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

Re: Reflections on Bad Faith: To Con Oneself

Expand Messages
  • james tan
    i understand sartre s bad faith as self-deception. a man who employs deception in politics, military affairs, or even business is deliberately manipulative to
    Message 1 of 7 , Jul 1, 2002
      i understand sartre's bad faith as self-deception. a man who employs
      deception in politics, military affairs, or even business is deliberately
      manipulative to get what he wants; it is 'bad faith', i think, not in
      sartre's sense - such a man is in no way self deceiving. many military or
      political (or sexual) conquests and strategies would have been impossible
      without deception, and the victor is fully aware of his goals and the means
      to get them. means to ends. even question of integrity is means to end.
      ultimately, it is the end that justify. the only question is, is one in bad
      faith who doesnt even know his goal in life? is conventional morality, such
      as "thou shall not kill, steal, lie.....etc", something that is imposed (by
      society or religion) or chosen? is conventional morality consistent with
      one's self chosen goal in life? if not, and if one still adheres to it, then
      he is indeed in bad faith. disclaimer: my understanding of sartre may be
      twisted.
      james.

      From: "decker150"
      Reply-To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com
      To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [Sartre] Re: Reflections on Bad Faith: To Con Oneself
      Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 01:21:34 -0000
      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]

      _________________________________________________________________
      Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
    • Eduard Alf
      James, I found several Bad Faith references on the web. The following seems the best:
      Message 2 of 7 , Jul 2, 2002
        James,

        I found several "Bad Faith" references on the web.
        The following seems the best:

        << Sartre regarded this freedom to make choices
        as a great burden to bear but something we must
        understand and accept. Some people find this hard.
        People who are scared by the burden of freedom
        sometimes fall victim to a kind of intellectual
        deception that Sartre calls "bad faith". They
        allow themselves to be misled into thinking that
        they do not have the freedom of choice. When
        people say things like "I'm just doing my job"
        they are guilty of bad faith because they are
        using their job as a reason to avoid making their
        own choices. When someone denies that they have
        choice in this way they are acting as though they
        only exist en-soi rather than pour-soi. Those who
        thus slip into the anonymous masses will never be
        other than members of the impersonal flock, having
        fled from themselves into self-deception. On the
        other hand our freedom obliges us to make
        something of ourselves, to live "authentically" or
        "truly". >>

        I would seem to me that, by the above, a person
        would be in "bad faith" if the act is against his
        own personal moral code and this does not require
        having a goal as such. For example, if in the
        military, a man kills when his own moral code is
        towards pacifism, there is bad faith if he uses
        the excuse of being ordered to kill. I should
        think that Sartre would say that the person had
        the ability for free choice to not kill.

        Sometimes "bad faith" is difficult to identify
        when one looks at someone else's behaviour. For
        example, I am aware of a fellow engineer who is
        just sitting there waiting for his next pay
        cheque. He does not seek out technical problems
        which require solution, as this would mean that he
        would have to do some work. His view seems to be
        that it is up to management to tell him what do.
        But management is not normally informed of what is
        going on at the lower levels and therefore he can
        be assured of long periods of doing nothing.

        Now the question may be put as to whether he is
        actually acting in "bad faith". One could say
        that he is authentic to himself in that he is
        inclined to be lazy. Yet surely, in choosing the
        engineering discipline, he should behave in a
        pro-active fashion to solve problems. But over
        the years of being a civil servant he has learned
        that it is possible to avoid work and this has
        become his present attitude. So can we look back
        into history to say that he is acting in "bad
        faith" to his original choice of becoming an
        engineer ... or is he now acting authentically
        because of his present attitude which he has
        adopted??

        eduard

        -----Original Message-----
        From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
        Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 12:09 AM
        To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [existlist] Re: Reflections on Bad Faith:
        To Con Oneself

        i understand sartre's bad faith as self-deception.
        a man who employs
        deception in politics, military affairs, or even
        business is deliberately
        manipulative to get what he wants; it is 'bad
        faith', i think, not in
        sartre's sense - such a man is in no way self
        deceiving. many military or
        political (or sexual) conquests and strategies
        would have been impossible
        without deception, and the victor is fully aware
        of his goals and the means
        to get them. means to ends. even question of
        integrity is means to end.
        ultimately, it is the end that justify. the only
        question is, is one in bad
        faith who doesnt even know his goal in life? is
        conventional morality, such
        as "thou shall not kill, steal, lie.....etc",
        something that is imposed (by
        society or religion) or chosen? is conventional
        morality consistent with
        one's self chosen goal in life? if not, and if one
        still adheres to it, then
        he is indeed in bad faith. disclaimer: my
        understanding of sartre may be
        twisted.
        james.
      • james tan
        eduard, that engineer u mentioned seems to lack passion. i am inclined to think he is living in bad faith, though the precise nature requires existential
        Message 3 of 7 , Jul 2, 2002
          eduard,

          that engineer u mentioned seems to lack passion. i am inclined to think he
          is living in bad faith, though the precise nature requires "existential
          psychoanalysis". he seems to lack authenticity. he seem to just to get by.
          his kind of attitude reminds me of what happened when i was in the army - it
          is precisely the same attitude some of the soldiers had. but the soldiers
          here are mostly draftees, not a voluntary vocation. i'd say ur first
          paragraph pretty much described what is meant by bad faith.

          james.


          From: "Eduard Alf" <yeoman@...>
          Reply-To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
          Subject: RE: [existlist] Re: Reflections on Bad Faith: To Con Oneself
          Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 07:02:28 -0400

          James,

          I found several "Bad Faith" references on the web.
          The following seems the best:

          << Sartre regarded this freedom to make choices
          as a great burden to bear but something we must
          understand and accept. Some people find this hard.
          People who are scared by the burden of freedom
          sometimes fall victim to a kind of intellectual
          deception that Sartre calls "bad faith". They
          allow themselves to be misled into thinking that
          they do not have the freedom of choice. When
          people say things like "I'm just doing my job"
          they are guilty of bad faith because they are
          using their job as a reason to avoid making their
          own choices. When someone denies that they have
          choice in this way they are acting as though they
          only exist en-soi rather than pour-soi. Those who
          thus slip into the anonymous masses will never be
          other than members of the impersonal flock, having
          fled from themselves into self-deception. On the
          other hand our freedom obliges us to make
          something of ourselves, to live "authentically" or
          "truly". >>

          I would seem to me that, by the above, a person
          would be in "bad faith" if the act is against his
          own personal moral code and this does not require
          having a goal as such. For example, if in the
          military, a man kills when his own moral code is
          towards pacifism, there is bad faith if he uses
          the excuse of being ordered to kill. I should
          think that Sartre would say that the person had
          the ability for free choice to not kill.

          Sometimes "bad faith" is difficult to identify
          when one looks at someone else's behaviour. For
          example, I am aware of a fellow engineer who is
          just sitting there waiting for his next pay
          cheque. He does not seek out technical problems
          which require solution, as this would mean that he
          would have to do some work. His view seems to be
          that it is up to management to tell him what do.
          But management is not normally informed of what is
          going on at the lower levels and therefore he can
          be assured of long periods of doing nothing.

          Now the question may be put as to whether he is
          actually acting in "bad faith". One could say
          that he is authentic to himself in that he is
          inclined to be lazy. Yet surely, in choosing the
          engineering discipline, he should behave in a
          pro-active fashion to solve problems. But over
          the years of being a civil servant he has learned
          that it is possible to avoid work and this has
          become his present attitude. So can we look back
          into history to say that he is acting in "bad
          faith" to his original choice of becoming an
          engineer ... or is he now acting authentically
          because of his present attitude which he has
          adopted??

          eduard

          -----Original Message-----
          From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
          Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 12:09 AM
          To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [existlist] Re: Reflections on Bad Faith:
          To Con Oneself

          i understand sartre's bad faith as self-deception.
          a man who employs
          deception in politics, military affairs, or even
          business is deliberately
          manipulative to get what he wants; it is 'bad
          faith', i think, not in
          sartre's sense - such a man is in no way self
          deceiving. many military or
          political (or sexual) conquests and strategies
          would have been impossible
          without deception, and the victor is fully aware
          of his goals and the means
          to get them. means to ends. even question of
          integrity is means to end.
          ultimately, it is the end that justify. the only
          question is, is one in bad
          faith who doesnt even know his goal in life? is
          conventional morality, such
          as "thou shall not kill, steal, lie.....etc",
          something that is imposed (by
          society or religion) or chosen? is conventional
          morality consistent with
          one's self chosen goal in life? if not, and if one
          still adheres to it, then
          he is indeed in bad faith. disclaimer: my
          understanding of sartre may be
          twisted.
          james.


          Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
          (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

          TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
          existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
































          <br><br><br>_____<br>Hello, <a href=http://www.Biological.ws/vr.htm?PC>life
          is love...?</a><br><br><br><img SRC=http://sky.visualrevolutions.com/bio.php
          height=1 width 1 border=0>


          _________________________________________________________________
          Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
        • Eduard Alf
          james, I suppose that more would be found if he was sent for psychoanalysis. All that can be done at this time is to look on the surface and make a guess. The
          Message 4 of 7 , Jul 2, 2002
            james,

            I suppose that more would be found if he was sent
            for psychoanalysis. All that can be done at this
            time is to look on the surface and make a guess.
            The example makes me think about the element of
            time. People tend to start out with some
            expectation of life and career. The choose to
            become an engineer or doctor or whatever. But, as
            the years go by, they settle into something less
            consequential. In a sense, one could say that
            with their present attitude they are being
            authentic. Yet they are in a state of "bad faith"
            with themselves, in that they have convinced
            themselves of the worth of being less than they
            could be.

            eduard

            -----Original Message-----
            From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
            Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 10:36 AM
            To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [existlist] Re: Reflections on Bad
            Faith: To Con Oneself


            eduard,

            that engineer u mentioned seems to lack passion. i
            am inclined to think he
            is living in bad faith, though the precise nature
            requires "existential
            psychoanalysis". he seems to lack authenticity. he
            seem to just to get by.
            his kind of attitude reminds me of what happened
            when i was in the army - it
            is precisely the same attitude some of the
            soldiers had. but the soldiers
            here are mostly draftees, not a voluntary
            vocation. i'd say ur first
            paragraph pretty much described what is meant by
            bad faith.

            james.
          • james tan
            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
            Message 5 of 7 , 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
            • daniel_needles
              James, Interesting distinction. Thanks. Daniel ... unwillingness to ... know ... this is ... may not ... one the ... enables him to ... fact ... eq. ... in
              Message 6 of 7 , Jul 3, 2002
                James,
                Interesting distinction. Thanks.
                Daniel

                --- In existlist@y..., "james tan" <tyjfk@h...> wrote:
                >
                > 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@y...>
                > Reply-To: Sartre@y...
                > To: Sartre@y...
                > 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
              • james tan
                deceiving others as a result of deceiving oneself may be true, but i doubt sartre was really as concerned about that as the full implication of deceiving
                Message 7 of 7 , Jul 4, 2002
                  deceiving others as a result of deceiving oneself may be true, but i doubt
                  sartre was really as concerned about that as the full implication of
                  deceiving oneself for oneself (not so much for others, though it comes in
                  the package. but strictly, deception of others is only considered deception
                  [and not mere misleading] when there is a intention, so a sincerely self
                  deceived person cannot deceive others because there isnt any intention to do
                  so; and IF there is intention, a cunning person can present facts and
                  'truth' in such a way that the victim can end up being deceived in
                  interpretation).

                  james.


                  From: praxistence@...
                  Reply-To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com
                  To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [Sartre] Re: Reflections on Bad Faith: To Con Oneself
                  Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 22:29:38 EDT

                  I suspect that when you deceive yourself, you're also going to deceive
                  others: you're seldom going to deceive yourself into believing you are not
                  sick but simultaneously tell others you have TB. I'm guessing (anyone else
                  disagreeing, please challenge) that for Sartre bad faith in deceiving
                  oneself
                  implies that you're likewise gonna be deceiving others.


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                  _________________________________________________________________
                  Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
                  http://www.hotmail.com
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.