When is Lying Justified?

[I Ratant]

Actually two of us were pulled over.
And I can't to this day finger out where that cop had been hiding!
They ain't nothin' there to hide behind!
I like to say I spent a week driving across Texas one day.
But..zoom!.. he came by me at about 120 mph to get the guy ahead of me and me.

 

[I Ratant]

Hmm. I would think that a society that is predominately truthful would be, on the whole, a happier one to live in and more successful than a society that is predominately deceitful.

...

.
It's because of lies that the government has the Highway Safety, Food & Drug, Fair Practices...etc.
The entrepeneur -will- lie to sell his product, even when he knows it is deadly.
Requiring minimum specifications of quality and safety removes a major problem to the consumer in selecting what to purchase.

 

[Tricky]

.
If you tend to be truthful most of the time, you don't have to remember what you said.

(Usually attributed to Mark Twain)

But it is correct to say that one of the most negative outcomes of lying is getting caught, and telling the truth eliminates that potential.

 

[godless dave]

When it's to a telemarketer.

I think it's morally justified to lie to anyone who is trying to scam you, but tactically it may not be the right move - scammers are practiced liars.

 

[Complexity]

You believe that there is no system based on right or wrong conduct that is meaningful? And that such a system cannot be shared by a community or society? I honestly don't recall many of your posts in detail, but I still find that difficult to believe of you.

There is none that is founded upon anything other than opinion.

It doesn't matter whether a moral system is held by only one person or by one billion - popularity doesn't make something correct or well-founded.

I assure you that I've been saying similar things for years.

 

[Kaylee]

<snip>

Or just to themselves. A lie is fundamentally an attempt to deceive. Whether that be making a statement I know to be false or simply disregarding the truth that I do know. If I am simply stating what I believe to be true but is in fact false, I'm not lying, I'm simply mistaken. Lying to ones self is the easiest thing to do as that is where we are most proficient at it. We know just what to say to be convincing and we want to be convinced that it is the truth. Wanting to believe we have some objective justification for our actions (or lack thereof) is not immune to that predilection. That we (as individuals) are not singular constructs but a conglomeration of often competing impulses only exacerbates that situation. We must repress some and reinforce others or we would not be able to function. As that is how our brains function (neurologically) some impulses get repressed before we are even aware of them. So the question of 'did I do it for the benefit of the family or just for myself?' is one we can only ask ourselves. When those goals (family vs. yourself) are opposing the question can be easy to answer truthfully. When those goals are perceived as mutual, both the question and the doubt (if any) is something that we must either live with or repress, if we are aware of it.

Agreed, people lie to themselves too. Either knowingly or unknowingly.

FWIW, the closest Bok comes to discussing that though is her belief that some people want to be lied to.

For example, many voters may prefer to be lied to rather than be forced to accept that difficult decisions and times probably lie ahead.

But that is really a different subject. Unknowingly lying to yourself is probably strictly a psychological issue.

 

[Kaylee]

Yes to a certain extent, your right! A person passes you in the hallway at work, "Hey, how are you doing today?" You answer, " Great! And you? " Even though the truth is, You would really like to smack the living crap out of your boss at that moment!

Yes, pretending to like people that you don't actually like -- in fact that you actually dislike or even hate -- that is a very important kind of lie. It probably goes a long way to help keep the peace in many businesses and neighborhoods. What are those type of lies called? White lies doesn't seem quit right. Utilitarian lie? Well, it is utilitarian -- but I think this category of lies could use a more specific name. Social lies?

You are right, everybody lies. How you choose to act about it, makes more difference, than the lie itself. I guess that shows more about what you are made of.

I agree that it is very revealing what someone chooses to lie about. Its very revealing about their actual values and priorities.

 

[jiggeryqua]

Everybody lies.

[/House]

Rule 1: The Doctor lies.

[/The Doctor]

 

[Kaylee]

For many people, especially politicians, communication has no moral value, it is simply a means to attempt to achieve some objective. When people have an objective, they will say anything whatever might promote the objective, regardless of the truthfulness of the said things. Considering the risk of getting caught of lying of course, which would have an adverse effect on reaching the objective.

The press officer of US Army will say to people anything whatsoever might promote the objectives of the US Army, truthfulness of the information is no factor there.

Bok discusses politics and lies also. When I come back to the forum in a few days I'll try to recall some of the more interestng comments she had to say about that. <snip>

Bok talks about politics and lies in her book. The first edition was only written about 5 years after Nixon and Watergate. So naturally she refers to that episode in the nation's history and discusses how sharply US citizen's trust in politicians and government has dropped since then.

She also discusses President Lyndon B. Johnson. IIRC, she said that 2 months before the 1964 election he had decided to escalate the war in Viet Nam. But he didn't think he would have the nation's support and he didn't think he would be able to change public opinion before the next election. So, he postponed the military escalation and he indicated in all of his public comments that he was not going to escalate America's military involvement in Viet Nam. Than he went ahead and did so after November.

This is an example of how politicians and their supporters feel justified in lying to the public because they believe that they are right and that its not possible to convince the electorate in time before the next election. It's not that they, in their minds, have no morality. It's that they believe that they have superior knowledge and they probably believe that they have superior intellect also(Bok doesn't say superior intellect, but that's my take on it), and they believe the public interest will be better served if they lie.

I think this belief is dangerously close to philosphocal beliefs held over 2,000 years ago that people from a superior class have a right, perhaps even a duty, to lie to their inferiors. I wouldn't be surprised if many American politicians believe that it is the right thing for them to lie to the majority of the "unwashed" electorate. It goes a long way towards explaining the lying.

I also believe that some politicians believe that they can't support policies that would be in everyone's interest and that its critical that they at least definitely support policies that help the people who got them into office. Whatever else they can accomplish is gravy. Bok doesn't discuss this particular justification -- but she does discuss the loyalty medical doctors and lawyers feel to their professional peers and how they often put their peers interest in front of their clients and the public's. Not the same justification but a similar one. A justification that deception towards others outside of your peer group is OK. She quotes a philosopher as saying the only way to get rid of this type of deceit is to get rid of separate classes. (I don't recall the philosopher's name, sorry. It might have been one of the British ones within a hundred years or so before the Industrial Revolution. )

Bok asserts that in the long run deceipt and lies in politics cause the public to lose its trust in government and the political process and it makes it more difficult to govern.

 

[Kaylee]

<snip>

And yes, the law of unintended consequences applies. We might think it will spare Bobby unnecessary harm to tell him Rover just ran away, rather than was hit by a car and died while Bobby was at school, but this lie could end up causing harm in other ways. And it doesn't help Bobby learn to deal with death, either.

You read the book!

 

[Kaylee]

I'm making the distinction here between deliberately making a false statement and attempting to lead someone into believing a falsehood.

The exact definition for lie will vary depending on your source, but the better dictionaries will provide several definitions. (Example.) Even the quote you gave provided two different definitions for lie, the first of which makes no mention of deception.

The simpler definition for lie is a deliberate untruth, which is the definition I'm using for the purpose of distinguishing a lie from a deception.

In a conversation about lying, the distinction between lies intended to deceive and lies not intended to deceive is important, even if the distinction is not usually made in everyday conversation. That's why I brought it up, to highlight this point.

I think the simpler truth is incomplete. What lie is not intended to deceive? Can you give me a few examples?

Pls don't include fiction. We already discussed that.

 

[Kaylee]

Yes, "House" is one strange character! He relies on the lab results, because it's science, and can be proven. His team, is doing the work, to disprove the straws, that are being grasped at, and reminding him of anything that he may have bulldozed over while looking for something more complicated.
Wilson is the cancer specialist, who also backs Cuddy, with the politics! Win, Win!
"Everyone lies." Maybe not, maybe they just leave things out, that they don't think are important, but really are. Sometimes it's all in how you look at things, where is your view coming from?

But the lab results are carried out by people, people that House needs to trust and rely upon so he can do his job.

You can look at the hospital like an analogy for society as t's large and complicated enough to do so.

House is a part of that society and he needs to be able to trust that all the members of that society will do their job, reliably. If he can't do that -- then he can't do his job.

As Bok puts it, society relies upon veracity in order to function.

Actually, IIRC the series well enough, the only real liar is House -- on occassion. Bok describes liars as free-riders (i.e., parasites) who can get what they need only because the majority of the other people are honest and do not lie.

 

[Kaylee]

No, no no, no, don't be a member of that "your feelings are (almost) always right" cult! Feelings are nothing but feelings. E.g. if you are accustom to lying compusively, it will feel fine to lie again and feel wrong to tell the truth.

Lying is an attempt to assert control ... to empower yourself and un-empower who you lie to. The kid who tries to claim his dog ate his homework is trying to take control away from the teacher.

Lying is an assertion of power, and a compensation for powerlessness.

It is a social misstep to assert deceptive control over peers you respect.

I agree.

A statement or act intended to cause someone to believe something that is not true is not different from plain lying. Lying without "technically" lying is still lying. E.g. if someone asks me, "did you sleep with her" and I did, but answer, "she's not attractive to me," I've attempted a lie.

Bok put it this way -- lying always involves deception but a deception does not always require a lie.

Sometimes it's possible to deceive without uttering a false statement.

 

[Kaylee]

I have lied to my 4 year old quite often, and will do so again I am sure.
If the correct answer to the question
"What were you and Mommy doing in the bedroom?"
is actually:
"A reciprocal act of oral sex assigned a number just below 70.",
then I think:
"Napping."
is the better answer.

<snip>

Ausmerican, What you told your four year old, was totally exceptable! They are not ready for that kind of truth yet! Five more years!

Gotta agree with you on that one Ausamerican.

But I think even when your 4 year old becomes 24 she would rather not know certain things about you and Mom. Privacy is another reason used to justify lying.

Most people say that young children don't need to know about sex and its appropriate to hold off on the knowledge. But given what really happens in society -- I wonder if what is really being taught to children in this fashion are the concepts of privacy and the important idea that its not appropriate to talk about every topic with every person. And one should never learn about sexual techniques from their parents.

This reminds me of the Santa Claus issue. Why do billions of people around the world lie to their children about a short fat dwarf who favors the color red?

I think the answer is deeper than because it's a fun thing to do. I use to think perhaps it was a way for parents to avoid explaining to their kids why they didn't get as expensive a present as some of their friends. Maybe, but I think the real reason is even deeper than that.

The real answer may be that most people want their children to know that people lie, and not just strangers but people that they know and love. That is probably too hard a thing for families to talk about directly -- and maybe the whole way society handles Santa Claus allows us to do so indirectly.

I don't think this is something thought out and done on a conscious level. I think its just something that a lot of communities accidentally stumbled upon and they kept doing it because, unconsciously, most people realize that it works and that its teaching something that needs to be learned.

I think that is why the whole Santa Claus cycle has been kept. A baby finally becomes old enough to be aware of a new character and have something new to talk about with the family, then becomes old enough to be able to look forward to a simple annual ritual, and then finally learns that even loved ones lie ... these are all important rites of passages that symbolize stages of cognitive growth.

Being raised Jewish, I don't have direct experience with the Santa Claus ritual. Let me ask you all, when most kids learn that Santa Claus is a lie -- do they move on and start to queston other things as well? I think that would be a reasonable response -- but I don't recall what my non-Jewish friends did.

As to some of the other common reasons to lie here I avoid those by being honest just one time.
My mother-in-law asked if the dress she was wearing made her butt look big. I replied no, the material the dress was made from and the pattern on it did nothing to make her butt look big.
Then, as she was walking happily away I mentioned "It is the fact that you have a huge arse that makes your butt look big."
Now, thanks to my admirable honesty in that regard, I never get asked questions like that.

So ... no white lies in the Ausamerican house. How do you get along with your mother-in-law?

 

[Kaylee]

An opinion I can not dispute, but I've known plenty of people who are quite happy lying and being lied to (in fact they may even be happier if people lied to them more often).

I agree and Bok mentioned this is her book also. I find this very difficult to relate too, but I'm certain that I have met some of those people also.

Not just games or professions but whole segments of our own society that are essentially societies unto themselves.[ed. responding to my post about games based on deceit and professions where many of its practitioners are deceitful to their clients] That this forum and the JREF even exist is a testament to their ability to be successful.

Um ... OK, you lost me, esp. at the last sentence.

Some details are simply irrelevant, so their truth or lack thereof, is of no consequence. Others are obviously false and require no further investigation. Remember deception is the key to lying (not just making assertions that happen to be, or are in all ways, false). Irrelevant and patently false details don't further the deception unless someone simply wants to believe it and then they are just lying to themselves.

Think about how much time and energy would be wasted double-checked and verifying each other, constantly, on every little detail (not to mention the problem of just working with each other) because most people can tell only just what they simply perceive to be the truth most the time as opposed to only what they believe will deceive.

Reductio ad absurdum cuts both ways.

In science double-checking and verifying each other, constantly, on every little relevant detail is the norm. Time well spent. Not because most scientist lie most of the time but because that is the best way to actually find the 'truth'.




Society needs some degree of truth to function, imagine a society where most were simply mistaken most of the time. The same (if not more) lack of truth is there but not the intent on deliberate deception.

I'm still lost.

Maybe this will help -- while looking for something else, I found a short article that claims to "explore and amplify" Bok's book on lying:

http://www.infed.org/thinkers/bok_lying.htm

It's another summary of Bok's book on lying. ETA: Is there any point in that summary that you disagree with?

So even lies and liars need some truth to function.

As Bok put it, more or less, liars are free-riders (I'm interpreting as parasites) in a society that is mostly run on veracity.

 

[Kaylee]

I don't think lies and liars need truth to function, as much as they use truth as a focus point.

Focus point? Not sure that I understand what you mean by that. Are you saying that they use truth as a starting point for their tales of deception?

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

I always lie.

 

[Kaylee]

Lying is an attempt to assert control ... to empower yourself and un-empower who you lie to.

So when I'm feeling a bit down and someone asks how I'm doing, by telling them that I'm fine, I'm engaging in an act of psychological manipulation and emotional dominance? Awesome.

Is automatically saying "Hi, How are you? I'm fine." a lie, or social shorthand? I think its understood to be the later.

 

[Kaylee]

.

Hmm. I would think that a society that is predominately truthful would be, on the whole, a happier one to live in and more successful than a society that is predominately deceitful.

It's because of lies that the government has the Highway Safety, Food & Drug, Fair Practices...etc.
The entrepeneur -will- lie to sell his product, even when he knows it is deadly.
Requiring minimum specifications of quality and safety removes a major problem to the consumer in selecting what to purchase.

I agree. Another way of looking at it is that while lies and deceit can benefit an individual, it rarely benefits a society as a whole.

Which is, I think, why Bok describes liars as free-riders (or parasites) in her book.

While it benefits most people to live in a society run on veracity -- most people probably need a combination of punishments and rewards to act truthfully.

Hence, the social invention of money, laws, regulations, court and prison -- among other things.

 

[Kaylee]

(Usually attributed to Mark Twain)

But it is correct to say that one of the most negative outcomes of lying is getting caught, and telling the truth eliminates that potential.

Being caught is probably one of the most negative outcomes of lying to the individual -- because it gets followed by lost of trust, possibly loss of respect and maybe punishment.

At its most extreme of negative outcomes -- lying can probably cause the breakdown of society.