Why Talking is Lying

Muslims, bankers, liberals – we use some terms so automatically, we don’t realize they are actually little lies of language. And little lies have a way of turning into big lies.

by Rob Wijnberg

Why talking is lying

"Every concept arises from the equation of unequal things.”

This statement by the hammer-wielding philosopher has been running through the back of my mind for a while – sometimes putting things reassuringly into perspective, more often constituting a despairing conclusion. (The German writer and philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche earned this sobriquet because of his scathing attacks on cherished cultural values.)

It’s from Friedrich Nietzsche’s 1873 essay “On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense” and is part of a discussion of how language misleads us. Not only do we blithely overgeneralize in making judgments about the world; worse, the words we use to do so are themselves grotesque generalizations about the world they profess to describe.


Part of the message is hidden for the guests. Please log in or register to see it.

https://thecorrespondent.com/3967/why-talking-is-lying/101674210-aaa3b87d

Are you sure "lie" is the word and not "inaccuracy"? Lying implies intended deceit. But much of this topic seems to concern natural misunderstanding more than intended deceit.

Thanks bro John for this gem. I am a practitioner of my own "sword" (words) and how I use them. Obviously the writers focus is evident. I do try my hardest to result better character in mom's ts of question, so there's no question.
Some one asked me my " support" of a campaign running around and I simply stated if to me all life maters , your label, gets it the way. Too be able to acknowledge things like this exist the sooner we ,if its our choice, can cogntitivly reframe our minds to think and see ...different.
So... I got if its in our speach...maybe our speach should be ...adjusted , i did and I reap, REAP the benefits to being pr e- prepared for moments or " words, and phrases that do more harm.
Peace and many blessing to you Bro.John ! After ,3 years I still love this place ,! I'm still growing ,!
I LIKEthis place!

Proteus wrote: Are you sure "lie" is the word and not "inaccuracy"? Lying implies intended deceit. But much of this topic seems to concern natural misunderstanding more than intended deceit.

@pro hi brother , I'm not sure actual lie is the thing as much as we use things a bit roughly like our words. I've learned a few moments of thought clears up a lot of my speech. its in our speech. In how we communicate. Are we passing it? Are we developing difrent communication styles, I think in the lot of things , our communication needs vamping aka " attention" at times as well as our action. Something to mponder friend ,!

Then again, the author is using the word "lying" or "lie" as a generalization, too. Would the author also be "lying" about how the words in question are "lying"? Not entirely. It's why I find it important, during a conversation, to ensure that my audience has at least a clear picture of what I'm referring to before using it any further. So, by Muslim, I refer to those who practice Islam, and by Liberal, I refer to those who are open to change, etc. Therefore, I would find it tedious to constantly define the same terms, repeatedly, though I would also find it important enough to spell out the distinctions between related words after someone responds by conflating two terms to mean the same thing (e.g., Muslim and terrorist, etc.). Two words may refer to related subjects, but the words, themselves, don't necessarily refer to the other on equal or specific terms.

In other words, generalization isn't necessarily a bad thing, but should be used sparingly.

That addition of character I think, is ...CAN...be the difrence in Our words.

Luthien wrote: I would find it tedious to constantly define the same terms, repeatedly, though I would also find it important enough to spell out the distinctions between related words after someone responds by conflating two terms to mean the same thing (e.g., Muslim and terrorist, etc.).

A lot of difference can be made to what we mean by what we say by inserting quantifiers such as "some", "a few", "a minority", "a majority" and "many" etc.

I like the modern journalistic versions: 'experts say ...reports or studies show...love you '

Nah,jk, I'm not that jaded.

I would say all language is deceitful, but also unavoidable.

Amaru M. Tu wrote: I would say all language is deceitful, but also unavoidable.

Good point. It's our most effective means of communication, at least until some scientist figures out how to unlock our brains capacity for telepathic communication.

our brains are hardwired to use language so at this point we hardly even have much choice about some level of articulation happening; you could likely raise a generation of humans without language and they would still vocalize, even if it were not well organized

i would expect to see a new language emerge within a few generations

(i dont think such an experiment would be legal but its an interestin line of thought)

the world is complex: language is possibly the most potent tool we have to sort out that complexity in a cooperative way

doing so effectively requires "honesty" at least in the sense of accuracy

if the process we use understand reality is not accurate - or accurate enough then it will fail, and we wont be able to structure our societies or govern our lives

i think its fair to say words or concepts or labels ect are simplifications, but thats what we need them to be; we need to simplify the complexity of reality so that it can be understood and organized

i mean even our basic perceptions work this way: rightthis very moment youve got all kinds of sounds and smells and fluctuations of temperature and pressure air currents to which youre paying little or no attention

all that stuff thats going on around us, our immediate space actually extends out to infinity in every direction but we couldnt possibly grasp all of it and so we narrow things down to a screen in front of our faces

to focus on one is to exclude the rest

most things are so alike to certain other things that they get lumped together, and thats totally fair

our brains evolved to identify patterns because ONLY patterns are useful

whats a pattern?
its something that repeats, basically; if it didnt repeat, it would be a one-time thing and we wouldnt be able to use it in an organized way

so we identify patterns and that allows us to act and interact with reality in ever more sophisticated ways

every snake is different from every other snake but its also similar to every other snake, so we identify the pattern/have the category of snake and then we divide it as appropriate

thats not a deliberate mis-reprepresentation, its just that we're not capable of any better at this time in our evolution

i guess this is a useful reminder not to mistake our labels as the be all end all of reality- dont mistake the finger for the moon/the map is not the terrain, but id say that, for the most part, we're being as accurate and honest with our categories as we can be, and we are accurate enough to create the internet and walk on the moon, which are seriously impressive accomplishments

Being awake probably means to discriminate (asserting identity to things), as part of perception, and so language is just a formalized effort to do so in a narrow band across a shared medium. It's fun to explore how to overlay emotion with language by adding layers of energy to expression outside of word meanings, things like the differences in sound or body expression perhaps.