Postperson wrote:
Accusations can actually be confessions, so sometimes you can interpret their accusations (of being a liar) as an admission on their part.
I don't understand.
But it's an intriguing idea. Care to elaborate?
Quote:
I have frequently had the feeling that I am being disbelieved. It makes me want to explain things in detail, and explaining when something is challenged is itself taken as an indicator of guilt by some people.
Yes.....if I start to get uncomfortable and try to explain myself, it's as if that in itself can be taken as evidence of guilt. A solicitor once told me that if a judge notices a witness squirming while giving evidence or answering difficult questions under cross-examination, then the judge will often assume the witness is making something up. But I reckon that often the person is telling the truth, but just feeling guilty because of lack of confidence, and so looking guilty and being judged guilty. There's something very unfair and competitive about all this - as if many people just don't care whether the truth is being spoken or not....if somebody doesn't come over as confident, they're deemed to be weak, and therefore pushed down.
Horrible isn't it? Everybody knows that some people are good liars, yet many people still judge what is said to them as if confident delivery equates to truth, as if there's a very primordial gut reaction that trumps critical thinking. Ever noticed that politicians are nearly always very skilled at coming over as if they're being completely honest?
Thanks for your answers, folks
It looks like some of you get this problem and some don't.
As for me, I do get the problem sometimes. Other times, particularly if I've anticipated it might happen, I can get quite brazen and resolute about what I'm saying.