(important) (first draft) (this ought to make some people think)

What I am struck by when researching this topic, is how primitive the research is into HOW lies are constructed. Here are the Axis I am working with:

So sticking with the general rules that:

  1. All language consists of negotiation on behalf of our reproductive strategies

  2. Transfer of meaning requires empathy and suggestion (guidance)

  3. Categories, Properties and Relations are transferred between people by analogies which we recursively test.

  4. Names of identities consisting of operations constitute the least divergent analogies for the purpose of transferring categories, properties and relations and establishing meaning.

  5. One can speak to:

a) speak directly to an individual or audience (as targets)

c) speak indirectly through individuals or audiences (as agents)

d) speak indirectly through media (as distributors)

e) speak indirectly through environmental ‘evidence and markers’ (as inferrers – this is the most interesting)

  1. One can convey :

a) speak as complete a set of information as possible to establish meaning sufficient to deny all possible alternative interpretations.

b) speak a sufficient set of information for the audience to construct the meaning, but insufficient to eliminate the possibilities.

c) speak an incomplete set of information hoping the audience will substitute the correct or incorrect information.

d) speak an alternative set of information sufficient to mislead the audience, but not necessarily determine falsehood of one’s statements.

e) speak an alternative set of information sufficient to mislead the audience but sufficient to determine the falsehood of you statements.

f) not speak at all.

  1. One can speak using:

-construction-

a) names of operations (truth)

b) analogies (meaning)

c) experiences (suggestion of how information should be interpreted)

d) loadings (influencing information)

f) framings (eliminating information)

g) obscurantisms (hiding information)

h) overloadings (saturating the environment with information)

i) outright lies and ‘big lies’.

  1. One can speak with:

a) Truthfulness

b) Honesty

c) Error

d) General Cognitive Bias

e) Reproductive Cognitive Bias

f) Wishful Thinking

g) Deception

  1. One can construct speech out of:

-axis-

a) a simple statement (information)

b) a simple narrative (experience)

c) a complex narrative (cause and effect)

d) a distributed fragmentary narrative (multiple narratives with corresponding and reinforcing value judgements).

  1. One can engage in discovery by:

-discovery-

a) conversation (free association)

b) discourse (investigation)

c) argument (criticism by reason)

d) debate (persona, audience/jury, court/jury, senate/jury)

e) publication and collective criticism (science)

10a) one can engage rallying by:

-Rallying-

a) gossip (positive or negative)

b) shaming(negative) or praising(positive)

c) rallying (positive or negative)

e) Propagandizing (positive or negative)

d) Critique(negative) or Heaping Undue Praise(positive)

f) Ideology (positive or negative)

  1. One can employ arguments using (true or false) :

11.1) EXPRESSIVE (emotional): a type of argument where a person expresses a positive or negative opinion based upon his emotional response to the subject.

11.2) SENTIMENTAL (biological): a type of argument that relies upon one of the five (or six) human sentiments, and their artifacts as captured in human traditions, morals, or other unarticulated, but nevertheless consistently and universally demonstrated preferences and behaviors.

11.3) MORAL (normative) : a type of argument that relies upon a set of assumedly normative rules of whose origin is either (a)socially contractual, (b)biologically natural, (c) economically necessary, or even (d)divine. (Also: RELIGIOUS)

11.4) RATIONAL (logical) – Most philosophical arguments rely upon contradiction and internal consistency rather than external correspondence.

11.5) HISTORICAL (analogical): A spectrum of analogical arguments – from Historical to Anecdotal — that rely upon a relationship between a historical sequence of events, and a present sequence events, in order to suggest that the current events will come to the same conclusion as did the past events, or can be used to invalidate or validate assumptions about the current period.

11.6) SCIENTIFIC (directly empirical): The use of a set of measurements that produce data that can be used to prove or disprove an hypothesis, but which are subject to human cognitive biases and preferences. ie: ‘Bottom up analysis”

11.7) ECONOMIC: (indirectly empirical): The use of a set of measures consisting of uncontrolled variables, for the purpose of circumventing the problems of direct human inquiry into human preferences, by the process of capturing demonstrated preferences, as expressed by human exchanges, usually in the form of money. ie: “Top Down Analysis”. The weakness of economic arguments is caused by the elimination of properties and causes that are necessary for the process of aggregation.

11.8) RATIO-EMPIRICAL (Comprehensive: Using all above): A rationally articulated argument that makes use of economic, scientific, historical, normative and sentimental information to comprehensively prove that a position is defensible under all objections. NOTE: See “Styles of Argument” below.

11.9) TRUTHFUL(COMPLETE): Internally consistent (logical), Externally Correspondent (Instrumental), Operational (Possible), Falsifiable (negatively tested).

11.10) THE TAUTOLOGICAL TRUTH – Not so much an argument but the most parsimonious verbal statement is possible.

CATEGORIES OF LIES?

—“Nanavati classifies lies into the following categories:”–

ambiguity

bluff

brazen

conceit

contextual

dissembling

emergency

equivocate

exaggeration

fabrication

fraud

gender specific

institutional

jargonese

jest

linguistic

noble

omission

pathological

perjury

propaganda

relationship

to children

vindictive

white.

READING LIST

Dallas Denery: The Devil Wins: A History of Lying from the Garden of Eden to the Enlightenment

Thomas Carson: Lying and Deception: Theory and Practice

Jennifer Mather Saul: Lying, Misleading, and What is Said

Clancy Martin: The Philosophy of Deception

Herbert Fingarette: Self-Deception

Brooke Harrington: Deception: From Ancient Empires to Internet Dating

Edward Bernays: Propaganda

Jason Stanley: How Propaganda Works Hardcover

Jeremy Elkins: Truth and Democracy

David Livingstone: Less Than Human: Why We Demean, Enslave, and Exterminate Others

Daniel Nanavati: A Brief History Of Lies