Former Community – We Moved

🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.

ForumPublic Forum: Power DynamicsIs talking about people being mal …

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Is talking about people being malicious or untruthful (almost) always to be avoided in common real life conversation?

#1 · September 6, 2023, 8:00 pm

Quote from B on September 6, 2023, 8:00 pm
Hi Guys.
This posts stems from a recent experience where I asked one neighbor in the countryside about a mattress that was deposited in front of the building.
My neighbor lies to me
He basically told me he was the one to put it there, but that "Monday they'll come to pick it up" to send it to waste.
But then, the neighbor left the house for good and, after two more days after Monday, nobody had come to pick up the mattress.
I tell the story to other people but they reframe my neighbor's actions as "not malicious"
Later I was speaking with some relatives and telling them the story.
I said the neighbor had probably "told me a lie".
I noticed my relatives tended to reframe what had happened in the sense that the neighbor - whom they didn't know and with whom they had no connection - had probably made a "mistake", or was "going to pick it up later", or had "forgotten".
Do the majority of people play the game of "not knowing/wanting to speak about lies/malice, and always assuming good intentions"?
Then I got thinking:
What was the reason my relatives didn't want to acknowledge the "lie by my neighbor" and tended to assume good intentions?
Was it that they (my relatives) didn't want to give me the impression they could be capable of "lying" themselves?
That they wanted to project an "aura of innocence and naivety"?
And did I, by openly speaking about a "lie", give this impression to my relatives about myself: that I am someone capable of "lying", since I assume it in another?
If I speak about malice or bad intentions, do I project the image that I assume the same in others, and thus that I may be malicious myself?
Is it better to go around the world while never openly talking about manipulation, malice, lying, and instead let others make the inference (while we instead always reframe malicious behavior by third parties, in conversations, in a more positive light)?
If I self-analize my legal briefs, I find that in time I learned to imply other people were malicious or lying in legal cases, rather than say it out loud.
I suppose the answer to the post's question may therefore be "yes, best to always openly speak of good but mistaken intentions, even when I get the feeling of malice".
There are very very little cases in which it's helpful to directly point out someone is malicious or lying.
Better let third parties get the realization, and ourselves project the image of someone who never even thinks about these possibilities.
Happy to read your opinions on this.

Hi Guys.

This posts stems from a recent experience where I asked one neighbor in the countryside about a mattress that was deposited in front of the building.

My neighbor lies to me

He basically told me he was the one to put it there, but that "Monday they'll come to pick it up" to send it to waste.

But then, the neighbor left the house for good and, after two more days after Monday, nobody had come to pick up the mattress.

I tell the story to other people but they reframe my neighbor's actions as "not malicious"

Later I was speaking with some relatives and telling them the story.

I said the neighbor had probably "told me a lie".

I noticed my relatives tended to reframe what had happened in the sense that the neighbor - whom they didn't know and with whom they had no connection - had probably made a "mistake", or was "going to pick it up later", or had "forgotten".

Do the majority of people play the game of "not knowing/wanting to speak about lies/malice, and always assuming good intentions"?

Then I got thinking:

What was the reason my relatives didn't want to acknowledge the "lie by my neighbor" and tended to assume good intentions?

Was it that they (my relatives) didn't want to give me the impression they could be capable of "lying" themselves?

That they wanted to project an "aura of innocence and naivety"?

And did I, by openly speaking about a "lie", give this impression to my relatives about myself: that I am someone capable of "lying", since I assume it in another?

If I speak about malice or bad intentions, do I project the image that I assume the same in others, and thus that I may be malicious myself?

Is it better to go around the world while never openly talking about manipulation, malice, lying, and instead let others make the inference (while we instead always reframe malicious behavior by third parties, in conversations, in a more positive light)?

If I self-analize my legal briefs, I find that in time I learned to imply other people were malicious or lying in legal cases, rather than say it out loud.

I suppose the answer to the post's question may therefore be "yes, best to always openly speak of good but mistaken intentions, even when I get the feeling of malice".

There are very very little cases in which it's helpful to directly point out someone is malicious or lying.

Better let third parties get the realization, and ourselves project the image of someone who never even thinks about these possibilities.

Happy to read your opinions on this.

Lucio Buffalmano, Mats G and 2 other users have reacted to this post.

#2 · September 6, 2023, 8:20 pm

Cheers Bel.

Personally I've had similar experiences than the one you point out, when I tell a relative about a person who made a manipulative comment/power move, they usually say that it was either a mistake or that there's no ill intention behind it. More than once I've been told that I overthink about it or they give me the impression of thinking I'm paranoid.

So yeah I agree, better to let them figure those things by themselves, the thing one is most likely to get is a bad reputation. Of course it depends on the person you're talking to.

Then I got thinking: was the reason my relatives didn't want to acknowledge the "lie by my neighbor" that they didn't want to give me the impression they could be capable of "lying"?

Could be. Although the cases I faced were most likely because of naivete.

That's my take on the topic.

P.S:

Just read the little changes. Hadn't thought of the possibility of stating others bad intentions making one look mistrustful. Still I would say that in most "less deep" relationships its better to appear "good", deeper relationships are a different thing of course.

B and Roberto have reacted to this post.

#3 · September 6, 2023, 8:27 pm

Hi Power Duck,

my own relatives also tended to convey to me that every third party was always innocent and that I was overthinking, and in my case it was because they themselves were manipulative, and they were worried I could "get" that they were manipulating me.

But in this case, the "relatives" I speak of in the first post are other different relatives. Though the reason could be the same, ie that these other relatives are also manipulative.

Relatedly, I noticed a tendency in people to "hide manipulativeness and being able to recognize it in others" the more one is unconsciously manipulative.

Conversely, the more one is able to integrate these things into conscience, the more one is open to speak about them.

This also seems to point in the direction of "generally avoid speaking openly about maliciousness/manipulation": if we assume most people have not "integrated" their subconscious manipulative tendencies, doing so with most people triggers their "own insecurity".

It's like most people don't want to talk about it, because they don't want to "see" that they are themselves (sometimes unconsciously, sometimes consciously) malicious/manipulative.

Lucio Buffalmano, Roberto and Power Duck have reacted to this post.

#4 · September 6, 2023, 8:38 pm

This also seems to point in the direction of "generally avoid speaking openly about maliciousness/manipulation": if we assume most people have not "integrated" their subconscious manipulative tendencies, doing so with most people triggers their "own insecurity".

Wow hadn't thought about that.

"If they try to understand how others manipulate they have to place themselves in the shoes of the manipulator so they have to recognize that they themselves have the ability to deceive" that's how it sounds to me although I could be wrong/have more reasons. It's quite interesting the things we can do to avoid facing our shadow.

P.S:

Just read the changes, seems like we got a very similar conclusion.

B and Roberto have reacted to this post.

#5 · September 6, 2023, 8:50 pm

I think that may be a good general rule with people you don't know well.

And it's also for the more generally acknoweldge reason:

Because you don't want to be the guy who talks badly about others in general.

So what you say, Bel, goes on top of that.

However, plenty of exceptions.

Including the fact that showing some anger/darker side is also a display of raw honesty so it can help to come across as more genuine and break interpersonal walls quicker and build trust quicker (ie.: the opposite effect).

Also, many times for me, this also applies:

Everytime I hear someone assuming good intention when I feel the opposite, I lose some respect for the speaker.
As in "look at this naive *****, good in life with those rose-tintend glasses".

So, yeah, good general rule, with many exceptions.
In my opinion, it's worth experimenting and learning when/how/with whom to do the direct/honest approach though, rather than sticking with the "hide the truth" for ever (first is more value-adding and higher upsides, the second is more defensive and keeping distance)

Mats G, B and 2 other users have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#6 · September 6, 2023, 8:56 pm

Quote from Bel on September 6, 2023, 8:00 pm
Then I got thinking:
What was the reason my relatives didn't want to acknowledge the "lie by my neighbor" and tended to assume good intentions?
Was it that they (my relatives) didn't want to give me the impression they could be capable of "lying" themselves?
That they wanted to project an "aura of innocence and naivety"?

This is also exactly the issue with it:

What's your opinion of those relatives you spoke to?

And how did you feel about them as they denied what to you seemed the most obvious truth?

Because if you didn't think too well of that, then you also got your answer: do you want to copy the people you didn't think highly of?

So I think that in most cases a middle way is best.

Such as:

Too direct: my neighbor is a liar and he said that on purpose to get away without doing what he was supposed to do (<---- this can also come across as too complaining / negative, or even too judgmental/easily triggered for not understanding and better coping with the relatively common people's ass-holishness)
Naive / too manipulative: he forgot it there (to me, this was laughable even to just write it)
Middle of the way: so basically he left it there (shrug your shoulder or look away while you shake your head or add a "tsk" as if to say "fucking asshole")
- Add on top: when they agree or add it was a cheap move, you can add "yeah, fucking asshole. Anyway, whatever, now I gotta a mattress to move :D" (and then move on)

B and Power Duck have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#7 · September 6, 2023, 10:58 pm

Quote from Roberto on September 6, 2023, 10:58 pm
Interesting topic!
My two cents on this:
For about a year I personally have the feeling that most people go through life with blinders on. At first, I even thought that it can not be and that most would have somehow forged a plot to fool me.
A short excerpt of the story that caused this realization:
An acquaintance of mine with whom I am friends because he is useful to me is a psychopath. You can even say that he is a textbook psychopath. He really ticks all the boxes for a factor 1 psychopathy diagnosis. It didn't take long, this was even before TPM, for me to realize that.
I know him around 5 years now. He truly is a fascinating person and I really wanted to talk to someone (not him, of course) about it.
When I suggested to some of our common friends that there was something wrong with him, most just said:
He is just a special person
That's just the way he is
He is just (a bit) narcissistic
***
The thing is, we are talking about someone who has Patrick Bateman as a profile picture on his private Instagram profile.
All our common friends know the channel.
This is really not a joke. I could even laugh sometimes, it's so absurd.
Women fall in love with him... and then are surprised that he has only lied to them and blocked after the first/second time sex.
Men want to be with him... and are framed as second class by him but still pay for the bottles in the club.
An example conversation with a good friend of mine who is usually quite power aware:
Friend: Do you still have contact with L?
Roberto: Yes, why?
Friend: A friend of mine had sex with him and said that he blocked her after sex.
Roberto: Yes, L usually does that
Roberto: Sometimes I think there is something wrong with him (wants to bring up the subject of psychopathy once again..)
Friend: Yes, he is quite narcissistic
Roberto: Do you think he is just a narcissist?
Friend: Yes, what else could he be?
*End of story*
I think this illustrates quite well how naive a large part of people can be.
To note: These are all still young people who have fallen victim to him or who have interacted with him. It may be that for the masses such realizations come only with certain life experience.
Cheers

Interesting topic!

My two cents on this:

For about a year I personally have the feeling that most people go through life with blinders on. At first, I even thought that it can not be and that most would have somehow forged a plot to fool me.

A short excerpt of the story that caused this realization:

An acquaintance of mine with whom I am friends because he is useful to me is a psychopath. You can even say that he is a textbook psychopath. He really ticks all the boxes for a factor 1 psychopathy diagnosis. It didn't take long, this was even before TPM, for me to realize that.

I know him around 5 years now. He truly is a fascinating person and I really wanted to talk to someone (not him, of course) about it.

When I suggested to some of our common friends that there was something wrong with him, most just said:

He is just a special person
That's just the way he is
He is just (a bit) narcissistic

***

The thing is, we are talking about someone who has Patrick Bateman as a profile picture on his private Instagram profile.

All our common friends know the channel.

This is really not a joke. I could even laugh sometimes, it's so absurd.

Women fall in love with him... and then are surprised that he has only lied to them and blocked after the first/second time sex.

Men want to be with him... and are framed as second class by him but still pay for the bottles in the club.

An example conversation with a good friend of mine who is usually quite power aware:

Friend: Do you still have contact with L?
Roberto: Yes, why?
Friend: A friend of mine had sex with him and said that he blocked her after sex.
Roberto: Yes, L usually does that
Roberto: Sometimes I think there is something wrong with him (wants to bring up the subject of psychopathy once again..)
Friend: Yes, he is quite narcissistic
Roberto: Do you think he is just a narcissist?
Friend: Yes, what else could he be?

*End of story*

I think this illustrates quite well how naive a large part of people can be.

To note: These are all still young people who have fallen victim to him or who have interacted with him. It may be that for the masses such realizations come only with certain life experience.

Cheers

Lucio Buffalmano, Jack and 3 other users have reacted to this post.

#8 · September 7, 2023, 7:56 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on September 7, 2023, 7:56 am
Quote from Roberto on September 6, 2023, 10:58 pm
Interesting topic!
My two cents on this:
For about a year I personally have the feeling that most people go through life with blinders on. At first, I even thought that it can not be and that most would have somehow forged a plot to fool me.
A short excerpt of the story that caused this realization:
An acquaintance of mine with whom I am friends because he is useful to me is a psychopath. You can even say that he is a textbook psychopath. He really ticks all the boxes for a factor 1 psychopathy diagnosis. It didn't take long, this was even before TPM, for me to realize that.
I know him around 5 years now. He truly is a fascinating person and I really wanted to talk to someone (not him, of course) about it.
When I suggested to some of our common friends that there was something wrong with him, most just said:
He is just a special person
That's just the way he is
He is just (a bit) narcissistic
***
The thing is, we are talking about someone who has Patrick Bateman as a profile picture on his private Instagram profile.
All our common friends know the channel.
This is really not a joke. I could even laugh sometimes, it's so absurd.
Women fall in love with him... and then are surprised that he has only lied to them and blocked after the first/second time sex.
Men want to be with him... and are framed as second class by him but still pay for the bottles in the club.
An example conversation with a good friend of mine who is usually quite power aware:
Friend: Do you still have contact with L?
Roberto: Yes, why?
Friend: A friend of mine had sex with him and said that he blocked her after sex.
Roberto: Yes, L usually does that
Roberto: Sometimes I think there is something wrong with him (wants to bring up the subject of psychopathy once again..)
Friend: Yes, he is quite narcissistic
Roberto: Do you think he is just a narcissist?
Friend: Yes, what else could he be?
*End of story*
I think this illustrates quite well how naive a large part of people can be.
To note: These are all still young people who have fallen victim to him or who have interacted with him. It may be that for the masses such realizations come only with certain life experience.
Cheers
Great point!
In some cases, people aren't just playing the game of being nice (virtue signaling) or being naive.
Sometimes they're actively defending people they like/admire BECAUSE they're socially high-power dark triads.
Started replying more about it here, then realized this specific sub-case deserves its own thread here.
Happy to read more about good general approaches on when sharing asshole-behavior with others.

Quote from Roberto on September 6, 2023, 10:58 pm
Interesting topic!
My two cents on this:
For about a year I personally have the feeling that most people go through life with blinders on. At first, I even thought that it can not be and that most would have somehow forged a plot to fool me.
A short excerpt of the story that caused this realization:
An acquaintance of mine with whom I am friends because he is useful to me is a psychopath. You can even say that he is a textbook psychopath. He really ticks all the boxes for a factor 1 psychopathy diagnosis. It didn't take long, this was even before TPM, for me to realize that.
I know him around 5 years now. He truly is a fascinating person and I really wanted to talk to someone (not him, of course) about it.
When I suggested to some of our common friends that there was something wrong with him, most just said:
He is just a special person
That's just the way he is
He is just (a bit) narcissistic
***
The thing is, we are talking about someone who has Patrick Bateman as a profile picture on his private Instagram profile.
All our common friends know the channel.
This is really not a joke. I could even laugh sometimes, it's so absurd.
Women fall in love with him... and then are surprised that he has only lied to them and blocked after the first/second time sex.
Men want to be with him... and are framed as second class by him but still pay for the bottles in the club.
An example conversation with a good friend of mine who is usually quite power aware:
Friend: Do you still have contact with L?
Roberto: Yes, why?
Friend: A friend of mine had sex with him and said that he blocked her after sex.
Roberto: Yes, L usually does that
Roberto: Sometimes I think there is something wrong with him (wants to bring up the subject of psychopathy once again..)
Friend: Yes, he is quite narcissistic
Roberto: Do you think he is just a narcissist?
Friend: Yes, what else could he be?
*End of story*
I think this illustrates quite well how naive a large part of people can be.
To note: These are all still young people who have fallen victim to him or who have interacted with him. It may be that for the masses such realizations come only with certain life experience.
Cheers

Great point!

In some cases, people aren't just playing the game of being nice (virtue signaling) or being naive.

Sometimes they're actively defending people they like/admire BECAUSE they're socially high-power dark triads.

Started replying more about it here, then realized this specific sub-case deserves its own thread here.

Happy to read more about good general approaches on when sharing asshole-behavior with others.

B, Roberto and Power Duck have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#9 · September 8, 2023, 11:30 am

Quote from B on September 8, 2023, 11:30 am
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on September 6, 2023, 8:56 pm
Quote from Bel on September 6, 2023, 8:00 pm
Then I got thinking:
What was the reason my relatives didn't want to acknowledge the "lie by my neighbor" and tended to assume good intentions?
Was it that they (my relatives) didn't want to give me the impression they could be capable of "lying" themselves?
That they wanted to project an "aura of innocence and naivety"?
This is also exactly the issue with it:
What's your opinion of those relatives you spoke to?
And how did you feel about them as they denied what to you seemed the most obvious truth?
Because if you didn't think too well of that, then you also got your answer: do you want to copy the people you didn't think highly of?
So I think that in most cases a middle way is best.
Such as:
Too direct: my neighbor is a liar and he said that on purpose to get away without doing what he was supposed to do (<---- this can also come across as too complaining / negative, or even too judgmental/easily triggered for not understanding and better coping with the relatively common people's ass-holishness)
Naive / too manipulative: he forgot it there (to me, this was laughable even to just write it)
Middle of the way: so basically he left it there (shrug your shoulder or look away while you shake your head or add a "tsk" as if to say "fucking asshole")
Add on top: when they agree or add it was a cheap move, you can add "yeah, fucking asshole. Anyway, whatever, now I gotta a mattress to move :D" (and then move on)
Thank you Lucio,
the middle of the way approach seems a good guideline to handle most cases.
That way, one doesn't subcommunicate naivety, and also doesn't really "talk bad about others" since one sticks to the facts.
I suppose that "sticking to facts" without "making character inferences" may be a high power trait. I think we discussed that as well.
As to my opinion of my relatives: I didn't interpret it as naivety, more as a "I'm doing the commonly accepted thing here".
But I also saw it as a "not so great" sign that they couldn't go with my interpretation, or even not say anything.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on September 6, 2023, 8:56 pm
Quote from Bel on September 6, 2023, 8:00 pm
Then I got thinking:
What was the reason my relatives didn't want to acknowledge the "lie by my neighbor" and tended to assume good intentions?
Was it that they (my relatives) didn't want to give me the impression they could be capable of "lying" themselves?
That they wanted to project an "aura of innocence and naivety"?
This is also exactly the issue with it:
What's your opinion of those relatives you spoke to?
And how did you feel about them as they denied what to you seemed the most obvious truth?
Because if you didn't think too well of that, then you also got your answer: do you want to copy the people you didn't think highly of?
So I think that in most cases a middle way is best.
Such as:
Too direct: my neighbor is a liar and he said that on purpose to get away without doing what he was supposed to do (<---- this can also come across as too complaining / negative, or even too judgmental/easily triggered for not understanding and better coping with the relatively common people's ass-holishness)
Naive / too manipulative: he forgot it there (to me, this was laughable even to just write it)
Middle of the way: so basically he left it there (shrug your shoulder or look away while you shake your head or add a "tsk" as if to say "fucking asshole")
Add on top: when they agree or add it was a cheap move, you can add "yeah, fucking asshole. Anyway, whatever, now I gotta a mattress to move :D" (and then move on)

Thank you Lucio,

the middle of the way approach seems a good guideline to handle most cases.

That way, one doesn't subcommunicate naivety, and also doesn't really "talk bad about others" since one sticks to the facts.

I suppose that "sticking to facts" without "making character inferences" may be a high power trait. I think we discussed that as well.

As to my opinion of my relatives: I didn't interpret it as naivety, more as a "I'm doing the commonly accepted thing here".

But I also saw it as a "not so great" sign that they couldn't go with my interpretation, or even not say anything.

Lucio Buffalmano and Power Duck have reacted to this post.