In a multi-dimensional universe, where the choices we make create the space-time reality we occupy (established in respect of the deterministic laws and relationships that govern it), art tunnels a wormhole. Art ties a topographic knot into the continuum, allowing us a mediated portal to a different world. For a few brief, illusory moments in time, art sheds light and creates space for a deeper truth to emerge, one which might ruffle the fabric of space-time in strange and incongruous ways.
Showing posts with label lies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lies. Show all posts
Saturday, September 6, 2025
Tuesday, September 4, 2018
A mac between two windows
Restored
when you revisit -
refreshed the pane stares back at you.
Through the looking glass
what once felt a bittersweet torture -
the years apart -
has become
a lopsided work of art.
refreshed the pane stares back at you.
Through the looking glass
what once felt a bittersweet torture -
the years apart -
has become
a lopsided work of art.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Scab
Madness is when
the mind gets stuck
on the wound that never healed,
when the scab that can be picked at
starts to bleed and before the clot can be formed again
you pick it apart, just so you can stay there
in the pain.
Because underneath the life you lead
that scab itches
and when you run your fingers across the surface
you can feel
the bump
the inconsistency -
the knowledge of your failure to gain
full closure.
So in order not to be
exposed in your ugliness
your scabby state naked to the world
you clothe yourself in the business of everyday life
and cover over your wounds
with the mask of sanity -
you deny ever having been hurt at all.
the mind gets stuck
on the wound that never healed,
when the scab that can be picked at
starts to bleed and before the clot can be formed again
you pick it apart, just so you can stay there
in the pain.
Because underneath the life you lead
that scab itches
and when you run your fingers across the surface
you can feel
the bump
the inconsistency -
the knowledge of your failure to gain
full closure.
So in order not to be
exposed in your ugliness
your scabby state naked to the world
you clothe yourself in the business of everyday life
and cover over your wounds
with the mask of sanity -
you deny ever having been hurt at all.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Appearances
We're told that appearances don't matter. We shouldn't be fussed about them - that's vanity.
The thing is, all we can see of other people is their appearance. Even when you say you know someone really well, all you can really say is that you've seen their various appearances over either a long period of time or in varied circumstances, such that it gives the semblance of knowing them well.
We don't, and we can't present anything less than an appearance, to well, anyone.
Except perhaps God.
Friday, January 9, 2009
With a couple of good friends coming back from overseas, I had the chance for a few heart-to-heart sessions. One thing that bugs me after I walk away from them is the odd feeling that I might not have been telling the truth. The thing about discussing one's feelings is that they're so apt to change and so hard to pinpoint that you can find yourself agreeing or claiming something that seems true at the time, but in retrospect wouldn't be something you would actually think of as true on your own. Truth is so finicky sometimes.
In the process of teasing words out of feelings and thoughts, you can manufacture sentiments that don't actually exist or find yourself saying things about people (whether yourself or others) that you might not otherwise say. For lack of a better way to say this is an expression I frequently find myself using to express half-baked thoughts in a rather skewed manner. At best, what you end up saying contains connotations you didn't at first intend. Whether it's because of a subconscious imperative to impress the listener, or a rather conscious attempt to skirt issues you feel are taboo, you can end up saying things that somehow grow progressively further from the truth as you keep up the discussion.
The worst part of it is, you may not even realise it. You think what you're saying is true, until several days, or weeks, or months later, when the issue comes up again, and you find yourself saying something completely different to someone else.
The world of emotions and opinions seems to slide between truth and untruth as (for lack of a less cliched to say this) water of a duck's back (from one metaphorical duck to another, I suppose). So much so that I often find myself questioning the value of the evaluation of truthfulness.
I guess I'm just not a very honest person. Then again, maybe I'm not dishonest. Just paradoxical. Periodically paradoxical.
In the process of teasing words out of feelings and thoughts, you can manufacture sentiments that don't actually exist or find yourself saying things about people (whether yourself or others) that you might not otherwise say. For lack of a better way to say this is an expression I frequently find myself using to express half-baked thoughts in a rather skewed manner. At best, what you end up saying contains connotations you didn't at first intend. Whether it's because of a subconscious imperative to impress the listener, or a rather conscious attempt to skirt issues you feel are taboo, you can end up saying things that somehow grow progressively further from the truth as you keep up the discussion.
The worst part of it is, you may not even realise it. You think what you're saying is true, until several days, or weeks, or months later, when the issue comes up again, and you find yourself saying something completely different to someone else.
The world of emotions and opinions seems to slide between truth and untruth as (for lack of a less cliched to say this) water of a duck's back (from one metaphorical duck to another, I suppose). So much so that I often find myself questioning the value of the evaluation of truthfulness.
I guess I'm just not a very honest person. Then again, maybe I'm not dishonest. Just paradoxical. Periodically paradoxical.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
True Lie
It's interesting that constructing a self-consistent system of falsehood bears many similarities to the pursuit of truth.
Did you notice that two theories of truth were employed to build the lie? In establishing how to lie, I made two statements:
The second is the correspondence theory of truth. This means that the proposition you make has to correspond to a factual reality. Like what I said before, in order to lie successfully, your story has to agree with certain witnessed facts. This will make it much more believable, because once someone knows that some things you say are true, and if your story tends to make logical sense, people will tend to believe you.
The third thing that I mentioned was Ockham's razor. In other words, keep your attempts at explanations as simple as possible, given all the accepted facts. In the case of a lie it's more believable. In the case of truth, it's more likely to be true. We only need to look at the elegance of physics formulae to see this case in point.
It would seem as if truth were intrinsically linked in falsehood. But wait, you say. You disagree, similarities extend only up to the fact that you want to make the lie as truthful as possible in order to be believable. Yet when we look at the way knowledge is discovered, we can only admit that we are as good as our best guess. The only difference between truth and prevarication, as we know it, is that in a lie, we know something that the other person does not, and attempt not to include that fact in our explanation.
When we attempt to discover the truth, we first take into consideration the preexisting conditions. We imagine the situation from various angles and make guesses as to the most likely explanation. Indeed, until we have rigorously tested our theories, we can hardly claim them to be more than conjectures, or propositions that we would like you to believe. We might even go as far as to say that until they are proven true, they might be considered to be lies. The ability to lie comes from these same skills.
Not to mention, so-called accepted "truths" have often proved false. There is the infamous, and over-used example of the ancient belief that the earth was the center of the universe, or that the earth was flat. We now know that this is not so. However, they made claims that best fit the situational evidence. Although some data was not perfectly in agreement with the claims, one can hardly say that in the past, the great thinkers of the era were lying to us, or falsifying fact.
I'm not saying that deliberate lying is morally acceptable. Rather, I put it to you that the line between truth and lie comes not so much a clear-cut distinction, but as the fuzzy intersection between two polarly opposite, yet infinitesimally different sets. It is this dichotomisation which knowledge depends on, like cells, to go forth, be fruitful, and multiply.
Which makes me wonder whether Adam and Eve's biggest sin was to taste of the forbidden fruit, or deny it (as you might have guessed, my next post in the theme will be on denial).
Did you notice that two theories of truth were employed to build the lie? In establishing how to lie, I made two statements:
- You need to create a system in which everything coheres.
- Your lies need to be consistent with what apparent reality.
The second is the correspondence theory of truth. This means that the proposition you make has to correspond to a factual reality. Like what I said before, in order to lie successfully, your story has to agree with certain witnessed facts. This will make it much more believable, because once someone knows that some things you say are true, and if your story tends to make logical sense, people will tend to believe you.
The third thing that I mentioned was Ockham's razor. In other words, keep your attempts at explanations as simple as possible, given all the accepted facts. In the case of a lie it's more believable. In the case of truth, it's more likely to be true. We only need to look at the elegance of physics formulae to see this case in point.
It would seem as if truth were intrinsically linked in falsehood. But wait, you say. You disagree, similarities extend only up to the fact that you want to make the lie as truthful as possible in order to be believable. Yet when we look at the way knowledge is discovered, we can only admit that we are as good as our best guess. The only difference between truth and prevarication, as we know it, is that in a lie, we know something that the other person does not, and attempt not to include that fact in our explanation.
When we attempt to discover the truth, we first take into consideration the preexisting conditions. We imagine the situation from various angles and make guesses as to the most likely explanation. Indeed, until we have rigorously tested our theories, we can hardly claim them to be more than conjectures, or propositions that we would like you to believe. We might even go as far as to say that until they are proven true, they might be considered to be lies. The ability to lie comes from these same skills.
Not to mention, so-called accepted "truths" have often proved false. There is the infamous, and over-used example of the ancient belief that the earth was the center of the universe, or that the earth was flat. We now know that this is not so. However, they made claims that best fit the situational evidence. Although some data was not perfectly in agreement with the claims, one can hardly say that in the past, the great thinkers of the era were lying to us, or falsifying fact.
I'm not saying that deliberate lying is morally acceptable. Rather, I put it to you that the line between truth and lie comes not so much a clear-cut distinction, but as the fuzzy intersection between two polarly opposite, yet infinitesimally different sets. It is this dichotomisation which knowledge depends on, like cells, to go forth, be fruitful, and multiply.
Which makes me wonder whether Adam and Eve's biggest sin was to taste of the forbidden fruit, or deny it (as you might have guessed, my next post in the theme will be on denial).
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
How did the Jamaican grow a Jewish nose?
A Jamaican fellow came across my blog, apparently having searched for nose+growth+reasons. So today's post shall be in his honour. Incidentally, today I happen to be 19 years and 8 months and 8 days precisely.
There are a number of reasons for nose growth. As you have probably already read in Pinocchio, it can grow from lying:
Whether this is true for people or not, I leave for you to decide. I can only tell you that this blog is named after the famous wooden puppet for a reason. I can also say that my nose is a rather prominent feature on my face. From the side, due to a lack of endowment in the vitally important region below my face, one might even say I looked like a nose on a stick. Again, I won't state explicitly whether I'm the lying sort, but there certainly do seem to be a lot of posts on the subject. Anyway, my nose has certainly grown bigger over time.
Since I will not disclose further details on my habits in deception, I shall suggest a number of other reasons, which I shall claim to be closer to the truth.
The first reason is genetics. Obviously, your parents' appearances and the genes which code for them will play a part in determining what you will look like. Genes also play a part in determining how you will grow. As a friend of mine who's studying optometry claims, you can't really help how you grow. Whether you become short-sighted or long-sighted depends on the depth of your eyeball, and that depends to a large extent on your genes. Similarly, whether your nose grows disproportionately larger as you grow older and bigger, as mine has, also depends on whether your parents have been kind enough to endow you with the best of both genes (in my case it was the worst).
The second reason is muscle activation. There are two kinds. One is active, or unassisted, where you use your nose muscles alone to move your nose. You can move your nose up and down, bunny-style, wrinkle your nose, or isolate movement of your left and right nostrils. You may also flare your nostrils. I have yet to discover and master more nose movement, although there have been reports of people who can perform feats such as nose-wriggling. Such movements will result in the building of the muscles of the nose and a resulting increase in size.
The other is passive, or assisted, where you use other parts of your body, such as your hands, to pull at or move your nose. The act of pulling one's nose also stimulates circulation to the area. Supplied with more blood, it is likely to promote healthy, and sometimes vigorous, tissue growth. Repeated contact with your nose if you wash your face too frequently may also result in over-stimulation and growth.
The third reason is injury or illness. If you are injured, or if you have sinuses or a blocked nose, inflammation is a likely result that will temporarily increase the size of your nose. Alternatively, a broken nose that is poorly healed may result in a misshapen and enlarged nose.
In short, who nose how your nose will grow? I might be pulling your leg, or lengthening my nose, but as I have mentioned before, a good lie is always based on observed fact.
There are a number of reasons for nose growth. As you have probably already read in Pinocchio, it can grow from lying:
At this third lie, his nose became longer than ever, so long that he could not even turn around. If he turned to the right, he knocked it against the bed or into the windowpanes; if he turned to the left, he struck the walls or the door; if he raised it a bit, he almost put the Fairy's eyes out.
Whether this is true for people or not, I leave for you to decide. I can only tell you that this blog is named after the famous wooden puppet for a reason. I can also say that my nose is a rather prominent feature on my face. From the side, due to a lack of endowment in the vitally important region below my face, one might even say I looked like a nose on a stick. Again, I won't state explicitly whether I'm the lying sort, but there certainly do seem to be a lot of posts on the subject. Anyway, my nose has certainly grown bigger over time.
Since I will not disclose further details on my habits in deception, I shall suggest a number of other reasons, which I shall claim to be closer to the truth.
The first reason is genetics. Obviously, your parents' appearances and the genes which code for them will play a part in determining what you will look like. Genes also play a part in determining how you will grow. As a friend of mine who's studying optometry claims, you can't really help how you grow. Whether you become short-sighted or long-sighted depends on the depth of your eyeball, and that depends to a large extent on your genes. Similarly, whether your nose grows disproportionately larger as you grow older and bigger, as mine has, also depends on whether your parents have been kind enough to endow you with the best of both genes (in my case it was the worst).
The second reason is muscle activation. There are two kinds. One is active, or unassisted, where you use your nose muscles alone to move your nose. You can move your nose up and down, bunny-style, wrinkle your nose, or isolate movement of your left and right nostrils. You may also flare your nostrils. I have yet to discover and master more nose movement, although there have been reports of people who can perform feats such as nose-wriggling. Such movements will result in the building of the muscles of the nose and a resulting increase in size.
The other is passive, or assisted, where you use other parts of your body, such as your hands, to pull at or move your nose. The act of pulling one's nose also stimulates circulation to the area. Supplied with more blood, it is likely to promote healthy, and sometimes vigorous, tissue growth. Repeated contact with your nose if you wash your face too frequently may also result in over-stimulation and growth.
The third reason is injury or illness. If you are injured, or if you have sinuses or a blocked nose, inflammation is a likely result that will temporarily increase the size of your nose. Alternatively, a broken nose that is poorly healed may result in a misshapen and enlarged nose.
In short, who nose how your nose will grow? I might be pulling your leg, or lengthening my nose, but as I have mentioned before, a good lie is always based on observed fact.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Lying on a bed of nails
WTF I hate lying.
People always say that you should tell the truth. It's not exactly in the ten commandments, although there is something about not giving false testimony about your neighbour. But what happens when not lying is bad? What happens when to tell the truth is to contradict other moral values?
It's so easy to say that we should tell the truth, and admire those who are courageous enough to tell the truth and face the consequences. But it's not always that simple. I wish I had the strength of conviction to stand up for myself and my causes and beliefs and tell the truth. But when you threaten me with causing others unnecessary worry or (as cliche and unfashionable as this sounds) disobeying the people you love, and who are supposed to know what's best, I feel like to tell the truth is a bigger sin than to lie (I know it seems insinuating that I'd lie to shield others, but really, I'm not trying to say that. I freely admit I lie for my own gain more than anything else. It's the moral sense of being caught between Scylla and Charybdis I'm trying to emphasize).
But then again, you can't just tell one lie and have done with it. You need to lie again to be self-consistent. And again, and again, and again. You need to create a system in which everything coheres. Your lies need to be consistent with what apparent reality. It's like Ockham's razor, except that instead of the simplest explanation being the truth, the simplest explanation that can best fit certain witnessed points in history.
The easiest on your conscience is to avoid having to tell the truth and let the other person assume an explanation on his own. Usually all you have to do is present the situation in a certain light, such that the points witnessed would tend to fit a certain explanation.
However, it often isn't so simple. In order to present your case in this way, you need to tweak reality a little. Take the case where you've sneaked off to eat ice-cream when you were not supposed to. You might get away with saying that you are going around the vicinity of the ice-cream parlour without actually mentioning you are going for ice-cream. If, for instance, it happens to be near a bookshop, the person you have lied to might assume you've gone to browse books. Once he attempts to confirm it with you, you need to act like you haven't heard him and make your escape ASAP, or you could change the subject. Either way, you need to tweak the reality that you've heard what he said, and be evasive.
It gets worse. You might think that after the one lie, you are home free. As I mentioned, this most certainly isn't the case. The amount you have to lie in order to cover up increases exponentially with the seriousness of the lie. Going back to the ice-cream incident, you might find that the person you lied to (A) might have gone and chatted with B, who was at the bookshop. You would then have to find an explanation for the fact that B didn't see you there. In other words, instead of directing dear old Ockham's razor to cut it's way to the truth, you will have to redirect it to bypass the truth, in favour of a more palatable lie.
Most of the time, you can get away with lies that just graze past the truth, like saying 'we must have missed each other' and being non-specific. Often we have mental caveats that we use to defend the lie as being at least partially true (for instance, you would definitely have missed B if you were never at the bookshop). But there are really only so many silent caveats that we can add to our lies, particularly when people ask questions that are all to close to the mark. In order to keep your lying consistent there will be times when you have to say something that directly contradicts historical events, and those are the worst kind. For instance, suppose C, someone working at the ice-cream parlour, ran into A, and told A about seeing you there. You would have to tell A that C saw the wrong person, or that you were walking across the ice-cream parlour to the toilet.
I confess, I eat too much forbidden fruit. Wait, I mean ice-cream.
People always say that you should tell the truth. It's not exactly in the ten commandments, although there is something about not giving false testimony about your neighbour. But what happens when not lying is bad? What happens when to tell the truth is to contradict other moral values?
It's so easy to say that we should tell the truth, and admire those who are courageous enough to tell the truth and face the consequences. But it's not always that simple. I wish I had the strength of conviction to stand up for myself and my causes and beliefs and tell the truth. But when you threaten me with causing others unnecessary worry or (as cliche and unfashionable as this sounds) disobeying the people you love, and who are supposed to know what's best, I feel like to tell the truth is a bigger sin than to lie (I know it seems insinuating that I'd lie to shield others, but really, I'm not trying to say that. I freely admit I lie for my own gain more than anything else. It's the moral sense of being caught between Scylla and Charybdis I'm trying to emphasize).
But then again, you can't just tell one lie and have done with it. You need to lie again to be self-consistent. And again, and again, and again. You need to create a system in which everything coheres. Your lies need to be consistent with what apparent reality. It's like Ockham's razor, except that instead of the simplest explanation being the truth, the simplest explanation that can best fit certain witnessed points in history.
The easiest on your conscience is to avoid having to tell the truth and let the other person assume an explanation on his own. Usually all you have to do is present the situation in a certain light, such that the points witnessed would tend to fit a certain explanation.
However, it often isn't so simple. In order to present your case in this way, you need to tweak reality a little. Take the case where you've sneaked off to eat ice-cream when you were not supposed to. You might get away with saying that you are going around the vicinity of the ice-cream parlour without actually mentioning you are going for ice-cream. If, for instance, it happens to be near a bookshop, the person you have lied to might assume you've gone to browse books. Once he attempts to confirm it with you, you need to act like you haven't heard him and make your escape ASAP, or you could change the subject. Either way, you need to tweak the reality that you've heard what he said, and be evasive.
It gets worse. You might think that after the one lie, you are home free. As I mentioned, this most certainly isn't the case. The amount you have to lie in order to cover up increases exponentially with the seriousness of the lie. Going back to the ice-cream incident, you might find that the person you lied to (A) might have gone and chatted with B, who was at the bookshop. You would then have to find an explanation for the fact that B didn't see you there. In other words, instead of directing dear old Ockham's razor to cut it's way to the truth, you will have to redirect it to bypass the truth, in favour of a more palatable lie.
Most of the time, you can get away with lies that just graze past the truth, like saying 'we must have missed each other' and being non-specific. Often we have mental caveats that we use to defend the lie as being at least partially true (for instance, you would definitely have missed B if you were never at the bookshop). But there are really only so many silent caveats that we can add to our lies, particularly when people ask questions that are all to close to the mark. In order to keep your lying consistent there will be times when you have to say something that directly contradicts historical events, and those are the worst kind. For instance, suppose C, someone working at the ice-cream parlour, ran into A, and told A about seeing you there. You would have to tell A that C saw the wrong person, or that you were walking across the ice-cream parlour to the toilet.
I confess, I eat too much forbidden fruit. Wait, I mean ice-cream.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)