A priori, maybe not. But it could be stifling and unpleasant, it could contradict a sense of truth, and it certainly is not how I would want to live my life.
Being rational should help you win at life. Do you think the author of the top post would have a better/happier/more fulfilling life if he (a) told the truth about his religious views but alienated his wife and friends, or (b) maintained his social relationships, mostly kept quiet about his atheism, and on rare occasions pretended to go along with other peoples’ religious views?
Sure:if the only choices are to stay in the closet or come out of the closet and lose all social relationships, and if staying closeted leads to being happier and more fulfilled than losing all social relationships, then the rational choice is to stay closeted.
Those are really big “if”s, though. I’d say in that situation it’s worth devoting some resources to looking for third options.
...if he (a) told the truth about his religious views but alienated his wife and friends
I might not have been clear, but my wife and close friends already know. This might have been a reasonable path to entertain where this not the case (I guess TheOtherDave made that point below already). They are already alienated and I don’t think there’s much hope of “going back” or trying to preserve ignorance in the rest of the acquaintances who don’t know.
(b) maintained his social relationships, mostly kept quiet about his atheism, and on rare occasions pretended to go along with other peoples’ religious views?
Well, I already do the first part (keep quiet) most of the time. The “going along with” is quite difficult when it involved actions. I guess I would put it like this:
I already don’t believe in god. That’s that.
Given this, it has seemed most consistent to me to not kneel at Mass, make the sign of the cross, bow my head or lip-sync along with various prayers, and the like.
In addition (also unstated, so you wouldn’t have known my personal conclusion on this), I resolved quite early on that I’d gladly (pun!) trade happiness for certainty/alignment with the best description of “what is.”
Your (a) is not possible, but that’s not necessarily your fault for suggesting it as I might have been unclear about where things are. The biggest problem with (b) that I have is that it actually combines three sub-actions:
1) maintain social relationships
2) mostly keep quiet about my atheism
3) on rare occasions, pretend to go along with others’ religious views
Could you make the case for #1 and #2 being dependent on #3 or explain what #3 buys me? Is it just helping with having things not socially awkward? I can understand that, but I suppose it feels quite short term. I just turned 27 and can’t imagine that were I to know these people for the next 20-60 years that it wouldn’t come up somewhere, somehow either from me or from the various other common relationships who are probably bound to say something about it within those 20-60 years.
Thus, it seems like it might be worse to “fake it” for as long as possible since my confidence is low that I’d 1) be emotionally satisfied “faking it” in the first place and 2) that doing this would make for a permanent social-awkwardness-alleviator.
Absolutely—I think I would feel like a liar. Heck, I already do sometimes when I feel group-pressured into saying meal blessings (“Bless us O Lord”) or concluding with “Amen” at large events where I’d rather go along with it rather than having someone find out via my non-participation vs. personally informing them.
There was an episode on the television show House where a brain injury forced a man to always tell the truth. The condition was destroying his life to such an extent that he underwent an extremely dangerous operation to attempt to change his condition.
I think the TV show had it right because telling the truth all the time would impose an enormous cost on you, one almost nobody would be willing to pay. You need to pick your battles with telling the the truth, weighing the cost and benefits in each situation.
The author of the top post needs friends a heck of a lot more than he needs to adopt a total truth telling lifestyle.
Even if that path weren’t already closed to him, how comfortable would you be with friends you know wouldn’t accept you if they knew what you were really thinking? Friends who casually degrade the things you believe, not knowing you’re offended, but who wouldn’t stop even if they knew? Friends who you know through a shared activity which is a major part of their lives, which you can never discuss honestly with them? I’d have a hard time thinking of a relationship like that as friendship.
Posted above before seeing this. Perhaps this was the answer to my last question, then. That friends are more valuable than me expressing my internal thoughts.
I’ll have to reflect on that. I’m still inclined to disagree, but moreso because we might not be agreeing on definitions. For example, I might look at “telling the truth” and see how were I to be compelled to tell every fat person they were fat or every person I found ugly that they were ugly, that this would be quite undesirable and increase my overall social dissatisfaction.
But I’m looking for suggestions about telling the truth about myself. More on that in a sec.
Similarly, how are you defining “friend”? People to spend time with and who share common interests? I think that’s fair, but what if I added in the clause that a friend should “accept me for who I am”? I’m not saying that you need to accept this definition, but you can see how the advice might change were such a clause included.
In other words, to withhold the truth about myself from others in order to preserve friends seems to reduce to acting like someone else because were my true self to be revealed, I would have no friends.
But, quite possibly, the very definition of a friend is one who knows who you are and sticks around. So… it’s kind of a catch 22. Keep “people-to-spend-time-with” by not “telling the truth”… or “tell the truth” and keep a lesser number of “people who accept who I am”?
In the end, I would absolutely agree that I need friends… but we might be disagreeing about what “type” of such “friend entities” will be most rewarding.
I think for most people there is diminishing marginal benefit to having each additional friend. If this applies to you and you can find many people to spend time with who can accept you for who you are then you should indeed be truthful and open about your atheism rather than pretending to realize that your friends have a point about the “truth” of their faith.
I’m relatively confident that a huge percentage of well-educated Americans are basically atheists, don’t attend church, but also don’t do anything to overtly disagree with their associates’ and families’ religious views. Given that so many people successfully follow this strategy you probably could as well.
The more unusual your beliefs, the harder it is to find people who can accept you for what you are. At some point those of us with what are considered to be bizarre beliefs have to choose between honesty, and having people who wish to spend time with us. I’m in my forties and looking back at my life I think I have got the trade-off wrong by often being too honest about what I really think.
Eliezer’s genius lets him get away with a degree of honesty that most of the rest of us who have strange beliefs can’t afford.
I think for most people there is diminishing marginal benefit to having each additional friend.
That’s probably true; the quality of each relationship decreases if one tries to add more and spend equal amounts of time and energy on each.
If...you can find many people to spend time with who can accept you for who you are then you should indeed be truthful and open about your atheism...
Probably poorly explained by me, I do have a handful of friends in this category. We get together a few times per month, still have a great time together, and pretty much leave religion alone even though they know very well where I stand. Probably 2 of this handful are very close.
Even then, though, there is something missing, as I don’t even like to talk about the “meta” issues brought about by non-belief (mental anguish, difficulties in marriage, etc.) -- it’s easier to do this with non-believers.
I’d actually love to find a “new-best-friend” who is a non-believer, or at least “try it out” if that can be done...
I read the article. Tough situation as well. I can see where you’re coming from. I think I’d think twice if my job or livelihood were at stake. And I do—I stay fairly anonymous online and have never mentioned my employer as I would never want anything somehow tracked back to me by the work arena.
While the social arena is uncomfortable, this is a scenario where I just don’t know if I could live in silence or acquiescence when it comes to actions. I can keep my mouth closed for sure… but to actually “play house” when it comes to things like participating in Mass, singing praise and worship, praying, saying “Amen,” and the like… I don’t think that’s in the same category as being docile and hospitable to contrary opinions.
For example, I might look at “telling the truth” and see how were I to be compelled to tell every fat person they were fat or every person I found ugly that they were ugly, that this would be quite undesirable and increase my overall social dissatisfaction.
Let’s flip that one around. What do you think might happen if you were uninhibited about telling people what you liked about them?
Intuitively, I think I’d make a lot of people happier, but it might depend. If others were around, it might make them jealous. Or if it were the “wrong” sorts of things (attractiveness, how great their breath smelled, or anything else that makes someone a little uncomfortable), it might have the reverse effect.
If you mean it simply and basically as in telling people I really appreciated their suggestion to a problem, their work ethic, skills I admire, their level of compassion, etc… then I think it would make many people happier and feel more valuable.
Human beings are not perfect liars. A primary problem is that we are rather well evolved to detect deception from other human beings, especially our mates; there is no reason to believe he could hide his deconversion from his friends or his wife. Another problem is that humans tend to slowly believe the lies we tell. Would you consider it a beneficial side effect if he accidentally reconverted to Christianity due to this deception?
There is a cost/benefit for every lie we tell. Generally it turns out that honesty really is the best policy. This case seems to be no different.
A priori, maybe not. But it could be stifling and unpleasant, it could contradict a sense of truth, and it certainly is not how I would want to live my life.
Well said.
Being rational should help you win at life. Do you think the author of the top post would have a better/happier/more fulfilling life if he (a) told the truth about his religious views but alienated his wife and friends, or (b) maintained his social relationships, mostly kept quiet about his atheism, and on rare occasions pretended to go along with other peoples’ religious views?
You are generalising from yourself. This can lead to obnoxious advice.
Sure:if the only choices are to stay in the closet or come out of the closet and lose all social relationships, and if staying closeted leads to being happier and more fulfilled than losing all social relationships, then the rational choice is to stay closeted.
Those are really big “if”s, though. I’d say in that situation it’s worth devoting some resources to looking for third options.
I might not have been clear, but my wife and close friends already know. This might have been a reasonable path to entertain where this not the case (I guess TheOtherDave made that point below already). They are already alienated and I don’t think there’s much hope of “going back” or trying to preserve ignorance in the rest of the acquaintances who don’t know.
Well, I already do the first part (keep quiet) most of the time. The “going along with” is quite difficult when it involved actions. I guess I would put it like this:
I already don’t believe in god. That’s that.
Given this, it has seemed most consistent to me to not kneel at Mass, make the sign of the cross, bow my head or lip-sync along with various prayers, and the like.
In addition (also unstated, so you wouldn’t have known my personal conclusion on this), I resolved quite early on that I’d gladly (pun!) trade happiness for certainty/alignment with the best description of “what is.”
Your (a) is not possible, but that’s not necessarily your fault for suggesting it as I might have been unclear about where things are. The biggest problem with (b) that I have is that it actually combines three sub-actions: 1) maintain social relationships 2) mostly keep quiet about my atheism 3) on rare occasions, pretend to go along with others’ religious views
Could you make the case for #1 and #2 being dependent on #3 or explain what #3 buys me? Is it just helping with having things not socially awkward? I can understand that, but I suppose it feels quite short term. I just turned 27 and can’t imagine that were I to know these people for the next 20-60 years that it wouldn’t come up somewhere, somehow either from me or from the various other common relationships who are probably bound to say something about it within those 20-60 years.
Thus, it seems like it might be worse to “fake it” for as long as possible since my confidence is low that I’d 1) be emotionally satisfied “faking it” in the first place and 2) that doing this would make for a permanent social-awkwardness-alleviator.
He thinks so. And in a situation like that, if you think so, you’re probably right in thinking so.
“He” = me?
“thinks so” = that (a) is preferable to (b) or vice versa?
Absolutely—I think I would feel like a liar. Heck, I already do sometimes when I feel group-pressured into saying meal blessings (“Bless us O Lord”) or concluding with “Amen” at large events where I’d rather go along with it rather than having someone find out via my non-participation vs. personally informing them.
There was an episode on the television show House where a brain injury forced a man to always tell the truth. The condition was destroying his life to such an extent that he underwent an extremely dangerous operation to attempt to change his condition.
I think the TV show had it right because telling the truth all the time would impose an enormous cost on you, one almost nobody would be willing to pay. You need to pick your battles with telling the the truth, weighing the cost and benefits in each situation.
The author of the top post needs friends a heck of a lot more than he needs to adopt a total truth telling lifestyle.
Even if that path weren’t already closed to him, how comfortable would you be with friends you know wouldn’t accept you if they knew what you were really thinking? Friends who casually degrade the things you believe, not knowing you’re offended, but who wouldn’t stop even if they knew? Friends who you know through a shared activity which is a major part of their lives, which you can never discuss honestly with them? I’d have a hard time thinking of a relationship like that as friendship.
Posted above before seeing this. Perhaps this was the answer to my last question, then. That friends are more valuable than me expressing my internal thoughts.
I’ll have to reflect on that. I’m still inclined to disagree, but moreso because we might not be agreeing on definitions. For example, I might look at “telling the truth” and see how were I to be compelled to tell every fat person they were fat or every person I found ugly that they were ugly, that this would be quite undesirable and increase my overall social dissatisfaction.
But I’m looking for suggestions about telling the truth about myself. More on that in a sec.
Similarly, how are you defining “friend”? People to spend time with and who share common interests? I think that’s fair, but what if I added in the clause that a friend should “accept me for who I am”? I’m not saying that you need to accept this definition, but you can see how the advice might change were such a clause included.
In other words, to withhold the truth about myself from others in order to preserve friends seems to reduce to acting like someone else because were my true self to be revealed, I would have no friends.
But, quite possibly, the very definition of a friend is one who knows who you are and sticks around. So… it’s kind of a catch 22. Keep “people-to-spend-time-with” by not “telling the truth”… or “tell the truth” and keep a lesser number of “people who accept who I am”?
In the end, I would absolutely agree that I need friends… but we might be disagreeing about what “type” of such “friend entities” will be most rewarding.
I think for most people there is diminishing marginal benefit to having each additional friend. If this applies to you and you can find many people to spend time with who can accept you for who you are then you should indeed be truthful and open about your atheism rather than pretending to realize that your friends have a point about the “truth” of their faith.
I’m relatively confident that a huge percentage of well-educated Americans are basically atheists, don’t attend church, but also don’t do anything to overtly disagree with their associates’ and families’ religious views. Given that so many people successfully follow this strategy you probably could as well.
The more unusual your beliefs, the harder it is to find people who can accept you for what you are. At some point those of us with what are considered to be bizarre beliefs have to choose between honesty, and having people who wish to spend time with us. I’m in my forties and looking back at my life I think I have got the trade-off wrong by often being too honest about what I really think.
Eliezer’s genius lets him get away with a degree of honesty that most of the rest of us who have strange beliefs can’t afford.
Here is an article I wrote for Forbes magazine explaining how excessive honesty came close to costing me my career.
That’s probably true; the quality of each relationship decreases if one tries to add more and spend equal amounts of time and energy on each.
Probably poorly explained by me, I do have a handful of friends in this category. We get together a few times per month, still have a great time together, and pretty much leave religion alone even though they know very well where I stand. Probably 2 of this handful are very close.
Even then, though, there is something missing, as I don’t even like to talk about the “meta” issues brought about by non-belief (mental anguish, difficulties in marriage, etc.) -- it’s easier to do this with non-believers.
I’d actually love to find a “new-best-friend” who is a non-believer, or at least “try it out” if that can be done...
I read the article. Tough situation as well. I can see where you’re coming from. I think I’d think twice if my job or livelihood were at stake. And I do—I stay fairly anonymous online and have never mentioned my employer as I would never want anything somehow tracked back to me by the work arena.
While the social arena is uncomfortable, this is a scenario where I just don’t know if I could live in silence or acquiescence when it comes to actions. I can keep my mouth closed for sure… but to actually “play house” when it comes to things like participating in Mass, singing praise and worship, praying, saying “Amen,” and the like… I don’t think that’s in the same category as being docile and hospitable to contrary opinions.
Let’s flip that one around. What do you think might happen if you were uninhibited about telling people what you liked about them?
Intuitively, I think I’d make a lot of people happier, but it might depend. If others were around, it might make them jealous. Or if it were the “wrong” sorts of things (attractiveness, how great their breath smelled, or anything else that makes someone a little uncomfortable), it might have the reverse effect.
If you mean it simply and basically as in telling people I really appreciated their suggestion to a problem, their work ethic, skills I admire, their level of compassion, etc… then I think it would make many people happier and feel more valuable.
They might reciprocate, as well. Double win.
Please remember that you’re Generalizing from Fictional Evidence.
Human beings are not perfect liars. A primary problem is that we are rather well evolved to detect deception from other human beings, especially our mates; there is no reason to believe he could hide his deconversion from his friends or his wife. Another problem is that humans tend to slowly believe the lies we tell. Would you consider it a beneficial side effect if he accidentally reconverted to Christianity due to this deception?
There is a cost/benefit for every lie we tell. Generally it turns out that honesty really is the best policy. This case seems to be no different.