Argument analysis and Critical Discussion of Paul Ekman’s and Mark Frank’s article, “Lies That Fail.”

Argument Analysis

Paul Ekman’s and Mark Frank’s reading, “Lies That Fail,” points out that liars are often unprepared while coming up with a line, rehearse as well as memorize it (Frank, 1993 p.194). It is such unpreparedness that exposes the liar’s deceptive lines. According to the authors, different clues are displayed by the liar that can assist in identifying the deception presented by the liar.

Frank and Ekman present different clues that betray lies, including thinking clues. Circumstances bear unpredictable changes that expose a false line (Frank, 1993, p.194). Even in situations where a liar does not necessarily have to change lines, liars find it problematic to remember the lies they previously committed themselves to, including individuals who are cleverer. Failing to predict the necessity to lie while coming up with a line reasonable with the new circumstances makes it difficult to recall the statement the liar has forethought. This resultantly produces clues to the deceit that are easy to spot. The liar’s statement may either be contradicting other incontrovertible facts or is internally inconsistent. Frank and Ekman also argue that lies about feelings are an essential clue to revealing the deception. Attempting to hide emotions the moment they are felt could be revealed in words. Once emotions are triggered, changes happen automatically unwillingly and without deliberation (Frank, 1993 pg. 195). These emotional adjustments occur so fast before one can realize and control, which is a key characteristic of emotional experiences.

Faking an emotion that one experiences are problematic, especially if one is trying to hide another emotion.  A liar will try to falsify emotions to hide the signs of the emotions they wish to conceal. Ekman and Frank assert that some of the ways emotional deception can be exposed are through leakage of the signs of the emotions the liar is trying to conceal.  Also, deception clues can help reveal that a lie is being executed, especially for liars who are hardly leaking concealed emotions.

The reading also mentions feelings about lying as a clue to revealing the deception. Different feelings and emotions are involved even in situations where the lie does not concern emotions (Frank, 1993 pg.196.) Feelings of contempt, surprise, guilt, and delight for successfully duping someone as well as pretense can be helpful in detecting lies. The fear of being caught is also an important clue in recognizing a deceiver. Liars, depending on their personality, may be afraid to be apprehended following detection for different reasons. The liar’s belief in their target’ capacity to recognize lies is one of the determining factors. Also, a lair’s fear of punishment, their successful experience in lying, and practice in deceiving are among the reasons that make a deceiver afraid of being caught.  According to research from Stephen Porter’s Forensic Psychology Lab at Dalhousie University (2008), the face is among the key body parts that will reveal the real emotions of a deceiver. The face and its musculature are termed as the most complex feature of the external human body. Different muscles in the face are beyond one’s control, and they cannot be triggered if genuine emotion is not expressed (Dalhousie University, 2008).   The reading shows that a range of clues can help lie detectors identify deceivers and lines that are false if they are effectively put in practice.

Critical Discussion

The main argument in Paul Ekman’s and Mark Frank’s reading, “Lies That Fail,” shows that the more unprepared a liar is, the higher the chances of identifying the deceit in their actions and statements. With this regard, lie detectors task of revealing the lies eases the more the lie is unrehearsed, and the liar is unable to forecast the circumstances. Unprepared liars will reveal clues that will guide lie detectors to identify the deceit. Franks and Ekman’s argument is factual since it mirrors the habits and practices of the majority of individuals in a situation that they are lying. It is common for one to be in circumstances that force them to create an instant deceitful line, be it long or brief. The quick response by the deceiver limits their period to prepare their deceit carefully, which exposes the lie through different clues as they express their statement and actions. Whilst the reading’s key argument assists in realizing and identifying less prepared lairs and their deceits, it does not provide sufficient ways to detect lies that are orchestrated by a long-term, well prepared, and organized deceiver. Some lies are sophisticated and are schemed by individuals with expertise and over a long period providing enough time to prepare its presentation and how to conceal it. Clues to such deceptions are narrow and difficult to identify as well as different from the ones portrayed by the unprepared liar.

The authors provide relevant and relatable premises in support of the argument. One’s emotions, thinking, and reasoning capacity, as well as fear of being caught, are essential to a liar’s preparation while presenting and concealing deceit.  Therefore, these are the factors that lie detectors can easily rely on to quickly realize lies, especially for unskilled and unprepared deceivers. In addition, the inclusion of examples that put the premises into context clarifies the authors’ argument further. Also, the principal clues that the article presents are the common factors and elements that encompass human nature and its characteristics and hence covers any individual with regard to detecting their lies. The authors choose premises that are easy to understand and less sophisticated, which makes it easy to understand the reading’s core argument and subsequent points. Additionally, the article’s premises sufficiently support its conclusion; the authors’ presentation of their principal points generally show that different clues displayed by a lair can assist in detecting their deceit.  The authors’ premises lean on the make-up of the human body to present the argument, which solidifies their conclusion. Perhaps one of the aspects that make the article fall short is it’s few and brief examples mentioned in the article that contextualize its premises. The authors do not sufficiently provide examples that reflect the clues they mention in the reading, and the few that are mentioned are less detailed.

 

 

References

Dalhousie University. (2008, April 24). Lying? The Face Betrays Deceiver’s True Emotions, But In Unexpected Ways. Retrieved from Dalhousie University: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080422200952.htm

Frank, P. E. (1993). Lies That Fail. In M. L. Saami, Truth, Lies, and Deception (pp. 194-200). New York: Gulliford Press.