the world. Just look at what’s going on. If this shit keeps up, things will go to shit very soon.

Dan (890) (@danfontaine) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@manimal, “Doing someone a “bear favour” means doing something with (false) “good intention” which really only leads to misery.”
Well, what’s stopping you from basically verbally assaulting everyone whom you deem as lowlier than thou? (In a valorous attempt to reconcile them)
It seems that putting the philosophy you’re outlining into full practical use would lead someone toward a state of elitism and aggression – borderline hostility.
Humans are prone to this thing where upon experiencing a would-be raw truth, they instead redirect it away from their self for the sake of self-preservation. Learning nothing AND becoming inoculated to the ‘truth’ in the process. Therefore I think it is more prudent to help someone else see things for themselves rather than telling them. You don’t have to lie ever, but at the same time you don’t have to put them behind the burner, lest they resist.

Dan (890) (@danfontaine) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

Hitler would be a good example of the result of such extension and ‘overbearingness’ of an ideology unto his surroundings.
I think of the human race like I think of the animal kingdom. If one animal thought they were the dominant species and acted on it, the entire system would no longer be fruitful.

Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@manimal, Personally I don’t think the cold hard truth is always nessecary, often it is even counter-productive, like anything it is a judgement call. I suppose if the cold hard truth were common practice, at first it would be destructive to our relationships, but after a while we all would develop a higher resilience to it and we would have much more tolerance for everything. It is something for us all to consider.

Manimal (2,998) (@manimal) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@trek79, Please elaborate on how it can be counter-productive. I don’t think I understand what you’re saying.

Yes, radical honesty would be very destructive at first, but it would be great in the long run. People are too damn short-sighted these days, only caring about instant gratification.
EVERYTHING great requires sacrifice, everything constructive requires initial destruction.

But guess what, NOTHING of value will be lost or destroyed, and it will do no actual harm. The only thing being destroyed is the harmful, destructive, counter-productive, limiting bullshit. Why would any sane person cling to that?

It’s just like a cure, it kills that which is malignant and leaves the rest alone. It IS a cure. That which is wicked must be destroyed relentlessly. IT HAS NO VALUE AND IT’S ONLY CAUSING MISERY.

The world has burned many times, just because people are so full of shit. A corrupt ego is the ONLY cause of ALL misery.

Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@manimal, I just mean that some times the truth can cause damage that cannot be recovered from, or specifically at that moment, but in time that truth can be eased in to in order to minimize collateral damage. I don’t really have any real life examples that I can think of but say if a person is critical in hospital, exciting them about something could be dangerous to their recovery.
Or as I said about being at a white power rally, I personally have some brilliant ideas on equality and tolerance but if I got up and started lecturing such a hostile crowd, well I would be standing up for my beliefs, sure, but would I even have a chance to affect real change? I would mainly be putting myself in incredible danger, something un-nessecary, when there are other avenues to persue that could achieve the intended out-come without provoking incident.

Manimal (2,998) (@manimal) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@trek79, That, sir, I daresay is a very good answer.

Just one thing about the first paragraph, the part about “minimizing collateral damage” by easing into it…
Think about all that time and energy that is wasted by easing into it, I mean as long as they haven’t changed they haven’t changed. And they still keep doing what they’ve been doing. By easing into it, you maintain this destructive mode for a lot longer.

It’s like pulling off a band-aid. Just ripping it off fast is really the most painless way to do it, despite the pain being more concentrated. And it uses up less time and energy, it’s much more efficient in every way.

Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@manimal, Yes, that is true. I was considering the micro-management path, there would be a range of potential outcomes to the truth, one being complete chaos, the other being possitve change. To control the impacts and to strategically place truth in how and when it is dealt out, can create an atmosphere toward achieving that possitive change.

Manimal (2,998) (@manimal) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@trek79, Micromanagement… how’s that working for you? Can you honestly recall it ever really working? Does history tell of a single case where micromanagement did not lead to massive destruction, including self-destruction? Hmm?

Micromanagment doesn’t work. Micromanagement is an attempt to parry and circumvent the consequences of of shitty actions, it’s all just a bunch of fragile work-arounds, all of which just bring more “side” effects into play. (That’s why some call it “chaos magick.”)

Micromanagement is what us artists call “polishing a turd,” trying to fix that which cannot -and should not- be fixed, because it’s shitty at a fundamental level. The only solution is to replace it, because there is no fixing it.
The only way to change things for the better is fundamental radical change, because all the bad stuff you can see is really nothing more than symptoms, results. Trying to fix it only adds another layer of miserable, messy crap.

A thistle cannot become a rose. Putting rose petals on it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a thistle and will always be a thistle. If you want a rose and not a thistle you must remove the thistle, roots and all, and plant a rose in its place.
A thistle is a thistle, a rose is a rose, neither can become the other.

Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@manimal, Yes, but just because you have the bomb, does not mean you drop it in every conflict, it means you look for every option before you do. Truth is the bomb, it is powerful and can be very destructive, so before you use it you have to determine if it is nessecary and if the consequences are worthwhile.
I agree with your analogy on the thistle, but you certainly need the rose seed before you plant, otherwise all you can do is dress up the thistle, or remove it and have only dirt.
But micromanagement is just a word that I thought may have some relevance to the method I was describing, creating the atmosphere for possitive change reduces the risk of the potential for turmoil.

Izco (42) (@maximo23) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

life is a lie with an F in it.
I was actually thinking about a similar Buddhist concept which you were talking about, it comes from the Toltec. its actually a story called the smokey mirror..well, there once was this medicine man who didn’t completely agree on what he was learning, one day, as he slept in a cave, he dreamed that he saw his own body sleeping, he said “I am made out of light: i am made of stars” so he looked at the stars and realized that its not the stars that create light but rather the light that creates the stars, the space in-between isnt empty, and he knew that what created the harmony and space between the two is life or intent. life is the force of the absolute. Human perception is merely light perceiving light. Everything is a mirror that reflects light and creates images of that light, and the world of illusion, the Dream, is just smoke which doesnt allow us to see what we really are. THE REAL US IS PURE LOVE PURE LIGHT. life mixes light and matter in different forms to create billions of manifestations of itself. EVERYONE is a mirror. sadly evryone is dreaming, without knowing who they really are. we are unable to see each other in one another, because there is a thick fog between the mirror. and that fog was made by the interpretation of images of light that we humans have created.

Manimal (2,998) (@manimal) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@trek79, How is it a bomb? I can only see that analogy make sense if the target is something like one of those “evil skullfortress full of pure evil people” places from cartoons and videogames.

Cancer is a life form, so is Gonnorhea and Tapeworms. But people don’t “look for every other option” before eliminating it, killing millions of lives. They just kill it as fast as they can, because it’s only harmful.
This ego stuff is not even lifeforms, it’s just thoughts, but people think we should hesitate about eliminating it. Why? It’s not even a living being, it’s not even real, it’s just thoughts. And they only do harm, no good.

The consequences are always worthwhile. Every piece of progress or success requires success. Betterment ALWAYS starts with PAIN. The only reason this stuff can have “bad” consequences is because people build walls of pain around themselves to keep the bullshit in place.

Yeah, you need rose seeds to plant the rose. But this analogy is all within the soul, the seeds are already there, they always were.

Removing the bad stuff IS creating a nice atmosphere for the good stuff to grow. It’s creating the BEST atmosphere for it to grow, and it’s the fastest way for creating a good atmosphere.

It’s like choosing between being given a nice house right now, or working for years only to receive a mediocre apartment.
The former choice is the smarter one, doesn’t matter much from what kind of perspective one looks at it.

Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

@manimal, It wasn’t an analogy, it was a comparison “Truth is the bomb, it is powerful and can be very destructive, so before you use it you have to determine if it is nessecary and if the consequences are worthwhile.” But yes this part was an analogy “just because you have the bomb, does not mean you drop it in every conflict, it means you look for every option before you do.” But I see the confusion.
Truth would be refreshing, if only that is all we had, I’m just trying to determine if deception has a place or if we are just deceived by ourselves and others, social programming or some sense of need to know. I see that sparing someone the truth in most cases is because the truth weilder has their own insecurities about how it would be recieved. That they tell themselves they are being a protecter but they are only really protecting themselves, the messenger does not want to be shot.

Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 10 years, 1 month ago ago

But with the “criminalization” of deception, where does fiction stand, where do stories in novels and movies stand, what of metaphor, illustration, comparison and analogy, what of matters of faith, what of imagination, what of intuition, because an intuition may always be true but it is yet to be confirmed, what of everything that is not true until it is and what of all that is only intended for expression or discription? Are all these void in a world that must rule out deception?

Viewing 14 reply threads
load more