posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 01:12 PM
We all think we "know" things, a sense I don't even have to describe. Something I was already aware of, that lying on a regular basis affects the
accuracy of that essential sense of knowingness, had a truly public field-test during the recent U.S. presidential campaign, especially in its final
I'll take it as a given that we know Mitt Romney's campaign lied in ads, in person, and probably in private. To me it was the most dishonest
high-level campaign I've ever seen. So what did they the public figures involved with his campaign "know"? Mitt Romney, his wife, his advisors, his
pollsters, the media figures supporting him, operatives like Karl Rove, major GOP strategists, and many others "knew", with their sense of
knowingness, that he would win the election. And they amazingly held this belief deep into election night, even when the outcome appeared final. They
were all totally wrong.
So do lies affect that wonderful sense of "knowing"? They surely seem to. People in my life who lie think they "know" things but are so often not only
wrong, but they "know" just the opposite of what actually occurred or will occur. People I've known who don't or seldom lie, and make a point of not
lying, know things easily and correctly.
There seems to be a direct coorelation here, and the Romney family and supporters experience on election night does seem to count as an interesting
field test of the theory.
edit on 3-1-2013 by Aleister because: edit
edit on 3-1-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason