The most classic means of getting to a state of forgiveness is chanting "Nobody's perfect". Because we are human, there are innate faults that we cannot avoid. Therefore, transgressions such as lies are automatically softened in terms of ownership and liability.
Is that fair? I had previously been of the belief that even one small lie significantly undermined the overall greater trust...which is difficult to build back and heal. This meant harsh realities when it came to relationships...abrupt endings were always within the realm of possibility. However now, after repeated exposure to lies from the most trusted of people, I'm starting to think this philosophy is too idealistic. Perhaps we set ourselves up for failure in our personal relationships if we are not flexible enough to accept that there is a certain level of unavoidable transgressions. However, say we do subscribe to this school of thought, how can we define the line?.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Are lies inevitable?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I would argue that it is the reason for lying that defines the line: is it pure convenience or the fear of losing someone very close to one? Lying should not be an modus operandi to begin with, but it can be an emergency brake. Lies are like a seatbelt: No one thinks about crashing their car in the first place, but when it happens it good to be buckled up...
Moreover, lying is not lying. An universal approach of transgressions might be easier, but only for one person. I like good quotes (who doesn't?!) and here is what Richard Bach put forward: “The worst lies are the lies we tell ourselves. We live in denial of what we do, even what we think. We do this because we're afraid. We fear we will not find love, and when we find it we fear we'll lose it. We fear that if we do not have love we will be unhappy.” People would do almost anything in fear of losing and alienating others....like lying.
Post a Comment