Deceit 3

[Enrique Vasquez]

Theword deceit often implies a pattern of behavior, rather than a one-time act. The adjective deceitful can describe something that deceives or is intended to deceive, or someone who is known for engaging in deceit.

True solutions will need to getbeyond the power and fear that currentlydictate the behavior and decisionsof nonprofits and foundations,from CEO to staff to board member.Nonprofits and foundations need to bemore accountable to each other and totheir boards of directors. As long asthe sector lacks objective performanceinformation and measures of effectiveness,power and fear will continue tofill that void and wreak havoc on relationshipsbetween nonprofits, funders,and their boards, undermining our collectivecharitable purposes.

Additionally, in order to end thedances of deceit, board members ofboth nonprofits and foundations needto perform to higher standards andincrease their accountability. Manyboards of directors should take a pagefrom high-engagement philanthropypractitioners and more fully involvethemselves in governance issues of fiscalresponsibility, fundraising, andsocial return on investment. When Ireflect on my own experience as a venturephilanthropist and nonprofitboard member, I know I spent farmore time and energy on my venturefund portfolio. The nonprofitsdeserved the same level of attentionand would have benefited if I andother board members had committedourselves more deeply to a comprehensivegovernance role.

I am an optimist. I believe we canrewrite the score, rebuild the stage,and transform the disingenuous relationshipsand practices in the nonprofitsector, making them more honest andopen. We need to encourage reflectionand the use of data to inform ourpractice, and work toward moreauthentic, transparent relationshipsacross the board. With dedication,coordination, and a willingness to usepower for the greater good, we can allincrease our effectiveness. That is myhope for our future, and who knows,maybe it will be my future as well.

SSIR.org and/or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessaryto its functioning and to our better understanding of user needs.By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking a linkor continuing to otherwise browse this site, you agree to the use of cookies.

The site is secure.

The ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Healthcare professionals often censor their information giving to patients in an attempt to protect them from potentially hurtful, sad or bad news. There is a commonly expressed belief that what people do not know does not harm them. Analysis of doctor and nurse/patient interactions reveals that this well-intentioned but misguided assumption about human behaviour is present at all stages of cancer care. Less than honest disclosure is seen from the moment that a patient reports symptoms, to the confirmation of diagnosis, during discussions about the therapeutic benefits of treatment, at relapse and terminal illness. This desire to shield patients from the reality of their situation usually creates even greater difficulties for patients, their relatives and friends and other members of the healthcare team. Although the motivation behind economy with the truth is often well meant, a conspiracy of silence usually results in a heightened state of fear, anxiety and confusion--not one of calm and equanimity. Ambiguous or deliberately misleading information may afford short-term benefits while things continue to go well, but denies individuals and their families opportunities to reorganize and adapt their lives towards the attainment of more achievable goals, realistic hopes and aspirations. In this paper, some examples and consequences of accidental, deliberate, if well-meaning, attempts to disguise the truth from patients, taken verbatim from interviews, are given, together with cases of unintentional deception or misunderstandings created by the use of ambiguous language. We also provide evidence from research studies showing that although truth hurts, deceit may well hurt more. 'I think the best physician is the one who has the providence to tell to the patients according to his knowledge the present situation, what has happened before, and what is going to happen in the future' (Hippocrates).

Told by Rosemary and Raymond Firth's son, and the daughter of Celia and Edmund Leach, the man Rosemary loved all her life, this part love-story, part biography, part social history is the tale of a highly influential circle of social anthropologists in Britain from the 1930s, through the Second World War, to the end of the century.

The book explores their early influences, their insecurities, their flaws, struggles and achievements. It is a story of passion and commitment, but also of deceit and betrayal, including the inexplicable disappearance, death and alleged murder of a very close friend. It also narrates Rosemary's struggles for emotional and intellectual independence in the face of societal expectations of women and her own guilt, loss and self-doubt.

From the Prologue:

Rosemary loved many people in many different ways, but she loved two men in particular throughout most of her life. One was her husband, Raymond Firth, regarded by some as among the founding fathers of social anthropology. Yet she also retained a passionate devotion to her first love, Edmund Leach, who would subsequently become the public intellectual face of social anthropology in the later 1960s. Both separately and together they were part of the process of defining the nature of this still growing discipline in the first part of the mid-twentieth century.

Hugh Firth, son of Rosemary and Raymond Firth, was a consultant clinical psychologist, now retired. He has published on issues in clinical and organisational psychology, and disability, and more recently on homicide in early medieval Iceland. He continues to teach on organisational relationships, threat, conflict and power.

Loulou Brown, daughter of Edmund and Celia Leach, obtained a diploma in sociology, a degree in social sciences, a master's in women's studies and a master's in English literature. She works as a freelance editor and proofreader, specialising in editing fiction and academic texts in the humanities and social sciences.

LinkedIn and 3rd parties use essential and non-essential cookies to provide, secure, analyze and improve our Services, and to show you relevant ads (including professional and job ads) on and off LinkedIn. Learn more in our Cookie Policy.

Yet I knew of many instances of quite successful lying, and my first studies found people did no better than chance in detecting deceit. Psychiatrists and psychologists were no better than anyone else. I am pleased with the answer that I have found: We are neither perfect nor imperfect as liars, detecting deceit is neither as easy as Freud claimed nor impossible. It makes matters more complex, and therefore more interesting. Our imperfect ability to lie is fundamental to, perhaps necessary for, our existence.

Consider what life would be like if everyone could lie perfectly, or if no one had the ability to lie at all! I have thought about this most in regard to lies about emotions, since those are the hardest lies, and it is emotions that interest me.

Paul Ekman is a well-known psychologist and co-discoverer of micro expressions. He was named one of the 100 most influential people in the world by TIME magazine in 2009. He has worked with many government agencies, domestic and abroad. Dr. Ekman has compiled over 50 years of his research to create comprehensive training tools to read the hidden emotions of those around you.

Deadly Deceit is the second book in the Harbored Secrets series by Natalie Walters. While the setting and characters from the first book have carried over into this second instalment, the main characters and plot are complete and so the two books can be read as standalone titles.

The death of Harold and his last words lead Vivian and Ryan to uncover a whole network of deceit, blackmail, murder and crime. There are misdirections, false leads and multiple suspects to keep readers guessing.

A classic book that analyzes and defines media appeals specific to American pro-fascist and anti-Semite agitators of the 1940s, such as the application of psychosocial manipulation for political ends. The book details psychological deceits that idealogues or authoritarians commonly used. The techniques are grouped under the headings "Discontent", "The Opponent", "The Movement" and "The Leader". The authors demonstrate repetitive patterns commonly utilized, such as turning unfocused social discontent towards a targeted enemy. The agitator positions himself as a unifying presence: he is the ideal, the only leader capable of freeing his audience from the perceived enemy. Yet, as the authors demonstrate, he is a shallow person who creates social or racial disharmony, thereby reinforcing that his leadership is needed. The authors believed fascist tendencies in America were at an early stage in the 1940s, but warned a time might come when Americans could and would be "susceptible to ... [the] psychological manipulation" of a rabble rouser. A book once again relevant in the Trump era, as made clear by Corey Robin's new introduction.

3a8082e126