Lying and deception have been with us since the dawn of time, and we expect it to continue in the age of the Internet and social media. How will the new technology change the nature of lying. With communication more easy than ever, we expect lying to increase. But with increased data capture, better lie detection is possible.
Here are the TED Talks for the matting:
- Marco Tempest explains the nature of lying by using magic tricks with iPhones
- Jeff Hancock tells how text communication make it less likely to lie
- Kung Lee tells how Internet video can be used to detect lies
- Markham Nolan tells how news organizations verify breaking stories from social media
Fascinating. I had watched the little kid one before and the final one tells me what the bad guys have the capability to do, as well as the public. One thing that wasn't part of this so far, is whether or not different cultures value truth or not. For example, Thailand, where I lived values family above everyone else and also values cleverness so that if they can fool a rich tourist, the more the better.
ReplyDeleteThat is interesting. I suppose that it is possible that the value of truth is dependent on culture. Be careful though; questioning a culture's values is a common practice when trying to degrade its people.
DeleteIf we took a close look at attitudes toward truth telling in a variety of cultures, we would no doubt find some differences. However, it seems unlikely that we would find a culture that fails to value truth-telling at least in some circumstances. That is, it’s hard to imagine how a flagrant disregard for the truth in all social relations would be adaptive over the long run. For example, do the Thais practice the same cavalier attitude to the truth in their relations with family and friends as in their relations with unsuspecting strangers? Or do they employ different standards in different social contexts? Perhaps Skye would know. If they do in fact restrict the more relaxed attitude toward truth to business dealings with strangers, we might be hard pressed to convince them that the Thai street vendor’s commitment to truth is any different from those of the typical marketer or campaign surrogate in the US.
ReplyDeleteAs to the talk on children’s proclivity to lie, perhaps they lie more as they age not only because of advanced development but because of their added years of socialization. After all, it is hard not to see the irony in a study of children’s propensity to deceive when that very research itself requires that adults deceive the children into thinking that they are not being observed. Indeed, the more astute among the children may learn that it’s OK to deceive when your reward is a possible boost to your academic status but not when it is a “prize” offered by a stranger. I’m reminded of what the anthropologist Jules Henry said back in the 1960s about children and the first day of school in the US. He opined that on that day a child learns two valuable lessons that they will carry with them the rest of their lives: (1) things are not what they appear to be, and (2) you had better pretend that they are.
Also, while these talks about deception in our culture are both valuable and interesting, in my opinion we should not allow them to distract us from more consequential deceptions in which we may be both victim and perpetrator. For it is not so much our potential for deception as children, or the actions of telemarketers or Internet scammers that do the greatest damage, but rather the lies that we tell ourselves and that we let those in power get away with – “the domino theory,” “Saddam was behind 9/11,” “the Taliban are an existential threat to the US,” “guns don’t kill people . . .,” “our lifestyle has no impact on the planet’s health,”— to name but a few of the more egregious. If we can’t detect these lies as a society, it may matter little if our technology can alert us in real time as to the blood distribution in the face of a politician. We already have pretty effective BS detectors, we just tend not to use them when there are other overriding concerns—such as when we want to convince ourselves and others of the “truth” of our particular worldview.
As the last presenter concluded, we now have big data with which we can carry out analyses of social behavior like never before. But as he also suggests, we are still human beings and human beings are both the producers and products of the social world in which we live. That is, Homo sapiens create and perpetuate a social reality to which we then react as if we had nothing to do with that creation, and this phenomenon is critical when we find ourselves unwilling or unable to successfully adapt to that same creation. Unfortunately, no amount of data alone is likely to spare us the consequences of this dilemma. If we are to be spared at all, we will also need all the reason, thoughtful analysis, and wisdom that we can muster.
Harry, it might be interesting for us to take a poll (vote) on the 5 'lies' you mention in para 3. I would wager that some of us believe they are the truth. Which brings us to the definition of a lie - can it be proven to be right or wrong and what if someone does not believe in the evidence? (I run into this all the time in dog training and it goes back to statistics and whether or not you can have an n of 1)
DeleteYour quote from Jules Henry was interesting. Was he referring to the lies parents tell their children about Santa Claus to prepare them for religion?
DeleteStatement Analysis (SCAN) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statement_analysis Many years ago, I paid for and took a 3-day course on statement analysis which enables one to determine with higher probability if someone is lying. I don't remember much but I will try to look it up before Thursday.
ReplyDelete