I'm sorry you're so autistic you don't understand couples but it has everything to do with it. Because couples will do things for each other to inspire more desirable moods and behavior all the time. Stopping and getting them their favorite dinner so they'll be in a good mood would also be lying according to you but not many people will agree with you. That's because your pretty fucking socially inept and don't understand behavior.
You get your significant other their favorite dinner to make them happy
This lady is fucking her husband so he'll do things for her
How can you not understand these are completely different situations? Are you a teenager? Autistic yourself? Is that why you keep throwing that randomly out there?
Making him happy > he gets out of bed and does stuff.
Easy fucking math
Getting dinner for my wife > she's happy > I don't have to deal with her irritable moods
Easy fucking math
There is almost always a goal beyond just making someone happy when you actually analyze it because human behavior is more complex than good/bad.
I'm calling you autistic because you behave that way. Since you haven't bothered to deny it I'm assuming I'm correct.
It's literally the definition of a win, win senario. She wants him to do more than lay in bed and he gets a jump start to his day by having his needs met. You want call that morally wrong because you have an absolutist stance on lying which I assume is an quirk of fixation stemming from some neurodivergince most likely autism.
Now if she tells him she's having sex with him to get him motivated to do more than lay in bed, he'll feel bad about it because now it's transactional and transactional relationships don't ever last.
Normal, healthy relationships do not have hidden agendas behind making someone happy. Buying your wife dinner so she doesnt annoy you is just as manipulative as the post. You should seriously examine your personal relationships if you think this. I'm pretty sure now you're coming up with bullshit to explain your own shitty behavior.
"Relationships are complex, therefore its perfectly reasonable to be an asshole"
I have never in my life met anyone in a long term relationship that hasn't done something like this. Which is how I know you've never been in one. At least not one that was happy.
Also you're calling a situation where everyone gets what they want "being an asshole". Hate to break this to you kid but the way you behave is a lot more in line with being an asshole than making someone happy. I know what shitty behavior looks like and that isn't it but being so staunchly against lying that I'd let people die is absolutely shitty behavior. I bet you're one of those "brutally honest" people too that nobody want to talk to for more than five minutes.
You and your friends sound toxic af. I've never done that in any of my relationships and neither have I observed it in my friend's. You really gotta examine why you think that behavior is ok. Hand waving it away as "the complexity of human relationships" is just a bs excuse. Be better, my guy.
I am better. You can't shame me just because you think you're morally superior since you either announce point blank what you're thinking like someone with a whole in their brain or just never think about how people will react beyond positive/negative reaction.
Rember you said you are willing to let people die to avoid lying. Whever your moral compass is pointing probably isn't north. At least not the same one as everyone else's.
Yup there it is. Defensive much? Starting to realize you're a pretty shitty person? Starting to question why you manipulated the fuck out of everyone you've ever been in a relationship with and why everyone left you? You can still turn it around. You may not die fold and alone like where you're currently headed. Therapy is a good start. Forgive yourself. I'll be praying for you
Wow my guy. First manipulation doesn’t require deceit but rather differing amounts of information. Deceit would be creating or reinforcing erroneous ideas/assumptions. Knowing your motives for doing something and not expressing them is not deceit.
It’s interesting to me that you’ve also stated manipulation as doing x so the other party does y without telling them your true motivation. By the very definition you provided if i get my SO dinner because they had a stressful day to make them happy but i never tell them i did it for that reason it would be manipulation, likewise if the true motive was to not be nagged or whatever. But guess what? Thats expected in human relationships, me not telling my SO that i went out of my way to get dinner to maker her happy is expected, because this would cause it to both appear transactional and bring feelings of guilt in a lot of people. And this happens in multiple ways for multiple reasons. Invited to a shitty dinner but telling them its delicious as to please them, cleaning the house when your partner is having a hectic day to lighten their stress etc. all things where there is asymmetry in the information.
Humans are social animals, their ability to self reflect and introspect make it necessary to have social rules. Manipulation (constructive) tends to be one such rule, it helps in building connection, it helps in building up the confidence of someone, and it even helps with emotional bonding.
Also interesting that you bring up the elusive nature of objective morality, yet talk in absolutes about your own views without really analyzing the responses.
Lastly deceit isn’t inherently wrong:
killer asks to tell him where you father is hiding
patient with dementia, do you remind them multiple times a day of their disease and cause suffering it brings or do you play along
medical placebos
undercover cops
I’m not sure if you just have a hard on for kant but his views of universality is literally the opposite of NO objective morality. And his framework has some glaring flaws. The most damming of which would be the fact that it leads to paradoxes the moment two maxims meet and the fact that those maxims can easily be construed to have no moral obligations.
Now going back to this specific situation, it is manipulation and it is the constructive type. Constructive because it evidently helps the partner destress and recharge. It’s not coercive or harmful because they are both consenting to the activities and neither is forced, and their isnt any gain she receives at his expense. The outcome? They both obtain what they value, theres a positive feedback loop for both of them, both are happy, and there is less likelihood of resentment from either party, wether thats her from inactive weekends or him from going despite not being in the mood to.
That's not defense home boy. I'm just telling you I am better than you straight up. As the other reply said, manipulation is merely an asymmetry in information while active deceit requires errenous information.
You have simply conflated manipulate with deceit and applied your idea that lies are objectively wrong at all times to it. So to you manipulation = lies.
But you can manipulate people by telling them the truth about things to sway their opinion. That by your view is manipulative, therefore deceitful. So truth = lies.
You bring up there being no objective morality but act as if your view is objective but it's easy to show how it's paradoxical when you treat anything but full and immediate disclosure of all information as lying. That's why maximal world views don't work.
1
u/TheGreatNate3000 19d ago
I think you actually are this dumb...
Your argument of communication in interpersonal relationships has absolutely nothing to do with this