26 Jan 11
Originally posted by AgergLying to people in an attempt to make them "happy" works against their well being. If they don't believe you, it undermines the trust between you. If they do believe you, it gives them a skewed view of reality. Most have enough trouble having realistic views of themselves and the universe without it being compounded by people telling them lies. To do this to a child who is still developing is particularly heinous.
I do have a thread waiting where I did think out of the box (though I would have posed it differently now than I did back then) - also, Andrew Hamilton's offering looks quite appetising!
That aside, if we consider telling a young child a white lie in order to make him happy; how intransient do we expect the kid's memory of this event to be such that it would induce any problems in the future?
26 Jan 11
2 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneIf we were considering the case where the child was old enough and articulate enough that they can pose less trivial questions than "Do you like my cat picture?" then I might grant some leeway with this one - a child at the age of four however is hardly going to take anything away from the lie one likes his drawing other than a short lived feeling of contentment that he has done something good. I somehow doubt when he turns eight, say, he's going to ruminate on the time he asked me whether I liked his picture then and I said yes, in response to my now, more critical or politely evasive evaluation of his work.
Lying to people in an attempt to make them "happy" works against their well being. If they don't believe you, it undermines the trust between you. If they do believe you, it gives them a skewed view of reality. Most have enough trouble having realistic views of themselves and the universe without it being compounded by people telling them lies. To do this to a child who is still developing is particularly heinous.
One could search further along this line and suppose some child with severe learning difficulties finally manages, after an excessive amount of coaxing, to eat his dinner on his own without having to be spoon fed is congratulated excitedly with the statement "clever
note: he always fails, due to his disability, to be anything close to what would be regarded as clever, and the speaker knows this
boy - you managed to eat that all by yourself!!!"
Would this be so heinous a lie also?
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by AgergYou seem to have missed the point of my post. Can you not see how lying to people in an attempt to make them "happy" gives them a skewed view of reality? Can you not see that such a view is detrimental to their well being?
If we were considering the case where the child was old enough and articulate enough that they can pose less trivial questions than "Do you like my cat picture?" then I might grant some leeway with this one - a child at the age of four however is hardly going to take anything away from the lie one likes his drawing other than a short lived feeling of contentme ...[text shortened]... n]boy - you managed to eat that all by yourself!!!"
Would this be so heinous a lie also?
26 Jan 11
3 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI don't think I did miss the point - I noticed your objection and attempted to undermine it by explaining how your objection wasn't justified in this case - and considered another hypothetical scenario to bear this out. Additionally, I acknowledged also that the well being of this particular example child (the "artist" ) might potentially be put in jeapardy if such a lie was given when they are at an age where they can express themselves better and where a false compliment carries any tangible degree of weight.
You seem to have missed the point of my post. Can you not see how lying to people in an attempt to make them "happy" gives them a skewed view of reality? Can you not see that such a view is detrimental to their well being?
You are holding to the notion that in ALL cases, i.e. with complete generality, it is true that a delivery of inaccurate information, regardless of it's magnitude or importance is detrimental to the well being of the recipient of said lie. You seem to hold there are no exceptions.
I ask what is this universal statement based upon, a small sample of cases which work in favour of your argument?
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by AgergAsk yourself this: If an individual believes lie X, does this or does it not give the individual a skewed view of reality?
I don't think I did miss the point - I noticed your objection and attempted to undermine it by suggesting your objection wasn't justified in this case - and considered another hypothetical scenario to bear this out.
You are holding to the notion that in ALL cases, i.e. with complete generality, it is true that a delivery of inaccurate information, regardless ...[text shortened]... niversal statement based upon, a small sample of cases which work in favour of your argument?
26 Jan 11
4 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI don't need to ask myself that; it is immediately obvious that the recipient of a lie will be in possession, at that particular instance of time, of a "skewed view of reality". That's pretty much the point of a lie - in that you hope to convey information which is false!
Ask yourself this: If an individual believes lie X, does this or does it not give the individual a skewed view of reality?
Or if you charge me with avoiding the question here - yes, the individual gets a skewed view of reality
My issue is that you hold this is both permanent and detrimental in all cases!, and again I ask why is this universal statement true?
Indeed if it was true that persons X and Y both thought Y was a thoroughly worthless human being - then if we accept your position on this matter and suppose Y asks X "am I a thoroughly worthless human being?" then a lie on the part of X would somehow make things worse for Y! 😕
26 Jan 11
3 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneHaving answered this question in the affirmative in my last response I can delve a little deeper into the realms of absurdity your somewhat binary proposition, that lying is always detrimental by skewing ones view of reality, entails.
Ask yourself this: If an individual believes lie X, does this or does it not give the individual a skewed view of reality?
Suppose person X currently believes false statements {A,B,C,D,E} and also believes the true statement F which has no bearing on any of {A,B,C,D,E}.
Now suppose that
A false implies B is false
B false implies C is false
C false implies D is false
D false implies E is false
and X asks some other person Y "Does F true imply A is false?"
If Y tells the truth that F true does not imply A is false then X retains his belief in five false statements; on the otherhand if Y lies and says F true does imply A is false then X ends up only believing one false statement!
Is the view of reality from the perspective of X more skewed in this case if he recieves a lie??? 😕
26 Jan 11
Regarding the early conversation about a child's rendering of a cat: One need not even crack open a Bible to know that anyone who would find fault/criticize a crayon drawing that a child worked diligently to produce (presumably to please parent, teacher, etc) has to be among the lowest form of life.
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by josephwbecause if the gestapo officer asks you "do you know where jews are hiding" and you know the gestapo doesn't want the jews over for tea, you are morally required to say "no, i do not know where jews are hiding" even if you do know. thus lying.
Why do we [b]have to lie in the first place?[/b]
saying nothing in this case would not work because the gestapo officer will naturally assume you do have information.
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by ThinkOfOnedid telling children world wide about santa claus ruined their trust in their parents? let's be serious here
Lying to people in an attempt to make them "happy" works against their well being. If they don't believe you, it undermines the trust between you. If they do believe you, it gives them a skewed view of reality. Most have enough trouble having realistic views of themselves and the universe without it being compounded by people telling them lies. To do this to a child who is still developing is particularly heinous.
26 Jan 11
2 edits
Originally posted by PinkFloydI'm not so sure whether this is a jab at me or not; do you mean
Regarding the early conversation about a child's rendering of a cat: One need not even crack open a Bible to know that anyone who would find fault/criticize a crayon drawing that a child worked diligently to produce (presumably to please parent, teacher, etc) has to be among the lowest form of life.
a) One is low if privately they hold the opinion that some cat drawing has no properties they find aesthetically or technically pleasing, and cannot reliably assign any length of time it took for them to render it (so they cannot conclude they worked dilligently) even if they don't state it? or
b) One is low if they communicate this opinion to the child?
If (a) then it really is out of a person's control as to whether they like something or not (at least not without spending a significant length of time acclimatizing themselves to it - so to convince himself there is something to like), if (b) then I completely agree with you!
27 Jan 11
Originally posted by AgergLying is not always bad. It's good to lie in bed.
I'm sure not only Robbie Carrobie holds that lying is always bad (because the Bible says so); my question is why??? to this end perhaps someone will point out where in these examples telling the truth would be a better solution:
Dave: "Hi Greg!...how you doing?"
Me: (having only had a couple of hours sleep, am in a hurry to get somewhere Dave isn't, ...[text shortened]... rds his mum looking for more approval of his "talents".
Stealing is not always bad, you can steal in baseball, and then it's a good thing.
🙂