Lie of Omission and Truth

Just as deceitful as right out telling a lie, is the lie of omission, where you actually refrain from saying anything, as an alternative to blatantly lying.

If you feel your personal exposure is too great to be honest and lying feels like too extreme an option, you might opt to initiate a deception by omission, to deceive by saying nothing. And if you do, a peculiar thing seems to take place. In most cases, even if with the best intentions, even though you have said nothing, people who have lies of omission between them tend to drift apart.

You can justify to yourself, “Well, at least I didn’t lie,” but the consequences are dire, if not worse than outright lying.

By withholding the truth, you also withhold vulnerability, love, and connection. Any authentic connection which may have existed between two individuals where one or each harbor lies of omission continues to erode until nothing is left.

Not being able to live life as an open and honest individual could very well keep you from achieving your highest and best, from having all the desires of your heart. All the life to live that is your divine birthright withheld from you as you practice deception by withholding.

Oh, you may have some degree of success as measured by your peers, but true love, joy, and happiness will remain elusive experiences and expressions in this life.

A deep connection between two individuals includes celebrating each individuality, understanding that no two people are identical, allowing and honoring those things that make each of us unique. That means that there will be times when we experience separation having different past experiences, differing points of view, and moments of uncomfortableness, as we are equally vulnerable and honest which strengthens the relationship.

No one can tell you what is true. Only you can know what truth at any given time is, for everything you believe is true. You know it. You can feel it, and you must find a way to express your truth. You should be able to attract those who are willing to listen to those things that are important to you without judgment, and you likewise in loving reciprocity.

If you are honest, you are true to and honest with yourself, then you can speak your truth with integrity and honor, which can (and should) make you vulnerable. Being transparent and honest leaves you at risk of being disagreed with, challenged, attacked, or left wide open for haters to exploit.

Honesty can include the truth in general, as follows:

Question: How are you feeling today?

Honest Answer: Okay, I’ve been better, but seeing you makes me feel better right now.

You can give an honest answer to most anyone, but vulnerable answers are best saved for only those people who you can trust with more intimate details of your life. You have vetted them, and you quite convinced of their trustworthiness.

Vulnerable Answer: Okay, I’ve been feeling like I’ve let my family down because I could be making more money and giving them a better quality of life, but I’m working on my attitude and trying to find other ways to show them how much I love them.

Some things are best kept in private, while others can be shouted from the rooftops, and if you have promised a friend to be discrete with the sensitive details of their life, by all means, do so. Unless you are a priest, you may be lawfully compelled to testify under oath, but in the absence of such a court order, honor your friend’s request and keep it to yourself.

To trust your friend means you believe that your friend will keep those things which you have shared in confidentiality will remain safely guarded by your friend, and your friend believes you to be trustworthy in kind.

Is Withholding the Truth the Same as Blatantly Lying to You?

The act of withholding the truth is a controversial topic, with debates over whether it should be considered a form of lying or not. Some assert that it is merely a strategic data omission and not an outright lie, while others say that withholding information is a lie of omission.

The Psychology of Withholding the Truth

For the average liar, withholding the truth may serve as a tactical maneuver to avoid the guilt associated with direct lies. By omitting crucial details, individuals may convince themselves that they are not actively engaging in bold-faced deceit. Psychologists often refer to this behavior as a rationalization, a self-protective mechanism that enables individuals to reconcile their actions with their own moral compass.

Pathological liars, in particular, may frequently resort to this tactic, justifying their actions by emphasizing what they did not say rather than what they did say. However, the question remains: Can withholding the truth truly be separated from the concept of lying?

The Moral Implications

The Catholic Church, along with various moral and ethical frameworks, takes a firm stance on the issue of withholding the truth. From a moral perspective, the act of intentionally omitting crucial information is considered deceptive and contrary to principles of honesty and transparency,  a venial sin according to Catholicism. Many argue that by withholding information, individuals are manipulating the truth, leading to potential harm or misunderstanding.

In the eyes of morality, the intent behind withholding the truth matters significantly. If the intention is to mislead or deceive, regardless of the means employed, it can be viewed as a breach of trust and a departure from ethical conduct.

Legal Perspectives

The legal system also weighs in on the question of whether withholding the truth is tantamount to lying. In various jurisdictions, the act of withholding information can have legal consequences, particularly when it comes to contracts, agreements, and legal obligations. Courts often recognize the importance of full disclosure to ensure fairness and justice.

One notable legal concept is the duty to disclose, which is a legal obligation requiring parties to reveal all material facts relevant to a transaction. Failure to fulfill this duty can result in legal repercussions, emphasizing the significance of transparency in legal matters.

Examples

To illustrate the blurred lines between withholding the truth and lying, consider the scenario of a job interview. An applicant might withhold information about a past employment termination, arguing that they were not explicitly asked about it. While they might not have told a direct lie, the omission of such a crucial detail could be deemed deceptive by the employer.

In a legal context, a seller withholding information about defects in a property during a real estate transaction could lead to legal consequences. The buyer may argue that the seller’s failure to disclose materially affected their decision, thus constituting a form of deception.

Withholding in the Name of Love

There are situations where withholding information can be motivated by compassion or an act of love. In certain contexts, the decision to withhold details may be guided by the desire to protect someone emotionally or physically, maintain their well-being, or uphold a greater good. Here are a few scenarios where compassionate withholding of the truth might be considered justifiable:

Protecting from Harm:

Example: A doctor may choose not to disclose the full severity of a patient’s condition if revealing it could cause extreme distress without offering any actionable steps for improvement. This is often seen in cases of terminal illnesses, where the focus is on preserving the patient’s emotional state.
Preserving Emotional Well-being:

Example: Parents might decide not to share certain family struggles or financial difficulties with their children to shield them from unnecessary stress. This compassionate act is driven by the intention to maintain a positive and stable environment for the well-being of the family.
Surprise or Gift Planning:

Example: Planning a surprise party or gift involves withholding information temporarily. This is done to enhance the joy and excitement of the recipient, demonstrating that withholding can be an act of love aimed at creating positive and memorable experiences.
Personal Relationships:

Example: In certain situations, individuals may choose not to disclose past mistakes or regrets to their partners if doing so would cause undue pain and not contribute constructively to the relationship. The intention is to protect the emotional connection rather than deceive maliciously.
Children and Sensitive Information:

Example: Parents may withhold certain details about difficult family situations or personal hardships from their young children until they are old enough to understand and cope with the information. This is often done to shield them from unnecessary emotional burdens.
It’s important to note that the justification for withholding information in these cases lies in the intention to prioritize the well-being and emotional health of the individuals involved. Compassionate withholding is not synonymous with deceit, as the underlying motivation is rooted in care and consideration for the feelings and mental state of others.

However, it’s crucial to strike a balance and recognize that openness and honesty are generally valued in relationships. In some cases, the decision to withhold information may need to be reassessed over time, and communication should be encouraged when the timing is right.

So, is Withholding the Truth Lying?

In conclusion, the question of whether withholding the truth is a lie involves a complex interplay of moral, psychological, and legal considerations. While some may attempt to rationalize this behavior as a strategy to avoid outright lies, both moral and legal frameworks emphasize the importance of transparency and full disclosure. The implications of withholding information, intentional or not, should not be underestimated, as they can have far-reaching consequences in personal relationships, professional settings, and legal proceedings.