WEBVTT - From the Vault: Authenticity, Part 1 0:00:06.240 --> 0:00:09.039 Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind. My name 0:00:09.119 --> 0:00:11.799 is Robert Lamb. Today is Saturday, so we venture into 0:00:11.800 --> 0:00:14.200 the vault once more. We are going to be re 0:00:14.360 --> 0:00:17.400 running our series on authenticity. This is going to be 0:00:17.480 --> 0:00:20.600 Authenticity Part one. That's Part one of three and it 0:00:20.640 --> 0:00:25.000 originally aired three nineteen twenty twenty four. Let's jump right in. 0:00:28.320 --> 0:00:32.080 Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind, a production of iHeartRadio. 0:00:37.920 --> 0:00:39.640 Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind. 0:00:39.680 --> 0:00:42.800 My name is Robert Lamb, and I am Joe McCormick. 0:00:42.960 --> 0:00:45.839 And today we're going to be kicking off a series 0:00:46.040 --> 0:00:49.760 on a concept that I have been thinking about a 0:00:49.800 --> 0:00:54.440 lot lately. That is the idea of authenticity. I've been 0:00:54.440 --> 0:00:56.680 thinking about doing an episode on this sort of off 0:00:56.680 --> 0:01:01.600 and on for I think several years now. Is really 0:01:01.600 --> 0:01:05.199 interesting to me because it is one of those concepts 0:01:05.200 --> 0:01:08.880 that is extremely important. It's highly relevant to our lives. 0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:11.960 We probably think about it every single day, and at 0:01:12.000 --> 0:01:15.240 the same time, it is sort of vaguely defined. We 0:01:15.360 --> 0:01:18.520 don't often stop to think about what it really means, 0:01:19.200 --> 0:01:23.560 or to analyze how we evaluated or what our criteria 0:01:23.760 --> 0:01:27.600 of authenticity are and so forth. And I think that's 0:01:27.680 --> 0:01:31.560 kind of a shame because our judgments about personal authenticity 0:01:32.200 --> 0:01:35.000 play into all kinds of things, into how we relate 0:01:35.080 --> 0:01:39.959 to friends, acquaintances, and co workers, whether we trust political candidates, 0:01:40.200 --> 0:01:43.800 how we make business decisions, how we understand and evaluate 0:01:44.000 --> 0:01:47.360 music and poetry and other works of art and entertainment. 0:01:47.600 --> 0:01:49.400 It's threaded all through our lives. 0:01:49.800 --> 0:01:52.640 It even comes down to basic decisions that you wouldn't 0:01:52.640 --> 0:01:55.440 even think of as getting into the core of authenticity. 0:01:56.160 --> 0:01:58.680 I think everybody has at least one I don't know, 0:01:58.800 --> 0:02:01.240 T shirt or other kind of arnman in their wardrobe, 0:02:01.600 --> 0:02:04.320 and you may find yourself wondering some days, is this 0:02:04.320 --> 0:02:06.600 the day I wear this? Can I pull this off? 0:02:06.880 --> 0:02:10.680 And and to some extent, you may be wondering about authenticity, 0:02:10.760 --> 0:02:13.840 like and can I wear this and be authentic or 0:02:14.280 --> 0:02:16.360 are people going to see through me and they're gonna 0:02:16.440 --> 0:02:20.840 question whether I actually support that band, or whether whether 0:02:20.919 --> 0:02:23.600 this is this is the appropriate color scheme for me? 0:02:23.800 --> 0:02:24.519 And so forth? 0:02:24.800 --> 0:02:27.040 Is this T shirt really me today? 0:02:27.520 --> 0:02:31.120 Exactly? Yeah? And as we'll get into like that answer 0:02:31.160 --> 0:02:33.400 may change day to day, Like you know, we're not 0:02:33.440 --> 0:02:35.560 necessarily the same person day to day, and what is 0:02:35.600 --> 0:02:37.200 authentic one day may not be authentic. 0:02:37.240 --> 0:02:39.960 The next right before we started recording, I was thinking 0:02:39.960 --> 0:02:45.280 about how authenticity is even often prescribed as a remedy 0:02:45.480 --> 0:02:49.200 for when people are having difficulty with social relations or 0:02:49.280 --> 0:02:53.280 social interactions, Like when somebody's like, I'm having trouble making 0:02:53.360 --> 0:02:56.000 friends or I'm having trouble with dating. What am I 0:02:56.080 --> 0:02:59.160 doing wrong? What's the first thing people usually say to them? 0:02:59.360 --> 0:03:03.400 Just be yourself? That is advice there. Essentially that means 0:03:03.520 --> 0:03:04.880 be authentic. 0:03:04.880 --> 0:03:07.360 Though it's a paradox, right, because at the same time, 0:03:07.919 --> 0:03:12.359 there's no other way to hijack your own authenticity than 0:03:12.360 --> 0:03:17.120 by overthinking your authenticity. Yeah, or at least that can 0:03:17.160 --> 0:03:17.680 be the case. 0:03:18.120 --> 0:03:22.400 Yeah, So you know, we invoke this concept all the time. 0:03:22.480 --> 0:03:24.800 We make judgments about it all the time. These judgments 0:03:24.800 --> 0:03:28.320 are highly relevant to our lives, but often we'd be 0:03:28.440 --> 0:03:30.760 I think if you press most people on what does 0:03:30.760 --> 0:03:32.880 it really mean, they'd probably have to think about it 0:03:32.919 --> 0:03:34.760 for a bit before they could come up with an answer. 0:03:35.280 --> 0:03:39.120 So I'm interested in exploring this question. What is authenticity 0:03:39.160 --> 0:03:42.000 and a person in a statement in a work of art. 0:03:42.720 --> 0:03:47.160 It seems to have some overlap with honesty, but is 0:03:47.240 --> 0:03:50.600 not the same thing as honesty. In fact, I think 0:03:50.640 --> 0:03:53.880 quite famously. There are people in the real world and 0:03:54.000 --> 0:03:57.120 like fictional characters you can think of who are known 0:03:57.440 --> 0:04:01.960 not to be honest but are still wide considered authentic 0:04:02.120 --> 0:04:06.200 in some way, like tricksters and liars and rascals who 0:04:06.240 --> 0:04:09.640 are are not thought to be reliable truth tellers, yet 0:04:09.680 --> 0:04:14.280 they're also not thought to be personally fake. You know 0:04:14.360 --> 0:04:17.760 a lot of like lovable scoundrels in movies. Han Solo 0:04:17.920 --> 0:04:20.719 is a character who like lies all the time, but 0:04:20.880 --> 0:04:23.440 he is you would probably judge him as authentic. 0:04:24.120 --> 0:04:26.080 Yeah, yeah, he's true to himself and that's one of 0:04:26.120 --> 0:04:27.480 the things we admire about him, Like, you know, he 0:04:27.480 --> 0:04:28.040 shoots from. 0:04:27.920 --> 0:04:30.080 The hip, and well, we might have a hard time 0:04:30.080 --> 0:04:34.039 coming up with a clear and all cases appropriate definition 0:04:34.200 --> 0:04:37.840 of authenticity, we definitely know what it is in opposition 0:04:37.880 --> 0:04:41.200 to its antonym, right. The opposite of an authentic person 0:04:41.960 --> 0:04:45.120 is a person who is fake. I think we all 0:04:45.160 --> 0:04:48.039 have this idea in our mind of a fake person 0:04:48.160 --> 0:04:50.159 and we know them when we meet them. 0:04:50.400 --> 0:04:52.640 Yeah yeah, but even this is this is the course 0:04:52.680 --> 0:04:55.040 difficult to figure out as well, because there's so many 0:04:55.040 --> 0:05:00.120 different versions of quote unquote fakeness in an individual, Like 0:05:01.000 --> 0:05:03.919 what is the context is it like a social situation. 0:05:04.320 --> 0:05:08.400 I think that tends to be a situation where a 0:05:08.520 --> 0:05:13.440 lack of authenticity is considered more of a red flag, 0:05:13.480 --> 0:05:17.040 as opposed to say, like a customer service environment, where 0:05:18.360 --> 0:05:20.520 you know, there's a lot of back and forth there 0:05:20.520 --> 0:05:22.479 as well, and there is some nuance as well. You 0:05:22.480 --> 0:05:26.640 can certainly come off two fake in a customer service situation, 0:05:26.760 --> 0:05:29.000 but there is like a level of like I'm putting 0:05:29.040 --> 0:05:32.679 on the public face, I'm not being one hundred percent 0:05:32.720 --> 0:05:35.640 myself because I am also representing this company or whatever. 0:05:35.960 --> 0:05:38.359 That's exactly right. Yeah, I mean, there's some jobs that 0:05:38.520 --> 0:05:41.680 just require you to act a certain way regardless of 0:05:41.680 --> 0:05:42.760 what you're feeling inside. 0:05:43.440 --> 0:05:45.960 Yeah, it's also interesting to think about. Yeah, this whole 0:05:45.960 --> 0:05:48.880 idea of like an authentic person versus a fake person, 0:05:49.200 --> 0:05:51.200 like someone who lies all the time, Because if someone 0:05:51.279 --> 0:05:54.479 lies all the time, then they tell the truth in 0:05:54.520 --> 0:05:56.480 a manner of speaking. You know. It's kind of like 0:05:56.520 --> 0:05:59.880 that old Night Knights and Knaves logic puzzle that was 0:06:00.320 --> 0:06:02.919 that it is popularized by the two gates scene in 0:06:03.000 --> 0:06:07.839 Jim Henson's Labyrinth, which Sarah ultimately solves via answer laundering. 0:06:08.440 --> 0:06:10.919 Right, so one of the gatekeepers always tells the truth 0:06:10.960 --> 0:06:12.960 and the other always lies, and with that you can 0:06:13.080 --> 0:06:14.800 like solve the logic puzzle. 0:06:14.800 --> 0:06:17.520 Right because since they're both absolute, so you can you 0:06:17.560 --> 0:06:21.040 can compare their answers and eventually get yourself to the 0:06:21.240 --> 0:06:22.680 absolute truth of the scenario. 0:06:23.080 --> 0:06:25.760 So the dog at that gate that lies all the time, 0:06:25.839 --> 0:06:28.359 you would probably not think of as a fake person 0:06:28.440 --> 0:06:31.560 as someone who's inauthentic. The way one of the dogs 0:06:31.560 --> 0:06:34.120 at the gates I think would actually be fake would 0:06:34.120 --> 0:06:37.840 be if they like cultivated an outward facing persona as 0:06:37.880 --> 0:06:41.840 a truth teller, but then secretly told lies sometimes, you know, 0:06:42.000 --> 0:06:44.360 like if one of the dogs at the gates actually 0:06:44.400 --> 0:06:47.920 broke their own rules about lying and telling the truth. 0:06:47.880 --> 0:06:49.960 Right, because then they would be inconsistent, which is which 0:06:49.960 --> 0:06:52.880 is ultimately I guess what we're getting at when it 0:06:52.880 --> 0:06:55.919 comes to, like the fear of someone in a social 0:06:55.920 --> 0:06:59.640 scenario being fake is that they will they will break 0:06:59.680 --> 0:07:02.200 a scene track record, like they'll you know, Oh, they 0:07:02.240 --> 0:07:04.360 seemed like they were so authentic and they were my friend, 0:07:04.400 --> 0:07:08.160 but then they weren't my friend, Whereas if they were, 0:07:08.800 --> 0:07:11.440 if they hated you the whole time, but they perfectly 0:07:11.520 --> 0:07:15.440 kept up the front of being your friend for say years, 0:07:15.520 --> 0:07:17.720 or the course of your entire lifetime, then they're essentially 0:07:17.720 --> 0:07:20.480 your friend, right, Yeah, like if the if the fake 0:07:20.600 --> 0:07:21.960 is perfect, it becomes the truth. 0:07:22.320 --> 0:07:24.400 That's a really good point, and I think I think 0:07:24.440 --> 0:07:28.400 in reality, that would correspond with some philosophical ideas of 0:07:29.120 --> 0:07:32.000 authenticity we'll get into in just a second. So for 0:07:32.160 --> 0:07:36.800 a direct definition of authenticity in persons, and of course 0:07:37.000 --> 0:07:38.960 you know that term gets applied to other types of 0:07:39.000 --> 0:07:41.080 things as well, and we'll discuss that in a minute. 0:07:41.400 --> 0:07:44.800 But in persons, I was looking. I was looking at 0:07:44.800 --> 0:07:48.440 a paper by Erica R. Bailey and Aaron Levy that 0:07:48.480 --> 0:07:50.560 I'm either going to discuss later in this episode or 0:07:50.960 --> 0:07:54.040 probably possibly in part two of this series. But in 0:07:54.080 --> 0:07:57.239 that paper, the authors define an authentic person as quote, 0:07:57.520 --> 0:08:02.080 someone whose behavior is genuine and reflects their true inner 0:08:02.160 --> 0:08:06.520 qualities and feelings. And I think this definition does get 0:08:06.600 --> 0:08:09.880 at a large part of what people mean with this word. Usually, 0:08:09.960 --> 0:08:14.520 authenticity has something to do with your outward behavior accurately 0:08:14.680 --> 0:08:18.640 reflecting your true inner feelings and your true inner character. 0:08:19.120 --> 0:08:23.280 So in short, authenticity is when the outside matches the inside, 0:08:23.680 --> 0:08:26.840 or when something is in fact what it seems to be, 0:08:27.440 --> 0:08:30.640 or when someone is in fact who they claim to be. 0:08:31.440 --> 0:08:34.520 But while that's I think pretty straightforward to understand, it 0:08:34.559 --> 0:08:37.040 still leaves a lot of questions unanswered. 0:08:37.720 --> 0:08:40.920 Yeah, I mean for starters, of course, we can never 0:08:41.040 --> 0:08:45.959 truly know somebody's actual inner reality, their actual inner thoughts, 0:08:46.000 --> 0:08:49.360 So it's all just us doing a mental model of 0:08:49.400 --> 0:08:54.560 what this person's inner thoughts and actual intentions are. And 0:08:54.600 --> 0:08:58.679 then it's yeah, it doesn't necessarily bear close scrutiny, right 0:08:58.720 --> 0:09:01.440 because along these lines, the person with no filters or 0:09:01.440 --> 0:09:05.040 composure whatsoever is the utmost authentic person you could hope 0:09:05.040 --> 0:09:07.920 to meet. And generally speaking, these are qualities you come 0:09:07.960 --> 0:09:10.720 to expect from say a cat or a dog. But 0:09:10.800 --> 0:09:13.840 a great deal of striving to be a mature human 0:09:14.280 --> 0:09:17.720 is knowing or learning how to manage the inner self 0:09:17.840 --> 0:09:20.640 and and outer expression. And as we grow up, there's 0:09:20.720 --> 0:09:22.880 a great deal to learn and develop along these lines. 0:09:22.880 --> 0:09:25.679 And then we continue to learn and develop along these lines. Ideally, 0:09:25.720 --> 0:09:27.680 you know, it's kind of a it's a never ending 0:09:27.760 --> 0:09:30.439 journey of trying to figure out how to do all 0:09:30.520 --> 0:09:34.120 this stuff and how to find that balance between how 0:09:34.120 --> 0:09:37.280 you are inside and how you appear outside to not 0:09:37.720 --> 0:09:40.200 necessarily everyone at once, but you know different groups at 0:09:40.240 --> 0:09:42.040 different times, how do you present yourself? 0:09:42.400 --> 0:09:44.400 Yeah, yeah, I think that's a great point. I mean, 0:09:44.440 --> 0:09:48.640 we think we value authenticity as a desirable trait in 0:09:48.720 --> 0:09:51.000 people to be friends with, people, to put our trust 0:09:51.040 --> 0:09:54.240 in as leaders, and so forth. But in reality, a 0:09:54.280 --> 0:09:59.080 person who authentically outwardly enacts every feeling they have and 0:09:59.120 --> 0:10:01.640 every thought they have, we would usually view that person 0:10:01.679 --> 0:10:03.720 as lacking in some kind of self control. 0:10:04.840 --> 0:10:05.360 So I think. 0:10:05.240 --> 0:10:09.720 There's a sort of contradiction there within our desires. But anyway, 0:10:09.800 --> 0:10:13.080 so while this definition I just mentioned, like the is 0:10:13.160 --> 0:10:16.080 what it seems to be or are who they claim 0:10:16.160 --> 0:10:19.400 to be definition, I think does cover a lot of 0:10:19.400 --> 0:10:22.600 the usage of authenticity in everyday life, especially when applied 0:10:22.640 --> 0:10:27.840 to persons and to artifacts. Discussing authenticity is complicated by 0:10:27.840 --> 0:10:29.840 the fact that this word is used to refer to 0:10:29.920 --> 0:10:33.680 a lot of different ideas that are all somewhat related 0:10:34.040 --> 0:10:37.880 but also somewhat different. So I think about a secondary 0:10:37.960 --> 0:10:42.439 usage of authenticity when describing an activity or a product 0:10:42.520 --> 0:10:47.320 that has like a known cultural history. Example that comes 0:10:47.360 --> 0:10:51.960 to my mind is making a recipe for spaghetti carbonara. 0:10:52.040 --> 0:10:54.640 According to a lot of people, there will be an 0:10:54.720 --> 0:10:57.920 authentic way to make this dish, you got to use 0:10:57.920 --> 0:11:01.880 eggs but not cream, et cetera. And there are many 0:11:02.080 --> 0:11:07.000 inauthentic ways to make spaghetti carbonara, and to some people 0:11:07.160 --> 0:11:10.920 there is something actually shameful or bad about making it 0:11:11.000 --> 0:11:15.320 in one of the allegedly inauthentic ways. And the same 0:11:15.360 --> 0:11:20.559 category of cultural authenticity or inauthenticity, I think I really 0:11:20.600 --> 0:11:22.680 often see it applied to food, but I think it 0:11:22.720 --> 0:11:26.600 also gets applied to things like clothing, dances, crafts, and 0:11:26.679 --> 0:11:31.680 other art forms. And so this understanding of authenticity has 0:11:32.080 --> 0:11:35.480 some overlap with the is what it claims to be definition, 0:11:35.559 --> 0:11:38.359 but it also seems to rope in some other things, 0:11:38.400 --> 0:11:40.599 like it relies on additional assumptions. 0:11:41.200 --> 0:11:44.120 Yeah, it's interesting. The culinary example is really interesting to 0:11:44.160 --> 0:11:47.040 ponder because the reality, of course, is that many examples 0:11:47.440 --> 0:11:51.560 of the authentic in culinary tradition, these were at some 0:11:51.640 --> 0:11:54.560 point the inauthentic new approach, you know, making use of 0:11:54.600 --> 0:11:58.240 say new ingredients. That there are a number of dishes 0:11:58.280 --> 0:12:00.920 you can find throughout global cuisines that you think of 0:12:00.960 --> 0:12:04.679 it as a particular form, but you're incorporating ingredients that 0:12:04.720 --> 0:12:08.440 were brought in from some other location and just became 0:12:08.960 --> 0:12:11.000 associated with that particular dish. 0:12:11.400 --> 0:12:13.680 That's right. So, I think the idea of authenticity in 0:12:13.720 --> 0:12:17.400 these sort of like cultural performances or you know, making 0:12:17.440 --> 0:12:21.120 a recipe or something, what it suggests is you're doing 0:12:21.160 --> 0:12:25.960 it the way it's always been done. But in basically 0:12:26.000 --> 0:12:28.880 no case has it ever actually always been done any 0:12:28.880 --> 0:12:29.680 particular way. 0:12:30.160 --> 0:12:33.280 Yeah, yeah, so, and maybe being a little pedantic there, 0:12:33.320 --> 0:12:35.720 but the point, because the point still holds that when 0:12:35.760 --> 0:12:39.360 we're talking about an authentic culinary experience, we mean that 0:12:39.400 --> 0:12:42.200 it's firmly rooted in the tradition, and not a tradition 0:12:42.280 --> 0:12:44.560 that's existed since the beginning of time, but has maybe 0:12:44.559 --> 0:12:49.080 existed for centuries, maybe decades, maybe just a few years. 0:12:50.160 --> 0:12:52.840 And it also is probably rooted in a particular culture. 0:12:53.400 --> 0:12:58.400 But again the paradox is that authenticity is rarely truly 0:12:58.480 --> 0:13:01.240 set in stone. It just may have the feeling of such. 0:13:01.720 --> 0:13:03.560 Yeah, I think that's right. And while we are sort 0:13:03.559 --> 0:13:07.319 of questioning the idea of these various ideas of authenticity 0:13:07.400 --> 0:13:09.600 and how much truth there is to them, really, at 0:13:09.640 --> 0:13:11.640 the same time, like I feel it, like, you know, 0:13:11.640 --> 0:13:16.440 if I see somebody like making spaghetti carbonaro with you know, 0:13:16.600 --> 0:13:19.600 just like heavy cream and American cheese and mixing it 0:13:19.640 --> 0:13:22.240 together with bacon. It's not like I think they're doing 0:13:22.280 --> 0:13:26.280 something morally wrong, but I do recognize there's some kind 0:13:26.280 --> 0:13:29.520 of gap there. There is like a difference between what 0:13:29.559 --> 0:13:33.840 they're doing and what a person might understand them to 0:13:34.040 --> 0:13:36.320 claim to be doing. If that makes any sense. Maybe 0:13:36.320 --> 0:13:38.840 it's too many orders removed, But do you understand what 0:13:38.880 --> 0:13:39.280 I'm saying? 0:13:39.679 --> 0:13:44.080 Yeah? Yeah, though, yeah, yeah. Like I say, it's hard 0:13:44.080 --> 0:13:46.960 to really figure out where to land on this, because 0:13:47.000 --> 0:13:50.800 I was thinking about classic cocktails as an example of this. 0:13:50.920 --> 0:13:54.439 You know, in many cases these are not terribly old, 0:13:55.760 --> 0:14:01.560 but people do get very possessive of original recipes and 0:14:01.600 --> 0:14:05.199 so forth. Thick the mytie, for example, which we did 0:14:05.200 --> 0:14:09.720 a whole episode of Invention on years back. We interviewed 0:14:10.200 --> 0:14:13.320 Jeff Beach Bumbarry about the origins of the my tie 0:14:13.400 --> 0:14:15.719 is a pretty fun shat, but yeah, my tie is 0:14:16.200 --> 0:14:20.280 a classic tropical drink that merely dates back to nineteen 0:14:20.360 --> 0:14:23.680 forty four. And when we talk about an authentic my ti, 0:14:23.800 --> 0:14:28.080 we're generally talking about this nineteen forty four Trader Vic recipe. 0:14:28.240 --> 0:14:31.000 And in this particular case, you might ask, well, does 0:14:31.040 --> 0:14:35.360 inauthentic equal bad? Well, oftentimes. Yes, there are plenty of 0:14:35.440 --> 0:14:39.200 bad my ties out there that are inauthentic, but there 0:14:39.200 --> 0:14:42.960 are also noted historic variations of the mytie that are 0:14:42.960 --> 0:14:47.560 not bad drinks, And there are various contemporary spins on 0:14:47.640 --> 0:14:50.480 the cocktail that range from good to great. So, in 0:14:50.520 --> 0:14:55.440 a weird sense, something can at once be authentic and inauthentic. 0:14:55.520 --> 0:14:57.400 You can have a great spin on the mytie that 0:14:57.560 --> 0:15:01.320 is inauthentic when compared to the original rest, but can 0:15:01.400 --> 0:15:05.480 still be an authentic product of a particular mixologists or 0:15:05.520 --> 0:15:16.040 bartender's skill in creativity. 0:15:17.600 --> 0:15:19.680 I think that's a great point, and I think, yeah, 0:15:19.680 --> 0:15:21.880 what you're getting at there with like, there's another type 0:15:21.920 --> 0:15:26.000 of authenticity that can be achieved even if the recipe 0:15:26.040 --> 0:15:28.640 is not the same as what it originally was. But 0:15:28.800 --> 0:15:33.800 you're saying an authenticity emerges out of a another mixologist's 0:15:33.920 --> 0:15:38.840 creativity and skill in putting something together, And that taps 0:15:38.880 --> 0:15:42.200 into this whole other nebula of meanings that people today 0:15:42.240 --> 0:15:45.640 attached to the word authenticity, which has something to do 0:15:45.880 --> 0:15:49.480 with like it is related to outward behavior, but is 0:15:49.520 --> 0:15:54.080 not necessarily about that matching your matching your inner character, 0:15:54.400 --> 0:15:57.720 matching your inner feelings. It's more about like behavior that 0:15:57.960 --> 0:16:01.960 is an achievement of your great potential or like living 0:16:02.000 --> 0:16:03.840 your best life. Does that make sense? 0:16:04.080 --> 0:16:04.360 Yeah? 0:16:04.480 --> 0:16:07.360 Yeah, there is a way people talk about being an 0:16:07.440 --> 0:16:10.640 authentic existence, being one in which you do your best. 0:16:10.720 --> 0:16:13.640 You're like become the best version of yourself that you 0:16:13.680 --> 0:16:15.600 can be and do the best you can do. 0:16:16.160 --> 0:16:17.840 Like it kind of a spin on that and just 0:16:17.920 --> 0:16:21.200 our lingos. Occasionally go hear someone refer to as say 0:16:21.200 --> 0:16:23.560 a particular director or creator, and they'll be like, Oh, 0:16:23.600 --> 0:16:27.480 this individual, they're the real deal. Or this movie, this song, 0:16:27.640 --> 0:16:30.440 this is the real deal. You know. It's kind of 0:16:30.440 --> 0:16:34.000 you know, it doesn't necessarily connect to anything in particular, 0:16:34.040 --> 0:16:36.200 but it does kind of at least imply that, like 0:16:36.320 --> 0:16:39.840 this is authentic. This is a work of someone's labor 0:16:40.280 --> 0:16:43.200 and love and passion, Like someone put in the work here. 0:16:43.560 --> 0:16:46.800 Another phrase that expresses this idea is the idea of 0:16:46.840 --> 0:16:50.160 someone coming into themselves as an artist, or as a leader, 0:16:50.320 --> 0:16:53.600 or as whatever, Like they are becoming the real version 0:16:53.600 --> 0:16:55.200 of themselves by doing something great. 0:16:55.600 --> 0:17:01.600 Yeah, Like what does that mean? Like they fulfilled the prophecy. 0:17:01.120 --> 0:17:06.080 Achieve their terrible purpose. Yeah. So yet another definition of 0:17:06.119 --> 0:17:08.840 authenticity that has been very important is one that is 0:17:09.000 --> 0:17:14.600 particular to existentialist philosophy, in which I don't claim to 0:17:14.600 --> 0:17:17.280 be an expert on existentialist philosophy, So I hope I'm 0:17:17.320 --> 0:17:20.840 summarizing it well enough here. But the way I understand 0:17:20.840 --> 0:17:24.679 it is that these branch in this branch of philosophy, 0:17:24.720 --> 0:17:31.080 authenticity has this specialized meaning where an authentic existence is 0:17:31.119 --> 0:17:36.400 basically living without illusions, accepting the extent to which you 0:17:36.480 --> 0:17:40.359 are free to control your actions, and accepting that you 0:17:40.440 --> 0:17:44.280 are thus defined by your actions. And so I think 0:17:44.320 --> 0:17:48.639 a big emphasis of the existentialist understanding of authenticity is 0:17:48.840 --> 0:17:52.600 accepting that you are what you choose to do, and 0:17:52.640 --> 0:17:56.520 there's not like a separate secret you. That's the real 0:17:56.680 --> 0:17:59.199 you that is different than what you do. What you 0:17:59.320 --> 0:18:02.399 do is what you are, And in order to be authentic, 0:18:02.480 --> 0:18:04.960 you have to accept that what you do is what 0:18:05.000 --> 0:18:05.360 you are. 0:18:05.960 --> 0:18:09.000 Okay, So it's not you are not who you are, 0:18:09.040 --> 0:18:11.159 not what you would like to do. You are not 0:18:11.280 --> 0:18:14.240 what you are thinking about doing. You are not what 0:18:14.320 --> 0:18:17.720 you regret not doing. You are what you actually do. 0:18:17.920 --> 0:18:20.000 What you actually choose to do is who you are. 0:18:20.160 --> 0:18:23.520 That's the way I understand it, Okay, Fans of existentialism, 0:18:23.560 --> 0:18:26.840 complain at us an email if you think I'm wrong. 0:18:27.440 --> 0:18:28.080 If you choose to. 0:18:29.560 --> 0:18:32.359 Yeah, And then of course there are even more ideas 0:18:32.400 --> 0:18:34.840 of authenticity that we can continue to explore in the 0:18:34.840 --> 0:18:37.399 rest of this series. But even coming back to the 0:18:37.400 --> 0:18:41.040 baseline of the is what it seems to be or 0:18:41.119 --> 0:18:44.719 the you are who you claim to be definition, there 0:18:44.720 --> 0:18:47.119 are still a bunch of questions that we can be 0:18:47.240 --> 0:18:50.199 left to wonder about, like why do we place so 0:18:50.440 --> 0:18:55.800 much value on authenticity? And why is authenticity especially important 0:18:55.880 --> 0:18:59.639 in some domains of life? What are the criteria of 0:18:59.680 --> 0:19:03.280 authoricity in a person or in a personal expression. What 0:19:03.440 --> 0:19:06.200 outward signs are we actually looking for when we make 0:19:06.359 --> 0:19:10.440 judgments about it? Are we good at making those judgments accurately? 0:19:10.480 --> 0:19:11.800 I think we're going to look at a paper on 0:19:11.840 --> 0:19:14.080 that in just a minute. And also, if we go 0:19:14.200 --> 0:19:18.480 with the definition above, do we truly value authentic behavior 0:19:18.640 --> 0:19:20.000 as much as we think we do? 0:19:20.840 --> 0:19:22.120 All right, let's dive into it. 0:19:22.480 --> 0:19:26.640 Well, so we're probably going to address authenticity from the 0:19:26.680 --> 0:19:29.639 angle of psychology research in a number of different ways 0:19:29.640 --> 0:19:31.920 in the series, but I wanted to start off by 0:19:32.000 --> 0:19:34.800 discussing a paper that was one of the first things 0:19:34.800 --> 0:19:37.800 that really interested me when I started researching this topic. 0:19:38.400 --> 0:19:40.919 This is the paper I mentioned earlier by Erica R. 0:19:41.000 --> 0:19:45.400 Bailey and Aaron Levy, published in the journal Psychological Science 0:19:45.520 --> 0:19:48.160 in twenty twenty two, and the title of the paper 0:19:48.280 --> 0:19:52.560 is are you for real? Perceptions of authenticity are systematically 0:19:52.680 --> 0:19:56.119 biased and not accurate. That'll give away the conclusions, but 0:19:56.160 --> 0:19:59.280 I think there's some interesting stuff to learn along the way. 0:20:00.560 --> 0:20:02.600 So at the time this paper was published, the authors 0:20:02.600 --> 0:20:06.560 were affiliated with Columbia University. I think since then Bailey 0:20:06.600 --> 0:20:10.520 has taken a position at Berkeley. But this paper begins 0:20:10.560 --> 0:20:14.760 by asking a simple question, how good are we at 0:20:14.800 --> 0:20:18.879 making accurate judgments about who is authentic and who is not. 0:20:20.320 --> 0:20:23.720 This paper, again is the source of the phrasing of 0:20:23.760 --> 0:20:27.639 the definition I mentioned earlier that quote. Theoretically, a person 0:20:27.760 --> 0:20:31.280 is authentic when their behavior is genuine. That is, their 0:20:31.320 --> 0:20:35.959 behavior reflects their true inner qualities and feelings. So if 0:20:36.000 --> 0:20:39.200 the way they behave outwardly reflects who they really are 0:20:39.560 --> 0:20:43.840 and how they really feel, and most of us behave 0:20:44.040 --> 0:20:47.240 as if we think we're good at making these judgments 0:20:47.280 --> 0:20:50.200 about others. You know, we do this all the time. 0:20:50.280 --> 0:20:53.480 You talk to somebody for five minutes, and after you 0:20:53.560 --> 0:20:55.679 walk away from them, you are pretty much ready to 0:20:55.720 --> 0:20:59.320 say Jimmy was so earnest and sincere I really like him, 0:20:59.800 --> 0:21:02.679 or Jimmy was so fake I couldn't stand that guy. 0:21:02.720 --> 0:21:06.439 It's almost embarrassing to look back on how quickly we 0:21:06.480 --> 0:21:08.600 think we can make these judgments about people. 0:21:09.119 --> 0:21:11.920 Yeah, I mean, of course it makes sense given why 0:21:12.000 --> 0:21:15.680 these this capacity for judging exists. I mean it comes 0:21:15.680 --> 0:21:20.120 down to basic survival scenarios in which it maybe doesn't 0:21:20.160 --> 0:21:22.399 pay to have an open mind, you know, coming back 0:21:22.440 --> 0:21:26.240 to the you know, the very worn out example of 0:21:26.400 --> 0:21:30.280 is there a tiger in the in the weeds there? 0:21:30.760 --> 0:21:33.320 Or is there not a tiger? Well, you know, sometimes 0:21:34.280 --> 0:21:36.800 you can't keep an open mind about the scenario. You 0:21:36.800 --> 0:21:38.879 have to make a judgment call and then make your 0:21:38.920 --> 0:21:43.920 survival choices accordingly. And you know that it holds true 0:21:43.920 --> 0:21:46.399 in life and death situations, but then it ends up 0:21:46.440 --> 0:21:49.480 applying to these various social contexts that are not life 0:21:49.520 --> 0:21:49.880 and death. 0:21:50.200 --> 0:21:53.000 That's right. So you could look at it on one hand, 0:21:53.000 --> 0:21:56.880 as there's a survival incentive for us to be suspicious 0:21:56.920 --> 0:21:59.360 and to not give out trust too easily. You could 0:21:59.359 --> 0:22:01.200 also look at it from the other hand and say, 0:22:01.280 --> 0:22:04.439 maybe there are some scenarios where there is incentive to 0:22:04.520 --> 0:22:07.960 trust more easily, maybe than we should because like, I 0:22:08.000 --> 0:22:10.280 don't know trusting, like you don't want to be hung 0:22:10.400 --> 0:22:14.440 up being suspicious of people preventing you from cooperating to survive. 0:22:14.800 --> 0:22:18.960 Right, right, And ultimately, like inaction on any given scenario 0:22:19.200 --> 0:22:22.560 is in action, Like nothing is getting accomplished exactly. 0:22:23.080 --> 0:22:25.359 So in the background section of their paper, the authors 0:22:25.480 --> 0:22:30.960 talk about they review previous research confirming that we really 0:22:31.000 --> 0:22:34.000 do make these judgments about authenticity, and we base a 0:22:34.040 --> 0:22:37.520 lot on them, Like people who are perceived as authentic 0:22:37.560 --> 0:22:41.480