My old classmate, Stephen de Souza, recently sent us something amusing. It concerns Facebook and scamming activities that we have grown accustomed to. Steve, of course, is too smart to be tricked. I, too, get plenty of requests to be friends with sweet young people.
We are now well into the era of online scams and alternative facts. COVID-19 has magnified and accelerated the birth of this blotch in human history. Sadly, the ex-US President and the White House sponsored half-truths, outright lies and “alternative facts.” Soon after Trump took office, his spokesperson, Kellyanne Conway, introduced a novel term (“alternative facts”) that startled the world. When confronted with a proven overinflated White House crowd size at Trump’s inauguration, she defended the claim as “alternative facts.” Indeed, her defence launched a new era of degraded public discourse, in which falsehoods become “alternative facts,” and unwelcome news for politicians becomes “fake news.”
But must we ALWAYS tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? If the answer is no, when is lying acceptable or even necessary? Discourses on authenticity are usually carried out in the context of not having it. What does authenticity look like when we have it?
We are authentic when we show an appropriate level of transparency. The Facebook con artists certainly did not do that. They concealed their true identity behind attractive ladies’ “stolen” identities. Authenticity requires us to show a concordance between value and behaviour. Retake the Facebook cases for illustration: the glaringly disguised behaviour (friendly initiative) did not match the hidden intention (to scam).
Telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth is often not realistic or pragmatic. We lie every day; it is a widespread social behaviour. However, equating authenticity = with integrity = telling the truth is difficult. Or, fake = without integrity = liars.
We must be clear about the three main types of lies: real, white, and grey. We can differentiate between them by considering their intention, consequences, truthfulness, acceptability, and beneficiary of the lies.
Real lies are unacceptable. They are malicious, self-serving, complete fabrications of the truth, and have serious consequences. In contrast, we accept white (polite) lies because these social fakes are viewed as altruistic, trivial, partially true, and lacking malicious motives. Telling white lies can be considered a communication competency that helps us negotiate social interactions successfully.
Another helpful way of evaluating lies is their focus. Self-centred lies make us look good. The closer the relationship we have with the people around us, the less likely they are likely to happen. Other-centred lies are more noble. They are often used to protect someone else’s feelings.
Therefore, the practice of authenticity requires us to align multiple conflicting values. The essence of authenticity is truth-seeking, a higher concept than honesty or lying. We are authentic when we carefully (or intentionally) choose contextually driven actions to express what is essential, desirable, or valuable. We need authenticity because it is the key to achieving internal well-being and reaching our external dreams.
Vince
Dr Vincent Chong is a retired Professor of Radiology at Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore.
