Everyone has experienced negative confrontations with co-workers, classmates, store clerks, or someone of similar stature. After we walk away, we frequently think things we should have said or done if we'd only had the presence of mind. By the time we relate the incident to a spouse or another sympathetic third party, however, our retelling of the incident includes all of those things as facts — not afterthoughts.

Author Linda Barry coined the term autobifictionalography — meaning my life the way it should have been — to cover this phenomenon.

Although this sort of self-deception is seemingly innocuous, it can keep us from making the personal changes needed to continue our journey back to our Father in Heaven.

Changing the particulars of an incident to place ourselves in the best light possible appears to be part of human nature. We want our friends and acquaintances to understand our outrage. We want them to admire how brilliantly we handled a situation — or, as we justify to ourselves, how brilliantly we would have handled it if we had it to do all over again. While on the surface there may not seem to be much threat associated with this practice, the long term consequences of this self-delusion can be damaging to us in many ways –the reality is we did not handle the situation brilliantly, and to present it as if we did is to lose any opportunity to learn and change from the experience.

Spin

Our natural tendencies toward self-deception have been magnified to exorbitant proportions by the secular media. Whole new careers in public relations have been created by this perceived need to put every decision or action made or taken by a public figure into a positive perspective — garnering kudos without acknowledging responsibility for any negative causation or blame.

The term spin itself has emerged from American politics to now cover this behavior in all phases of life. Journalist William Safire is generally credited with popularizing the term in 1986. At first used to describe public relations manipulation by public relations spokesmen — or spin doctors — spin has expanded to include any attempt to control a message, avoid political fallout, or use obvious or obscure propaganda to promote a cause.

Safire himself describes spin as slang for deceit . He hypothesized its origin as a truncation of the phrase to spin a yarn . Within current language usage, spin has been transformed into a noun meaning a story has been angled or slanted to serve the purposes of the person or organization advocating it. While pervasive in our modern society, spin is little more than an attempt to doctor a problem with a product, a statement, or an incident in the same way a crooked accountant cooks the books to achieve a desired outcome and cover up criminal actions.

In his 2003 novel, Thank You for Smoking , satirist Christopher Buckley takes spin to outrageous proportions. His morally vacuous anti-hero, Ned Naylor, is chief spokesperson for the Academy of Tobacco Studies and, as such, has the dubious honor of defending and promoting the rights of smokers at a time when they are accorded the same treatment lepers once were.

Naylor's ability to blithely, and apparently, effortlessly deflect blame for smoking related deaths is amazing in its audacity. His amoral reasoning in refuting research connecting tobacco to addiction, and misdirecting any and all efforts to hold Big Tobacco responsible for anything, anywhere, anytime turns him into the king of spin. Even Naylor realizes his preposterous rationalizations are complete hokum, but it takes a certain daring to accept a job as a target for a hated employer.

Perhaps the novel's supreme feat is making a sympathy figure out of a character who lies to sell cigarettes for a living — in itself the ultimate spin . Somehow, you find yourself rooting for and admiring Naylor while despising everything he represents. And isn't that how the adversary works —- by leading us astray even when we know we are being led astray? Doesn't the adversary constantly spin bad choices to make them appear, if not acceptable, then inevitable?

It may be natural, at times even inadvertent, to fictionalize our role in the events of our lives. We use rationalizations and self-deception to convince ourselves and others we were in the right, or we were the wronged party in a recounted incident. When this becomes a habit, we continually run all our experiences through a mental filter so they fit into the world as we want to see it.

Not only does this fill us with the lies of the adversary, but it can also lead to bad advice from others who are basing their responses on the supposed veracity of our recounting of events. The personal interactions between spouses are particularly vulnerable to this type of damaging spin when inappropriately shared with others.

Law Enforcement

In police investigations, “everybody lies,” is a cynical yet realistic catch phrase. Often it seems everyone interviewed in an investigation — victims, suspect, witnesses — puts their personal perspective on an event. Even if they are trying to tell the truth, the events are colored by many different factors from prior similar experiences, to personal prejudices, and dozens of other tangents.

In the police academy the inaccuracies of “eye-witnesses” are demonstrated during a classroom session by a man unexpectedly running into the room through the front door, clambering over desks, knocking over the instructor, and fleeing by the back door. When asked for a description of the suspect , the police recruits who witness the event often can't even agree on the suspect's race, height, weight, and hair color — let alone provide further accurate descriptions.

When interviewed, the recollection of events by witnesses and victims is clouded further by drugs and alcohol, making truth an even more elusive goal. Clearly, we should give thanks for the Word of Wisdom. Battling the adversary's lures toward self-deception is difficult enough without weakening our resolve by indulging in self-destructive behavior as well.

Finding the truth in secular situations can almost be an impossibility. Often in those situations, it is hard to remember there is but one Truth — our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Hewing close to Him and His teachings will help us keep from spinning out of control and spiraling down into the clutches of the adversary.

Self-Deception in Business

All too often, we use self-deception to protect ourselves from painful truths. We don't want to admit we were in the wrong, were foolish, or didn't act or respond in a manner we wish we had. This behavior jeopardizes not only our personal and spiritual salvation, but it can bring our secular businesses crashing down around us.

Spinning the reasons behind why we won or lost a contract, why business is good or bad, how glitches in a product are actually benefits, or why a competitor's product or service is inferior, can stop a business from making a truthful assessment of its own position in the marketplace.

If we are truthful with ourselves in business, we can see these actions for the excuses they are. If you take an honest look at the services your business provides, or the flaws in your products would the results be so bad? Maybe, but you would at least have a starting point for improvements that could lead to major success. Spinning flawed business decisions in an attempt to ignore their implications can only make a bad situation worse.

The Mirror of Truth

If we look at our actions in the pure light of Christ's Truth will we like what we see? If we seek to avoid responsibility for our actions by spinning their implications, how can we seek repentance? Does the Lord not see spin for the lies it represents? Of course, He does. To think differently is to let the adversary control or thoughts.