Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

8424Re: Reflections on Bad Faith: To Con Oneself

Expand Messages
  • james tan
    Jul 2, 2002
      i agree with u that bad faith basically is the inability or unwillingness to
      accept truth about oneself. u asked a interesting question: "if 'i know'
      that i am lying to myself, how could i really be deceived". i think this is
      just another manifestation of bad faith. one may 'know', but one may not
      'accept', thus the self deception. there are two components here: one the
      intellectual, the other the emotional. his cognitive ability enables him to
      'know', but emotionally, he cannot or do not want to 'accept' that fact
      about himself - and thus, there is really a difference in iq and eq.
      research has shown that not all high scorers in iq are successful in life,
      whereas what is common among the 'achievers' in life are a good healthy dose
      of eq. eq enables people to accept the facts about themselves, which has a
      important effect in making the right decision in how they would
      realistically use their resources. more or less, they know their own
      strengths AND limits, they know what they want - and people engaged in bad
      faith is precisely lacking in these areas, so that without even these basic,
      fundamental psychological elements, they end up ineffective and maladaptive,
      and unhappy. freud went a step further in positing the unconscious, so that
      self deception may not even be 'known' to the person concerned.

      james.


      From: "decker150" <decker150@...>
      Reply-To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com
      To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [Sartre] Re: Reflections on Bad Faith: To Con Oneself
      Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 01:40:55 -0000

      Well, I wonder about that. Bad faith had a sense to it that oneself
      was mainly deceived in the process. If 'I know' that I am lying to
      myself, how could I really be deceived. It strikes me that bad faith
      neccessitates a believing of something that is not truth without the
      self-realization that it's actually untrue. The solitary or
      autonomous act of bad faith occurs when I am unwilling or unable to
      recognize that truth about myself. It seems to have little to do
      with 'the others' around me, but has it's central affect on oneself.

      Please help me here if I am wrong - Joe

      --- In Sartre@y..., Debby Coley <debbycoley@y...> wrote:
      > My thinking on this is that the person in question is
      > the one acting in bad faith, the self-deceived, is an
      > active participant in the act of lying to another and
      > simultaneously lying to his/her self. There is no
      > duality in the act of lying as the liar lies to
      > him/her self as well as lying to another person.
      > Sartre states in "Being and Nothingness" that "Bad
      > faith on the contrary implies in essence the unity of
      > a single consciousness"(89). ..."There must be an an
      > original intention and a project of bad faith as such
      > and a pre-reflective apprehension (of) consciousness
      > as affecting itself with bad faith" (89). As far as
      > the question of that decker raises fits along with the
      > concept of bad faith. The liar knows the truth
      > distinctly and yet chooses to lie for whatever reason,
      > thus lying to himself/herself and to the recipient of
      > the lie. Surely, these types of entities that Decker
      > mentions are aware that they are lying to others and
      > likewise lying to themselves. I apologize if I have
      > become repetitious.
      > debby
      > --- decker150 <decker150@y...> wrote:
      > > I was wondering, do you think Sartre extended bad
      > > faith to include
      > > deception towards other beings? I've been thinking
      > > about the social
      > > fraud which is not criminal. Also, the thought came
      > > to me of 'the
      > > mask', or the greek concept of the hypocrises, the
      > > actor behind the
      > > mask: This could be the pedaphile priest, the
      > > unfaithful spouse, the
      > > well honored employee who steals, the person who is
      > > two-faced, the
      > > pretender, someone who acts like a friend but
      > > doesn't stick with you
      > > through thick and thin. The corporate slizziness of
      > > Enron and
      > > MCIworld? Are these bad faith? A lack of the
      > > authentic, the genuine
      > > and the true? The confidence trickster?
      > >
      > > Joe
      > >
      > > --- In Sartre@y..., praxistence@a... wrote:
      > > > In Truth & Existence, Sartre provides an example
      > > of bad faith: the
      > > woman who
      > > > knows she is ill but refuses to see a doctor.
      > > People ask, "What's
      > > the
      > > > matter?," & she says, "Oh, nothing."
      > > >
      > > > How many of us do this kind of thing every day?
      > > But I suspect that
      > > true bad
      > > > faith is to exhibit a pattern of this sort of
      > > conduct: people that
      > > NEVER see
      > > > (or say they never see) a doctor. My favorite is
      > > somebody that
      > > retires from
      > > > some company or agency after umpteen-plus years, &
      > > the report
      > > concludes with,
      > > > "never taken a sick day."
      > > >
      > > > Have there never been days when someone just
      > > didn't feel well? Was
      > > the person
      > > > sick but went to work anyway? If so, who else got
      > > sick because
      > > someone
      > > > refused to take sick day?
      > > >
      > > > Here in the US of A, it's apparent that, with this
      > > example, we
      > > actually
      > > > celebrate the person of bad faith: "Oh, I've never
      > > taken a sick
      > > day!" "Hey,
      > > > well good for you!" Moreover, even if the person
      > > has consciously
      > > refused to
      > > > take a sick day for umpteen-plus years, in order
      > > to be able to say,
      > > on
      > > > retirement, "Hey, no sick days for me!," is this
      > > not also bad
      > > faith? At
      > > > retirement, this is the legacy one leaves?: no
      > > sick days?
      > > >
      > > > If anyone disagrees, please say so, but I think
      > > Joe is on to
      > > something: good
      > > > faith v. bad faith. Good faith in taking sick
      > > days when one knows
      > > one is
      > > > sick is far more admirable than being able to
      > > leave the legacy of
      > > no sick
      > > > days taken.
      > > >
      > > > Unfortunately, at least here in the States, bad
      > > faith gets the seal
      > > of
      > > > approval until one is lawfully taken to task for
      > > bad faith, e.g.,
      > > failing to
      > > > carry out a contract in good faith
      > > >
      > > > Of course, there're also the cases of people that
      > > take off sick
      > > when they're
      > > > not: this is likewise bad faith: deceiving
      > > oneself, deceiving
      > > others, &
      > > > knowing one is deceiving others.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
      > > removed]
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      > =====
      >
      >
      > __________________________________________________
      > Do You Yahoo!?
      > Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
      > http://sbc.yahoo.com





      _________________________________________________________________
      Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
    • Show all 7 messages in this topic