Hacker News Reader

Comment by vnorby | Hacker News Reader

I appreciate you linking to this article but I wonder what you were doing browsing the archives of Esquire. To be honest, I did not see much of a conclusion from the article, but I enjoyed reading it. Also, I thought I would let you know that I am writing this comment to get up-voted, so that I can increase my karma. If I increase my karma, people may remember my username, and later up-vote the articles I submit about my company. That will increase traffic to my website. Eventually, the result of this will be that I become rich and famous.

View on HN

I have the same problem with your comment that I have with the article. What you're doing is a kind of kitschy psuedo-honesty that I think the author is engaging in to some extent. None of the author's admissions were that risky. They were refreshing to read and perhaps a little courageous, but it's stuff you might have guessed was there already. If, hypothetically, his wife left him because of a sexual fetish, that would be no more or less of a non-sequitur than anything else he admitted to, but much more potentially damaging to his reputation. (Again, the preceding was a hypothetical.)

It's not that A.J. Jacobs should have to hold himself to that standard of the subject he's reporting on, but that he's purporting-to-do-so-but-not-really, which is irritating. For some reason his (and your) version of "radical honesty" becomes a game where you just craft a succession of start-and-stop sentences with cute, largely forgivable admissions of self-interest. I'm not against humor but I'm suspicious that for some it functions as a coping mechanism that substitutes for sincere engagement with an uncomfortable idea.

I did not discover this article by browsing Esquire. It was part of Luke Muelhauser's list of favorite articles.

For me, there's definitely an attention-getting side to the "radical honesty" as presented in the article. I'm more inclined to believe people value the truth when they are:

a) good listeners b) rigorous with facts c) possessed of humility and respect for others

One can display such traits and thereby signal valuing the truth in a more substantive way than the behavior presented in the article, which I suspect could be easily faked (at least at first) by someone with borderline personality disorder.

You described that beautifully. I've known people who use that sort of flashy pseudo-honesty who intend to be shocking and get a reaction out of people, and while it does work for some, I'm usually inclined to point out what they're doing in hopes that they'd stop and I could never find which words to say. It irritates me.

I thought the comment was very funny. It was clearly a riff on the article. Maybe you need to get a sense of humor.

I appreciate you writing this comment. I resent the fact that you wrote it first before I could think of it. I hope I don't get down voted for continuing a thread in this reddit-esque manner. Although I try not to be attached, I check my karma every time I log in, with the hopes that my opinions have been validated and accepted.

Yeah except what you're doing with this comment is so painfully obvious. This isn't anything close to Radical Honesty. You're just saying something vaguely taboo, in a space where this is already accepted, and to absolutely no end.

Nothing is gained from your comment, and I can picture you sitting there with a stupid smile on your face thinking, "oh aren't I clever! I understood something enough to copy its form." It's pissing me off but no one here should care about that.

What people should take away is that RH doesn't just mean be a little dickish all the time. It means that when you have something important to say, something that has a direct impact on the people around you, you should not worry about spinning or softening it. Don't just tell the hot girl you were trying to look at her tits. Tell your wife about it. It matters to your wife more.

Doesn't RH require you tell anyone who happens to be in earshot at the time. If the hot girl is in front of you, you tell her about the fantasy. If you kind of don't trust Blacks, you say it when you come across a few of them when you're walking to the bus stop -- if it crosses your mind.

If you think your boss is a jerk, you tell him everyday. If you think your daughter is not cute enough to get a good boyfriend, you tell her that whenever it pops into your mind.

The article notes its is if there is no filter from your brain to your mouth. You say it when you think it.

Personally I think it is a stupid idea. There's a reason that the filter exists -- otherwise we likely would have evolved to have no such filter (the filter was probably an evolutionary development as I suspect the default is to have no such filter).

>You say it when you think it.

Anyone who can't think faster than they can talk ought to go get a job washing dishes somewhere. So people are still needing to filter what they say, since no one can say everything they think.

The question is more "what if you could talk as fast as you think?"

French stand-up artist Pierre Desproges once said "one can laugh about anything, but not with everyone."

It's the same with radical honesty. I've been able to enjoy "radically honest" types of friendships. It works, it really does, it's on a different level of enlightenment from any other kind of relationship, until someone simply refuses to communicate anymore for some reason.

It's one of those things you find out of sheer luck, and when you do, you'd better milk it for all its worth while it lasts. The closest description would be that of a jazz band improvization ("boeuf") turning music into something else entirely.

In the interest of temporary honesty in this thread, as someone about to tip 18k karma, I warn that having lots of karma on HN has proven to be not particularly useful and doesn't seem to help my items get upvoted at all ;-)

I started out thinking you were funny and hip for writing the comment, and then I realized you were only honest to be upvoted, and you are probably not as honest in real life and I got angry that I did not think about this first. Also, I would like to write like Hemingway.

You're both just trying to be clever by aping the article without putting any thought into what it means.

I think we succeeded, and you are just jealous.

This was a hilarious comment and I also enjoy this thread in general.

I'm trying to decide if you really enjoyed it, or are deceiving me (us) to get upvoted. I am ashamed of myself for thinking another human being is being deceitful, when in fact he may actually be being completely honest.

I am now worrying that telling complete truths is taking too much time, self-reflection and thinking to be good as a day-to-day activity.

Legitimately funny. Reminded me of my favorite Futurama quote:

"You're just jealous."

"No I'm not! Oh wait, I am! But my point remains valid."

I don't know if your jealousy remark was accurate or not, but this whole thing is definitely amusing.

I think you started off strong but you went too far with the rich and famous part, which left me thinking you are full of shit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com