Your Life is Like Fox News: Reality Distortion Fields & Why Self-Deception is Inevitable

“I’m a great believer in self-deception. If you asked me what makes the world go round, I would say self-deception. Self deception allows us to create a consistent narrative for ourselves that we actually believe. I’m not saying that the truth doesn’t matter. It does. But self-deception is how we survive” Errol Morris, documentary filmmaker, The Fog of War, Tabloid.

I would much rather listen to somebody who is trying to figure out what they think, than somebody who already knows what they think. I’d rather eaves drop on someone who is making up their mind, than somebody whose mind is already made up. It’s why I can’t watch to Fox News. In the first chapter of his book Eating the Dinosaur, Chuck Klosterman plays around with why this might be.

He starts by asking a simple question: Do you really know what you think? If the mind exists somewhere inside my own body, then shouldn’t I have better access to my own mind than anyone else does? Shouldn’t I be able to question my own mind, and get more honest answers from myself than any other questioner? The answer may not be as simple as you think.

We are all constantly attempting to construct our own identity. The question in the back of our minds is constantly “Who am I?” It’s an existential constant.

One of the ways we construct identity is by talking  about our lives. We tell stories, share opinions, and talk about our lives. Say you are at lunch with your colleagues. When you each share snapshots of your own lives, you do this in part to build self-identity. When you tell a story about your home life, you are saying “This is part of who I am–part of how I see myself.” When you talk about the world and give your opinion, you do this in part to to build your own reality. When you talk about todays news, you are saying, “This is what I think reality is like.”

What’s fascinating about this sharing, in Klosterman’s opinion, is that as we do this we constantly edit. We don’t tell everything about our lives. We just tell the parts we want each other to know. The way I share an opinion about a political event with an extremely conservative friend, might be very different from what I would say to a liberal feminist. Klosterman says we do this not primarily for others, but for ourselves. Like the stars of our own reality show, we are constantly attempting to project our own identity out into the world.

Hence we are not very accurate in the way we tell stories about our lives, and about the world. We constantly edit what we think about our own stories, and the things we see happening in the world. Nothing we say is objective, because we are not neutral observers of our lives. We are players. We have a point of view, and it is not unbiased. So we are saddled with unavoidable subjectivity. We have perspective, our perspective. And it is inescapable. We are walking reality distortion fields bumping into one another.

The reason we are constantly editing our lives is that we have a deep need to feel consistent. We need to feel as though our lives are conforming to a coherent narrative. So we will do everything we can to shape our perception of actual events to fit that narrative, including edit our own perception of reality. We edit the way we talk about ourselves. We edit our account of “what really happened” when we had that conversation with our boss. We edit the details of a news event to conform to our opinion about it. We edit the words that come out of our spouses mouth in the middle of an argument.

We are constantly editing our perception of reality so that it will match our preconceived narrative about who we are as persons. In that way, we are all exactly like Fox News. We have an agenda. And that agenda colors everything about our perception of reality and the way we engage the world.

This is why I’m instinctively averse to people who think they are always right. I’m instantly skeptical of someone who purports to always know exactly what they think. I’m talking about myself here as well. The more certain I hear myself sounding, the more skeptical I am of my own opinion.

Only a person who is deeply self-deceived would claim to always be right, and always know the truth about what’s happening in their world. This does not mean I think truth doesn’t matter. In fact, I think the truth is of ultimate importance. I just don’t trust my ability (or yours), to sum it up accurately. Nobody can be right about everything all the time. So we should probably be a little more humble about everything.

This is why I would rather talk with somebody who is still deciding what they think yet about any given issue, than with somebody who is absolutely convinced they are right. The former is more honest and real. The latter is a projection of personal identity.

Morris again, as quoted by Klosterman,

“I don’t feel like I know myself, let alone the people I interview. I might actually know the people I interview better than I know myself. A friend of mine once said that you can never trust a person who doesn’t talk much, because how else do you know what you are thinking? Just by the act of being willing to talk about oneself, the person is revealing something about who they are.”

So, when I talk about my life, I’m not revealing who I am so much as I’m revealing who I want you to think I am. And your reaction will be slanted–edited to fit with your own version of reality. In other words, your reaction will not be based solely on reality either. It will be based on what you need reality to be in order to feel consistent about your own personal narrative.

Reality is reality. But our perceptions of reality are all very dynamic and fluid.

This is why it is interesting to listen people who are still trying to make up their minds, and boring to listen to someone who thinks they are right. I’m not even convinced they really know what they think, because what they think about what they think is necessarily a distortion.

Perhaps this is also why I’m drawn to mystery, and wonder, and awe. I don’t want to get rid of the category of truth, I just want it to be an open ended conversation. I’m a Christian, so ultimately I think Jesus is the truth, and this truth is the unavoidable reality into which we will all eventually bump. But my ability to describe this reality is fraught with self-deception. So the conversation must keep going. Only then can we all spiral closer and closer to that which is really real. The moment we freeze, solidify, harden, and close off, we lock ourselves inside our own unreality. That is, by the way, the very definition of what we call hell.

About Tim Suttle

Find out more about Tim at TimSuttle.com

Tim Suttle is the senior pastor of RedemptionChurchkc.com. He is the author of several books including his most recent - Shrink: Faithful Ministry in a Church Growth Culture (Zondervan 2014), Public Jesus (The House Studio, 2012), & An Evangelical Social Gospel? (Cascade, 2011). Tim's work has been featured at The Huffington Post, The Washington Post, Sojourners, and other magazines and journals.

Tim is also the founder and front-man of the popular Christian band Satellite Soul, with whom he toured for nearly a decade. The band's most recent album is "Straight Back to Kansas." He helped to plant three thriving churches over the past 13 years and is the Senior Pastor of Redemption Church in Olathe, Kan. Tim's blog, Paperback Theology, is hosted at Patheos.

  • Larry

    Well said Tim— often in church settings one is not allowed to hover over an issue before clicking on a proposal. And once that proposed interpretation is clicked you must forever own it. No one wants to hear an issue discussed by being prefaced with the assertion “this is my understanding of the issue at this point in my theological journey”. We like dogmatic certainty, especially when prefaced with the assertion that the “Bible is clear on this issue”! One might wish we were better skilled to ask good questions than to make dogmatic affirmations that an issue is forever settled in precisely the way we understand the issue.

    • swbarnes2

      We like dogmatic certainty

      What a bizarre mindset from a religion that teaches as a major tenet that humanity is, down to its core, fallible and flawed.

  • Psycho Gecko

    I would take issue with how you apply this to everything but “ultimately I think Jesus is the truth, and this truth is the unavoidable reality into which we will all eventually bump.”

    That shows a certain blind spot right there.

  • Jerry Lynch

    There are those, like the fictional character Sherlock Holmes, who have incredible powers of perception, a keen eye for the truth and deductive reasoning. 999 out of a thousand would miss the detail and its significance. This is not to say that such a person could not be wrong or self-deceived just far, far less so than the general population. Which most would find extremely annoying. And a few would find extremely impressive. It is the ones without such a gift that are impressed who are gifted with that awe and wonder you speak off. They are open to discovery and thus still maturing in spirit, not stagnating with certainty.

    I would say that all of us have anomalies, contradictions, and blind spots within our outlook and character. I would add that most people are not only unaware of this fact about their nature but would also patently deny its existence. Yet there are a few blessed with a basic honesty and openness about themselves that are not only aware of these shortcomings but actually welcoming in them being revealed.

    Everything good about the mind is passive: it requires surrender rather than effort. Spontaneity, curiosity, wonder, awe, love, creativity, and finally a will dependent on God (not its own intent or understanding) are not to be directed but allowed to flow. Self-deception gets its place in the mind from the paradoxical need to know things with certainty. Fear plays a large role in this need. To say “I know” is a superstitious fetish fashioned unconsciously to ward off the boogie man of vulnerability, which is ironically what is vital to come to our greatest freedom and deepest joy.

    • Jerry Lynch

      Anais Nin wrote: “We do not see things as they are but as we are.” I would say this is true of every soul on this planet, yet need to add this addendum: this is true only to widely varying degrees, from 99% to 1% of such perception. .

    • Rick D.

      I agree.

  • Y. A. Warren

    “The moment we freeze, solidify, harden, and close off, we lock ourselves inside our own unreality.”

    Isn’t this what religions have done by limiting what is considered “sacred” scripture only to ancient texts?

  • Rick D.

    The idea of being a friend would involve trust.

    It is important at the beginning of any relationship that those
    involved keep trust in the center. It is to be earned, it is to be
    rewarded, and it is to be cherished.
    It is in this way that true friends are united.

    Adam and Eve were not required to understand every little nuance of their reality.
    All they had to do was trust God.
    Abraham pleased God by trusting Him as well as David.
    We are in the same position.

    The placebo effect requires us to trust in a deception.
    No deception no placebo effect. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/…l-not-exactly/

    Our reality appears to have some element of deception built into it.
    Speed of light measurements fluctuate for no known reason, outside the value of the margin of error.
    http://www.zmescience.com/science/ph…acuum-0432432/
    http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog…t-varies-.html

  • Rick D.

    Theory of reality
    Truth is the highest energy state of a system, it is also the foundation or
    unity.
    Innocence is the ability to see things for what they are.
    Intelligence is the ability to make great conceptual leaps.
    Knowledge is the physical manifestation of consciousness.
    Wisdom is the ability to project into the future and see the consequences of every choice.
    As
    we continue our journey through life we built up layers of filters in
    our minds until innocence is buried. A small child is closer to
    innocence than an adult.
    These filters can be beneficial in a
    material sense or harmful in a spiritual sense and affect our perception
    of the world around us.
    They have an effect on the degrees of freedom in a fractal sense. The limiting of our choices can be expressed mathematically.
    The resolution of a system defines the limits of any value assigned to it.
    Infinity could be the changing value inside of a cycle.
    Love only has value if it is given away.
    Freewill is the material expression of love.
    If reality contains both infinity and unity then it is either is a multifaceted jewel or the singularity dancing.
    There
    is a fractal and holographic aspect to our reality. There is at one
    level a material expression of the information stored holographically
    that we perceive. At a deeper level we connect to this information
    through our consciousness and every choice we make is branching out in a
    fractal pattern.

    The tree of knowledge of good and evil.
    The tree of life.
    The tree is a fractal representation of the heavens and the earth.
    It is inside of the time domain.
    It is consciousness.
    Choices bifurcating there way to somewhere or some-when else.
    There are only so many choices that can be made in one lifetime but every choice branches out into infinity.
    Notice
    that in the lower half of the tree (the root system) which represents
    the earth, most of the paths lead to the abyss, only one path leads to
    the light.
    Every choice has a fractal quality to it and you have to figure out which way leads to the light.
    Love and freewill are connected.
    Stay on the path of love.
    This path leads to the light.
    All of the other paths lead to the abyss/chaos.
    The right hand path
    While you may agree with some points, you will probably not agree with all points.
    There
    is what I will call the religion of the 10,000 lies. It does not matter
    which of these lies you believe, they are all the same religion.
    Then there is truth, which I will call a secure foundation.
    This
    quest for truth is what I will call the right hand path. When you make a
    decision ask yourself, is it true, is it kind, is it helpful. This is
    the golden rule.
    The difference that becomes a point of contention is
    that I believe I have to rely on the still small voice, because I do
    not possess the understanding required to make these choices correctly
    every time. I am human and so I fail to make the correct choice, or to
    hear the still small voice on occasion.
    The right hand path/choice leads to the light. This is the straight and narrow road.
    The left hand path/choice leads to the darkness/abyss/chaos. This is the broad way that leads to destruction.
    I also believe that Jesus made the correct choice every single time. He is a trailblazer, the one way out of this fractal maze.
    The scaffolding we use to ask the right questions may not necessarily be of any benefit when trying to answer those questions.
    These filters in our minds may block the direction we should be looking.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X