Apparently Kant was both.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 24th, 2021, 10:27 pm Is there anyone who thinks that lying is always wrong who isn't basically a simplistic moron?
Lying for Altruism
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Lying for Altruism
- Leontiskos
- Posts: 695
- Joined: July 20th, 2021, 11:27 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle and Aquinas
Re: Lying for Altruism
What rule would you apply to determine which lies are permissible and which are not?
Socrates: He's like that, Hippias, not refined. He's garbage, he cares about nothing but the truth.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Lying for Altruism
To my view it isn't about what is being said, it is to whom it is being said. The perfect example of this is the Gestapo example. People fall into categories. Some are so evil that one is free to say any and all things, whatever leads to the best outcome. The vast majority of people (whom you have absolutely no relationship with whatsoever) deserve the truth as long as no negative outcome comes to you and those you hold dear. Many are friends, whom you will tell truths to even if it leads to a certain amount of negative outcome for you. Then there is close family who deserve your whole truth, no matter what.Leontiskos wrote: ↑December 24th, 2021, 11:10 pmWhat rule would you apply to determine which lies are permissible and which are not?
- 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
If only that were news.LuckyR wrote: ↑December 24th, 2021, 10:30 pmApparently Kant was both.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 24th, 2021, 10:27 pm Is there anyone who thinks that lying is always wrong who isn't basically a simplistic moron?
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Re: Lying for Altruism
I would add to this that a lie that does more good than harm is not immoral. That would allow the example of the kid in Mulberry Street stretching the trruth about what he saw to entertain his listeners, or parents telling their children about Santa Claus.LuckyR wrote: ↑December 25th, 2021, 3:57 am
To my view it isn't about what is being said, it is to whom it is being said. The perfect example of this is the Gestapo example. People fall into categories. Some are so evil that one is free to say any and all things, whatever leads to the best outcome. The vast majority of people (whom you have absolutely no relationship with whatsoever) deserve the truth as long as no negative outcome comes to you and those you hold dear. Many are friends, whom you will tell truths to even if it leads to a certain amount of negative outcome for you. Then there is close family who deserve your whole truth, no matter what.
- Leontiskos
- Posts: 695
- Joined: July 20th, 2021, 11:27 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle and Aquinas
Re: Lying for Altruism
This is the idea that gained prominence in 18th century Protestant circles. It is essentially the idea that a lie is only a lie when the person you are speaking to has a right to know the truth. Incidentally, this is precisely the view that Immanuel Kant was arguing against in his 1799 essay, "On a Supposed Right to Lie because of Philanthropic Concerns." See also Alexander Pruss' article, "Lying and Speaking Your Interlocutor's Language."LuckyR wrote: ↑December 25th, 2021, 3:57 amTo my view it isn't about what is being said, it is to whom it is being said. The perfect example of this is the Gestapo example. People fall into categories. Some are so evil that one is free to say any and all things, whatever leads to the best outcome. The vast majority of people (whom you have absolutely no relationship with whatsoever) deserve the truth as long as no negative outcome comes to you and those you hold dear. Many are friends, whom you will tell truths to even if it leads to a certain amount of negative outcome for you. Then there is close family who deserve your whole truth, no matter what.
What's curious about this idea is that it flies in the face of a great deal of progressive morality. Usually subdividing people into groups and deciding which ones have certain rights and which do not is not done in our egalitarian societies. So this approach to the question was not taken prior to the 18th century and it is also out of step with our contemporary forms of morality. Nevertheless, it remains a popular approach.
Socrates: He's like that, Hippias, not refined. He's garbage, he cares about nothing but the truth.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Lying for Altruism
It is an error to correlate the grouping of people and the mores of egalitarian societies because when grouping, what I am describing has a relative definition, not an absolute one. Thus every individual will be in just about every group (egalitarian) depending on to whom they are interacting with.Leontiskos wrote: ↑December 26th, 2021, 3:18 pmThis is the idea that gained prominence in 18th century Protestant circles. It is essentially the idea that a lie is only a lie when the person you are speaking to has a right to know the truth. Incidentally, this is precisely the view that Immanuel Kant was arguing against in his 1799 essay, "On a Supposed Right to Lie because of Philanthropic Concerns." See also Alexander Pruss' article, "Lying and Speaking Your Interlocutor's Language."LuckyR wrote: ↑December 25th, 2021, 3:57 amTo my view it isn't about what is being said, it is to whom it is being said. The perfect example of this is the Gestapo example. People fall into categories. Some are so evil that one is free to say any and all things, whatever leads to the best outcome. The vast majority of people (whom you have absolutely no relationship with whatsoever) deserve the truth as long as no negative outcome comes to you and those you hold dear. Many are friends, whom you will tell truths to even if it leads to a certain amount of negative outcome for you. Then there is close family who deserve your whole truth, no matter what.
What's curious about this idea is that it flies in the face of a great deal of progressive morality. Usually subdividing people into groups and deciding which ones have certain rights and which do not is not done in our egalitarian societies. So this approach to the question was not taken prior to the 18th century and it is also out of step with our contemporary forms of morality. Nevertheless, it remains a popular approach.
- Leontiskos
- Posts: 695
- Joined: July 20th, 2021, 11:27 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle and Aquinas
Re: Lying for Altruism
I am thinking in particular of the concept of universal human rights; rights which apply to all.LuckyR wrote: ↑December 26th, 2021, 4:02 pmIt is an error to correlate the grouping of people and the mores of egalitarian societies because when grouping, what I am describing has a relative definition, not an absolute one. Thus every individual will be in just about every group (egalitarian) depending on to whom they are interacting with.
Socrates: He's like that, Hippias, not refined. He's garbage, he cares about nothing but the truth.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Lying for Altruism
Exactly. We all have the right to be especially close to family and friends and to expect a modicum of respect from perfect strangers.Leontiskos wrote: ↑December 26th, 2021, 6:34 pmI am thinking in particular of the concept of universal human rights; rights which apply to all.LuckyR wrote: ↑December 26th, 2021, 4:02 pmIt is an error to correlate the grouping of people and the mores of egalitarian societies because when grouping, what I am describing has a relative definition, not an absolute one. Thus every individual will be in just about every group (egalitarian) depending on to whom they are interacting with.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
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
by Chet Shupe
March 2023