When is Lying Justified?

[Frank Merton]

.
I see this lack of desire for an early death out in the wild, also.
All animals will flee a situation where their life is possibly threatened, without being aware they are alive.. just not wanting the alternative.

Animals, ourselves included, are equipped with survival instincts: this is a consequence of natural processes since gene lines that do not have such instincts do not persist. I do not see where that has anything to do with when lying might be justified.

I am perhaps after a more philosophical question -- what justifications, if any, are available for lies (deliberate attempts to mislead)? Stated from the opposite angle -- what, if anything, is there about such lies that makes them consistently wrong (or consistently unjustified).

My view is simply that I "know" lies are unjustified and wrong, but I cannot produce a satisfactory rational argument to show it, nor can I produce a similarly satisfactory rational argument that might show that there are justified lies. This leave me wanting help.

I added the parenthesis to the above of, "deliberate attempts to mislead" to try to avoid the red herring some posters have played games with -- of things that are formally untrue but are not really lies, as there is no effort to mislead -- things like hyperbole, metaphor, and of course puns.

 

[I Ratant]

Animals, ourselves included, are equipped with survival instincts: this is a consequence of natural processes since gene lines that do not have such instincts do not persist. I do not see where that has anything to do with when lying might be justified.

I am perhaps after a more philosophical question -- what justifications, if any, are available for lies (deliberate attempts to mislead)? Stated from the opposite angle -- what, if anything, is there about such lies that makes them consistently wrong (or consistently unjustified).

My view is simply that I "know" lies are unjustified and wrong, but I cannot produce a satisfactory rational argument to show it, nor can I produce a similarly satisfactory rational argument that might show that there are justified lies. This leave me wanting help.

I added the parenthesis to the above of, "deliberate attempts to mislead" to try to avoid the red herring some posters have played games with -- of things that are formally untrue but are not really lies, as there is no effort to mislead -- things like hyperbole, metaphor, and of course puns.

.
Justifications are legion.. to get laid. To get easy money. To get out of a spot of trouble. To sooth an injured person. To enhance one's public image.
... Ya know, the ordinary things of living.

 

[Frank Merton]

.
Justifications are legion.. to get laid. To get easy money. To get out of a spot of trouble. To sooth an injured person. To enhance one's public image.
... Ya know, the ordinary things of living.

You must be either a lawyer or a Jesuit. At any rate you try my patience. I guess I'm not use to the exchanges on these boards, but I had thought the objective was to make some sort of progress on things that bother people, rather than just winning "gotcha" points.

Okay, for "justify," try "a justification that is morally acceptable and rationally defensible when looked at deeply and in all its implications."

 

[I Ratant]

You must be either a lawyer or a Jesuit. At any rate you try my patience. I guess I'm not use to the exchanges on these boards, but I had thought the objective was to make some sort of progress on things that bother people, rather than just winning "gotcha" points.

Okay, for "justify," try "a justification that is morally acceptable and rationally defensible when looked at deeply and in all its implications."
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/helloworld2/buttons/quote.gif[/qimg]

.
Good luck on that.
As lying can also save one's ass, or the ass of some Jew hiding from the Nazis, lying has its place.

 

[Pacal]

That is one strange character. He says everyone lies, but he relies on the lab results and he relies on his team's work. He relies on Cuddy and Wilson to be dependable and to be the "straight men" to his antics.

But ... "everyone lies."

Maybe he's lying about everyone lying? Like "The Man" just posted -- "I'm lying even when I'm lying."

Nothing strange about the comment at all. It is simply true in the same way the statement everyone goes to the washroom is true. All the character is saying is that everyone at one time or the other tells lies, and as far as I'm concerned that is simply true.

Anyone who says they never lie is well lying.

 

[tsig]

You must be either a lawyer or a Jesuit. At any rate you try my patience. I guess I'm not use to the exchanges on these boards, but I had thought the objective was to make some sort of progress on things that bother people, rather than just winning "gotcha" points.

Okay, for "justify," try "a justification that is morally acceptable and rationally defensible when looked at deeply and in all its implications."
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/helloworld2/buttons/quote.gif[/qimg]

Sure you don't want to throw a few more hoops in there just in case someone manages to jump thru those?

 

[Frank Merton]

.
Good luck on that.
As lying can also save one's ass, or the ass of some Jew hiding from the Nazis, lying has its place.

Nazis make good exemplars of evil, but I have to wonder how often this sort of situation really arises (or arose).

Be that as it may be, your first example (to save one's ass) is not a justification. It may be an excuse, but that is about it, as it appeals to selfish interest.

As far as saving the Jew goes, yes, I will lie out my teeth. Most people will. I still wonder, however, at what cost. One wrong in trade for what certainly seems a worse wrong, but can we be sure?

A similar situation, but one that makes the quandary a little clearer, is that of paying ransom to rescue a kidnapped child. One saves the child but enriches the kidnapper and encourages others to do the same.

In the lying to save someone from the Nazis, depending on the details, one could well end up doing vastly more harm. How does one know?

 

[Frank Merton]

Anyone who says they never lie is well lying.

I think I know people who never lie. They aren't likely to tell me so, however.

 

[Frank Merton]

Sure you don't want to throw a few more hoops in there just in case someone manages to jump thru those?

If you don't want to address the issue, there is no law that says you have to post anything. I don't see where the issue is worth addressing unless one at least tries to jump through all the hoops.

Let me add to that that I am not here to make people jump through hoops; all I am doing is exploring. These boards seem to be viewed as contests or ego-games; I would rather try to avoid that sort of thing.

 

[Aridas]

For example, there's been many threads where posters have explained why they don't believe in free will but in determination. Very logical, but I don't think most governments are going to change our legal system to reflect the philosophy of determination. Because, as a society, its not practical for us to do so.

This response is not quite on topic for the thread, but... Determinism is a great theoretical stance. I certainly prefer to believe that reality is deterministic, myself. However, it's not useful, except in a theoretical and investigative contexts. It's worked wonders and continues to do so in those contexts, as shown by reliable results in many fields of scientific inquiry. Our daily lives and social constructs have far too much uncertainty related to them in each of our understandings of the way things work, though, for us to depend on anything other than "Free Will" or the illusion of it to make decisions regarding ourselves and our interactions with others.

 

[Aridas]

Let me add to that that I am not here to make people jump through hoops; all I am doing is exploring. These boards seem to be viewed as contests or ego-games; I would rather try to avoid that sort of thing.

I'd actually say that, while it may include contests or ego-games, it's simply a lot of people with differing opinions, interacting in somewhat predictable ways. Some people's opinions are changed or affected. Some people's aren't. There's lots and lots of prejudice, as discussed earlier, present. When differing prejudices clash, contests and ego games are fairly certain to happen. Lying happens, on all kinds of levels. And truth shines through, much of the time, for those who may not have known much on the subject before. Frankly, just looking at the forums like this, I applaud, figuratively, and thank those who set them up and attracted so many people.

But, that's completely tangential. Probably a bit rambling, too, in my tiredness.

 

[h.g.Whiz]

When you are posting in Shemp's "Tell me lies thread".

 

[Mr. Scott]

Say, a person performing on stage or in a sports event wants to know if a relative is OK that you know has just died, you lie and say he is fine because you don't want to ruin the performance. I call justified.

 

[Frank Merton]

Say, a person performing on stage or in a sports event wants to know if a relative is OK that you know has just died, you lie and say he is fine because you don't want to ruin the performance. I call justified.

That's an interesting scenario. I would say that if a death is involved, that it would be impossible to lie in that situation, performance or no performance. Put yourself in that position and think about it. There is a respect we unavoidably accord the dead, especially those who have just died, and this would demand truth.

I would also say that probably this would be the right thing to do. To be sure it could ruin the performance, but imagine the actor's or athlete's feelings if they go on and then later find out the truth. They will have a certain unavoidable feeling of guilt and even shame, innocent though they may be. I would not want to risk burdening someone with such a thing.

 

[Aridas]

That's an interesting scenario. I would say that if a death is involved, that it would be impossible to lie in that situation, performance or no performance. Put yourself in that position and think about it. There is a respect we unavoidably accord the dead, especially those who have just died, and this would demand truth.

I would also say that probably this would be the right thing to do. To be sure it could ruin the performance, but imagine the actor's or athlete's feelings if they go on and then later find out the truth. They will have a certain unavoidable feeling of guilt and even shame, innocent though they may be. I would not want to risk burdening someone with such a thing.

Interestingly enough, truth deferred for a few moments, in situations like this, seems to be a generally moral thing to do, to my eyes. The scenario is sounds like they are practically mid event, though. If there's absolutely nothing that they can do about it, I see no reason why delaying the truth until after the event, when they can actually have a little time to start dealing with it in relative privacy, is a bad thing. If the delay would cause the person to miss the final moments of the person who's dying's life and they value that, that's a more complex situation, though.

 

[I Ratant]

.
Do whatever covers your personal ass.
**** the Jew.
After all, -you- won't be dropping the pellets into the gas chambers.

 

[rofl]

If you got game, why do you need guile anyway?

 

[Mr. Scott]

The scenario is sounds like they are practically mid event

I intended just prior to the event, and how long prior would be of course a factor. I know this happens occasionally. I guess each case is individual -- some performers may prefer not to know about a tragedy just before they go on stage.

This brings up another question. If a friend asks you to lie to them about something, do you comply? My first wife gave me the instruction that, if I cheated on her, she didn't want to know. The marriage counselor said to me, privately, that it meant she permitted me to cheat on her.

So, are you justified to comply with requests that you lie, by the person you would lie to? (eg tell me I don't look fat in this dress; tell me my parents are fine until after I leave the stage).

 

[tsig]

If you don't want to address the issue, there is no law that says you have to post anything. I don't see where the issue is worth addressing unless one at least tries to jump through all the hoops.
Let me add to that that I am not here to make people jump through hoops; all I am doing is exploring. These boards seem to be viewed as contests or ego-games; I would rather try to avoid that sort of thing.

Which is it? Do you want people to jump thru your hoops or not?

If you want to avoid ego-games you shouldn't engage in them.

 

[Aridas]

I intended just prior to the event, and how long prior would be of course a factor. I know this happens occasionally. I guess each case is individual -- some performers may prefer not to know about a tragedy just before they go on stage.

As I said, "practically mid-event." This involves prep time immediately before, especially when there's no time for plans to be changed to accommodate last minute disasters. That comes from looking at a larger picture of balancing individual and group needs and desires. At the individual level, it's not clear, in that specific instance, but I would suspect that giving a horrible performance or having the experience ruined for them and likely others, too, will only make matters worse for the individual in the long run. Any mistakes that they make because of a failure to concentrate will just add to their suffering, likely. If they make the decision to remove themselves from the event because of the knowledge, it will just make things nastier and more complicated for everyone else.

There are of course, points to be said for the opposition, but truth delayed for a short time to enhance an experience for a person and others, at no real harm and possible benefit to the one being lied to, is difficult to condemn.