WEBVTT - Authenticity, Part 1 0:00:03.080 --> 0:00:06.840 Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind, a production of iHeartRadio. 0:00:12.720 --> 0:00:14.400 Hey you welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind. 0:00:14.480 --> 0:00:17.560 My name is Robert Mayant, and I am Joe McCormick. 0:00:17.720 --> 0:00:20.600 And today we're going to be kicking off a series 0:00:20.800 --> 0:00:24.560 on a concept that I have been thinking about a 0:00:24.600 --> 0:00:29.200 lot lately. That is the idea of authenticity. I've been 0:00:29.240 --> 0:00:31.440 thinking about doing an episode on this sort of off 0:00:31.480 --> 0:00:35.519 and on for I think several years now. Authenticity is 0:00:36.000 --> 0:00:38.840 really interesting to me because it is one of those 0:00:39.360 --> 0:00:43.640 concepts that is extremely important. It's highly relevant to our lives. 0:00:44.159 --> 0:00:46.760 We probably think about it every single day, and at 0:00:46.760 --> 0:00:50.000 the same time, it is sort of vaguely defined. We 0:00:50.120 --> 0:00:53.280 don't often stop to think about what it really means, 0:00:53.960 --> 0:00:58.320 or to analyze how we evaluated, or what our criteria 0:00:58.520 --> 0:01:02.400 of authenticity are and so forth. And I think that's 0:01:02.440 --> 0:01:06.280 kind of a shame, because our judgments about personal authenticity 0:01:06.959 --> 0:01:09.800 play into all kinds of things, into how we relate 0:01:09.840 --> 0:01:14.720 to friends, acquaintances, and co workers, whether we trust political candidates, 0:01:14.959 --> 0:01:18.560 how we make business decisions, how we understand and evaluate 0:01:18.760 --> 0:01:22.119 music and poetry and other works of art and entertainment. 0:01:22.160 --> 0:01:24.160 It's threaded all through our lives. 0:01:24.560 --> 0:01:27.399 It even comes down to basic decisions that you wouldn't 0:01:27.400 --> 0:01:30.200 even think of as getting into the core of authenticity. 0:01:30.920 --> 0:01:33.440 I think everybody has at least one I don't know, 0:01:33.600 --> 0:01:36.000 T shirt or other kind of garment and their wardrobe, 0:01:36.360 --> 0:01:39.080 and you may find yourself wondering some days, is this 0:01:39.120 --> 0:01:41.360 the day I wear this? Can I pull this off? 0:01:41.640 --> 0:01:45.440 And and to some extent, you may be wondering about authenticity, 0:01:45.520 --> 0:01:49.160 like can I wear this and be authentic? Or are 0:01:49.200 --> 0:01:51.080 people going to see through me and they're going to 0:01:51.200 --> 0:01:55.600 question whether I actually support that band, or whether whether 0:01:55.680 --> 0:01:59.320 this is the appropriate color scheme for me? And so forth? 0:01:59.520 --> 0:02:01.800 Is this T shirt really me today? 0:02:02.280 --> 0:02:05.840 Exactly? Yeah? And as we'll get into like that answer 0:02:05.920 --> 0:02:07.960 may change day to day, Like you know, we're we're 0:02:08.000 --> 0:02:10.160 not necessarily the same person day to day, and what 0:02:10.280 --> 0:02:12.400 is authentic one day may not be authentic the next. 0:02:12.720 --> 0:02:15.519 Right before we started recording, I was thinking about how 0:02:15.840 --> 0:02:20.639 authenticity is even often prescribed as a remedy for when 0:02:20.760 --> 0:02:25.040 people are having difficulty with social relations or social interactions, 0:02:25.080 --> 0:02:28.800 like when somebody's like, I'm having trouble making friends or 0:02:28.840 --> 0:02:31.400 I'm having trouble with dating. What am I doing wrong? 0:02:31.760 --> 0:02:34.240 What's the first thing people usually say to them, just 0:02:34.320 --> 0:02:39.160 be yourself. That is advice there. Essentially that means be authentic. 0:02:39.639 --> 0:02:42.120 Though it's a paradox, right, because at the same time, 0:02:42.680 --> 0:02:47.120 there's no other way to hijack your own authenticity than 0:02:47.160 --> 0:02:51.880 by overthinking your authenticity. Yeah, or at least that can 0:02:51.960 --> 0:02:53.239 be the case. Yeah. 0:02:53.320 --> 0:02:57.160 So, so you know, we invoke this concept all the time, 0:02:57.240 --> 0:02:59.520 We make judgments about it all the time. These judgments 0:02:59.560 --> 0:03:03.080 are highly relevant to our lives, but often we'd be 0:03:03.200 --> 0:03:05.520 I think if you press most people on what does 0:03:05.560 --> 0:03:07.640 it really mean, they'd probably have to think about it 0:03:07.680 --> 0:03:09.560 for a bit before they could come up with an answer. 0:03:10.040 --> 0:03:13.880 So I'm interested in exploring this question. What is authenticity 0:03:13.919 --> 0:03:16.760 and a person in a statement in a work of art. 0:03:17.520 --> 0:03:21.920 It seems to have some overlap with honesty, but is 0:03:22.000 --> 0:03:25.359 not the same thing as honesty. In fact, I think 0:03:25.440 --> 0:03:28.639 quite famously, there are people in the real world, and 0:03:28.760 --> 0:03:31.880 like fictional characters you can think of, who are known 0:03:32.200 --> 0:03:36.720 not to be honest, but are still widely considered authentic 0:03:36.880 --> 0:03:40.920 in some way, like tricksters and liars and rascals who 0:03:41.000 --> 0:03:44.640 are not thought to be reliable truth tellers, yet they're 0:03:44.680 --> 0:03:49.200 also not thought to be personally fake. You know a 0:03:49.240 --> 0:03:52.720 lot of like lovable scoundrels in movies. Han Solo is 0:03:52.720 --> 0:03:55.760 a character who like lies all the time, but he 0:03:55.880 --> 0:03:58.240 is you would probably judge him as authentic. 0:03:58.880 --> 0:04:00.880 Yeah, yeah, he's true to himself and that's one of 0:04:00.880 --> 0:04:02.240 the things we admire about him, Like, you know, he 0:04:02.280 --> 0:04:03.000 shoots from the hip. 0:04:03.400 --> 0:04:05.280 And what we might have a hard time coming up 0:04:05.280 --> 0:04:09.840 with a clear and all cases appropriate definition of authenticity, 0:04:10.320 --> 0:04:13.839 we definitely know what it is in opposition to its antonym, right, 0:04:13.920 --> 0:04:17.600 the opposite of an authentic person is a person who 0:04:17.720 --> 0:04:20.760 is fake. I think we all have this idea in 0:04:20.800 --> 0:04:23.800 our mind of a fake person and we know them 0:04:23.800 --> 0:04:24.640 when we meet them. 0:04:25.160 --> 0:04:27.440 Yeah. Yeah, but even this is this is the course 0:04:27.440 --> 0:04:29.839 difficult to figure out as well, because there's so many 0:04:29.839 --> 0:04:35.719 different versions of quote unquote fakeness in an individual, Like like, 0:04:35.760 --> 0:04:38.640 what is the context is? Is it like a social situation? 0:04:39.080 --> 0:04:43.200 I think that tends to be a situation where a 0:04:43.320 --> 0:04:48.200 lack of authenticity is considered more of a red flag, 0:04:48.240 --> 0:04:51.840 as opposed to say, like a customer service environment, where 0:04:53.120 --> 0:04:55.120 you know, there's there's a lot of back and forth 0:04:55.120 --> 0:04:57.080 there as well, and there is some nuance as well. 0:04:57.160 --> 0:04:59.960 You can certainly come off too fake in a cut 0:05:00.200 --> 0:05:02.960 customer service situation. But there is like a level of 0:05:03.080 --> 0:05:06.000 like I am putting on the public face, I'm not 0:05:06.120 --> 0:05:09.240 being one hundred percent myself because I am also representing 0:05:09.240 --> 0:05:10.400 this company or whatever. 0:05:10.760 --> 0:05:13.000 That's exactly right. Yeah, I mean, there are some jobs 0:05:13.040 --> 0:05:16.360 that just require you to act a certain way regardless 0:05:16.360 --> 0:05:17.600 of what you're feeling inside. 0:05:18.200 --> 0:05:20.680 Yeah, it's also interesting to think about. Yeah, this whole 0:05:20.720 --> 0:05:23.640 idea of like an authentic person versus a fake person, 0:05:23.960 --> 0:05:26.000 like someone who lies all the time, Because if someone 0:05:26.040 --> 0:05:29.240 lies all the time, then they tell the truth in 0:05:29.279 --> 0:05:31.120 a manner of speaking. You know. It's it's kind of 0:05:31.160 --> 0:05:34.440 like that old Knight Knights and Knaves logic puzzle that 0:05:34.640 --> 0:05:37.680 was that was popularized by the two gates scene in 0:05:37.760 --> 0:05:42.599 Jim Henson's Labyrinth, which Sarah ultimately solves via answerer laundering. 0:05:43.200 --> 0:05:45.719 Right, So one of the gatekeepers always tells the truth 0:05:45.760 --> 0:05:47.720 and the other always lies, and with that you can 0:05:47.880 --> 0:05:49.520 like solve the logic puzzle. 0:05:49.560 --> 0:05:52.520 Right because since they're both absolutees, you can you can 0:05:52.720 --> 0:05:56.480 compare their answers and eventually get yourself to the absolute 0:05:56.560 --> 0:05:57.400 truth of the scenario. 0:05:57.880 --> 0:06:00.560 So the dog at that gate that lies all the time, 0:06:00.600 --> 0:06:03.120 you would probably not think of as a fake person 0:06:03.200 --> 0:06:06.360 as someone who's inauthentic. The way one of the dogs 0:06:06.360 --> 0:06:08.919 at the gates I think would actually be fake would 0:06:08.920 --> 0:06:12.640 be if they like cultivated an outward facing persona as 0:06:12.640 --> 0:06:16.599 a truth teller, but then secretly told lies sometimes, you know, 0:06:16.760 --> 0:06:19.160 like if one of the dogs at the gates actually 0:06:19.160 --> 0:06:22.040 broke their own rules about lying and telling the. 0:06:22.000 --> 0:06:24.480 Truth, right, because then they would be inconsistent, which is 0:06:24.520 --> 0:06:27.000 which is ultimately I guess what we're we're getting at 0:06:27.320 --> 0:06:30.279 when it comes to, like the fear of someone in 0:06:30.320 --> 0:06:33.680 a social scenario being fake is that they will they 0:06:33.720 --> 0:06:36.720 will break a seeming track record, like they'll you know, oh, 0:06:36.760 --> 0:06:38.760 they seemed like they were so authentic and they were 0:06:38.760 --> 0:06:42.440 my friend, but then they weren't my friend. Whereas if 0:06:42.480 --> 0:06:45.320 they were if they hated you the whole time, but 0:06:45.440 --> 0:06:48.599 they perfectly kept up the front of being your friend 0:06:48.760 --> 0:06:51.720 for say years or the course of your entire lifetime, 0:06:51.800 --> 0:06:54.599 then they're essentially your friend, right, Yeah, Like if the 0:06:54.760 --> 0:06:56.719 if the fake is perfect, it becomes the truth. 0:06:57.080 --> 0:06:59.160 That's a really good point, and I think I think 0:06:59.200 --> 0:07:03.840 in reality that would correspond with some philosophical ideas of 0:07:03.880 --> 0:07:06.800 authenticity we'll get into in just a second. So for 0:07:06.920 --> 0:07:11.600 a direct definition of authenticity in persons, and of course 0:07:11.760 --> 0:07:13.720 you know that term gets applied to other types of 0:07:13.760 --> 0:07:15.920 things as well, and we'll discuss that in a minute. 0:07:16.160 --> 0:07:19.560 But in persons, I was looking I was looking at 0:07:19.560 --> 0:07:23.200 a paper by Erica R. Bailey and Aaron Levy that 0:07:23.240 --> 0:07:25.360 I'm either going to discuss later in this episode or 0:07:25.720 --> 0:07:28.800 probably possibly in part two of this series. But in 0:07:28.840 --> 0:07:32.120 that paper, the authors define an authentic person as quote 0:07:32.280 --> 0:07:36.840 someone whose behavior is genuine and reflects their true inner 0:07:36.920 --> 0:07:41.320 qualities and feelings. And I think this definition does get 0:07:41.360 --> 0:07:44.680 at a large part of what people mean with this word. Usually, 0:07:44.720 --> 0:07:49.360 authenticity has something to do with your outward behavior accurately 0:07:48.960 --> 0:07:53.440 reflecting your true inner feelings and your true inner character. 0:07:53.880 --> 0:07:58.040 So in short, authenticity is when the outside matches the inside, 0:07:58.440 --> 0:08:01.600 or when something is in fact what it seems to be, 0:08:02.200 --> 0:08:05.400 or when someone is in fact who they claim to be. 0:08:06.200 --> 0:08:09.320 But while that's I think pretty straightforward to understand, it 0:08:09.320 --> 0:08:11.800 still leaves a lot of questions unanswered. 0:08:12.480 --> 0:08:15.680 Yeah, I mean, for starters, of course, we can never 0:08:15.800 --> 0:08:20.720 truly know somebody's actual inner reality, their actual inner thoughts, 0:08:20.760 --> 0:08:24.120 so it's all just us doing a mental model of 0:08:24.160 --> 0:08:29.320 what this person's inner thoughts and actual intentions are. And 0:08:29.360 --> 0:08:33.439 then it's yeah, it doesn't necessarily bear close scrutiny, right 0:08:33.480 --> 0:08:36.199 because along these lines, a person with no filters or 0:08:36.200 --> 0:08:39.800 composure whatsoever is the utmost authentic person you could hope 0:08:39.840 --> 0:08:42.679 to meet. And generally speaking, these are qualities you come 0:08:42.720 --> 0:08:45.480 to expect from say a cat or a dog. But 0:08:45.600 --> 0:08:48.600 a great deal of striving to be a mature human 0:08:49.040 --> 0:08:52.480 is knowing or learning how to manage the inner self 0:08:52.600 --> 0:08:55.440 and and outer expression. And as we grow up, there's 0:08:55.480 --> 0:08:57.640 a great deal to learn and develop along these lines. 0:08:57.640 --> 0:09:00.480 And then we continue to learn and develop along these lines. Ideally, 0:09:00.520 --> 0:09:02.440 you know, it's kind of a it's a never ending 0:09:02.520 --> 0:09:05.200 journey of trying to figure out how to do all 0:09:05.320 --> 0:09:08.880 this stuff and how to find that balance between how 0:09:08.880 --> 0:09:12.040 you are inside and how you appear outside to not 0:09:12.520 --> 0:09:15.000 necessarily everyone at once, but you know, different groups at 0:09:15.000 --> 0:09:16.840 different times, how do you present yourself? 0:09:17.160 --> 0:09:19.199 Yeah, yeah, I think that's a great point. I mean, 0:09:19.240 --> 0:09:23.400 we think we value authenticity as a desirable trait in 0:09:23.480 --> 0:09:25.720 people to be friends with, people to put our trust 0:09:25.800 --> 0:09:29.000 in as leaders and so forth, But in reality, a 0:09:29.080 --> 0:09:33.839 person who authentically outwardly enacts every feeling they have and 0:09:33.920 --> 0:09:36.440 every thought they have. We would usually view that person 0:09:36.480 --> 0:09:39.720 as lacking in some kind of self control. Yeah, so 0:09:39.760 --> 0:09:42.960 I think there's a sort of contradiction there within our desires. 0:09:44.000 --> 0:09:47.320 But anyway, so while this definition I just mentioned, like 0:09:47.400 --> 0:09:50.360 the is what it seems to be or are who 0:09:50.360 --> 0:09:53.920 they claim to be definition, I think does cover a 0:09:53.920 --> 0:09:56.760 lot of the usage of authenticity in everyday life, especially 0:09:56.800 --> 0:10:01.480 when applied to persons and to artifacts. Discussing authenticity is 0:10:01.800 --> 0:10:04.120 complicated by the fact that this word is used to 0:10:04.160 --> 0:10:06.880 refer to a lot of different ideas that are all 0:10:07.320 --> 0:10:11.920 somewhat related but also somewhat different. So I think about 0:10:11.960 --> 0:10:16.200 a secondary usage of authenticity when describing an activity or 0:10:16.240 --> 0:10:21.360 a product that has like a known cultural history. Example 0:10:21.760 --> 0:10:24.600 that comes to my mind is making a recipe for 0:10:24.800 --> 0:10:28.880 spaghetti carbonara. According to a lot of people, there will 0:10:28.880 --> 0:10:32.400 be an authentic way to make this dish. You got 0:10:32.400 --> 0:10:35.040 to use eggs but not cream, et cetera, et cetera, 0:10:35.559 --> 0:10:40.000 And there are many inauthentic ways to make spaghetti carbonara, 0:10:40.559 --> 0:10:44.240 And to some people there is something actually shameful or 0:10:44.360 --> 0:10:48.040 bad about making it. In one of the allegedly inauthentic ways, 0:10:49.240 --> 0:10:54.319 and the same category of cultural authenticity or inauthenticity. I 0:10:54.360 --> 0:10:57.080 think I really often see it applied to food, but 0:10:57.120 --> 0:11:01.280 I think it also gets applied to things like clothing, dances, crafts, 0:11:01.320 --> 0:11:05.800 and other art forms. And so this understanding of authenticity 0:11:06.240 --> 0:11:09.480 has some overlap with the is what it claims to 0:11:09.520 --> 0:11:12.040 be definition, but it also seems to rope in some 0:11:12.200 --> 0:11:15.400 other things, like it relies on additional assumptions. 0:11:16.000 --> 0:11:18.880 Yeah, it's interesting. The culinary example is really interesting to 0:11:18.920 --> 0:11:21.800 ponder because the reality, of course, is that many examples 0:11:22.200 --> 0:11:26.319 of the authentic in culinary tradition, these were at some 0:11:26.440 --> 0:11:29.320 point the inauthentic new approach, you know, making use of 0:11:29.360 --> 0:11:33.040 say new ingredients that there are a number of dishes 0:11:33.080 --> 0:11:35.680 you can find throughout global cuisines that you think of 0:11:35.720 --> 0:11:39.440 it as a particular form, but you're incorporating ingredients that 0:11:39.520 --> 0:11:43.199 were brought in from some other location and just became 0:11:43.760 --> 0:11:45.960 associated with that particular dish. 0:11:46.160 --> 0:11:48.440 That's right. So I think the idea of authenticity and 0:11:48.480 --> 0:11:52.160 these sort of like cultural performances or you know, making 0:11:52.200 --> 0:11:55.880 a recipe or something, what it suggests is you're doing 0:11:55.920 --> 0:12:00.200 it the way it's always been done, but in and 0:12:00.240 --> 0:12:03.320 basically no case has it ever actually always been done 0:12:03.400 --> 0:12:04.520 any particular way. 0:12:04.960 --> 0:12:08.040 Yeah, yeah, so, and maybe being a little pedantic there, 0:12:08.080 --> 0:12:10.320 but yeah, the point, because the point still holts that 0:12:10.360 --> 0:12:14.040 when we're talking about an authentic culinary experience, we mean 0:12:14.040 --> 0:12:16.600 that it's firmly rooted in the tradition, and not a 0:12:16.600 --> 0:12:19.040 tradition that's existed since the beginning of time, but has 0:12:19.080 --> 0:12:23.880 maybe existed for centuries, maybe decades, maybe just a few years. 0:12:24.960 --> 0:12:27.640 And it also is probably rooted in a particular culture. 0:12:28.160 --> 0:12:33.200 But again, the paradox is that authenticity is rarely truly 0:12:33.280 --> 0:12:36.000 set in stone. It just may have the feeling of such. 0:12:36.480 --> 0:12:38.320 Yeah, I think that's right. And while we are sort 0:12:38.360 --> 0:12:42.080 of questioning the idea of these various ideas of authenticity 0:12:42.160 --> 0:12:44.400 and how much truth there is to them, really, at 0:12:44.400 --> 0:12:46.400 the same time, like I feel it, like, you know, 0:12:46.440 --> 0:12:51.240 if I see somebody like making spaghetti carbonaro with you know, 0:12:51.360 --> 0:12:54.360 just like heavy cream and American cheese and mixing it 0:12:54.400 --> 0:12:56.959 together with bacon, It's not like I think they're doing 0:12:57.040 --> 0:13:00.760 something morally wrong, but I do reckon n there's some 0:13:00.840 --> 0:13:04.080 kind of gap there. There is like a difference between 0:13:04.160 --> 0:13:08.480 what they're doing and what a person might understand them 0:13:08.559 --> 0:13:10.840 to claim to be doing. If that makes any sense, 0:13:10.880 --> 0:13:13.520 Maybe that's too many orders removed. But do you understand 0:13:13.520 --> 0:13:14.040 what I'm saying? 0:13:14.440 --> 0:13:19.040 Yeah? Yeah, though, yeah yeah. Like I say, it's hard 0:13:18.840 --> 0:13:21.720 to really figure out where to land on this, because 0:13:21.760 --> 0:13:25.560 I was thinking about classic cocktails as an example of this. 0:13:25.679 --> 0:13:29.240 You know, in many cases these are not terribly old, 0:13:30.559 --> 0:13:35.440 but that people do get very possessive of, like original 0:13:35.600 --> 0:13:39.680 recipes and so forth. Think the mytie, for example, which 0:13:39.679 --> 0:13:43.640 we did a whole episode of Invention on years back. 0:13:43.880 --> 0:13:47.679 We interviewed Jeff Beach Bumbarry about the origins of the 0:13:47.720 --> 0:13:50.400 Mytai is a pretty fun shat, but yeah, my tie 0:13:50.480 --> 0:13:54.599 is a classic tropical drink that merely dates back to 0:13:54.679 --> 0:13:58.120 nineteen forty four. And when we talk about an authentic 0:13:58.160 --> 0:14:00.960 my ti, we're generally talking about this nineteen forty four 0:14:01.080 --> 0:14:05.560 trader Vic recipe. And in this particular case, you might ask, well, 0:14:05.600 --> 0:14:10.040 does inauthentic equal bad? Well, oftentimes, yes, there are plenty 0:14:10.080 --> 0:14:13.120 of bad my ties out there that are inauthentic, But 0:14:13.840 --> 0:14:17.400 there are also noted historic variations of the my tie 0:14:17.440 --> 0:14:21.680 that are not bad drinks, And there are various contemporary 0:14:21.720 --> 0:14:25.000 spins on the cocktail that range from good to great. So, 0:14:25.160 --> 0:14:29.040 in a weird sense, something can at once be authentic 0:14:29.320 --> 0:14:31.560 and inauthentic. You can have a great spin on the 0:14:31.600 --> 0:14:35.200 my tie that is inauthentic when compared to the original recipe, 0:14:35.480 --> 0:14:39.240 but can still be an authentic product of a particular 0:14:39.280 --> 0:14:51.200 mixologists or bartender's skill in creativity. 0:14:52.360 --> 0:14:54.440 I think that's a great point, and I think, yeah, 0:14:54.440 --> 0:14:56.680 what you're getting at there with like, there's another type 0:14:56.680 --> 0:15:00.800 of authenticity that can be achieved even if the recipe 0:15:00.840 --> 0:15:03.400 is not the same as what it originally was. But 0:15:03.560 --> 0:15:09.440 you're saying an authenticity emerges out of another mixologist's creativity 0:15:09.920 --> 0:15:13.880 and skill in putting something together, and that taps into 0:15:13.880 --> 0:15:17.440 this whole other nebula of meanings that people today attached 0:15:17.440 --> 0:15:20.760 to the word authenticity, which has something to do with 0:15:21.320 --> 0:15:24.480 like it is related to outward behavior, but is not 0:15:24.560 --> 0:15:29.520 necessarily about that matching your matching your inner character, matching 0:15:29.520 --> 0:15:32.880 your inner feelings. It's more about like behavior that is 0:15:33.320 --> 0:15:36.960 an achievement of your greatest potential or like living your 0:15:37.000 --> 0:15:38.600 best life. Does that make sense? 0:15:38.880 --> 0:15:39.120 Yeah? 0:15:39.240 --> 0:15:42.160 Yeah, there is a way people talk about being an 0:15:42.200 --> 0:15:45.400 authentic existence being one in which you do your best 0:15:45.520 --> 0:15:48.400 you're like, become the best version of yourself that you 0:15:48.440 --> 0:15:50.360 can be and do the best you can do. 0:15:50.960 --> 0:15:52.600 Like it kind of a spin on that and just 0:15:52.680 --> 0:15:56.000 our lingos. Occasionally go hear someone refer to as, say 0:15:56.000 --> 0:15:58.320 a particular director or creator, and they'll be like, Oh, 0:15:58.360 --> 0:16:02.240 this individual they're the real or this movie, this song, 0:16:02.440 --> 0:16:05.160 this is the real deal. You know. It's kind of 0:16:05.200 --> 0:16:08.760 you know, it doesn't necessarily connect to anything in particular, 0:16:08.800 --> 0:16:10.960 but it does kind of at least imply that, like, 0:16:11.080 --> 0:16:14.600 this is authentic. This is a work of someone's labor 0:16:15.080 --> 0:16:17.960 and love and passion, Like someone put in the work here. 0:16:18.320 --> 0:16:21.600 Another phrase that expresses this idea is the idea of 0:16:21.600 --> 0:16:24.560 someone coming into themselves as an artist or as a 0:16:24.600 --> 0:16:27.960 leader or as whatever, Like they are becoming the real 0:16:28.080 --> 0:16:30.000 version of themselves by doing something great. 0:16:30.400 --> 0:16:33.960 Yeah, Like what does that mean? Like they fulfilled the prophecy, 0:16:35.880 --> 0:16:37.240 achieve their terrible purpose. 0:16:37.520 --> 0:16:42.040 Yeah. So yet another definition of authenticity that has been 0:16:42.160 --> 0:16:46.000 very important is one that is particular to existentialist philosophy, 0:16:47.000 --> 0:16:50.040 in which I don't claim to be an expert on 0:16:50.160 --> 0:16:53.720 existentialist philosophy, so I hope I'm summarizing it well enough here, 0:16:54.280 --> 0:16:58.240 But the way I understand it is that these branch 0:16:58.280 --> 0:17:02.240 In this branch of philosophy, authentic has this specialized meaning 0:17:03.560 --> 0:17:09.680 where an authentic existence is basically living without illusions, accepting 0:17:09.720 --> 0:17:13.440 the extent to which you are free to control your actions, 0:17:13.960 --> 0:17:18.000 and accepting that you are thus defined by your actions. 0:17:18.480 --> 0:17:21.760 And so I think a big emphasis of the existentialist 0:17:21.840 --> 0:17:25.800 understanding of authenticity is accepting that you are what you 0:17:25.920 --> 0:17:30.320 choose to do, and there's not like a separate secret you. 0:17:30.560 --> 0:17:33.560 That's the real you that is different than what you do. 0:17:33.680 --> 0:17:36.280 What you do is what you are, and in order 0:17:36.320 --> 0:17:38.919 to be authentic, you have to accept that what you 0:17:39.040 --> 0:17:40.120 do is what you are. 0:17:40.720 --> 0:17:43.760 Okay, So it's not you are not who you are, 0:17:43.800 --> 0:17:45.919 not what you would like to do. You are not 0:17:46.080 --> 0:17:49.000 what you are thinking about doing. You are not what 0:17:49.080 --> 0:17:52.520 you regret not doing. You are what you actually do. 0:17:52.680 --> 0:17:54.760 What you actually choose to do is who you are. 0:17:54.920 --> 0:17:58.280 That's the way I understand it, Okay, Fans of existentialism 0:17:58.320 --> 0:18:01.320 complain at us an email if if you think I'm wrong, 0:18:02.200 --> 0:18:06.359 if you Tuesday, yeah, and then of course there are 0:18:06.400 --> 0:18:09.000 even more ideas of authenticity that we can continue to 0:18:09.040 --> 0:18:11.760 explore in the rest of this series. But even coming 0:18:11.800 --> 0:18:14.480 back to the baseline of the is what it seems 0:18:14.520 --> 0:18:17.800 to be or the you are who you claim to 0:18:17.840 --> 0:18:21.080 be definition, there are still a bunch of questions that 0:18:21.320 --> 0:18:24.040 we can be left to wonder about, like why do 0:18:24.119 --> 0:18:28.399 we place so much value on authenticity? And why is 0:18:28.440 --> 0:18:33.359 authenticity especially important in some domains of life? What are 0:18:33.400 --> 0:18:36.320 the criteria of authenticity in a person or in a 0:18:36.359 --> 0:18:40.360 personal expression, What outward signs are we actually looking for 0:18:40.400 --> 0:18:43.480 when we make judgments about it? Are we good at 0:18:43.520 --> 0:18:45.959 making those judgments accurately? I think we're going to look 0:18:46.000 --> 0:18:48.160 at a paper on that in just a minute. And also, 0:18:48.400 --> 0:18:51.560 if we go with the definition above, do we truly 0:18:51.720 --> 0:18:54.720 value authentic behavior as much as we think we do? 0:18:55.600 --> 0:18:56.879 All right, let's dive into it. 0:18:57.280 --> 0:19:01.440 Well, so we're probably going to address authenticity from the 0:19:01.480 --> 0:19:04.399 angle of psychology research in a number of different ways 0:19:04.400 --> 0:19:06.720 in the series, but I wanted to start off by 0:19:06.760 --> 0:19:09.560 discussing a paper that was one of the first things 0:19:09.600 --> 0:19:12.560 that really interested me when I started researching this topic. 0:19:13.200 --> 0:19:15.679 This is the paper I mentioned earlier by Erica R. 0:19:15.800 --> 0:19:20.160 Bailey and Aaron Levy, published in the journal Psychological Science 0:19:20.280 --> 0:19:22.960 in twenty twenty two, and the title of the paper 0:19:23.040 --> 0:19:27.320 is are you for real? Perceptions of authenticity are systematically 0:19:27.440 --> 0:19:30.800 biased and not accurate that I'll give away the conclusions, 0:19:30.840 --> 0:19:33.680 but I think there's some interesting stuff to learn along 0:19:33.720 --> 0:19:36.880 the way. So at the time this paper was published, 0:19:36.920 --> 0:19:40.400 the authors were affiliated with Columbia University. I think since 0:19:40.440 --> 0:19:44.480 then Bailey has taken a position at Berkeley. But this 0:19:44.560 --> 0:19:48.600 paper begins by asking a simple question, how good are 0:19:48.640 --> 0:19:53.040 we at making accurate judgments about who is authentic and 0:19:53.080 --> 0:19:57.000 who is not? This paper, again is the source of 0:19:57.000 --> 0:20:01.800 the phrasing of the definition I mentioned earlier that quote. Theoretically, 0:20:01.920 --> 0:20:05.800 a person is authentic when their behavior is genuine. That is, 0:20:05.840 --> 0:20:10.520 their behavior reflects their true inner qualities and feelings. So 0:20:10.600 --> 0:20:13.760 if the way they behave outwardly reflects who they really 0:20:13.800 --> 0:20:18.160 are and how they really feel, and most of us 0:20:18.240 --> 0:20:21.400 behave as if we think we're good at making these 0:20:21.480 --> 0:20:24.960 judgments about others. You know, we do this all the time. 0:20:25.040 --> 0:20:28.240 You talk to somebody for five minutes, and after you 0:20:28.320 --> 0:20:30.440 walk away from them, you are pretty much ready to 0:20:30.480 --> 0:20:34.080 say Jimmy was so earnest and sincere I really like him, 0:20:34.600 --> 0:20:37.320 or Jimmy was so fake I couldn't stand that guy. 0:20:37.480 --> 0:20:41.199 It's almost embarrassing to look back on how quickly we 0:20:41.280 --> 0:20:43.359 think we can make these judgments about people. 0:20:43.920 --> 0:20:46.720 Yeah, I mean, of course it makes sense given why 0:20:46.760 --> 0:20:50.440 these this capacity for judging exists. I mean it comes 0:20:50.480 --> 0:20:54.920 down to basic survival scenarios in which it maybe doesn't 0:20:54.920 --> 0:20:57.200 pay to have an open mind. You know, comes back 0:20:57.200 --> 0:21:01.000 to the you know, the very worn out example of 0:21:01.160 --> 0:21:05.760 is there a tiger in the weeds there or is 0:21:05.800 --> 0:21:09.440 there not a tiger? Well, you know, sometimes you can't 0:21:09.760 --> 0:21:11.760 keep an open mind about the scenario. You have to 0:21:11.760 --> 0:21:15.080 make a judgment call and then make your survival choices accordingly. 0:21:15.440 --> 0:21:19.320 And you know that it holds true in life and 0:21:19.359 --> 0:21:21.960 death situations, but then it ends up applying to these 0:21:22.000 --> 0:21:24.600 various social contexts that are not life and death. 0:21:24.960 --> 0:21:27.760 That's right. So you could look at it on one hand, 0:21:27.760 --> 0:21:31.640 as there's a survival incentive for us to be suspicious 0:21:31.680 --> 0:21:34.120 and to not give out trust too easily. You could 0:21:34.160 --> 0:21:35.960 also look at it from the other hand and say, 0:21:36.040 --> 0:21:39.200 maybe there are some scenarios where there is incentive to 0:21:39.280 --> 0:21:42.720 trust more easily, maybe than we should because like, I 0:21:42.760 --> 0:21:45.120 don't know trusting, Like you don't want to be hung 0:21:45.200 --> 0:21:49.280 up being suspicious of people preventing you from cooperating to survive. 0:21:49.560 --> 0:21:53.280 Right right, and ultimately like in action on any given 0:21:53.280 --> 0:21:57.320 scenario is in action, like nothing is getting accomplished exactly. 0:21:57.840 --> 0:21:59.960 So in the background section of their paper, the author 0:22:00.280 --> 0:22:05.760 talk about they review previous research confirming that we really 0:22:05.760 --> 0:22:08.760 do make these judgments about authenticity, and we base a 0:22:08.800 --> 0:22:12.280 lot on them, Like people who are perceived as authentic 0:22:12.320 --> 0:22:16.240 have been found to be more well liked, more easily trusted, 0:22:16.760 --> 0:22:21.720 and authenticity is apparently considered especially important when people select leaders. 0:22:21.720 --> 0:22:23.919 If you're going to look to someone for leadership for 0:22:24.000 --> 0:22:27.840 some reason, people want somebody who is authentic, somebody who 0:22:27.880 --> 0:22:31.960 that where they think the outside matches the inside. Now, Rob, 0:22:32.000 --> 0:22:35.719 you brought this up earlier, but when you think about it, 0:22:34.760 --> 0:22:39.280 it really would be kind of difficult to make a 0:22:39.440 --> 0:22:44.760 judgment about another person's authenticity, especially after just a limited 0:22:44.840 --> 0:22:48.439 time amount of time knowing someone, Because to really judge 0:22:48.440 --> 0:22:52.119 somebody's authenticity by this main definition we're talking about, you 0:22:52.160 --> 0:22:56.919