Recovery Board
: RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum.
Humans are very emotional and we tend to rationalize very easily. Do you believe that truth is always more important regardless of outcome?
I think it depends on the context. If my dying grandpa begged me to promise that I would get baptized after he died so he could feel secure that we would be together in the eternities I'd have no problem telling him I would even if it was not true. If he wanted me to tell him there is most certainly an afterlife I would tell him whatever he wanted to hear that would give him peace. If he wasn't dying and terrified I'd give him my true opinion but in that case it's only an opinion and not necessarily truth.
However, if someone asks me for truthful information that will help them make a necessary or life altering decision I would have a hard time telling a lie. What they do with that truth, say deciding to leave Mormonism and possibly causing a split in their family, is that person's decision, not mine. But if telling someone something that might cause them to commit murder or suicide would be different. You cannot always know what your input will lead someone to do.
Then there is the difficult decision of telling someone the truth about their medical condition. If they are most certainly going to die do you tell them or lie? Personally, I would want the truth. Other people would rather have the lie. Life is sticky sometimes and I don't believe you can be black and white about everything.
However, if someone asks me for truthful information that will help them make a necessary or life altering decision I would have a hard time telling a lie. What they do with that truth, say deciding to leave Mormonism and possibly causing a split in their family, is that person's decision, not mine. But if telling someone something that might cause them to commit murder or suicide would be different. You cannot always know what your input will lead someone to do.
Then there is the difficult decision of telling someone the truth about their medical condition. If they are most certainly going to die do you tell them or lie? Personally, I would want the truth. Other people would rather have the lie. Life is sticky sometimes and I don't believe you can be black and white about everything.
Thaddeus Stevens (played by Tommy Lee Jones) I will say what I have to say to get this amendment.
He refrained from saying that he believed in COMPLETE equality because it would hurt his cause. Just kept it to equality before the LAW.
I don't know jack about Buddhism but I like the creed listed in Wikipedia under the heading "Noble eightfold path". I like speaking in a truthful non hurtful way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism
He refrained from saying that he believed in COMPLETE equality because it would hurt his cause. Just kept it to equality before the LAW.
I don't know jack about Buddhism but I like the creed listed in Wikipedia under the heading "Noble eightfold path". I like speaking in a truthful non hurtful way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism
There is a saying, "sometimes the truth hurts", so even if you try to speak the truth invariably someone gets unintentionally hurt. At least initially. I think most people love the truth, unless they are so entrenched in their delusion or denial that they experience their "hurt" as fear or anger.
People may eventually thank you for revealing the truth or holding onto the truth in very difficult times even though they were initially hurt. That is where wisdom prevails over irrationality.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 01:03PM by orange.
People may eventually thank you for revealing the truth or holding onto the truth in very difficult times even though they were initially hurt. That is where wisdom prevails over irrationality.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 01:03PM by orange.
There's the old Ann Landers question: Should I tell the wife her husband is cheating on her? Is it kind or cruel?
Ann flip flopped on this one. She originally said the wife probably knows, so it was only cruel to bring it up to her. But her readers disagreed.
Ann flip flopped on this one. She originally said the wife probably knows, so it was only cruel to bring it up to her. But her readers disagreed.
ALWAYS
thedesertrat1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ALWAYS
So, are you saying that people in Nazi Germany that lied in order to hid and protect Jews from the Holocaust should have told the truth because it "ALWAYS" more important to tell the truth?
-------------------------------------------------------
> ALWAYS
So, are you saying that people in Nazi Germany that lied in order to hid and protect Jews from the Holocaust should have told the truth because it "ALWAYS" more important to tell the truth?
I stand corrected. You have a valid point.
Circumstances alter conditions.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 01:02PM by thedesertrat1.
Circumstances alter conditions.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 01:02PM by thedesertrat1.
Yep, not so black and white, is it?
The whole thing is so much more nuanced. Scientific research supports the idea that those who are sincerely optimistic are happier than the realistic but depressed. I'm not saying we should all be optimistic in defiance of reality, but it is interesting.
If you value truth over empathy, you will make mistakes. If you value empathy over truth, you will make mistakes. Should be a skillful balance of the two...
The whole thing is so much more nuanced. Scientific research supports the idea that those who are sincerely optimistic are happier than the realistic but depressed. I'm not saying we should all be optimistic in defiance of reality, but it is interesting.
If you value truth over empathy, you will make mistakes. If you value empathy over truth, you will make mistakes. Should be a skillful balance of the two...
s4711 logged out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> If you value truth over empathy, you will make
> mistakes. If you value empathy over truth, you
> will make mistakes. Should be a skillful balance
> of the two...
Can it be argued that the 12 operates in this fashion? Many of us would love to have the truth handed over by the 12, but what is the end result for those that are very emotionally vulnerable? Is the 12 arguing on their behalf in a sick and twisted fashion so they can keep their administrative and ecclesiastical position.
Wasn't it Packer that said, "sometimes the truth is not very useful..."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 01:09PM by orange.
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> If you value truth over empathy, you will make
> mistakes. If you value empathy over truth, you
> will make mistakes. Should be a skillful balance
> of the two...
Can it be argued that the 12 operates in this fashion? Many of us would love to have the truth handed over by the 12, but what is the end result for those that are very emotionally vulnerable? Is the 12 arguing on their behalf in a sick and twisted fashion so they can keep their administrative and ecclesiastical position.
Wasn't it Packer that said, "sometimes the truth is not very useful..."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 01:09PM by orange.
People who are sincerely optimistic in the face of reality are probably the happiest of all. Optimism and realism are not necessarily antithetical.
Speaking your truth with love, IMO, also means having the personal discernment to consider who you are talking to--and the option and right to remain silent.
Even the most ardent supporter of integrity, honesty, authenticity can see the difference in speaking your truth to your dying LDS grandmother vs. your questioning brother-in-law.
It is advanced spiritual practice to recognize the value of silence. The fact that silence was SOMETHING rather than NO THING was the very first Buddhist principle that resonated with me. (I picked up the Eckhart Tolle book "Silence Speaks")
After some years of effort to use silence appropriately, I can tell you that people ask questions to which they do not actually expect an answer. When you fail to answer the question, they do not even notice. What they really want is for you to listen to their feelings.
What I thought was my valuable opinion was actually me giving my judgment of what they did or what was going on. After years of stopping doing that, I had one of my most previously alienated children call me her "best friend." Why? "Because you're not all judgey and you don't repeat what I tell you."
This was a dream come true for me because I ruined their childhood and now they struggle with black and white thinking and the fact of a dysfunctional childhood.
My point is that your "truth" may not be all that useful in promoting your relationships. Your "love" and interest in their truth may be much more important.
It may be shocking for you to pull out the most shocking discovery about Mormonism that shocked you. For example, don't start with Helen Marr Kimball or Fanny Alger.
Most of us don't have just one issue--we have dug sometimes for years in this pile of bones and have dozens of issues. A gentle start might be something more like this:
Them: So what issue is it that made you leave the church?
You: I researched and learned that what the church taught in Sunday School was not actually the truth.
Them: That's impossible. The church would never lie, people lie, but not the church.
You: Silence.
Them: There are answers for every criticism of the church. All you have to do is go to FAIR and look it up on a church-authorized site. You'll see.
You: OK. If you want to research an issue from another perspective, just go to www.mormonthink.com and look it up from a non-church-authorized site.
Them: What issue?
You: Why don't you start with the First Vision?
Them: Is that your issue?
You: Silence. After you check out mormonthink, we can talk.
---
Forgive me if I am not answering the question you intended.
Anagrammy
Even the most ardent supporter of integrity, honesty, authenticity can see the difference in speaking your truth to your dying LDS grandmother vs. your questioning brother-in-law.
It is advanced spiritual practice to recognize the value of silence. The fact that silence was SOMETHING rather than NO THING was the very first Buddhist principle that resonated with me. (I picked up the Eckhart Tolle book "Silence Speaks")
After some years of effort to use silence appropriately, I can tell you that people ask questions to which they do not actually expect an answer. When you fail to answer the question, they do not even notice. What they really want is for you to listen to their feelings.
What I thought was my valuable opinion was actually me giving my judgment of what they did or what was going on. After years of stopping doing that, I had one of my most previously alienated children call me her "best friend." Why? "Because you're not all judgey and you don't repeat what I tell you."
This was a dream come true for me because I ruined their childhood and now they struggle with black and white thinking and the fact of a dysfunctional childhood.
My point is that your "truth" may not be all that useful in promoting your relationships. Your "love" and interest in their truth may be much more important.
It may be shocking for you to pull out the most shocking discovery about Mormonism that shocked you. For example, don't start with Helen Marr Kimball or Fanny Alger.
Most of us don't have just one issue--we have dug sometimes for years in this pile of bones and have dozens of issues. A gentle start might be something more like this:
Them: So what issue is it that made you leave the church?
You: I researched and learned that what the church taught in Sunday School was not actually the truth.
Them: That's impossible. The church would never lie, people lie, but not the church.
You: Silence.
Them: There are answers for every criticism of the church. All you have to do is go to FAIR and look it up on a church-authorized site. You'll see.
You: OK. If you want to research an issue from another perspective, just go to www.mormonthink.com and look it up from a non-church-authorized site.
Them: What issue?
You: Why don't you start with the First Vision?
Them: Is that your issue?
You: Silence. After you check out mormonthink, we can talk.
---
Forgive me if I am not answering the question you intended.
Anagrammy
That's why I advocate simply staring at a person silently who asks you the same question over and over again. You've already answered it, but sometimes it takes silence for the other person to realize that.
The same concept of "silence" exists in art in the concept of empty space. The empty space supports and complements the painted space. They are as necessary to each other as yin is to yang. In the same way, silence complements talking, singing, etc. Listen to music, and you will hear artists using silence effectively in the course of their composition or work.
The same concept of "silence" exists in art in the concept of empty space. The empty space supports and complements the painted space. They are as necessary to each other as yin is to yang. In the same way, silence complements talking, singing, etc. Listen to music, and you will hear artists using silence effectively in the course of their composition or work.
Absolutely not, I'm not even a real fan of truth because it is such a hard thing to nail down. MJ's example is a great one because it illustrates my issue with truth. To expose someone who you have hid just so you can stay true would violate your reasons for having hid them in the first place.
The example of lying to a dying loved one is another great example. If your truth is that you don't want to cause harm to someone who is already suffering greatly why would you "tell the truth" when doing so would violate your stated intent?
Truth is just to nebulous of an idea for me to feel comfortable with using it as my moral standard.
The example of lying to a dying loved one is another great example. If your truth is that you don't want to cause harm to someone who is already suffering greatly why would you "tell the truth" when doing so would violate your stated intent?
Truth is just to nebulous of an idea for me to feel comfortable with using it as my moral standard.
I post this because I feel strongly about it,
Brutallity of truth
Truth is brutal. It is non-compromising to circumstance.
Those who seek to speak the truth at all times will discover that their circle of friends will be quite small. However the circle of people that respect them will be large.
People are generally taught that a “little white lie” is acceptable if it saves embarrassment or hurt feelings, but is it worth surrendering personal integrity to tell one?
So if I always tell the truth as I see it I will need to be prepared for the behavioral consequence of may action.
Let me pause and define behavioral consequence. “That which is the result of an action taken. It can be either good or bad, but there is a consequence to every behavior.”
Example: many times people will ask you if you like the dress, shirt, or whatever they are wearing. I always answer “Do you really want to know or are you seeking my endorsement of your choice?” If the answer is “I want to know” then I am obligated to say “yes I like it, or no I do not like it”. Coupled with “Would you like to know why?” the brutality of the truth can be lessened.
So, what are the behavioral consequences of always telling the truth as you see it?
First: no one will ever doubt your honesty.
Second: everyone will know where you stand.
That brings me to this point of issue. It is not so much “anti” anything that is the enemy of the mormon church. The brutality of truth is the enemy of the mormon church
It is a lonely, lonely feeling when you speak only the truth.
This said; concerning the issue of revealing the whereabouts of someone to the gestapo I WOULD BLATENTLY LIE!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 04:57PM by thedesertrat1.
Brutallity of truth
Truth is brutal. It is non-compromising to circumstance.
Those who seek to speak the truth at all times will discover that their circle of friends will be quite small. However the circle of people that respect them will be large.
People are generally taught that a “little white lie” is acceptable if it saves embarrassment or hurt feelings, but is it worth surrendering personal integrity to tell one?
So if I always tell the truth as I see it I will need to be prepared for the behavioral consequence of may action.
Let me pause and define behavioral consequence. “That which is the result of an action taken. It can be either good or bad, but there is a consequence to every behavior.”
Example: many times people will ask you if you like the dress, shirt, or whatever they are wearing. I always answer “Do you really want to know or are you seeking my endorsement of your choice?” If the answer is “I want to know” then I am obligated to say “yes I like it, or no I do not like it”. Coupled with “Would you like to know why?” the brutality of the truth can be lessened.
So, what are the behavioral consequences of always telling the truth as you see it?
First: no one will ever doubt your honesty.
Second: everyone will know where you stand.
That brings me to this point of issue. It is not so much “anti” anything that is the enemy of the mormon church. The brutality of truth is the enemy of the mormon church
It is a lonely, lonely feeling when you speak only the truth.
This said; concerning the issue of revealing the whereabouts of someone to the gestapo I WOULD BLATENTLY LIE!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 04:57PM by thedesertrat1.
Do you know why the ideological elitist is lonely? Because invariably they are lying to themselves.
- I believe there is always an ultimate reality. In other words, truth is not in the eye of the beholder.
- I believe that no one completely accurately perceives reality.
- I don't consider a full understanding of reality all that important.
- I consider being truthful an important part of morality, but by no means the most important part. For example, I think there is a time and a place for white lies and that they can be the most moral choice in some circumstances.
- Often outcome has a large element of randomness involved. Doing something may sometimes produce a good outcome, but overall causes a bad outcome.
- However, I do believe that things based on correct, truthful foundations are more likely to have positive outcomes. For example someone who has a correct understanding of gravity, air resistance, and uses a properly designed and packed parachute jumping out of a airplane is much more likely to have a positive outcome than someone who believes their god will somehow save them and not use a parachute when jumping out of an airplane.
- In regards to the LDS church, this is why I find the statistics for UT to be so important. If statistically Utah had the very best mental health, the least stressed people, the least bankruptcies, etc. then I think there would be a very strong case that Mormonism is a good thing despite being false. However, the outcome is exactly the opposite - Utah is the very worst or nearly the worst in all of these categories despite having above average education and poverty rates.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 07:25PM by The Oncoming Storm - bc.
- I believe that no one completely accurately perceives reality.
- I don't consider a full understanding of reality all that important.
- I consider being truthful an important part of morality, but by no means the most important part. For example, I think there is a time and a place for white lies and that they can be the most moral choice in some circumstances.
- Often outcome has a large element of randomness involved. Doing something may sometimes produce a good outcome, but overall causes a bad outcome.
- However, I do believe that things based on correct, truthful foundations are more likely to have positive outcomes. For example someone who has a correct understanding of gravity, air resistance, and uses a properly designed and packed parachute jumping out of a airplane is much more likely to have a positive outcome than someone who believes their god will somehow save them and not use a parachute when jumping out of an airplane.
- In regards to the LDS church, this is why I find the statistics for UT to be so important. If statistically Utah had the very best mental health, the least stressed people, the least bankruptcies, etc. then I think there would be a very strong case that Mormonism is a good thing despite being false. However, the outcome is exactly the opposite - Utah is the very worst or nearly the worst in all of these categories despite having above average education and poverty rates.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 07:25PM by The Oncoming Storm - bc.
>
> - In regards to the LDS church, this is why I find
> the statistics for UT to be so important. If
> statistically Utah had the very best mental
> health, the least stressed people, the least
> bankruptcies, etc. then I think there would be a
> very strong case that Mormonism is a good thing
> despite being false. However, the outcome is
> exactly the opposite - Utah is the very worst or
> nearly the worst in all of these categories
> despite having above average education and poverty
> rates.
Belief in superstitions often has unintended negative consequences. Many tbms do not want to consider the outcome or result of remaining in the con. For years the press has been reporting the negative consequences of being a tbm...but many still stay regardless of family members suffering all around them.
> - In regards to the LDS church, this is why I find
> the statistics for UT to be so important. If
> statistically Utah had the very best mental
> health, the least stressed people, the least
> bankruptcies, etc. then I think there would be a
> very strong case that Mormonism is a good thing
> despite being false. However, the outcome is
> exactly the opposite - Utah is the very worst or
> nearly the worst in all of these categories
> despite having above average education and poverty
> rates.
Belief in superstitions often has unintended negative consequences. Many tbms do not want to consider the outcome or result of remaining in the con. For years the press has been reporting the negative consequences of being a tbm...but many still stay regardless of family members suffering all around them.
The truth shall set you free . . . but first it will piss you off.
I love my grandparents, but if they were on their deathbed I would not lie to them and give them any kind of false hope about me going back to the church.
Others may believe and react differently in that situation, but to me, my personal integrity would require me to be truthful about who I am, what I believe. I certainly would not be rude or confrontational on some's deathbed like saying, "Suck it, Grandpa!" but would find a respectful way to decline. I think that you can achieve honesty in a mutually respectful way without compromising your integrity.
I also think there is a world of difference between telling a lie to actually save a life, and telling a lie to spare someone's hurt feelings. For example, if me lying about going back to church would SAVE my grandparent's life, I would do it in a heartbeat.
But just to spare their feelings? That is so foreign to who I am, I could never see myself lying in that way.
Others may believe and react differently in that situation, but to me, my personal integrity would require me to be truthful about who I am, what I believe. I certainly would not be rude or confrontational on some's deathbed like saying, "Suck it, Grandpa!" but would find a respectful way to decline. I think that you can achieve honesty in a mutually respectful way without compromising your integrity.
I also think there is a world of difference between telling a lie to actually save a life, and telling a lie to spare someone's hurt feelings. For example, if me lying about going back to church would SAVE my grandparent's life, I would do it in a heartbeat.
But just to spare their feelings? That is so foreign to who I am, I could never see myself lying in that way.