> One person was not upset enough. The other was too upset.
This immediately made me think of Camus’s The Stranger, though maybe it’s an overreaction to bring existentialism into the conversation!
How can you tell if someone is lying?
31–40 of 363 posts
Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?
#32I can't recommend Talking to Strangers enough. We have a crippling inability of people to read strangers correctly. In addition to amazing testimony and evidence, great case studies, the production quality of the audiobook is like a good podcast.
Can you give more info on that podcast? I'm finding a bunch with that name.
Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?
#33I recall reading about a patient with split-brain (severed corpus callosum) could tell when people were lying. It seems there are verbal and physical cues when we lie.
Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?
#34The article seems to have avoided mentioning the easy way of detecting a lie - go and collect some evidence then compare it to what the person is saying. Incentives count as weak evidence for detecting lies. While not foolproof, it is much more effective than looking for verbal cues. Detecting lies by assessing someone's demeanour is a symptom. The average person seem to have this unshakeable belief that they are psy…
> the easy way of detecting a lie
The problem is that is not easy. Lies can be generated easily. Disproving them requires probably 20x the time.
Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?
#35Most of us can’t reliably tell when a romantic interest is actively signaling their mutual interest. If we can’t get cooperative activities right, most of us don’t have a chance to spot a liar through nonverbal cues. The fact is that random effects are huge when dealing with people. Is that person you’re interrogating not showing emotion because they’re a psychopath, or because they were taught not to display emotion…
> current polygraph techniques can allegedly be beaten with training No training is needed because polygraphs don't work. Polygraph testing is about as worthwhile as astrology: https://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph https://www.salon.com/2000/03/02/polygraph/ And inadmissible in court in many places: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MurUEJL/2000/6.html > if trained polygraph techs with special equipment T…
That your post has been downvoted is disheartening. Your reply was factually correct, cited, and reasonably polite.
Perhaps instead of saying "at best" they are con artists, it would have been more polite to say at worst, they are con artists. Probably many earnestly believe in what they are doing, and are just wrong.
Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?
#36The article seems to have avoided mentioning the easy way of detecting a lie - go and collect some evidence then compare it to what the person is saying. Incentives count as weak evidence for detecting lies. While not foolproof, it is much more effective than looking for verbal cues. Detecting lies by assessing someone's demeanour is a symptom. The average person seem to have this unshakeable belief that they are psy…
> go and collect some evidence then compare it to what the person is saying
It's so much easier said than done though. Think about an example that might come up in daily life. Say, someone says they're busy/absent/whatever at X time, but then you spot them at that time, very clearly to the contrary. Did they lie to you? Sure looks that way. But it could also be that their schedule just changed. How can you possibly tell? Either you have to do it repeatedly and look at it statistically, or go prying around or asking other people to vouch for their story, or you have to ask them directly. Are you willing to do that? Especially if it happens multiple times? What if they in fact didn't lie, but also feel it's an invasion of their privacy to have to give a compelling explanation of what happened? Or what if they did lie, but only due to circumstances beyond your imagination where you might have lied, too? Are you willing to risk your relationship with that person to make a determination?
Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?
#37[deleted]
Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
> current polygraph techniques can allegedly be beaten with training No training is needed because polygraphs don't work. Polygraph testing is about as worthwhile as astrology: https://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph https://www.salon.com/2000/03/02/polygraph/ And inadmissible in court in many places: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MurUEJL/2000/6.html > if trained polygraph techs with special equipment T…
That your post has been downvoted is disheartening. Your reply was factually correct, cited, and reasonably polite. Perhaps instead of saying "at best" they are con artists, it would have been more polite to say at worst, they are con artists. Probably many earnestly believe in what they are doing, and are just wrong.
One thing to add:
> And inadmissible in court in many places:
I'm not aware of any place that accepts polygraphs in a court.
Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?
#39"The slickest way in the world to lie is to tell the right amount of truth at the right time -- and then shut up." -- Robert A. Heinlein
Two ways to lie, say something false or only give 1/2 of the story.
Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
> current polygraph techniques can allegedly be beaten with training No training is needed because polygraphs don't work. Polygraph testing is about as worthwhile as astrology: https://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph https://www.salon.com/2000/03/02/polygraph/ And inadmissible in court in many places: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MurUEJL/2000/6.html > if trained polygraph techs with special equipment T…
That your post has been downvoted is disheartening. Your reply was factually correct, cited, and reasonably polite. Perhaps instead of saying "at best" they are con artists, it would have been more polite to say at worst, they are con artists. Probably many earnestly believe in what they are doing, and are just wrong.
> It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.