The Costanza Matrix

Seinfeld, a TV series that first ran from 1989 to 1998 in the United States (and will likely run for decades more) was famous as a "show about nothing." More accurately, perhaps, it was a show about life. It has become the source of a genre of Web sites, books, and miscellaneous whatnot with the general theme "What Seinfeld Teaches Us about Life." One valuable idea that I — and many others — drew from Episode 102 appears in a line spoken by the famous ne'er-do-well character "George Costanza," who says, "…it's not a lie…if you believe it."

Whether he's correct or not, it's apparent that "George" does believe what he's saying, and therefore, if his claim is correct, he's not lying. But that's obvious. Less obvious: if the statement is incorrect, is he lying?

This is a nontrivial question. In the United States, substantiating a charge of fraud requires that five specific conditions be met, one of which is that the defendant must have knowingly made a false statement.

So I decided to examine the connection between statement validity and the speaker's belief. The result is what might be called "The Costanza Matrix." As a legal tool, it isn't worth much, but in the workplace it can help sort out ethical questions when someone makes a false statement.

The Costanza matrix is a two-by-two matrix whose axes might be described as Statement Truth and Speaker's Belief, which are, respectively, the degree of truth of the statement, and the degree to which the speaker believes it. Here are the four cells of this matrix.

Statement is true; Speaker believes it's true

The speaker is honestly conveying valid information when the statement is true and the speaker believes it's true. I call this Honest Information.

Statement is false; Speaker believes it's true

The speaker The Costanza matrix is a two-by-two
matrix whose axes might be
described as Statement Truth
and Speaker's Beliefis making an honest error when the statement is false, but the speaker believes it's true, whether out of ignorance, stupidity, or having been misinformed. I call this Misinformation. This is the situation "George" was talking about: it's not a lie if you believe it.

Statement is false; Speaker believes it's false

The speaker is dishonestly conveying disinformation, or is plainly lying, when the statement is false, and the speaker knows it's false. I call this Disinformation or Lying.

Statement is true; Speaker believes it's false

When the statement is true, but the speaker believes it's false, and intends to mislead, the speaker is lying, but incompetently so. I call this Incompetent Lying.

The possibly novel insight here is that when a speaker is making a true statement, it's nevertheless a lie if the speaker believes it to be false and intends to mislead — an incompetent lie, to be sure, but still a lie. One finer point: if the statement is true, but the speaker believes it's false and is mistaken about why he or she believes the statement is false, we might be underestimating the degree of incompetence, but the speaker is still lying incompetently. In any case, as "George" might say, if a statement is true, "it is a lie if you don't believe it."  Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Conflict Management:

Ending Conversations

At times, we need to end the current conversation. It's going nowhere, or we have something important to do, or we just don't want to deal with the other person. Here are some suggestions for ending conversations.

Toxic Conflict in Virtual Teams: Minimizing Authority

Toxic conflict in virtual teams is especially difficult to address, because we bring to it assumptions about causes and remedies that we've acquired in our experience in co-located teams. In this Part II of our exploration we examine how minimizing authority tends to convert ordinary creative conflict into a toxic form.

Agenda Despots: I

Many of us abhor meetings. Words like boring, silly, and waste come to mind. But for some meeting chairs, meetings aren't boring at all, because they fear losing control of the agenda. To maintain control, they use the techniques of the Agenda Despots.

On Snitching at Work: II

Reporting violations of laws, policies, regulations, or ethics to authorities at work can expose you to the risk of retribution. That's why the reporting decision must consider the need for safety.

Symbolic Self-Completion and Projects

The theory of symbolic self-completion holds that to define themselves, humans sometimes assert indicators of achievement that either they do not have, or that do not mean what they seem to mean. This behavior has consequences for managing project-oriented organizations.

See also Conflict Management and Conflict Management for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming February 26: Devious Political Tactics: Bad Decisions

When workplace politics influences the exchanges that lead to important organizational decisions, we sometimes make decisions for reasons other than the best interests of the organization. Recognizing these tactics can limit the risk of bad decisions. Available here and by RSS on February 26.

And on March 5: On Begging the Question

Some of our most expensive wrong decisions have come about because we've tricked ourselves as we debated our options. The tricks sometimes arise from rhetorical fallacies that tangle our thinking. One of the trickiest is called Begging the Question. Available here and by RSS on March 5.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info