>> Psychologists have long known how hard it is to spot a liar.
Absolutely this.
Lying is a loose concept. Is it lying if I believe it is true? Is it lying if it's just an omission of truth?
You can spot nervousness, you can spot defiance.
I work in a field where people deceive almost 80% of the time, and less than 1 in 10 where caught. The way we approach this is by flanking. Using falsifiable questions the subject cannot determine your intentions, therefore is much more likely to tell the truth (less cognitive taxing).
Our brains are complex things, with many independent actors.
There are pragmatic parts that determine what actions would best serve your interest. These parts mostly make the decisions.
There are other "press secretary" parts that come up with good sounding motivations for these decisions. You will believe those reasons, and state them with conviction.
You may then be lying, if the press secretary lied to "you", but you don't consciously know that. Apparently evolution has favored that model, and here we are.
> Lying is a loose concept. Is it lying if I believe it is true? Is it lying if it's just an omission of truth?
I think what underlies this discussion are assumptions that lying is, by default, unethical and that we can trust truth-telling to be beneficial. I have found that neither of these things are factual.
Truths can be devastatingly harmful with no discernible benefit. I have found this outcome more likely when one assumes truth is a moral high-ground, while disregarding the well being of the person on the receiving end.
This led me to conclude that honesty is a poor goal, in and of itself. It is at best a tool, that often requires consideration and compassion to yield a positive outcome.
Much of the same can be said for lying. It isn't the opposite of truthing so much as it is a different tool. Wielded like a blunt weapon, it's harms are legendary. Used with precision, with empathy and with wise consideration of larger outcomes - lying can be used to smooth over small rough spots and avoid large disasters.
In short, it isn't uncommon for lying to be the most ethical of our choices.
...after all, in the end is not truth most situations are about, but power. Tell the truth, you're exposed, vulnerable. Tell something else - a lie sometimes - and the balance of power is restored. For good or bad, who am I to judge.
> Truths can be devastatingly harmful with no discernible benefit.
I completely and utterly disagree with this statement, but I want to try to see how you personally parse this out, so give me an example where this might be the case, if you would.
Yes. I'm struggling to keep from bursting out laughing because the answer to both these questions are so plainly obvious that even young children know them, even if they're unable to articulate to you why its lying.
Recruiting - behavioural interviews to be precise - and you're pretty close, I work with methodologies developed by law enforcement/intelligence as well as psychotherapy.
Absolutely this.
Lying is a loose concept. Is it lying if I believe it is true? Is it lying if it's just an omission of truth?
You can spot nervousness, you can spot defiance.
I work in a field where people deceive almost 80% of the time, and less than 1 in 10 where caught. The way we approach this is by flanking. Using falsifiable questions the subject cannot determine your intentions, therefore is much more likely to tell the truth (less cognitive taxing).