January 15, 2007

Would You Rather?

Would you rather:

  • Be a pathological liar (you are compelled to tell lies)
  • Be unable to detect lies when they are told to you (you are gullible and sarcasm is also lost on you)
Posted by James at January 15, 2007 11:39 AM
Create Social Bookmark Links
Comments

...so what you're really asking is, would I rather hurt others, or get hurt?

Hmm... actually I take it back. It doesn't say that I'd have to tell hurtful lies. But if I were gullible, people would have made short work of me a long time ago. I'll go with the lying and try not to be too hurtful with my lies. I don't think I could bear to live without sarcasm, anyway.

Posted by: Julie at January 15, 2007 12:14 PM

It's pathological, you may even have yourself convinced that much of it is the truth.

That is not to say you will tell all sorts of lies that hurt people. The pathological nature of your lying doesn't take hurting others into account.

You are free to try to make it up to people in other ways, once you realize that you may have hurt somebody.

Hurt others or be hurt is an oversimplification. Telling lies certainly can hurt you.

Posted by: James at January 15, 2007 12:21 PM

I'll go with the lying. Not being able to detect lies sound like bigger trouble than telling them pathologically. Like Julie, hopefully the lies can be of a relatively minor variety.

Posted by: B.O.B. (bob) at January 15, 2007 12:22 PM

Yep, don't want to get hornswaggled. I'll go with the lying.

Posted by: Patti M. at January 15, 2007 1:09 PM

I think I'd choose to be extremely gullible and be unable to detect lies.

Oh wait, that's what I already have. Um, never mind.

Posted by: Cindy at January 15, 2007 4:11 PM

It is very hard to give up my skeptical nature. OTOH, what a happy Christian I'd be. :-P I don't think I could live a happy life as a liar, but I could live a happy life without skepticism, and I wouldn't be propagating evil. So I'll prefer to be lobotomized and harmless, over harmful and wise. I don't want to be part of the problem. Those of you who are saying that you're only going to tell particular kinds of lies are cheating.

Posted by: Maggie at January 15, 2007 4:12 PM

No, I just said hopefully. I'm still perfectly willing to be a full fledged lying bastard over being naive.

Posted by: B.O.B. (bob) at January 15, 2007 4:24 PM

So spaketh my husband.

Posted by: Patti M. at January 16, 2007 8:17 AM

Cheating is a kind of lying. I've made my choice!

Posted by: Julie at January 16, 2007 9:51 AM

I'm going to go with the naivete. My integrity is too important to me. I'll trust that by being such a trusting soul, the good people of the world will be compassionate toward me and the skeptics of the world will help expose the liars to me.

True, I'll be looked on as somewhat foolish. But I'll be trustworthy and foolish.

Another interesting choice is would you rather be unable to tell the truth or unable to lie?

Posted by: briwei at January 16, 2007 1:29 PM

Say, Brian, I have this bridge for sale...

Posted by: Patti M. at January 16, 2007 1:30 PM

Good point, Julie! LOL, getting an early start.

Nobody told me that I'd be part of the stupid masses, propagating dangerous ideas like belief in crystals, aliens, and virgin births. I guess that's because you're all liars now. ;-)

I don't know if there's any way to be ignorant and innocent or lying and innocent. I don't know if there's an answer to this question that keeps your integrity *and* keeps you from being, in some way, dangerous.

Posted by: Maggie at January 16, 2007 3:27 PM

Copyright © 1999-2007 James P. Burke. All Rights Reserved