I believe in you; "Ilovephilosophy.com"

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Did you know that Brevel_Monkey once directed a short video that was shown to the G8 summit? Probably not!

One thing you now know is that:
Brevel_Monkey asserts that he once directed a short video that was shown to the G8 summit.

Now (assuming that the statement is true) - my question is:

Do you now know that Brevel_Monkey once directed a short video that was shown to the G8 summit?

Essentially, what I am asking is whether someone claiming something on a message board is justification of that assertion? I think in general life it is well shown that there is significant value in taking people’s testimony as being normally true, and that therefore testimony is in general sufficient justification for believing something. Maybe you disagree with this?

But if you do agree - then maybe you can help solve my present dillema. I have noticed on another thread that someone has made an assertion about themselves that has been met with considerable scepticsm. It seems that most people seem to have very little trust in what people assert about themselves on message boards. And my question is - why?

At first, I thought it might be because there is a tendency of people to lie about themselves on message boards. But - the problem with this is how do you know? Does anyone have a body of evidence and experience to suggest this is the case?

If not, then maybe you would want to argue that people would probably desire to lie about themselves on message boards, and that therefore they can’t be trusted. So, then, why do people lose their general desire to tell the truth when they join an online community? Because there is less chance of being found out? This seems to insinuate that everyone in real life is sitting around wanting to lie but being scared of doing so - that it is the consequences of lying and being found out that are the fundamental reason that people normally tell the truth. I can’t abide this negative view of human nature myself, though.

Finally, perhaps it is because people on message boards generally have very weak relationships with each other, therefore they have less reason to tell the truth. This looks more promising - and interesting. But many people desire to form genuine relationships over message boards - and surely these people would then have a reason not to tell giant porkies?

And generally, it seems to me that people should have a motivation to tell the truth: because if everyone told the truth then the community of which they are a part would benefit. So shouldn’t we sensibly assume that people are motivated by this to tell the truth?

:^o ](*,)

So - why the general lack of trust?

Doesn’t it harm the community? After all, perhaps if everyone were more trusting then people would be more willing to share personal examples that may help their argument and also be interesting (perhaps more in the social science forum than the philosophy one?), and the shared experiences of others would be more valuable to the community as a whole?

n.b this is a discussion point not an attack on anyones actions on other threads. I myself commonly experience the feeling of mistrust when I’m posting on message boards - what I’m trying to discover is whether it is justified and whether or not it is harmful.

2

I trust everybody. My personal problem is learning that few people are actually-smart enough to lie.

3

the internet produces something i like to call the lowest common denominator, which is filth.

There are people who lie about themselves in order to provoke, more than a few…

There are also people with outrageous claims in general…

I know someone who consistently claims to be the deuteronomy prophesied prophet, and they go to great great lengths to support their claims (but inevitably lead to circularity).

My point is that few tend to ruin it for the many…

distrust is something learned i wager…

4

I will counter your assertion by noting that Brevel_Monkey is an avatar on an internet forum, and therefore does not exist in the “real world” and therefore is lying about anything Brevel_Monkey has done, as Brevel_Monkey is a fictitious entity.

5

Everything in the “real world” is a representation of yourself though.

So Brevel_Monkey may be more honest or “true-to-himself” here than any other place… :-s

6

Its allot easier to lie the internet. More so about certain things like aesthetics, but also regarding other things. firstly as you are writing this down you can go over your work and re-work it to make it sound more believable, you don’t have to worry about body language, which is a great help in finding out if someone is lying.
I think that everyone is distrustful of people they don’t know by nature (defense mechanism). As you get to know people better you can become more trusting of them or not depending on your observations of that person. This remains the same on the internet, there are certain people who I believe more readily than others. So I think the answer to your question is just that its easier to lie on the internet, so people but up their natural barriers more often than not.

7

I disagree Rhino. I think it is much easier to lie in person than on the internet or through text, watch this:

“It is both scientifically-factual & generally-true that I simultaneously drink water and breath air at the same moment.”

Am I lying??? How do you even know?

8

Good point
Then perhaps my post needs adapting. Maybe it should be that the internet makes it harder to know whether people are lying or telling the truth, this uncertainty makes people more likely to be suspicious

9

My point is this: it is hard, if not impossible, to tell the “truth” when you don’t know the truth to begin with.

10

do you know that?

11

I know that, but I do not know if that is the same that that you mean.

12

I don’t see a “problem” with the liar, who cares why anyone said anything about anything. If I said that Barack Obama is my best friend or that I am a medical doctor, it seems as if most people would want to disprove me and question the authenticity of my claim. Since this is a philosophy forum and knowledge is the ultimate motive in our posting, who cares if someone makes outrageous claims about themselves, why are people so interested in disproving whether someone is a doctor or a model? I think we have to examine this before we can even begin to understand the liar.
It’s prudent for me to overlook the biographies of posters, I’m more focused on the substance of the post instead, even if someone posted their medical license on this forum and we were all convinced that she/he was a doctor, shouldn’t we still validate there posts using other sources? Not even experts are exempted from this.

I can understand why someone would want to lie, and I agree with Wonderer. I don’t think its a matter of trust, in an emotional sense, like he’s my friend so I can’t lie to him. On forums, the lack of trust in the post comes from the lack of a relationship with one another. It’s easy to convince a friend of your knowledge or intelligence because they know you, and depending on how close, they often know what is inside/outside of your realm of thought. On message boards, it becomes even harder to convince people of knowledge or intelligence, I mean we’re on the internet, most of the questions posted on all forums or forum-like sites all discuss or ask things people can easily Google. Anyone can come off as an expert, all it takes is a good writer with good grammar.