If you can't say anything nice, say it anyway?
December 13, 2012 8:42 PM Subscribe
Help me suss out the pros and cons of truth vs tact, honesty vs politeness.
I'm looking for philosophical arguments or other quotes in support of and against (especially against) these ideas:
"Before you speak, think - Is it necessary? Is it true? Is it kind? Will it hurt anyone? Will it improve on the silence?"
and
"if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
Personal examples help too (no you won't be quoted in a book or anything, I'm just struggling with my own feelings on the topic and wanting input from the intelligent hivemind.)
I'm looking for philosophical arguments or other quotes in support of and against (especially against) these ideas:
"Before you speak, think - Is it necessary? Is it true? Is it kind? Will it hurt anyone? Will it improve on the silence?"
and
"if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
Personal examples help too (no you won't be quoted in a book or anything, I'm just struggling with my own feelings on the topic and wanting input from the intelligent hivemind.)
"if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
I agree with this school of thought. If you value discretion and not being a gossip, it is the way to go. It is not easy (I am responding here to your quote "especially against") sometimes, but worth it in my opinion.
posted by mlis at 9:08 PM on December 13, 2012
I agree with this school of thought. If you value discretion and not being a gossip, it is the way to go. It is not easy (I am responding here to your quote "especially against") sometimes, but worth it in my opinion.
posted by mlis at 9:08 PM on December 13, 2012
You need to read How To Win Friends And Influence People. I was one of those "truth and honesty at any cost" types and, well, let's say reading that book a decade earlier would've saved me a whole lot of hassle on the personal and professional sides. Seriously, I thought it would be a bunch of crap going in and by the end I was like "This is the manual for how things could've turned out differently."
The biggest lesson I have learned in my personal and professional life is people do not care if you are right. They only care about whether they like you. If they do not like you, they will not listen even if you are correct (and may, in fact, hew to the disastrous choice just because you are advocating for the other one). If they do not like you and you are correct, they will assume you tanked the project/rigged the result/whatever to prove yourself right rather than it being doomed from the outset.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 9:19 PM on December 13, 2012 [11 favorites]
The biggest lesson I have learned in my personal and professional life is people do not care if you are right. They only care about whether they like you. If they do not like you, they will not listen even if you are correct (and may, in fact, hew to the disastrous choice just because you are advocating for the other one). If they do not like you and you are correct, they will assume you tanked the project/rigged the result/whatever to prove yourself right rather than it being doomed from the outset.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 9:19 PM on December 13, 2012 [11 favorites]
For better or worse, gossip is a central part of human communication and bonding. Make of that what you will.
posted by BusyBusyBusy at 9:19 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by BusyBusyBusy at 9:19 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: I am feeling lately like these ideas are what have led us to "how are you?" "I'm fine." (when I may not actually fine at all) and "what do you think?" "It's good." (when I may not really think it's good at all.) That tipping the truth/tact scales more in the direction of truth can only be a good, productive thing, a way to deeper human connections and real friendships.
posted by thrasher at 9:20 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by thrasher at 9:20 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
That's the way to become "The guy/girl who discloses way too much during smalltalk" and "The guy/girl who hurts everyone's feelings," at least with casual acquaintances.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 9:22 PM on December 13, 2012 [4 favorites]
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 9:22 PM on December 13, 2012 [4 favorites]
Couch everything in scathing euphemism. In response to a request for technical support, one of our vendors cc'ed all of our regional competitors and claimed that we stiffed him. I'd call that "unexceptional customer service."
posted by Nomyte at 9:31 PM on December 13, 2012
posted by Nomyte at 9:31 PM on December 13, 2012
I think that it's important to be aware that it's not so much *what* you say but *how* you say it. I hate the people who say something that might be "true" but say it rudely and bluntly and then use the "truth hurts and I'm not sugarcoating it" argument. Constructive criticism goes a long way.
posted by radioamy at 9:35 PM on December 13, 2012 [5 favorites]
posted by radioamy at 9:35 PM on December 13, 2012 [5 favorites]
Well, answering a question with a question is one way to find out which your partner in conversation prefers:
"How are ya?"
"Do you want the truth, or the polite answer?"
In my life lately, the response from most people has been: "Some of each!" From some: "Aw, I know things are tough right now - tell me about it." And from one or two: "Only good news please."
Because an opening remark is just that - it's not a floodgate.
PS - eponysterical!
posted by peagood at 9:37 PM on December 13, 2012 [2 favorites]
"How are ya?"
"Do you want the truth, or the polite answer?"
In my life lately, the response from most people has been: "Some of each!" From some: "Aw, I know things are tough right now - tell me about it." And from one or two: "Only good news please."
Because an opening remark is just that - it's not a floodgate.
PS - eponysterical!
posted by peagood at 9:37 PM on December 13, 2012 [2 favorites]
tipping the truth/tact scales more in the direction of truth can only be a good, productive thing, a way to deeper human connections and real friendships.
First it has to be established that whoever you're speaking with is actually interested in having a deeper human connection and real friendship with you, and vice versa. For some combinations of people, conversations will never go beyond small talk/phatic expressions, surface discussions about movies and the sports game and whatnot.
This is a natural thing for many people to navigate, but a lot of other people have trouble with small talk since it's just generic conversation and seems pointless on the surface; why bother saying anything if you're not really saying anything?
It really depends on who you're talking to and the context of the conversation. It's complicated.
posted by wondermouse at 9:38 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
First it has to be established that whoever you're speaking with is actually interested in having a deeper human connection and real friendship with you, and vice versa. For some combinations of people, conversations will never go beyond small talk/phatic expressions, surface discussions about movies and the sports game and whatnot.
This is a natural thing for many people to navigate, but a lot of other people have trouble with small talk since it's just generic conversation and seems pointless on the surface; why bother saying anything if you're not really saying anything?
It really depends on who you're talking to and the context of the conversation. It's complicated.
posted by wondermouse at 9:38 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
Would you rather be right or would you rather be happy?
posted by Lynsey at 9:40 PM on December 13, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by Lynsey at 9:40 PM on December 13, 2012 [2 favorites]
I am feeling lately like these ideas are what have led us to "how are you?" "I'm fine."
That is not how I interpreted "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
To me, that suggests an interaction where someone is badmouthing a third party, thus my advice above.
w/r/t your update, I think context is important. If your twin sister or a lifelong friend asks how you are doing that is one thing. An acquaintance or someone you work with, it is something else entirely.
a way to deeper human connections and real friendships.
I hear you that to develop deeper connections you need to take risks and feel comfortable being vulnerable.
You can selectively disclose information without oversharing. As Ghostride points out you do not want to be *that* person. The thing is, many, many people ask "How are you?" and are not interested in the answer. It is just something people ask.
But let's assume someone asks you that you like and you have a sense that the person likes you. You would like to develop a "deeper connection" with the person. So. You might share a little bit.
"Been kind of a tough week, I am helping out with a relative who is sick" is much different from describing exactly what is wrong with the relative and how you have been helping and the toll it has taken on you.
posted by mlis at 9:44 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
That is not how I interpreted "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
To me, that suggests an interaction where someone is badmouthing a third party, thus my advice above.
w/r/t your update, I think context is important. If your twin sister or a lifelong friend asks how you are doing that is one thing. An acquaintance or someone you work with, it is something else entirely.
a way to deeper human connections and real friendships.
I hear you that to develop deeper connections you need to take risks and feel comfortable being vulnerable.
You can selectively disclose information without oversharing. As Ghostride points out you do not want to be *that* person. The thing is, many, many people ask "How are you?" and are not interested in the answer. It is just something people ask.
But let's assume someone asks you that you like and you have a sense that the person likes you. You would like to develop a "deeper connection" with the person. So. You might share a little bit.
"Been kind of a tough week, I am helping out with a relative who is sick" is much different from describing exactly what is wrong with the relative and how you have been helping and the toll it has taken on you.
posted by mlis at 9:44 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
This seems to be a variant of a question you bring to AskMe over and over in different guises, some sort of a conflict you seem to have internally. Your question asks for pros and cons but your follow up comment seems to indicate that you feel that not saying what is on your mind is in some way "lying" or otherwise not being honest or true to yourself.
I guess my question in response is what are you looking for? There are a lot of people who value absolute honesty and if you share those values with those people they may be good people to hang out with. On the other hand if they're not the people you are hanging out with now, absolute honestly may not be super useful for you in whatever relationship you want to be having with the people around you. I may be projecting because I see a lot of the ACOA struggles I've had seem to be ones that you seem to be having. You say honest things and then feel hurt when people respond as if you're being impolite or as if you're the one who peed in the pool or whatever.
And I think part of this is knowing, contextually, when what you are having is a real/honest interaction and when what you are trying to do is have some sort of social cohesion or interaction that just facilitates something else [making a friend, passing the time, getting to know people at work] and if there is a goal in mind that may have a higher priority than saying exactly what you want to say, it's a smart and canny move to adjust what you do to meet the goals that you are trying to meet. For people who you are close with, you should be able to be yourself to a much greater degree. Allowing people to see us as we truly are is a way of establishing intimacy.
One of the reasons people are uncomfortable with the absolute honesty angle is that it's often attempting a greater degree of intimacy than is warranted. If someone at work asks you how you are, it's getting a little TMI to start talking about your cramps or the fight you got into with your partner in exactly the same way it's TMI to talk about the good sex you had that morning or how well your stock portfolio is. Being able to gauge the level of appropriate intimacy for various types of social interaction is a part of manners and etiquette. And manners and etiquette are a sort of formalized way that we indicate to other people that we have respect for them and/or their role. And this may not be true of you and I'm not saying "Fake it" but I'm saying be mindful of the fact that there is a system in place that has been at least somewhat in place since before you were born.
It's fine to decide you don't care about the advantages and disadvantages of working within this system [of politeness, manners and social graces] but it's worth at least making sure you understand what it is that you're shutting a door to if you decide to go the "total honesty route" This is not me saying I'm stoked about the way the world is or that I always support this sort of thing, but it's a system that evolved for reasons and it's worth getting to know those reasons so that you are mindfully finding the place you are comfortable within it, not just grousing because you don't like the rules and don't seem to be able to get yourself to a place where you can comfortably live outside of them and/or find people to share your view of how the rules ought to be.
posted by jessamyn at 9:45 PM on December 13, 2012 [31 favorites]
I guess my question in response is what are you looking for? There are a lot of people who value absolute honesty and if you share those values with those people they may be good people to hang out with. On the other hand if they're not the people you are hanging out with now, absolute honestly may not be super useful for you in whatever relationship you want to be having with the people around you. I may be projecting because I see a lot of the ACOA struggles I've had seem to be ones that you seem to be having. You say honest things and then feel hurt when people respond as if you're being impolite or as if you're the one who peed in the pool or whatever.
And I think part of this is knowing, contextually, when what you are having is a real/honest interaction and when what you are trying to do is have some sort of social cohesion or interaction that just facilitates something else [making a friend, passing the time, getting to know people at work] and if there is a goal in mind that may have a higher priority than saying exactly what you want to say, it's a smart and canny move to adjust what you do to meet the goals that you are trying to meet. For people who you are close with, you should be able to be yourself to a much greater degree. Allowing people to see us as we truly are is a way of establishing intimacy.
One of the reasons people are uncomfortable with the absolute honesty angle is that it's often attempting a greater degree of intimacy than is warranted. If someone at work asks you how you are, it's getting a little TMI to start talking about your cramps or the fight you got into with your partner in exactly the same way it's TMI to talk about the good sex you had that morning or how well your stock portfolio is. Being able to gauge the level of appropriate intimacy for various types of social interaction is a part of manners and etiquette. And manners and etiquette are a sort of formalized way that we indicate to other people that we have respect for them and/or their role. And this may not be true of you and I'm not saying "Fake it" but I'm saying be mindful of the fact that there is a system in place that has been at least somewhat in place since before you were born.
It's fine to decide you don't care about the advantages and disadvantages of working within this system [of politeness, manners and social graces] but it's worth at least making sure you understand what it is that you're shutting a door to if you decide to go the "total honesty route" This is not me saying I'm stoked about the way the world is or that I always support this sort of thing, but it's a system that evolved for reasons and it's worth getting to know those reasons so that you are mindfully finding the place you are comfortable within it, not just grousing because you don't like the rules and don't seem to be able to get yourself to a place where you can comfortably live outside of them and/or find people to share your view of how the rules ought to be.
posted by jessamyn at 9:45 PM on December 13, 2012 [31 favorites]
Yup, context is everything. If I ask a good, close friend of mine how they are, I do genuinely want to know, and I want them to tell me if things weren't so good, so we can have a meaningful conversation about it and I can be a supportive friend. If, however, I am passing an acquaintance in the hall at work and I greet them by saying, "How are you?" in essence I am saying "Hello! I acknowledge your presence and would like to be friendly while passing you." If they then started divulging all sorts of personal information to me in that moment, it would be strange and off-putting. I would not think, "Wow, we are well on our way to becoming better friends." I would think, "That person is odd and an oversharer and I will now strive to avoid them."
The same thing applies to "What do you think?" If you are being asked to critique something in a work context, or a good friend has asked you for help tweaking their resume so they have a better chance at getting interviews, then by all means provide constructive criticism (note: constructive). If a friend is proudly showing you the scarf they made in their beginning knitter class, that is not the time to start pointing out all the dropped stitches and the weird changes in tension. If you're the knitting teacher, it's appropriate to show them how to fix their mistakes as they go along.
Context. It's all about context and good judgment. Otherwise you become Brad Blanton, the Radical Honesty guy. Don't be that guy.
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 9:45 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
The same thing applies to "What do you think?" If you are being asked to critique something in a work context, or a good friend has asked you for help tweaking their resume so they have a better chance at getting interviews, then by all means provide constructive criticism (note: constructive). If a friend is proudly showing you the scarf they made in their beginning knitter class, that is not the time to start pointing out all the dropped stitches and the weird changes in tension. If you're the knitting teacher, it's appropriate to show them how to fix their mistakes as they go along.
Context. It's all about context and good judgment. Otherwise you become Brad Blanton, the Radical Honesty guy. Don't be that guy.
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 9:45 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
I would add that it is not just context, but timing. If the first thing someone I knew well said to me was "How are you?" Regardless of how I was, I would probably answer with something from "Good thanks," to "Not too bad." But if we had been sitting and chatting for a while and she asked, "How are you?" I might respond with much more detail. "It has been a shitty week. My mom got sick, my dog bit the neighbor and I can't find my glasses."
posted by JohnnyGunn at 9:55 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by JohnnyGunn at 9:55 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
You can do both. Be truthful and tactful. "Hey dad, I really didn't like that sampler of beer, but at least I got to spend the afternoon with you so it was worth it."
posted by JohnnyGunn at 10:01 PM on December 13, 2012
posted by JohnnyGunn at 10:01 PM on December 13, 2012
Response by poster: My apologies for the repeat.
As to what I'm looking for, I guess I'm trying to find balance. All my life I've been the person who would go out of their way not to hurt anyone's feelings, not to stand up for myself. It's only been in the past couple years that I've started breaking out of that pattern, and I'm finding that people *really* don't seem to want that (not only the people I have established relationships with, but new people as well.) It's got me very (and repetitively, apparently) confused on how to proceed.
People are absolutely loathe to turn down an invite and truthfully say, "thanks but that's just not my thing." They make up stories and excuses instead, or say "yeah, I'll try to make it." They have no intention of trying to make it. I'd rather know the truth.
A musician asks what I think of their new CD. If "I love your music but I think it comes across much better live" is not what they wanted to hear - then why ask?
Perhaps it's just a matter of being more explicit. "Do you want to go to this thing? Tell me honestly." "I assume since you're asking my opinion of your CD, you want some specific details?"
posted by thrasher at 10:33 PM on December 13, 2012
As to what I'm looking for, I guess I'm trying to find balance. All my life I've been the person who would go out of their way not to hurt anyone's feelings, not to stand up for myself. It's only been in the past couple years that I've started breaking out of that pattern, and I'm finding that people *really* don't seem to want that (not only the people I have established relationships with, but new people as well.) It's got me very (and repetitively, apparently) confused on how to proceed.
People are absolutely loathe to turn down an invite and truthfully say, "thanks but that's just not my thing." They make up stories and excuses instead, or say "yeah, I'll try to make it." They have no intention of trying to make it. I'd rather know the truth.
A musician asks what I think of their new CD. If "I love your music but I think it comes across much better live" is not what they wanted to hear - then why ask?
Perhaps it's just a matter of being more explicit. "Do you want to go to this thing? Tell me honestly." "I assume since you're asking my opinion of your CD, you want some specific details?"
posted by thrasher at 10:33 PM on December 13, 2012
There's a rule of thumb I've learned from Talmudic thought for when to be polite. It is, will they be able to act on what you're saying, or is it just going to make them feel bad? The standard example is a woman in an unflattering dress - if she asks you before going out, or before buying the dress, of course you tell her it looks bad. But while she's out at a party, and the only thing that will happen is that she will feel bad all evening, you tell her she looks just fine. Otherwise you are just hurting her to no benefit.
If an artist asks you what you think of his CD that is a work in progress, let him know how he could improve it. If he asks you what you think of his newly released and published CD, tell him you are so impressed by him for putting it out and think his music sounds great. If you think his live performances are way better maybe suggest that he be sure to promote the CD with concerts so that people can get 'the full experience'. But don't tell him something that will only serve to make him feel like a failure.
In addition, sometimes when people ask you questions they are trying to achieve an end other than 'finding out the answer to this question'. Dispassionate curiosity motivates fewer people than you might think. So your musician friend is quite possibly trying to show you his new CD and express how happy he is and maybe get some reassurance about this massive brave step that he's feeling really self-conscious about. And someone who asks how you are may be trying to express concern or just open a conversation more generally. By focusing on the quantifiable answer to the question, you're side-stepping their real intent.
And for you on the other side, if you're worried that people aren't interested in a certain type of event, that's not usually what you're asking when you send an invitation to an event (that is, they may see it as more, "thrasher is looking for people to do X with" rather than "thrasher is looking for something to do with these people"). You can always send out a preliminary query: "Hey, I'm thinking about inviting folks to a concert by so-and-so. Is that something you'd be interested in, or if not how would you feel about a hike or hanging out downtown?"
posted by Lady Li at 11:06 PM on December 13, 2012 [40 favorites]
If an artist asks you what you think of his CD that is a work in progress, let him know how he could improve it. If he asks you what you think of his newly released and published CD, tell him you are so impressed by him for putting it out and think his music sounds great. If you think his live performances are way better maybe suggest that he be sure to promote the CD with concerts so that people can get 'the full experience'. But don't tell him something that will only serve to make him feel like a failure.
In addition, sometimes when people ask you questions they are trying to achieve an end other than 'finding out the answer to this question'. Dispassionate curiosity motivates fewer people than you might think. So your musician friend is quite possibly trying to show you his new CD and express how happy he is and maybe get some reassurance about this massive brave step that he's feeling really self-conscious about. And someone who asks how you are may be trying to express concern or just open a conversation more generally. By focusing on the quantifiable answer to the question, you're side-stepping their real intent.
And for you on the other side, if you're worried that people aren't interested in a certain type of event, that's not usually what you're asking when you send an invitation to an event (that is, they may see it as more, "thrasher is looking for people to do X with" rather than "thrasher is looking for something to do with these people"). You can always send out a preliminary query: "Hey, I'm thinking about inviting folks to a concert by so-and-so. Is that something you'd be interested in, or if not how would you feel about a hike or hanging out downtown?"
posted by Lady Li at 11:06 PM on December 13, 2012 [40 favorites]
That tipping the truth/tact scales more in the direction of truth can only be a good, productive thing, a way to deeper human connections and real friendships.
You could write a pretty decent history of philosophy tracing only the relationship presumed to exist between what's true and what's good. Let's start with that's pretty much the story of Socrates that Plato tells, in theory to show what a champion of truth he was and how important it is to do that kind of thing, and OK, sure--up to a point. But in plenty of the shorter dialogues Socrates was kind of an asshole mansplainer cornering poets and slave-boys and whatnot into set-up 'dialogues' where really only Socrates's point of view matters and the main outcome is to knock someone down intellectually with arguments that weren't always that great themselves. I'm guessing you'd like a lot of what he tries to do but probably recognize some of it as a bit too twisty and manipulative, if not mean.
Skipping ahead 2000 years, we get to a point where people are raising fundamental questions about whether there's a relationship between the true and the good at all. Some highlights here include the is-ought problem (can you go directly from knowing what's true to knowing what ought to be the case?), Nietzsche's critique of the will-to-truth in the Genealogy of Morals and Beyond Good and Evil (the first section starts in on it right away), the Pragmatist point of view expressed by Rorty in this brief video clip, and the notion of a différend, which is a sort of dispute based on opposing premises such that there's no way to decide between them and achieve a consensus among those holding those points of view.
Of course, these are subtle points, and I'm glad to vote for the local judge who believes in a nice simple connection between discovering the truth and deciding what to do about it. And hurray open societies and government transparency and so on.
But insofar as you ask a philosophical question about whether aiming at the true also leads to the good, I really don't think that's clear. Whose premises you start with, why you're bothering to talk about the issue, whether you have a virtuous goal in mind, and is there an intrinsic relationship between the truth you express and the judgment you express are all pretty fair questions to ask, even regarding everyday conversations.
I also wonder if you'd think about this completely differently if you considered, say, Japanese conversational norms in contrast to your own. When, how, why, and to what extent to be polite is not a universal, and although you might set some wide constraints on what's workable by observing the limits on worldwide variation there's likely no clear justification for preferring one practical, working set of norms on this point over another.
posted by Monsieur Caution at 11:09 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
You could write a pretty decent history of philosophy tracing only the relationship presumed to exist between what's true and what's good. Let's start with that's pretty much the story of Socrates that Plato tells, in theory to show what a champion of truth he was and how important it is to do that kind of thing, and OK, sure--up to a point. But in plenty of the shorter dialogues Socrates was kind of an asshole mansplainer cornering poets and slave-boys and whatnot into set-up 'dialogues' where really only Socrates's point of view matters and the main outcome is to knock someone down intellectually with arguments that weren't always that great themselves. I'm guessing you'd like a lot of what he tries to do but probably recognize some of it as a bit too twisty and manipulative, if not mean.
Skipping ahead 2000 years, we get to a point where people are raising fundamental questions about whether there's a relationship between the true and the good at all. Some highlights here include the is-ought problem (can you go directly from knowing what's true to knowing what ought to be the case?), Nietzsche's critique of the will-to-truth in the Genealogy of Morals and Beyond Good and Evil (the first section starts in on it right away), the Pragmatist point of view expressed by Rorty in this brief video clip, and the notion of a différend, which is a sort of dispute based on opposing premises such that there's no way to decide between them and achieve a consensus among those holding those points of view.
Of course, these are subtle points, and I'm glad to vote for the local judge who believes in a nice simple connection between discovering the truth and deciding what to do about it. And hurray open societies and government transparency and so on.
But insofar as you ask a philosophical question about whether aiming at the true also leads to the good, I really don't think that's clear. Whose premises you start with, why you're bothering to talk about the issue, whether you have a virtuous goal in mind, and is there an intrinsic relationship between the truth you express and the judgment you express are all pretty fair questions to ask, even regarding everyday conversations.
I also wonder if you'd think about this completely differently if you considered, say, Japanese conversational norms in contrast to your own. When, how, why, and to what extent to be polite is not a universal, and although you might set some wide constraints on what's workable by observing the limits on worldwide variation there's likely no clear justification for preferring one practical, working set of norms on this point over another.
posted by Monsieur Caution at 11:09 PM on December 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
'People are absolutely loathe to turn down an invite and truthfully say, "thanks but that's just not my thing." They make up stories and excuses instead, or say "yeah, I'll try to make it."'
Just say "thanks, but I can't make it." There's no need to rub the person's face in the fact that you don't want to go.
If you know the person well, and they're suggesting a night out at the casinos and you would hate that, just say, "oh, thanks, but casinos are not my scene at all. Maybe catch you some other time." That way, it's clear that you do want to see them and it's the casino you're turning down. With a mere acquaintance, you wouldn't tell them you don't like the thing they're offering because it can sound like an extension of not liking them. But if you're already friends, there's enough shared history to separate these concerns.
People who say they're coming to an event, or even worse, that they "might" come, are not being "polite". They're combining rude with nonconfrontational while maximizing both.
posted by tel3path at 3:38 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
Just say "thanks, but I can't make it." There's no need to rub the person's face in the fact that you don't want to go.
If you know the person well, and they're suggesting a night out at the casinos and you would hate that, just say, "oh, thanks, but casinos are not my scene at all. Maybe catch you some other time." That way, it's clear that you do want to see them and it's the casino you're turning down. With a mere acquaintance, you wouldn't tell them you don't like the thing they're offering because it can sound like an extension of not liking them. But if you're already friends, there's enough shared history to separate these concerns.
People who say they're coming to an event, or even worse, that they "might" come, are not being "polite". They're combining rude with nonconfrontational while maximizing both.
posted by tel3path at 3:38 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
I was thinking about a question very similar to this one, exploring how our culture seems to favor lying over honesty where "feelings" are concerned. Example: A tells B something B really needs to know, carefully and considerately something A thinks it will help B to know. B isn't ready to hear it, has some deep-seated guilt or other shadow-related energy, and reacts with distancing. Only B doesn't retreat to consider why she feels as she does about it. She instead consults C, and preferably D and E, etc... for verification of A's insensitivity and general blindness to all that is good and right in human relatedness.
Not everyone reacts this way, of course. Sometimes though it can seem as if people generally seem to cherish their unconsciousness, putting the onus on those who value consciousness to learn when and how its values can be shared.
posted by R2WeTwo at 3:56 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
Not everyone reacts this way, of course. Sometimes though it can seem as if people generally seem to cherish their unconsciousness, putting the onus on those who value consciousness to learn when and how its values can be shared.
posted by R2WeTwo at 3:56 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
That tipping the truth/tact scales more in the direction of truth can only be a good, productive thing, a way to deeper human connections and real friendships.
Consider that direct communication is not the only way people can have deep, meaningful social interactions. Also consider that "indirect" does not equate with "untruthful." Tipping the scales toward "truth" is not at all necessarily a good thing, because that's not really what you're doing. You're tipping them toward the interaction being wholly word-based with no reliance on other context. Which is at best value-neutral.
A musician asks what I think of their new CD. If "I love your music but I think it comes across much better live" is not what they wanted to hear - then why ask?
This is a good example. All you had to say was, "I love your music." The rest of the phrase is implied if they want to think about it - you praised their music but not their CD - but you haven't directly stated it. You haven't lied, and they haven't been directly confronted with an unpleasant truth, though it's hanging in the air if they want to acknowledge it.
People are absolutely loathe to turn down an invite and truthfully say, "thanks but that's just not my thing." They make up stories and excuses instead, or say "yeah, I'll try to make it." They have no intention of trying to make it. I'd rather know the truth.
Indirect, not lying. Spoken: "Yeah, I'll try to make it." Implied: "But not very hard." It can be frustrating, but you can't control other people's behavior, so rather than stewing about it, maybe try researching why people act like that, and stop assuming it comes from a deep and abiding need to be dishonest.
I live in a society where if I invite someone to something, they will never, ever just say "Thanks, but that's just not my thing." That would be hideously rude here. They may say, "I'll try to be there." Heck, often they will even say straight up "Yes, I'll be there," even knowing they won't be. Seems like lying - but once you learn to read the cues, you learn to know when "Yes" means yes and when it means no. They're not lying, they ARE telling you whether or not they're going, but if you can't read the subtext you might think they are lying. In fact, they are trying as hard as they can to be kind to you while still *communicating* the truth - you just have to look deeper than the words alone to interpret their communication correctly.
posted by solotoro at 4:23 AM on December 14, 2012 [2 favorites]
Consider that direct communication is not the only way people can have deep, meaningful social interactions. Also consider that "indirect" does not equate with "untruthful." Tipping the scales toward "truth" is not at all necessarily a good thing, because that's not really what you're doing. You're tipping them toward the interaction being wholly word-based with no reliance on other context. Which is at best value-neutral.
A musician asks what I think of their new CD. If "I love your music but I think it comes across much better live" is not what they wanted to hear - then why ask?
This is a good example. All you had to say was, "I love your music." The rest of the phrase is implied if they want to think about it - you praised their music but not their CD - but you haven't directly stated it. You haven't lied, and they haven't been directly confronted with an unpleasant truth, though it's hanging in the air if they want to acknowledge it.
People are absolutely loathe to turn down an invite and truthfully say, "thanks but that's just not my thing." They make up stories and excuses instead, or say "yeah, I'll try to make it." They have no intention of trying to make it. I'd rather know the truth.
Indirect, not lying. Spoken: "Yeah, I'll try to make it." Implied: "But not very hard." It can be frustrating, but you can't control other people's behavior, so rather than stewing about it, maybe try researching why people act like that, and stop assuming it comes from a deep and abiding need to be dishonest.
I live in a society where if I invite someone to something, they will never, ever just say "Thanks, but that's just not my thing." That would be hideously rude here. They may say, "I'll try to be there." Heck, often they will even say straight up "Yes, I'll be there," even knowing they won't be. Seems like lying - but once you learn to read the cues, you learn to know when "Yes" means yes and when it means no. They're not lying, they ARE telling you whether or not they're going, but if you can't read the subtext you might think they are lying. In fact, they are trying as hard as they can to be kind to you while still *communicating* the truth - you just have to look deeper than the words alone to interpret their communication correctly.
posted by solotoro at 4:23 AM on December 14, 2012 [2 favorites]
All my life I've been the person who would go out of their way not to hurt anyone's feelings, not to stand up for myself. It's only been in the past couple years that I've started breaking out of that pattern, and I'm finding that people *really* don't seem to want that (not only the people I have established relationships with, but new people as well.) It's got me very (and repetitively, apparently) confused on how to proceed.
Someone very dear to me is going through exactly this. He was the last person in the world to say something unkind, and now he is convinced that brutal honesty is the right thing to do, that behaving differently in different contexts and with different people is inauthentic.
It is difficult when you are already an adult when you first find your voice. As kids, we get subtle instruction in social mores in the form of group lessons and constant observation, and the give and take of social interaction becomes ingrained and natural. When a kid either doesn't have good models, or doesn't have the confidence to push limits, or is harshly instead of gently rebuked, or for who knows what other reasons, he reaches adulthood without an unselfconscious way of interacting with others. So here you are making a conscious effort to interact with others in a genuine way, but you're so self-aware that you can't help getting in your own way about it, you see your words as a reflection of your character, and you want to be honest. And you're right! Your words are a reflection of your character, who you are. But it's more complicated than that. Your restraint is also a reflection of your character, and your capacity for kindness is also a reflection of your character, and your respect for the people or the place where you are is also a reflection of your character.
I think there are two essential elements to developing these social skills: realizing that it's not black-and-white, honest vs. poser; and observing others to learn what works. After that, seeing it as a project, practice, practice, practice. Openness to accepting that most meaningful social interaction and intimacy occurs in between silence and brutal honesty is critical.
posted by headnsouth at 4:29 AM on December 14, 2012 [7 favorites]
Someone very dear to me is going through exactly this. He was the last person in the world to say something unkind, and now he is convinced that brutal honesty is the right thing to do, that behaving differently in different contexts and with different people is inauthentic.
It is difficult when you are already an adult when you first find your voice. As kids, we get subtle instruction in social mores in the form of group lessons and constant observation, and the give and take of social interaction becomes ingrained and natural. When a kid either doesn't have good models, or doesn't have the confidence to push limits, or is harshly instead of gently rebuked, or for who knows what other reasons, he reaches adulthood without an unselfconscious way of interacting with others. So here you are making a conscious effort to interact with others in a genuine way, but you're so self-aware that you can't help getting in your own way about it, you see your words as a reflection of your character, and you want to be honest. And you're right! Your words are a reflection of your character, who you are. But it's more complicated than that. Your restraint is also a reflection of your character, and your capacity for kindness is also a reflection of your character, and your respect for the people or the place where you are is also a reflection of your character.
I think there are two essential elements to developing these social skills: realizing that it's not black-and-white, honest vs. poser; and observing others to learn what works. After that, seeing it as a project, practice, practice, practice. Openness to accepting that most meaningful social interaction and intimacy occurs in between silence and brutal honesty is critical.
posted by headnsouth at 4:29 AM on December 14, 2012 [7 favorites]
Your real question is "How do I connect with others?" Saying the content-free expected is too distant. Saying they scare you, make you angry, turn you on, look ridiculous, would chase them away. There's no set of rules to this problem, in part, because a set of rules creates distance by its inflexibility. Since everyone has this problem, the culture provides solutions in the form of politeness, ritual, custom, etc. But it's up to you to tweak this in a way that works for you. It's a non-trivial problem and many get professional help at it. Just remember that others often want to connect with you too and are trying to figure out how. Good luck out there.
posted by Obscure Reference at 4:40 AM on December 14, 2012 [4 favorites]
posted by Obscure Reference at 4:40 AM on December 14, 2012 [4 favorites]
There are different kinds of truths and falsehoods that are communicated simultaneously when you say things like, "Don't worry honey, those pants don't make you look fat at all" that make it almost always the correct answer when asked whether the pants your partner is wearing make them look fat. You could certainly understand the question in the most literal way possible and make your best assessment of how flattering the pants are, and in some situations that would indeed be appropriate, but in most it would be as wrong an answer to the real question asked as reading from a phone book would be to a question about what kind of people live in a city.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:43 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by Blasdelb at 4:43 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
I think one thing you have to watch for with the "honesty" policy is that you are actually dealing with the situation at hand, and not with generalized anger or negativity. headnsouth's example reminded me of this. I too had a friend who was trying, actually on the advice of his therapist, to stand up for himself more. But he was-- or he had become, through bottling up his feelings over long periods of time-- a very angry person. At that stage in his life anyway. So occasionally he would blast people with doses of "honesty" which eventually drove a lot of his friends away. I think it's really easy to slip into this behavior if you grew up in a home where you were supposed to bottle things up and where strong emotions (or even opinions) were something to be afraid of. (I've been using "you" here in the sense of "one." No idea if this applies to you specifically, OP.)
I think where "dishonesty" becomes an actively bad thing in social interactions is when it involves manipulation. There are grey areas of this, to me. A certain level of manipulation is inherent, for instance, in a lot of jobs. A certain amount of playing the game to get the results you want. But what is "playing the game," to some people, to other people is simply being aware of your function and performing accordingly. I think with friends, you should be aiming for a situation where there's as little manipulation as possible. But that doesn't mean sharing with them every little thing that's on your mind, if they don't need to know it.
posted by BibiRose at 6:51 AM on December 14, 2012 [3 favorites]
I think where "dishonesty" becomes an actively bad thing in social interactions is when it involves manipulation. There are grey areas of this, to me. A certain level of manipulation is inherent, for instance, in a lot of jobs. A certain amount of playing the game to get the results you want. But what is "playing the game," to some people, to other people is simply being aware of your function and performing accordingly. I think with friends, you should be aiming for a situation where there's as little manipulation as possible. But that doesn't mean sharing with them every little thing that's on your mind, if they don't need to know it.
posted by BibiRose at 6:51 AM on December 14, 2012 [3 favorites]
That tipping the truth/tact scales more in the direction of truth can only be a good, productive thing, a way to deeper human connections and real friendships.
I think that when you have a good connection, then a greater level of truth very much is part of that -- e.g., if my spouse asks me how I am, I give a very different answer than when I'm passing a colleague in the hall. However, greater truth is what gradually emerges from increasing trust and fondness between two people, not a way to *create* such trust -- the reason that "niceties" exist is to smoothe the relations between people whose view of "truth" might be mutually hurtful or trust-destroying (e.g., coworkers or others you spend time with but aren't particularly intimate with).
posted by acm at 6:57 AM on December 14, 2012
I think that when you have a good connection, then a greater level of truth very much is part of that -- e.g., if my spouse asks me how I am, I give a very different answer than when I'm passing a colleague in the hall. However, greater truth is what gradually emerges from increasing trust and fondness between two people, not a way to *create* such trust -- the reason that "niceties" exist is to smoothe the relations between people whose view of "truth" might be mutually hurtful or trust-destroying (e.g., coworkers or others you spend time with but aren't particularly intimate with).
posted by acm at 6:57 AM on December 14, 2012
If the grocery clerk asks how you are, you can say fine, or be scrupulously honest and say I'm enjoying the sun today, the snow is so pretty, hoping tomorrow won't be so gloomy, etc. That's why we have weather; it gives us a topic. Follow with How are you? because it's always nice to ask people how they are, and it reduces your focus on your troubles. How are you is a social nicety, a way to show courtesy, not a request for detailed info, unless it's a close friend.
Friend wearing a new outfit that you don't like? It's a nice color, it fits well, makes your legs look long, etc. If a friend is making a serious decision and you have concerns, be as honest and kind as you can. Frank, can I take 5 minutes to share my concerns about your marriage: details, and I promise not to bring it up again, because your friendship means a lot to me. Social lies about why you were late - be honest I'm sorry to be late, I was distracted. Making a commitment to honesty is a good thing, but you don't have to say everything you think.
posted by theora55 at 7:50 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
Friend wearing a new outfit that you don't like? It's a nice color, it fits well, makes your legs look long, etc. If a friend is making a serious decision and you have concerns, be as honest and kind as you can. Frank, can I take 5 minutes to share my concerns about your marriage: details, and I promise not to bring it up again, because your friendship means a lot to me. Social lies about why you were late - be honest I'm sorry to be late, I was distracted. Making a commitment to honesty is a good thing, but you don't have to say everything you think.
posted by theora55 at 7:50 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
It's also worth keeping in mind that not everyone communicates and connects in the same way. A LOT of people do the sugar-coating, saying yes to invitations even if they have no intention of actually showing up, acting effusively friendly and personally interested in people they don't think of as friends, never wanting to say no to someone's face for any reason. Not only that, but they expect that same behavior from those they associate with because that's what's normal to them. They find it weird when people take this behavior to mean they're actually friends with them. They find honest criticism, even without malice, to be very strange. It can be disorienting to navigate when this isn't how you prefer to communicate with others.
If you've made friends based on a way that you used to act, it makes sense that they are confused when you suddenly start being "honest" instead of "nice," since that's not what the relationship was formed on initially. But there are ways of being both honest and kind, by focusing on things you actually do like and only mentioning those. And if a friend invites me to something and I can't or don't want to go, I just tell them I can't make it. I think it's rude to say you'll be going to something if you will not be going. I've had people do that to me, and the expectation of seeing them at an event only to have them not show up stings way more than just being told beforehand that they won't be able to make it. Some people are really just bad at saying no to anything. Not everyone is the same in that respect.
As for your musician example, as a musician myself, I personally think it's rude to ask someone what they think of your music. I have a policy of not doing that, preferring instead that if someone wants to express positive feelings about my music, they'll do it on their own terms. But if someone does ask you, unless they make it clear up front that they want to know what you really think and they want criticism (and they say this without your prompting), you can't tell them what you really think unless you honestly think it's great. But you can pick out a couple things you specifically like about it, like a favorite song or something, and leave the negative stuff or back-handed compliments out.
posted by wondermouse at 9:23 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
If you've made friends based on a way that you used to act, it makes sense that they are confused when you suddenly start being "honest" instead of "nice," since that's not what the relationship was formed on initially. But there are ways of being both honest and kind, by focusing on things you actually do like and only mentioning those. And if a friend invites me to something and I can't or don't want to go, I just tell them I can't make it. I think it's rude to say you'll be going to something if you will not be going. I've had people do that to me, and the expectation of seeing them at an event only to have them not show up stings way more than just being told beforehand that they won't be able to make it. Some people are really just bad at saying no to anything. Not everyone is the same in that respect.
As for your musician example, as a musician myself, I personally think it's rude to ask someone what they think of your music. I have a policy of not doing that, preferring instead that if someone wants to express positive feelings about my music, they'll do it on their own terms. But if someone does ask you, unless they make it clear up front that they want to know what you really think and they want criticism (and they say this without your prompting), you can't tell them what you really think unless you honestly think it's great. But you can pick out a couple things you specifically like about it, like a favorite song or something, and leave the negative stuff or back-handed compliments out.
posted by wondermouse at 9:23 AM on December 14, 2012 [1 favorite]
First of all, this is something that everyone struggles with. It is hard to know when you should say exactly what you are thinking, when you should say some modified version of what you are thinking, and when you should lie/avoid the topic/say something vapid. There are situations where each of those things is appropriate.
You are right about some of the things you've said here - "That tipping the truth/tact scales more in the direction of truth can only be a good, productive thing, a way to deeper human connections and real friendships." Yes! It is very hard to get close to someone who is always positive and cheerful and fine, and who is never willing to go beyond the surface of topics.
In general, except with your closest friends and family, it's best go beyond the positive and cheerful and fine by being honest and vulnerable about yourself, not about your opinions on others and things they care about. "How are you?" "Not so good, I had a hard day at work and my dog is a little sick so I'm worried. How are you doing?" is the former; "What do you think of my CD?" "I like your music better live" is the latter.
You achieve those deeper human connections and real friendships by telling people when you are nervous, insecure, angry, upset, happy, ecstatic, confused, tired, etc - not when you feel those feelings about them, as in some sort of discussion about the friendship, but when you are feeling them otherwise and want to confide and be real about where you are at. This is mutual self-disclosure, and it's a key part of building relationships.
Another thing you said: "All my life I've been the person who would go out of their way not to hurt anyone's feelings, not to stand up for myself. It's only been in the past couple years that I've started breaking out of that pattern, and I'm finding that people *really* don't seem to want that (not only the people I have established relationships with, but new people as well.)" Your finding is partially right - people do want you to continue going out of their way to not hurt anyone's feelings. Even if sometimes that means not standing up for yourself - you have to choose the times when your needs are more important than not hurting their feelings (those times do exist).
So, with the CD? "I liked it! You know how much I like your music, especially live. When's your next show?" Unless your friend brought you into the studio and you are actually collaborating on the mix, in which case give your opinion but demure to his decision if he disagrees with you. And tell him it sounds great, because he probably mostly brought you into the studio to be a cheerleader.
Keep in mind what people are asking for - sometimes it's a true opinion, sometimes it's reassurance, cheering up, a listening ear, empathy, compassion, advice, agreement, the knowledge that other people have the same experience. Try to give them that - which may not always be exactly what you are thinking.
Really, the ideal honesty I'm talking about here is if the guy who made a CD said: "What do you think of my new CD? I"m really worried about how it turned out, I think I sound better live." The person who owns the topic is in a better place to be vulnerable. And then the friend responds with something ranging from "No way man! It sounds great!" (because what he's asking for your reassurance, not real opinions) to "No way man! It sounds great! But you know I love how you sound live. Maybe on your website you could upload some live recordings from shows so people could hear those too." (because this is a close friend who trusts you and will appreciate an idea from you).
When it comes to honesty with friends about little things like why they don't want to go to a thing...I don't know, worry more about your honesty than theirs. I think it would be great for you to respond to an invitation to go hiking that "No thanks, hiking isn't really my thing. Want to grab lunch after, though?" or "No thanks, I don't like getting up that early on the weekend [smile]. Maybe a movie on Sunday evening?" (Note the reciprocal invitations - never turn one down without at least passingly mentioning an alternative, unless you don't want to spend time with that person). It takes a pretty close level of friendship - probably the inner 5 or 10 people in their life - before most people are that honest about why they don't want to do something, but I think it is a good and admirable thing to practice those small daily honest moments more often with more people.
TLDR: Yes, being more honest is a way to cultivate deeper, more real relationships. It's great to strive to be more congruent in the way you feel and the way you act. Generally this means being more honest and vulnerable about your own shit rather than offering honest opinions on that of others. Put yourself out there. And yes, always continue to avoid hurting others' feelings, and choose when it's necessary to stand up for yourself if others' feelings are at risk.
Really, go read How to Win Friends and Influence People. It's great.
posted by amaire at 9:26 AM on December 14, 2012 [4 favorites]
You are right about some of the things you've said here - "That tipping the truth/tact scales more in the direction of truth can only be a good, productive thing, a way to deeper human connections and real friendships." Yes! It is very hard to get close to someone who is always positive and cheerful and fine, and who is never willing to go beyond the surface of topics.
In general, except with your closest friends and family, it's best go beyond the positive and cheerful and fine by being honest and vulnerable about yourself, not about your opinions on others and things they care about. "How are you?" "Not so good, I had a hard day at work and my dog is a little sick so I'm worried. How are you doing?" is the former; "What do you think of my CD?" "I like your music better live" is the latter.
You achieve those deeper human connections and real friendships by telling people when you are nervous, insecure, angry, upset, happy, ecstatic, confused, tired, etc - not when you feel those feelings about them, as in some sort of discussion about the friendship, but when you are feeling them otherwise and want to confide and be real about where you are at. This is mutual self-disclosure, and it's a key part of building relationships.
Another thing you said: "All my life I've been the person who would go out of their way not to hurt anyone's feelings, not to stand up for myself. It's only been in the past couple years that I've started breaking out of that pattern, and I'm finding that people *really* don't seem to want that (not only the people I have established relationships with, but new people as well.)" Your finding is partially right - people do want you to continue going out of their way to not hurt anyone's feelings. Even if sometimes that means not standing up for yourself - you have to choose the times when your needs are more important than not hurting their feelings (those times do exist).
So, with the CD? "I liked it! You know how much I like your music, especially live. When's your next show?" Unless your friend brought you into the studio and you are actually collaborating on the mix, in which case give your opinion but demure to his decision if he disagrees with you. And tell him it sounds great, because he probably mostly brought you into the studio to be a cheerleader.
Keep in mind what people are asking for - sometimes it's a true opinion, sometimes it's reassurance, cheering up, a listening ear, empathy, compassion, advice, agreement, the knowledge that other people have the same experience. Try to give them that - which may not always be exactly what you are thinking.
Really, the ideal honesty I'm talking about here is if the guy who made a CD said: "What do you think of my new CD? I"m really worried about how it turned out, I think I sound better live." The person who owns the topic is in a better place to be vulnerable. And then the friend responds with something ranging from "No way man! It sounds great!" (because what he's asking for your reassurance, not real opinions) to "No way man! It sounds great! But you know I love how you sound live. Maybe on your website you could upload some live recordings from shows so people could hear those too." (because this is a close friend who trusts you and will appreciate an idea from you).
When it comes to honesty with friends about little things like why they don't want to go to a thing...I don't know, worry more about your honesty than theirs. I think it would be great for you to respond to an invitation to go hiking that "No thanks, hiking isn't really my thing. Want to grab lunch after, though?" or "No thanks, I don't like getting up that early on the weekend [smile]. Maybe a movie on Sunday evening?" (Note the reciprocal invitations - never turn one down without at least passingly mentioning an alternative, unless you don't want to spend time with that person). It takes a pretty close level of friendship - probably the inner 5 or 10 people in their life - before most people are that honest about why they don't want to do something, but I think it is a good and admirable thing to practice those small daily honest moments more often with more people.
TLDR: Yes, being more honest is a way to cultivate deeper, more real relationships. It's great to strive to be more congruent in the way you feel and the way you act. Generally this means being more honest and vulnerable about your own shit rather than offering honest opinions on that of others. Put yourself out there. And yes, always continue to avoid hurting others' feelings, and choose when it's necessary to stand up for yourself if others' feelings are at risk.
Really, go read How to Win Friends and Influence People. It's great.
posted by amaire at 9:26 AM on December 14, 2012 [4 favorites]
Speaking for myself, I would say that one single realization made a huge impact on how I now try to balance my interactions with others. Simply put, when I really stopped to think about how often my subjective opinions of things have changed over time (often enough over periods as short as a day or even an hour) I realized that even my more "truthful" responses may not really be entirely honest, reflecting mood and other intangible, mutable subjectives as much as any kind of all-encompassing objective personal truth.
In practice, before I decide that I simply must share, I first ask myself why I think it’s important for the other person to hear these thoughts, and why I think it’s important for me to convey them, and how confident I am that I truly understand my own feelings prior to sharing them, and how likely those feelings are to change.
That said, it’s obviously cumbersome to overanalyze everything that comes out of one’s mouth in every conversation, so my general approach has been to set general guidelines for how personal I intend to be with different groups of people and different individuals, and then adjust as interactions seem to warrant. I always try to start from a position of maintaining privacy and respect on both sides of any interaction, but I also try to convey a sense of genuine listening whenever possible.
The most important step in fostering honest relationships is to listen honestly.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:57 AM on December 14, 2012 [2 favorites]
In practice, before I decide that I simply must share, I first ask myself why I think it’s important for the other person to hear these thoughts, and why I think it’s important for me to convey them, and how confident I am that I truly understand my own feelings prior to sharing them, and how likely those feelings are to change.
That said, it’s obviously cumbersome to overanalyze everything that comes out of one’s mouth in every conversation, so my general approach has been to set general guidelines for how personal I intend to be with different groups of people and different individuals, and then adjust as interactions seem to warrant. I always try to start from a position of maintaining privacy and respect on both sides of any interaction, but I also try to convey a sense of genuine listening whenever possible.
The most important step in fostering honest relationships is to listen honestly.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:57 AM on December 14, 2012 [2 favorites]
In the card game of bridge there is something called bidding conventions. When one player during bidding phase says eg. 2 hearts it does not mean that he actually has a hand that allows that result. The same is true with human relations. Many questions and answers are conventional.
To put it another way: in international diplomacy statement: "yours note from yesterday is received and given appropriate attention" is equivalent to saying "no".
Much of spoken statements during human interactions are conventional and it's literal sense is different from conventional. For example: when someone is asking "do you like my tie?" and the answer is: "it's interesting" both of them know that the real answer was "I don't like your tie". Many times on this site it was said that when someone after being asked for a date answers "ok, but maybe later, I'm busy" without specific proposal is equivalent to "no, and don't ask me again".
Saying "I'll try to be there if I'll be able to feed my cats earlier" after being invited for a party isn't lying about one's intentions. It's just conventional answer equivalent to "no unless I'll be extremely bored".
Thus there is no philosophical question polite vs. truthful. One should be polite and truthful. Bluntly honest people aren't more honest than the rest of us. They are just don't understands social conventions.
posted by przepla at 6:08 PM on December 14, 2012
To put it another way: in international diplomacy statement: "yours note from yesterday is received and given appropriate attention" is equivalent to saying "no".
Much of spoken statements during human interactions are conventional and it's literal sense is different from conventional. For example: when someone is asking "do you like my tie?" and the answer is: "it's interesting" both of them know that the real answer was "I don't like your tie". Many times on this site it was said that when someone after being asked for a date answers "ok, but maybe later, I'm busy" without specific proposal is equivalent to "no, and don't ask me again".
Saying "I'll try to be there if I'll be able to feed my cats earlier" after being invited for a party isn't lying about one's intentions. It's just conventional answer equivalent to "no unless I'll be extremely bored".
Thus there is no philosophical question polite vs. truthful. One should be polite and truthful. Bluntly honest people aren't more honest than the rest of us. They are just don't understands social conventions.
posted by przepla at 6:08 PM on December 14, 2012
Tact is not lying and it is not dishonest. Tact is how we tell the truth in a way that hurts less and allows the other to save face.
posted by bunderful at 5:48 AM on December 15, 2012
posted by bunderful at 5:48 AM on December 15, 2012
This thread is closed to new comments.
"if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
Personal story: One time at work, a few co-workers were bitching about our very unpopular boss, who was not in the building at the time. Unfortunately, one woman had accidentally butt-dialed our boss, who heard their disparaging remarks in the form of a voicemail. For some reason I had the good sense to keep my mouth shut that entire time, and I have never been so grateful.
So now I ask myself, "how bad would this thing I'm about to say be if I were accidentally butt-dialing someone?"
posted by thank you silence at 8:55 PM on December 13, 2012 [36 favorites]