|
Daily Dose of Reason -
Psychology & Self-Improvement
|
|
Written by Michael J. Hurd, Ph.D.
|
|
Thursday, 26 January 2012 00:00 |
|
There are two types of liars.
The first type does not feel comfortable with lying. He feels guilty for betraying other people with his lie. He also feels awkward because lying complicates his life and his mind. He has to remember who knows about the falsehood and who does not. He must keep two separate lists in his mind at all times: one for the actual facts, the other for the “facts” he has created.
The second type of liar is much more sophisticated—and dangerous. He believes his own lies. He convinces himself that the “alternate reality” he creates with his lies actually exists. He is the more persuasive, more “effective” type of liar. He can fool loved ones, business associates, juries—even millions.
The persuasive liar rationalizes
|
|
Read more... [The Psychology of Honesty (Part 1 of 3)]
|
|
|
Daily Dose of Reason -
Quotations
|
|
Written by Michael J. Hurd, Ph.D.
|
|
Wednesday, 25 January 2012 00:00 |
|
A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves.
-- Judge Andrew Paolo Napolitano |
|
Daily Dose of Reason -
Psychology & Self-Improvement
|
|
Written by Michael J. Hurd, Ph.D.
|
|
Tuesday, 24 January 2012 00:00 |
|
Dear Dr. Hurd: There are those among us who think that it is perfectly fine to blurt out whatever "truth" that they feel/think at the moment and simply disregard the impact, effect or relevance of their unfiltered utterance. When they are challenged on their word choice, they indignantly cry, "I am an independent adult and I can say whatever I want!" This may be true in the sense of one's individual rights, but it is not effective in achieving long-range goals. Why do people choose the inarticulate and hurtful way of saying things instead of thinking before they speak and choosing their words more carefully--with the goal of achieving their own goals? Why do they place their "right to utter whatever they think at the moment" over their own long-range self-interest? Whatever happened to "picking your battles" and fighting the battles one has at least a chance of winning? From obnoxious individuals at a dinner party who are perceived as rude to political activists who turn people off with their brute-like style, none of these people will ever achieve anything more than being thought of as either obnoxious or mean--and written off before they can even begin to try to persuade someone to think or do something differently.
Dr. Hurd's Reply: You're basically asking why people are irrational in their communication, to the point of acting against their own interests. The most likely explanation is that they don't see it as against their interests. The justification you hear is, "I'm an adult and I'll say whatever I want." Fine, then. But what is it you're trying to convey? And how well is it coming across?
There are two rules of objective communication. Rational communication must answer
|
|
Read more... [When Communication Becomes Self-Defeating]
|
|
Daily Dose of Reason -
Politics & Government
|
|
Written by Michael J. Hurd, Ph.D.
|
|
Monday, 23 January 2012 00:00 |
|
Mitt Romney's defeat in the South Carolina primary shows how he's not such a strong candidate after all, not generally or not against Barack Obama.
Newt Gingrich was simply hurling the same insults at Romney as Barack Obama will do in greater force. "You're a selfish capitalist. You're greedy! You won't release your tax returns!" Gingrich, whose motive was his own candidacy, of course, was in effect preparing Romney for what's to come, if Romney ends up running against Obama.
Romney's response? Essentially, "Um, um, um...."
Missing from Romney's response, and from his campaign more generally, is
|
|
Read more... [Romney: Not Ready for Prime Time]
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 4 of 361 |