As Saira Khan and I were chatting on Skype, the discussion topic of lying came up. She created a false statement, which got me to ask if she was a pathological liar. Now this question, when first asked, seems to be a relatively benign one; however, it is not as simple as one may think. The answer is twofold; if Saira is a pathological liar, she would answer with “no” (which she did). However, if she answered yes, she would be a pathological liar, which would mean she needed to say no, so she was telling the truth, which would not make her a pathological liar!
Oh wow, this is quite confusing for the layman (or laywoman like Saira). It is necessary to comprehend that it is a lose-lose situation for her; as she is a liar, and is lying. In all honesty, she isn’t really a liar at all. I was lying. But does that make me a pathological liar? Oh gawd, another stupid paradox. The only truth in the matter is that she is going to the Dirty T (Tucson), and it is a grave mistake. I would be lying if I said that otherwise (wait, she said that to me over Skype).
This whole thing is so confusing. Or is it? I have no idea. We are all just laymen (or laywomen) living in a world of confusion. Just chew on that non-sequiter argumentation for a while. Boom. Big Wordz. I don’t even know if I used that big phrase correctly. Adios for now.