The art of lying by Prof Dr Sohail Ansari

 I know that a man who shows me his wealth is like the beggar who shows me his poverty; they are both looking for alms from me, the rich man for the alms of my envy, the poor man for the alms of my guilt. Ben Hecht
So woe unto those performers of Salat (hypocrites), Those who delay their Salat (from their stated fixed times). Those who do good deeds only to be seen (of men).And prevent Al-Ma’un (small kindnesses) (Surah Al-Maauun 107: 4 – 7)

A lie ceases to be a lie if it is recognizable

·       The art of lying is the art of knowing how to make people believe lies. The best lie is a lie that people knowing what truth may be cannot still recognize lies.

"The art of living is the art of knowing how to believe lies. The fearful thing about it is that not knowing what truth may be, we can still recognize lies."

Cesare Pavese:

Guba and Lincoln (1998), definition of research paradigm "A research paradigm is intrinsically associated with the concepts of ontology (i.e., the way the investigator defines the truth and reality), epistemology (i.e., the process in which the investigator comes to know the truth and reality) and methodology (i.e., the method used in conducting the investigation."

Paradigm: different paradigms in social science  

Positivism: This is the view that social science procedures should mirror, as near as possible, those of the natural sciences. The researcher should be objective and detached from the objects of research. It is possible to capture ‘reality’ through the use of research instruments such as experiments and questionnaires. The aims of positivist research are to offer explanations leading to control and predictability. Positivism has been a very predominant way of knowing the social world; what Guba and Lincoln (2005) refer to as the ‘received view’. This can be seen by the ways in which many still perceive positivist approaches to be simply a commonsensical way of conducting research. While there are many varieties of positivism (see Crotty 1998), quantitative approaches that use statistics and experiments are seen as classic examples.

Paradigm consists of some specific components:

Ontology, Epistemology, Methodology and Methods. 

 It is important how you consider the reality, as an independent phenomenon that should be discovered by the researcher?  Or as a mental issue that is interpreted and constructed by different people and as a result, it can’t be considered as an independent issue.

Ontology and epistemology are two different ways of viewing the research philosophy. Ontology can be defined as “the science or study of being” and it deals with the nature of reality. Ontology is a system of belief that reflects an interpretation of an individual about what constitutes a fact.

Epistemology is the study of knowledge. Three epistemological factors that contribute to knowledge acquisition are truth, belief and justification. Truth is an occurrence in which there are no false propositions. ... Knowledge itself can be defined as 'justified true belief'.

Common Paradigms

Qualitative and Quantitative Methods

Qualitative and quantitative approaches are rooted in philosophical traditions with different epistemological and ontological assumptions.

Epistemology - is the theory of knowledge and the assumptions and beliefs that we have about the nature of knowledge.  How do we know the world? What is the relationship between the inquirer and the known?

Ontology - concerns the philosophy of existence and the assumptions and beliefs that we hold about the nature of being and existence.

Paradigms - models or frameworks that are derived from a worldview or belief system about the nature of knowledge and existence. Paradigms are shared by a scientific community and guide how a community of researchers act with regard to inquiry.

Methodology - how we gain knowledge about the world or "an articulated, theoretically informed approach to the production of data" (Ellen, 1984, p. 9).

---

Research, controlled: A study that compared results from a treated group and a control group. The control group may receive no treatment, a placebo, or a different treatment. 

What is a control in research?

One way to design an experiment is by using a control group, or group of subjects that do not get the treatment being studied in the study. The experimental group does get the treatment, and then the two groups are compared to see if the treatment had an effect.

What is the control of the experiment?

A scientific control is an experiment or observation designed to minimize the effects of variables other than the independent variable. This increases the reliability of the results, often through a comparison between control measurements and the other measurements.

A "control" group in research is to have an extra set of statistics to compare your experimented results with.

For instance, you want to experiment if people who looks at a lot of cat pictures is cooler than those who don't.

Your "experiment" group, will be to find a bunch of people and make them look at a lot of cat pictures.

Your "control" group, will be a bunch of people who DON'T look at cat pictures and see which group is cooler. This "control" group usually consists of neutral conditions (not supporting or helping either side)  just to compare against with your "experiment" group, so your results show something worth noting.

After your experiment, you'll compare the two, and see if your "experiment" group, after excessive pussy portrait viewing is any cooler than the "control" group, with maybe a thermometer or something.

But just to let you know the results, anyone can be cool but nobody can be cooler than Bruce Willis.

Attitude Control" is a research name is the aerospace area, and it means you can decide the behavior of attitude, you can change it to a special magnitude, or you can keep it still.

Aerospace is not the same as airspace, which is the physical air space directly above a location on the ground. The beginning of space and the ending of the air is considered as 100 km above the ground according to the physical explanation that the air pressure is too low for a lifting body to generate meaningful lift force without exceeding (extremely) orbital velocity (The velocity at which a body revolves about another body. The minimum velocity required to place or maintain a satellite in a given orbit.)

Predictability is the degree to which a correct prediction or forecast of a system's state can be made either qualitatively or quantitatively

In the study of biology – particularly genetics and neuroscience – predictability relates to the prediction of biological developments and behaviors based on inherited genes and past experiences.

Significant debate exists in the scientific community over whether or not a person's behavior is completely predictable based on their genetics. Studies such as the one in Israel, which showed that judges were more likely to give a lighter sentence if they had eaten more recently.  In addition to cases like this, it has been proven that individuals smell better to someone with complementary immunity genes, leading to more physical attraction. Genetics can be examined to determine if an individual is predisposed to any diseases, and behavioral disorders can most often be explained by analyzing defects in genetic code. Scientist who focus on examples like these argue that human behavior is entirely predictable. Those on the other side of the debate argue that genetics can only provide a predisposition to act a certain way and that, ultimately, humans possess the free will to choose whether or not to act.

Animals have significantly more predictable behavior than humans. Driven by natural selection, animals develop mating calls, predator warnings, and communicative dances. One example of these engrained behaviors is the Belding's ground squirrel, which developed a specific set of calls that warn nearby squirrels about predators. If a ground squirrel sees a predator on land it will elicit a trill after it gets to safety, which signals to nearby squirrels that they should stand up on their hind legs and attempt to locate the predator. When a predator is seen in the air, a ground squirrel will immediately call out a long whistle, putting himself in danger but signaling for nearby squirrels to run for cover. Through experimentation and examination scientists have been able to chart behaviors like this and very accurately predict how animals behave in certain situations.

Combining in such a way as to enhance or emphasize the qualities of each other or another.

"They had different but complementary skills"

synonyms:

harmonizing, harmonious, complementing, supportive, supporting, reciprocal, interdependent, interrelated, compatible, corresponding, matching, twin;

In popular culture

The study of predictability often sparks debate between those who believe humans maintain complete control over their free-will and those who believe our actions are predetermined. However, it is likely that neither Newton nor Laplace saw the study of predictability as relating to determinism.

Techniques

One example of prediction techniques is tarot cards. Tarot cards have been used for hundreds of years to help in determining the future. "Fortune tellers" have been traced through history back to the Ancient Egyptians, however the earliest complete record dates only to the 18th century.

Tasseography is a divination method, typically utilizing tea leaves or coffee grounds. Western tasseography first started in medieval Europe, where fortune tellers would interpret splatters of wax, lead, and various other molten substances. When the Dutch brought tea from China in the seventeenth century, this evolved into tea tasseography. Tasseography is typically performed in a bright colored cup to contrast with the dark tea leaves or coffee grounds. The bright colors symbolize good fortunes while the dark color symbolizes misfortunes.

In climate

As climate change and other weather phenomenon become more common, the predictability of climate systems becomes more important. The IPCC notes that our ability to predict future detailed climate interactions is difficult, however, long term climate forecasts are possible.

A received view is any world view that is taken for granted or that is assumed to be true without further criticism by the part of the "receiver" – until he or she manages to "unhide" it, e.g. by getting to know another contrasting worldview. The expression is usually used by other philosophical schools to refer to the logical-positivist view; see, for instance, the received view of theories.

Un`hide´

v. t.

1.

To bring out from concealment; to discover.

Taken for granted

To accept without question or objection; assume: Your loyalty to the cause is taken for granted. to use, accept, or treat in a careless or indifferent manner: A marriage can be headed for trouble if either spouse begins to take the other for granted.

Definitions of commonsensical

1

adj exhibiting native good judgment

“Unlearned and commonsensical country folk were capable of solving problems that beset the more sophisticated”

Synonyms:

commonsense, commonsensible

reasonable, sensible

showing reason or sound judgment

The phrase “common sense” means native good judgment and is derived from the Greek koinē aesthēsiswhich refers to the total perception of the five senses.  If you have senses, then those of you who read this have, potentially anyway, as much common sense as anybody else.  The problem lies in the execution.  Like any other gift, native good judgment must be exercised. Over my lifetime, my mother and father constantly challenged me and my siblings to use good common sense, and it’s never been easy considering the world we live in.  I never forgot those simple edicts that came from my parents: “If you eat all that Halloween candy, you will get sick”; “If you wait until the last-minute to study, you probably won’t really understand the material and not do well on the test”; “If you treat your siblings like crap, crap is what you will get in return.”; “The most important lessons always contain some form of difficulty.”  Those pearls of wisdom created a strong base for much of my decision-making as an adult, (that and scoring the 97th percentile in an aptitude test measuring common sense…which I’ve bragged about before).  Common sense should also never be confused with intelligence-it is not the same thing.  Some of the most intelligent people I know actually seem to be lacking in common sense.  Like the scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz, they really should give diplomas for that kind of smarts.  The scarecrow discovered that the only way to increase the wisdom of one’s native good judgment is not by always doing what one is told, but by figuring it out on ones own and actually taking personal responsibility for those choices that go awry.

Taking personal responsibility for the choices one makes and developing common sense are intimately connected.   Unfortunately one can’t develop without the other.   Based on what I observe in the world at large, be it politics or religion, common sense is on hiatus.  It has simply left the building.  And that is the root of much my of my anger and sadness about the world today.

While in college, I had the chance to study and to meet Lawrence Kohlberg, a professor at Harvard University who was well-known for his theory of moral development.  In his theory, there are three levels of moral development with two stages within each level.  Kohlberg also maintained that individuals could only progress through these stages one at a time, in order, without jumping any stage.  The first level, termed “pre-conventional” is generally found in elementary school age children.  At stage 1, (ages 1-5) children behave according to socially acceptable norms created by an authority figure.  Obedience is compelled by threat of punishment.  At stage 2, (ages 5-10) right behavior means acting in one’s own interest, “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine.”  The next level, “conventional,” is where most of society lies.  Beginning with stage 3 (ages 8-16) right choices are based on being a “good boy/girl or doing what will gain the approval of important others such as parents, teachers or friends.  Stage 4 (ages 16 and above and if they reach it, where most adults remain) is defined by abiding the law and fulfilling one’s obligation of duty.  In this stage, leaders are assumed to be right and individuals adopt social rules without considering the underlying ethical principles involved.  People who break rules, deserved to be punished.

What I found most disturbing was Kohlberg’s conclusion that only about 20-25% of today’s adults (most in their late twenties) ever reach the last level of moral development, labeled “post-conventional.”   In stage 5, people do recognize the underlying moral principles served by laws, and if a law no longer serves a good purpose, they actively work to change it through legal and democratic means.  Respect for the law and a sense of obligation to live by the rules is still important, but an individual uses only legally acceptable means to make changes.   Less than 1% of adults ever make a stage 6 moral decision.  Kohlberg believed, theoretically, that civil disobedience was often how a stage 6 moral decision distinguished itself.  In this instance, breaking a law in defense of an individual right can be justified.  Martin Luther King, for example, argued that laws are only valid insofar as they are grounded in justice, and that a commitment to justice carries with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws and accept whatever consequences may come.

It is the kind of strength of conscience that defines Kohlberg’s sixth level that led me to conclude that developing one’s native good judgment is a necessary step in reaching the latter stages of moral development.  It is by exercising and honing one’s native good judgment that acts as a moral compass in not only determining what rules we are going to live by, but gives an individual the internal fortitude and certainty to actually live by them.

In the Judeo/Christian tradition, we are taught that human beings are created in the image of God so the obvious conclusion is that we should have a great deal of faith in our native good judgment.  If we are going to continue to evolve as human beings it doesn’t make sense to think that by questioning cultural rules we would encourage anarchy, rather, it should encourage just the exact opposite.  It is often through questioning that truth itself becomes clearer and that clarity will ultimately shed light on what rules are working in each individual life.  Of course any challenge to these rules most likely leads to conflict but, it was and still is from this kind of vantage point that I make most decisions to co-direct my destiny.

As I mentioned before, exercising the senses to develop that inherent native good judgment is a must.  Lack of use weakens our ability to use them and leaves one vulnerable to outside influences.  Of course, there are many reasons that all of us have, at times, chosen to disregard what we know to be true, subjecting ourselves to a whole other set of unhealthy rules.  Catholic school taught me that they were the seven deadly sins: pride, envy, gluttony, lust, anger, greed and sloth.  There are a host of others, to be sure, but these seven are as good as any.  Knowing what rules serve a higher purpose doesn’t mean that I was always capable of listening to that inner voice and adhering to them—which is normal because sometimes the best way to learn is by making mistakes.  Note the distinction between discovering what rules are good to follow and actually choosing to follow them; it is very important.  Obviously, the proof is in what kind of choices we have made in our lives thus far and the people who influence us on a daily basis.  However, the more adept we become at using native good judgment, the more difficult it becomes to fall prey to those deadly sins.

It would be inaccurate to assume that “proof” of using native good judgment will always result in being labeled “good” by society.  In thinking of my own childhood a little poem comes to mind: “When I was good, I was very, very good and when I was bad I was clueless.”  The ditty needed changing because sometimes challenging the rules means embracing the willingness to accept judgment as being bad.  Being labeled “naughty” by some of my teachers perhaps was the inevitable result of not behaving as little girls should, meaning I always spoke my mind and never stopped barraging teachers with questions about things that were difficult to wrap my young brain around.  Mind you, I never wanted to be bad; being arbitrary just didn’t come naturally.  All I wanted to know, if I was expected to act a certain way, was the reason why.  Perhaps one of the results of questioning the validity of the rules we follow is to turn up the volume on those innate sensibilities.  So, what does this all mean in practical terms?  Stay tuned…

codirect. co·di·rect. transitive verb. co·di·rect·ed, co·di·rect·ing, co·di·rects. Todirect (a play, film, or other form of public entertainment) jointly with another or others.

Definition of turn up. transitive verb. 1 : find, discover. 2 : to raise or increase by or as if by turning a control. turn up the volume on the radio.