I wonder what the town square used to be like? You know the image. A bustling market with vendors barking and folks haggling. Town cryers standing upon literal soap boxes shouting the latest news. Others holding their own little court, promoting the latest in good living philosophies. I can only imagine the feeling.
I have a hard time in spaces like that, having a predisposition of being open. That just means that I am liable to take in everything – and there would be a lot to take in. I’d be overrun with propositions – here, you need this; you should buy this; you should be living like this. I’d likely get overwhelmed, and need some time away.
This is precisely the landscape I find when I explore any one of the social media platforms. While each one has its own take, none escape the fact that the things we post emanate from a deeper truth. As George Orwell observed, “All art is propaganda.” That is to say that everything we express speaks to something that we believe – or deeper still, something that we are. The expression – be it a piece of visual art, or a social media post – can’t escape it. As much as we might try, we can’t escape ourselves.
We can’t escape the reality that what we say, how we show up, and what we pursue, are all based in large part on the invisible landscape of our person (including our desires, character, hopes, thoughts, habitual actions and more). Instead of running away, better to try to face it. There is a way to get to know what is in there, and engage in changing it (if we want). A large part of this process is making choices about what we think is good and right and true. Only then might we be clear sighted in the face of opposing propositions.
An Stark Example
While exploring LinkedIn I came upon this video.
Mark Bowden is a prominent speaker and teacher in the business world focusing on body language and communication. In this video he proposes the advantages – even necessity – of lying. He is clear about his proposition, doesn’t mince words, and gives a compelling example as to why his proposition is true.
There is another competing proposition that speaks to the idea of lying. It was once quite popular, and you may recognize it. In the old English, it is often recalled as, “Thou shalt not lie.” I actually like the longer statement, from which the short hand is derived. Still in the older English, “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”
Welcome to the open market. Where a business consultant who specializes in body language and communication is now a spokesperson for a particular ethic on moral living. I don’t mean to single out Mr. Bowden. He is one of many who are publicly espousing entire worldviews under the guise of technical solves for the challenges of life.
You wouldn’t want to harm someone with your words. And we all know that the truth hurts. Therefore lying is permissible. And here is one way you can do that well.
Goal, reality, justification, technique – all presented in a tightly packaged take.
The competing proposition – living a good life without lying – is not often pitched as tightly. It feels like the harder road to travel. Folks might say, “If you never lie, you don’t have to keep track of all the lies you told.” That’s just one defense for having an easier life if you didn’t lie. Then again, someone else might say, “Lying is a necessary evil.” This seems more honest, acknowledging the fact that lying is not good, but considering it necessary in light of the state of the world. Still, the framing is the same. I want a life that has ease, or success, in the midst of a world seems effectively organized against such things.
What I’m scratching at here is the idea that both propositions speak to deeper questions and realities. They offer answers in response to those questions, without necessarily flushing out the entire conversation. Of course, there is little time on a social media post to flush out much of anything. But in a piece of writing like this, or better, in conversation, we can give more time to this important ideas.
When confronted with these two competing propositions here are some of the questions that come to mind:
What kind of world would I live in if lying was an accepted form of communication?
What kind of world would I live in if not bearing false witness was the norm?
What would happen to my relationships?
What would happen to the way agreements are reached?
Let’s start with the idea of bearing false witness. We can acknowledge that we see and know only in part. We are imperfect with our representation of the world around us. We don’t have all the answers. However, telling the truth and having all the answers are two different things. I don’t think we are called to have all the answers. What keeping ourselves from bearing false witness is asking of us is to be a trustworthy witness for our neighbor. That is to represent reality to the best of our ability for those we interact with.
If we live in relationships in which this is the dynamic – many people attempting to represent reality to the best of their abilities with one another – a few things would automatically end. The use of language for manipulation would have little ground to stand on in such a community. Folks would relate from a place of trust – not only in the answers but in the process – that the intention in the group would be to represent reality as they see it with one another. I would trust that you would be doing that and vice versa. There would likely be more openness to learning from one another in such cases.
The opposite is also true. If these same people had to navigate a landscape of communication in which lying was acceptable, manipulation would have an easy foothold. Trust would be harder to come by, as no one would know whether they are being lied to, or not. Folks would become guarded if nothing else. This very necessary guarding would limit the very exchange of vision and experience that is necessary to learn and grow and see a complete representation of reality – to be together.
A simple idea – lying is necessary to navigate this world for our own sakes – leads to a world in which trust is impossible to achieve. There is a paraphrase that may be worthwhile to share here. I first heard it from Dallas Willard, and it speaks to the question and resistance underneath much of the opposition. Instead of, “Thou shalt not lie,” what if we heard, “You can live the good life without lying,” or deeper still, “You can live the good life without being a false witness to those near you.
But the Truth Hurts
Bowden proposes that the reason for lying is in consideration or someone else’s feelings. He creates the avatar of the lier as a good person. This is a convincing turn. No one wants to be the cause of someone else’s pain. But there is something deeper going on here.
The truth hurts like lifting weights hurts. It bears witness against our desired perception of reality. We wish the world was a certain way, and the truth shows us otherwise. We think we are strong and the weight either proves or disproves our point. We either confirm our thinking, or are caught in a kind of conundrum. We are found out to be wrong.
Such is the experience of bumping into reality. However, reality is better than illusion or delusion. Although pain and sadness are often consequences, discovering the reality of a situation is better than giving time and effort to something that isn’t as it seems. Having a clear vision of reality allows for clearer thinking, surer action, and a more integrated sense of being.
Truth in Love
All this talk about lying or truth-telling, illusion or reality, can miss the point. Either action can be measured against a different ethic – love.
Is it ever loving to bear false witness against your neighbor?
Is it ever loving to tell the truth against your neighbor?
Is it ever loving to dodge the consequences of reality by lying?
Is it ever loving to bear the consequences of reality by accepting the truth?
Is it ever loving to create an illusion through lying (to yourself or others)?
Is it ever loving to seek the reality of a situation by attempting to discern the truth (by yourself or with others)?
In reality seeking, seeing, and sharing the truth is a function of love. It is a function of willing the good of ourselves and those around us. Love engenders trust, and trust is based on honesty, and honesty is based on sharing the truth – whatever that looks like for you.
I honestly think it’s better to contend with the dire and hopeful nature of reality as it is revealed to each of us, than try to make up some other story just to feel better. I really believe that the good life is available to each one of us without having to lie to get it. Whatever we know of reality is our starting point – and having a clear starting point is a good thing.