-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Would This Be A Weakness To A Polygraph Machine?
- Thread starter Eyeron
- Start date
-
- Tags
- lie detectors polygraphs
Jeff Corey
New York Skeptic
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2001
- Messages
- 13,714
This makes no sense. This contradicts itself in so many ways that it is impossible to deal with.
Why don't you try again.
KingMerv00
Penultimate Amazing
Would This Be A Weakness To A Polygraph Machine?
The primary weakness of polygraph machines is that they do not work.
The primary weakness of polygraph machines is that they do not work.
Last edited:
LordoftheLeftHand
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2005
- Messages
- 1,188
Yeah other than that tiny inconvenient fact, their great! (great doorstops, great wastes of resources)
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist Pronouns: He/Him
Except as an intimidation technique towards those who believe that they do work.
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
No it absolutely does make sense.
A great example of this kind of thing are 911 cultists. Their belief in 911 conspiracy nonsense is all a lie because the real evidence backs up the official story. They can not accept the official story under any circumstance, and believe their assumptions very strongly, even though their assumptions of it being an inside job is a lie.
But it's not just limited to them either. There are many people who believe in a lie so strongly that it is the truth to them. Such as those who believe they're psychic.
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
If you know for sure it is a lie, you aren't going to believe it very strongly no matter what. So I'm with Jeff.
KingMerv00
Penultimate Amazing
Thirded. A lie by definition is the assertion of something you believe to be false.
Sorry, just can't agree. The truth is something very different.
People believe lies all the time, far more than you know. I'm just not doing a very good job of explaining it in a manner you can understand. I am not an academic nor am I an overly verbose kind of person, and that is the reason why I am unable to explain it to you in a fashion you can understand.
But this is a real phenomena.
People believe lies all the time, far more than you know. I'm just not doing a very good job of explaining it in a manner you can understand. I am not an academic nor am I an overly verbose kind of person, and that is the reason why I am unable to explain it to you in a fashion you can understand.
But this is a real phenomena.
scratchy
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2004
- Messages
- 624
Sure, its an interesting thought that the human psyche has layers of thruthfullness, selfdeception and and lies, with grey areas between them. But discussing it as a possible source for inaccuracy of the lie detector is like discussing if theres something wrong with the sparkplugs, when the whole engine is missing.
Wolfman
Chief Solipsistic, Autosycophant
I think that some definition of terms is needed here.
"Telling a lie" is subjective; it is based on whether or not the person making the statement believes it to be true or not; it is not based on whether the statement itself is factually true.
Example: A Christian believes the Earth was created in 7 days. Physical evidence shows very much the contrary. What the Christian is stating is not true, but they are not telling a lie...they are stating honestly what they believe to be true. On the other hand, if they said the earth was billions of years old, but didn't believe it, they'd be lying.
A lie detector (even if we assumed such a machine worked) is absolutely incapable of knowing objective reality, and determining whether what a person says coincides with or contradicts reality. It can tell only if the person who is making a statement believes that statement to be true. So the objective truth of a statement is entirely irrelevant to the question.
Prometheus
Acolyte of Víðarr
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 50,595
Well, it does fit, but not entirely.
There several things I'm thinking of.
Examples:
People who engage in deviant behaviors never see themselves as deviants or themselves as being normal. Such as the child molester. But believing they're not a deviant is a lie.
Tyrants, such as Stalin, also never see themselves as doing any wrong and what they're doing is right even though they are causing a lot of harm.
People who abuse their spouses emotionally and physically often know it's wrong to do so but continue to do so.
Gang-bangers often know their way of life is bad and wrong but still do it anyway.
Smokers know it's wrong to smoke but do it anyway.
Sylvia Brown. People who believe in psychic phenomena or supernatural events won't change their minds when they're shown that what they're doing is a lie.
There several things I'm thinking of.
Examples:
People who engage in deviant behaviors never see themselves as deviants or themselves as being normal. Such as the child molester. But believing they're not a deviant is a lie.
Tyrants, such as Stalin, also never see themselves as doing any wrong and what they're doing is right even though they are causing a lot of harm.
People who abuse their spouses emotionally and physically often know it's wrong to do so but continue to do so.
Gang-bangers often know their way of life is bad and wrong but still do it anyway.
Smokers know it's wrong to smoke but do it anyway.
Sylvia Brown. People who believe in psychic phenomena or supernatural events won't change their minds when they're shown that what they're doing is a lie.
If they do not believe they are a deviant then, if they say they are not one they are not lying.
We would consider them incorrect, but it's only a lie if they believe they are not telling the truth. Which they don't.
A belief in itself is not a lie even if it is incorrect (and you're in a further complex area if you assign all behavior as morally 'right' or 'wrong').
It is only a lie if you state differently to what you believe to be true.
This is a yet further different concept.
Right and wrong are not equivalent to lying/not lying.
The concept of lying is not even applicable to that example.
Again you are simply describing things that could be considered morally right or wrong.
That isn't to do with lying.
Ditto.
Lying is not about 'right' and 'wrong' but whether somebody is stating somethng as fact that they believe to not be fact.
Even further removed from the concept of lying.
This example considers 'right' and 'wrong' in terms of good for you/bad for you.
What does this have to do with a lie detector?
If you asked such a person whether they thought smoking was good for you they would say 'No' and be telling the truth.
But they do not believe it is a lie. When shown evidence they may rationalise it somehow so they still believe it is true even in the face of evidence. Or they may accept the evidence and alter their opinion.
But either way, whatever they subsequently believe after the evidence, they still are not lying when they state that is what they believe.
Lanzy
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2007
- Messages
- 976
IF (huge if here) a lie dector had enough "magic" in it to actually be able to tell if someone is lying, then it would always work. To do this it would have to know truths from untruths to infinity, thus it would always know when it heard the truth and would always know when a lie was spoken.
Assuming it could work without magic means it can be fooled, which mean it doesn't work as a lie detector, which is pretty much the way they actually work.
Assuming it could work without magic means it can be fooled, which mean it doesn't work as a lie detector, which is pretty much the way they actually work.