Lying for Altruism

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7096
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Sculptor1 »

AverageBozo wrote: November 24th, 2021, 7:53 pm
LuckyR wrote: November 24th, 2021, 2:35 pm
AverageBozo wrote: November 24th, 2021, 9:03 am
LuckyR wrote: November 24th, 2021, 2:48 am

But is not giving information that another seeks, deceit?
Yea, if asked a direct question I withhold information that would directly answer the question, that is usually intentional. However, there are some who unintentionally are not intelligent enough to properly answer a question. I would call that ignorance rather than deceit.
Really? So here's my question to you, what is your PayPal username and password?
Did you know that the idea for PayPal came from William Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar” in the original Latin?
Yes you can find it on Ceasar's FaceBook page.
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by AverageBozo »

Pattern-chaser wrote: November 24th, 2021, 10:17 am
LuckyR wrote: November 22nd, 2021, 1:50 pm Is there an ethical difference between telling an untruth and lying by omission (which does not technically include telling an untruth)?
Yes ... but perhaps not in all circumstances. In general, yes. All IMO, of course. 🙂
Yea, there is a difference in the means of lying, however the intent to deceive would be present in either case.
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by AverageBozo »

Pattern-chaser wrote: November 24th, 2021, 10:20 am
AverageBozo wrote: November 22nd, 2021, 2:31 pm PC’s various suggested replies, while practical, are actually untruths in the sense that they are intended to deflect for the sake of misleading someone.
I don't recognise that in my memory of what I wrote. Can you give an example of an untruth I wrote, or of something I wrote that is intended to mislead?
I only meant to reference those places where you suggested a response, e.g. by the parent or by the friend, that you characterized as not being untruthful. I took these as suggestions for responding.

I did not mean to put words in your mouth. I apologize for doing so.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7940
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by LuckyR »

AverageBozo wrote: November 27th, 2021, 4:58 pm
Pattern-chaser wrote: November 24th, 2021, 10:17 am
LuckyR wrote: November 22nd, 2021, 1:50 pm Is there an ethical difference between telling an untruth and lying by omission (which does not technically include telling an untruth)?
Yes ... but perhaps not in all circumstances. In general, yes. All IMO, of course. 🙂
Yea, there is a difference in the means of lying, however the intent to deceive would be present in either case.
I do agree with you that the intent is much more important than the transcript of the conversation.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Leontiskos
Posts: 695
Joined: July 20th, 2021, 11:27 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle and Aquinas

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Leontiskos »

Steve3007 wrote: November 23rd, 2021, 6:47 am I we were to regard communication in a purely functional way then we'd judge our communications purely in terms of the extent to which they're likely to further our goals. In that case, the question of whether the communication contained factually true or false statements would be a secondary consideration. If the goal was to impart factual information, then the secondary consideration would always coincide with the primary one. But if the goal was, for example, to make someone happy, then it wouldn't necessarily coincide.
I think Kant was basically right. Communication itself is for the purpose of telling what one believes to be true. Violate that and you've undermined the very essence of communication.

With regard to your first point, communication itself is the primary goal. "Function" must always be secondary. Any function that you dream up presupposes the goal of communication, including things like language conventions and objective lexicons. If you turn to a function that is parasitic on communication itself, you are engaged in a form of self-contradiction.

Similarly, people aren't made happy by being lied to. If they ask a question, they are expecting an honest answer (true communication). If the wife asks about how a dress looks, she is at least to some extent wondering about the objective reality of the appearance of the dress. If you lie to her and provide her with delusional happiness, it will come back to haunt you when she walks out in front of thousands of people with a large hole in the backside of her dress.
Wrestling with Philosophy since 456 BC

Socrates: He's like that, Hippias, not refined. He's garbage, he cares about nothing but the truth.
Ecurb
Posts: 2138
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Ecurb »

Leontiskos wrote: December 24th, 2021, 2:27 am

I think Kant was basically right. Communication itself is for the purpose of telling what one believes to be true. Violate that and you've undermined the very essence of communication.
I hate to argue with Kant, but since he isn't around any more perhaps I stand a better chance in the debate. Communication often serves purposes other than telling what one believes to be true. I doubt that Shelley ever met "A traveller from an antique land, who said, 'two vast and trunkless legs of stone stand in the desert...." But what poetry lover would wish that he had never written "Ozymandias"? Herodotus, the father of history, is also called "the father of lies", because, along with other Greek historians, he invented speeches that famous people might have made and inserted them into his histories. I often wish modern historians would do the same, if they could write speeches as well as Herodotus.

Mark Twain (well, that's a lie, I mean Samuel Clemens) supposedly said, "Show me a man who don't lie, and I'll show you a man who ain't got much to say." I have no idea if he REALLY ever said that -- but who cares? It's something he could have said, it's illustrative of his wit and character, and it shows some wisdom about the value of lying and fiction. The quote is a good one, whether or not Clemens said it.
User avatar
Leontiskos
Posts: 695
Joined: July 20th, 2021, 11:27 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle and Aquinas

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Leontiskos »

Ecurb wrote: December 24th, 2021, 10:45 am I hate to argue with Kant, but since he isn't around any more perhaps I stand a better chance in the debate. Communication often serves purposes other than telling what one believes to be true. I doubt that Shelley ever met "A traveller from an antique land, who said, 'two vast and trunkless legs of stone stand in the desert...." But what poetry lover would wish that he had never written "Ozymandias"? Herodotus, the father of history, is also called "the father of lies", because, along with other Greek historians, he invented speeches that famous people might have made and inserted them into his histories. I often wish modern historians would do the same, if they could write speeches as well as Herodotus.
Poetry is just a different form of communication. It isn't non-communication and it isn't a form of lying.
Mark Twain (well, that's a lie, I mean Samuel Clemens) supposedly said, "Show me a man who don't lie, and I'll show you a man who ain't got much to say." I have no idea if he REALLY ever said that -- but who cares? It's something he could have said, it's illustrative of his wit and character, and it shows some wisdom about the value of lying and fiction. The quote is a good one, whether or not Clemens said it.
Yes, most people lie. Humans are pretty crappy.
Wrestling with Philosophy since 456 BC

Socrates: He's like that, Hippias, not refined. He's garbage, he cares about nothing but the truth.
Ecurb
Posts: 2138
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Ecurb »

Lying is as lying does. We can all imagine situations where it would be unethical to tell the truth -- "Ver are der Jews hiding?" asks the Gestapo officer, speaking, for some strange reason, in German-accented English. If you say, "I don't know" does that make you "pretty crappy"? Earlier in this thread I posted a reference to "To think that I Saw it on Mulberry Street". If you were the kid's father, wouldn't you rather hear the fanciful story than the "plain horse and wagon"? What harm would a little entertainment value added to the story do?

Humans may be pretty crappy, but not because they occasionally stretch the truth in search of a good yarn to make the lives of their companions a little more fun. Would we prefer it if Shakespeare had refrained from making up Marc Anthony's "Friends, Romans, Countrymen" speech? I mean, Anthony didn't even speak English, so it's all a lie.

No stories are the whole truth. All offer only one perspective. All mention some things and delete others. If the search for the truth is in vain anyway, why not spice things up a bit?
Ecurb
Posts: 2138
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Ecurb »

One more thing: if you write, "I met a traveler from an antique land who said....." and you never met such a traveler, how is that not a lie? YOu say, "poetry is a different form of communication". But what does that mean? Does it suggest that lies are justified if they are made more entertaining by rhymes and rhythms? If so, what about "tall tales", or embellished stories? Do they qualify as a "different form of communication"?

When you begin to justify some forms of lying, you cannot make blanket condemnations of lying in general.
User avatar
Leontiskos
Posts: 695
Joined: July 20th, 2021, 11:27 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle and Aquinas

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Leontiskos »

Ecurb wrote: December 24th, 2021, 12:54 pm One more thing: if you write, "I met a traveler from an antique land who said....." and you never met such a traveler, how is that not a lie? YOu say, "poetry is a different form of communication". But what does that mean? Does it suggest that lies are justified if they are made more entertaining by rhymes and rhythms? If so, what about "tall tales", or embellished stories? Do they qualify as a "different form of communication"?

When you begin to justify some forms of lying, you cannot make blanket condemnations of lying in general.
A lie is an assertion contra mentem. It is when you assert something as true which you believe to be false.

A work of fiction is not something asserted as true. Nor is a joke. Nor is a tall tale.

So yes, not all forms of communication are assertive, but moralists like Kant are primarily concerned with those acts which directly impugn truthfulness, i.e. lies.
Wrestling with Philosophy since 456 BC

Socrates: He's like that, Hippias, not refined. He's garbage, he cares about nothing but the truth.
Ecurb
Posts: 2138
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Ecurb »

I get it, but the line is blurry. Tall tales are often assertive -- they are first person stories about adventures that may be half true, but exaggerated for effect. I'm not aware of Kant's position -- but what about the Gestapo example? The person being questioned can either lie ("I don't know"), rat out the Jews, or refuse to tell (in which case he will be tortured). Surely you don't advocate that he tell the truth, do you?
User avatar
Leontiskos
Posts: 695
Joined: July 20th, 2021, 11:27 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle and Aquinas

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Leontiskos »

Ecurb wrote: December 24th, 2021, 2:00 pm I get it, but the line is blurry. Tall tales are often assertive -- they are first person stories about adventures that may be half true, but exaggerated for effect. I'm not aware of Kant's position -- but what about the Gestapo example? The person being questioned can either lie ("I don't know"), rat out the Jews, or refuse to tell (in which case he will be tortured). Surely you don't advocate that he tell the truth, do you?
Yeah, it is a blurry line in some cases. Kant would say that you can't lie to the Gestapo, but that you should do something other than tell them where the Jews are. This is where things like "mental reservations" come into play (although a large portion of mental reservations would be considered inadmissible by stricter moralists like Kant).
Wrestling with Philosophy since 456 BC

Socrates: He's like that, Hippias, not refined. He's garbage, he cares about nothing but the truth.
Ecurb
Posts: 2138
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Ecurb »

A quick glance through the internets shows that Kant's universal distaste for lying is highly controversial. Most philosophers think it does not derive from the categorical imperative, and that lying is morally acceptable in many circumstances. Utilitarians, for example, think that the morality of lying can be judged by the result of the lie. Kant seems to think (I know nothing about this except a ten minute search) that lying is a "duty" because lying corrupts the liar, and because it corrupts the dignity of others to make choices based on true information.

I (like many others) disagree in the case of the Gestapo -- but I also disagree in the case of the fabulist, the story-teller, and the entertainer. Let's take as an example a memoir writer. Which is more important to the reader -- an entertaining, enlightening memoir, or a factually acurate one? The memoir (unlike the novel) is supposedly non-fiction, but if the memoirist alters the story for dramatic effect, isn't he doing a favor to the reader? The reader doesn't care if the memoir is "true" -- the reader cares if it is enlightening, or entertaining, or enjoyable. Whom has the memoirist harmed by making up a few scenes for dramatic effect? And if he hasn't harmed anyone, in what way is the lie immoral?

In addition, the promise to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" is impossible. The "whole truth" is not available from any one point of view. So the memoirist is always picking and choosing based on the story he wants to tell, and the story he thinks his readers want to hear.

Kant would probably claim that the memoirist who twists the fact has harmed hiself, by failing to fulfill a duty of honesty. But whence the duty? Kant might think it a duty, but other people might not. Obviously, some lies are clearly iimmoral. Bearing false witness is proscribed by the Ten Commandments, and is a sin against honor (if someone swears to tell the truth). Kant (it seems) thinks that any lie is a sin against honor -- and that may be true for him, but not for me, not for Mark Twain, and not for those others who reject the universal prohibition against lying.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7940
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by LuckyR »

Ecurb wrote: December 24th, 2021, 4:43 pm A quick glance through the internets shows that Kant's universal distaste for lying is highly controversial. Most philosophers think it does not derive from the categorical imperative, and that lying is morally acceptable in many circumstances. Utilitarians, for example, think that the morality of lying can be judged by the result of the lie. Kant seems to think (I know nothing about this except a ten minute search) that lying is a "duty" because lying corrupts the liar, and because it corrupts the dignity of others to make choices based on true information.

I (like many others) disagree in the case of the Gestapo -- but I also disagree in the case of the fabulist, the story-teller, and the entertainer. Let's take as an example a memoir writer. Which is more important to the reader -- an entertaining, enlightening memoir, or a factually acurate one? The memoir (unlike the novel) is supposedly non-fiction, but if the memoirist alters the story for dramatic effect, isn't he doing a favor to the reader? The reader doesn't care if the memoir is "true" -- the reader cares if it is enlightening, or entertaining, or enjoyable. Whom has the memoirist harmed by making up a few scenes for dramatic effect? And if he hasn't harmed anyone, in what way is the lie immoral?

In addition, the promise to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" is impossible. The "whole truth" is not available from any one point of view. So the memoirist is always picking and choosing based on the story he wants to tell, and the story he thinks his readers want to hear.

Kant would probably claim that the memoirist who twists the fact has harmed hiself, by failing to fulfill a duty of honesty. But whence the duty? Kant might think it a duty, but other people might not. Obviously, some lies are clearly iimmoral. Bearing false witness is proscribed by the Ten Commandments, and is a sin against honor (if someone swears to tell the truth). Kant (it seems) thinks that any lie is a sin against honor -- and that may be true for him, but not for me, not for Mark Twain, and not for those others who reject the universal prohibition against lying.
I agree completely. There is no "duty" to tell the truth to those who have not earned that right (such as the Gestapo).
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Lying for Altruism

Post by Terrapin Station »

Is there anyone who thinks that lying is always wrong who isn't basically a simplistic moron?
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021