CDZ What count as "lies" in society?

[grbb]

What I mean by lying means

1. Giving false impression
2. So others do things that hurt their interests
3. That benefit the liars

Also, giving false impressions on the credibility of a statement is a lie too to me. That's because the credibility of a statement is a statement by itself. Hence misrepresenting that is a lie too. So if a statement is most likely false, or are not supported by evidence, but said confidently as if it's the truth, with expectation that people can't check the truth easily, it's a lie.

Many lies are very excusable
1. A person can believe their own statement. In religion this happens through "faith". So people can say anything and claim that he is not lying because he believe what he said is true. A person can say give me $1 million dollar because that's what God's want, and he won't be charged with fraud unless someone can proof beyond reasonable doubt he wants the money.
2. The statement can be arguable or do not have precise meaning.
3. The statement can be technically correct.
4. The lie is done legally.

I wonder if there is a book that does more analysis on this.

I will give you a sample.

An insurance salesman sell "investment" to a customer. The customer specifically ask that he wants only small insurance and the rest can be investments. The salesman says that all money are invested. Turns out, only 47% of the money are invested like regular mutual fund. The rest are gone in fees that the customer doesn't know when buying.

Is this lying?

Is this excusable?

How many are like this?

Are so many things grey area like this?

 

[GLASNOST]

What count as "lies" in society?

It depends upon what country you live. In the US you only lie when you get caught. If you don't get caught, it's not a lie.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

What count as "lies" in society?

It depends upon what country you live. In the US you only lie when you get caught. If you don't get caught, it's not a lie.

Why do you make things up in order to broad brush an entire country?

 

[GLASNOST]

... In the US you only lie when you get caught. If you don't get caught, it's not a lie.

Why do you make things up in order to broad brush an entire country?

I used a narrow brush. There are very few countries where lies are acceptable. My response applies to the US ..... which is one of those very few countries where my assessment is applicable.

 

[eflatminor]

I may reject your definition of lying. It depends on your definition of false.

Then there's context. Important.

 

[there4eyeM]

It was once pointed out that truth depends also upon who is being addressed. Example, the SS officer at your door asking if you are sheltering anyone. Does such a one even deserve the truth? What would he do with the truth? Truth can be ill digested. If one knows it will be, it is like poisoning.

 

[GLASNOST]

I doubt if you have ever been to the United States much less lived here.

I lived there more than 20 years, which judging by your response (whether you were born there or not) might indicate that I lived there longer than you have.

If you wish to just make up a bunch of shit in a thread about honesty, though, be my guest.

Are you aware of the

rules?

 

[Mac1958]

What I mean by lying means

1. Giving false impression
2. So others do things that hurt their interests
3. That benefit the liars

Also, giving false impressions on the credibility of a statement is a lie too to me. That's because the credibility of a statement is a statement by itself. Hence misrepresenting that is a lie too. So if a statement is most likely false, or are not supported by evidence, but said confidently as if it's the truth, with expectation that people can't check the truth easily, it's a lie.

Many lies are very excusable
1. A person can believe their own statement. In religion this happens through "faith". So people can say anything and claim that he is not lying because he believe what he said is true. A person can say give me $1 million dollar because that's what God's want, and he won't be charged with fraud unless someone can proof beyond reasonable doubt he wants the money.
2. The statement can be arguable or do not have precise meaning.
3. The statement can be technically correct.
4. The lie is done legally.

I wonder if there is a book that does more analysis on this.

I will give you a sample.

An insurance salesman sell "investment" to a customer. The customer specifically ask that he wants only small insurance and the rest can be investments. The salesman says that all money are invested. Turns out, only 47% of the money are invested like regular mutual fund. The rest are gone in fees that the customer doesn't know when buying.

Is this lying?

Is this excusable?

How many are like this?

Are so many things grey area like this?

That's a great freakin' question.

I've seen people accuse others of lying just for providing an opinion. That's not lying.

I've seen people speak out of ignorance and be factually incorrect. I wouldn't call that lying.

But the behaviors we regularly see from hardcore partisan ideologues on both ends - deflection, distortion, straw man arguments, avoidance, obtuseness - those are intellectually dishonest, and yeah, I'd call that lying.

We're so narcissistic and divided at this point, that we can't even agree on why lying actually is. How is anything discussed and improved if definitions are meaningless?
.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

What I mean by lying means

1. Giving false impression
2. So others do things that hurt their interests
3. That benefit the liars

Also, giving false impressions on the credibility of a statement is a lie too to me. That's because the credibility of a statement is a statement by itself. Hence misrepresenting that is a lie too. So if a statement is most likely false, or are not supported by evidence, but said confidently as if it's the truth, with expectation that people can't check the truth easily, it's a lie.

Many lies are very excusable
1. A person can believe their own statement. In religion this happens through "faith". So people can say anything and claim that he is not lying because he believe what he said is true. A person can say give me $1 million dollar because that's what God's want, and he won't be charged with fraud unless someone can proof beyond reasonable doubt he wants the money.
2. The statement can be arguable or do not have precise meaning.
3. The statement can be technically correct.
4. The lie is done legally.

I wonder if there is a book that does more analysis on this.

I will give you a sample.

An insurance salesman sell "investment" to a customer. The customer specifically ask that he wants only small insurance and the rest can be investments. The salesman says that all money are invested. Turns out, only 47% of the money are invested like regular mutual fund. The rest are gone in fees that the customer doesn't know when buying.

Is this lying?

Is this excusable?

How many are like this?

Are so many things grey area like this?

That's a great freakin' question.

I've seen people accuse others of lying just for providing an opinion. That's not lying.

I've seen people speak out of ignorance and be factually incorrect. I wouldn't call that lying.

But the behaviors we regularly see from hardcore partisan ideologues on both ends - deflection, distortion, straw man arguments, avoidance, obtuseness - those are intellectually dishonest, and yeah, I'd call that lying.

We're so narcissistic and divided at this point, that we can't even agree on why lying actually is. How is anything discussed and improved if definitions are meaningless?
.

I see it in terms of group identification, myself. As soon as a person attaches their ego to their sense of group, all bets are off by way of honesty. Anything that threatens the group threatens them and so people will go to great lengths towards denying anything that does not confirm their preconceptions.

People often say things that are patently untrue, or are just making things up. That does not mean they are lying, necessarily, until somebody points out the untruth. Once alerted to the fact, however, if they cling to the statement, they are definitely lying.

 

[grbb]

Perhaps there are many kind of lies.

Sarcasm is a lie. Elijah says that Baal may be on a quest. However, Elijah isn't trying to fool anyone. He's using sarcasm. Something that every body knows is a lie, to drive a point, that Baal doesn't exist.

Then there are effective lies. Those are lies that are often not punished by law or even protected by laws. Religions are such lies. When it comes to making you believing false statements, lies that are tolerated are the most dangerous lies.

 

[dcbl]

the way things are today?

anything that is said by the other side that someone disagrees with

sad, but true...

 

[Dragonlady]

A lie is a deliberate attempt to mislead someone with information you know to be false.

If you say something you believe to be true, and it's not, that's a mistatement, or an honest mistake, not a lie.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[grbb]

A lie is a deliberate attempt to mislead someone with information you know to be false.

If you say something you believe to be true, and it's not, that's a mistatement, or an honest mistake, not a lie.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

That is one definition.

What about if you don't know that something is false but you actually have no evidence it is true anyway? Religions are a sample. Are religions lies?

Also what about things that are technically true but make people believe things.

For example, "Cancer is the leading cause of death since industrialization."

It's technically true. However, it leads to false impressions that industrialization cause cancer. The truth is, industrialization reduces cancer. Industrialization simply reduce all other cause of death even more than cancer. We simply live longer. We simply no longer die to starvation, poison, disease, etc. We got to die somehow and that's why cancer becomes "leading" cause of death.

Is saying "Cancer is the leading cause of death since industrialization" a lie?

What about if people that says that doesn't know about the fact that industrialization actually reduces cancer? Is he still lying when he says "Cancer is the leading cause of death since industrialization"?

 

[Onyx]

We often conflate lying with dishonesty. A lie is an outright falsehood. Dishonestly is an unethical conversation, such as withholding the truth, making personal attacks, engaging in rhetoric and spin, or making logical fallacies.

 

[grbb]

Sometimes calling some dishonest person lying can cause problems.

 

[Onyx]

I agree.

 

[Dragonlady]

A lie is a deliberate attempt to mislead someone with information you know to be false.

If you say something you believe to be true, and it's not, that's a mistatement, or an honest mistake, not a lie.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

That is one definition.

What about if you don't know that something is false but you actually have no evidence it is true anyway? Religions are a sample. Are religions lies?

Also what about things that are technically true but make people believe things.

For example, "Cancer is the leading cause of death since industrialization."

It's technically true. However, it leads to false impressions that industrialization cause cancer. The truth is, industrialization reduces cancer. Industrialization simply reduce all other cause of death even more than cancer. We simply live longer. We simply no longer die to starvation, poison, disease, etc. We got to die somehow and that's why cancer becomes "leading" cause of death.

Is saying "Cancer is the leading cause of death since industrialization" a lie?

What about if people that says that doesn't know about the fact that industrialization actually reduces cancer? Is he still lying when he says "Cancer is the leading cause of death since industrialization"?

Religions are based on faith, not on evidence, science or facts. If you believe something to be true because of your religious beliefs, you need to qualify your statements in this regard so that others know why you hold this belief without evidence.

When given a "fact", such as "Industrialization causes cancer", it is our responsibility to question the veracity of such facts. Evidence of this belief? Veracity of the source provided?

We have just watched a candidate lie his way into the White House repeating the most proveably outrageous lies, and he has indicated that he will continue lying to the American public, via huge public rallies, and his tweets. This is the very definition of propaganda. Tell the people what they want to hear to get power, and continue to lie to them to keep power.

Trump's repeated assertions that is the media which is lying and he's telling the truth, proves the old adage "You can fool some of the people, all of the time".

When called for his numerous lies, called Clinton "Lying Hillary", when Trump was called on the fraud charges he faced as a result of his dealings with the public and promotion of Trump University, he responded by calling Clinton "Criminal Hillary" and chanting "lock her up".

Lies about the Clinton Foundation being a "pay for play scheme" were all over the media, but the cease and desist order issued to the Trump Foundation for illegal fundraising, and the request that the Foundation make proper filings with the State of New York to obtain the proper license to raise funds and solicit donations, or return the money donated, was barely mentioned.

As a non-American, I wondered why this supposed criminal hadn't been locked up, and I researched all of the charges against her. All of these allegations go right back to the Republican Party making something out of nothing, or making something out of what could be something, but upon closer examination, proved to be nothing.

For example, the allegation that the Clinton "stole" $200,000 worth of furniture from the White House when they left. No they didn't. When every President leaves office, there is always some confusion about gifts the President receives while in office. Whether the donor intended the gift to be to the President personally, or to the American people, is often fuzzy, and record keeping isn't good. Nancy Reagan tried to take a $125,000 china service which was donated and the donor said "No". No one accused Mrs. Reagan of trying to steal the dishes.

Furthermore, the record keeping on such gifts by the government department charged with keeping tabs on such gifts, is fuzzy at best, leading to much confusion as to which gifts are personal and which are not.

There was some dispute as to whether a sofa the Clintons were taking was such a gift, and Republicans made a big deal about the amount of personal gifts they were taking (which really was no different that other Presidents have taken), so to end the matter, the Clintons agreed to pay for everything they were taking, and Republicans continue to say that they tried to steal $200,000 worth of furniture from the White House.

All of the Clinton "crimes" are like this. There may be a small nugget of truth in there somewhere, but then it becomes wrapped in such speculation, innuendo and out-right falsehoods that it becomes something else.

Bill Clinton was the most successful, popular president since JFK, until the Republican Party machine decided to destroy the man. Now you have people calling the Clintons "criminals", and Bill Clinton, a "rapist", even though $100 million dollars of taxpayer money has been spent investigating these people and not one witness came forward with one piece of evidence.

Ken Starr has apoligized to the Clintons about his role in the Republican witchhunt, which started before Bill Clinton was elected, and continues to this day. The 7 Benghazi hearings were a political move to rag on Clinton and keeping her from ever being elected.

And after 20 years, people believe the lies. Hillary Clinton is a criminal who should be locked up.

 

[Onyx]

Nice wall

 

[yiostheoy]

What I mean by lying means

1. Giving false impression
2. So others do things that hurt their interests
3. That benefit the liars

Also, giving false impressions on the credibility of a statement is a lie too to me. That's because the credibility of a statement is a statement by itself. Hence misrepresenting that is a lie too. So if a statement is most likely false, or are not supported by evidence, but said confidently as if it's the truth, with expectation that people can't check the truth easily, it's a lie.

Many lies are very excusable
1. A person can believe their own statement. In religion this happens through "faith". So people can say anything and claim that he is not lying because he believe what he said is true. A person can say give me $1 million dollar because that's what God's want, and he won't be charged with fraud unless someone can proof beyond reasonable doubt he wants the money.
2. The statement can be arguable or do not have precise meaning.
3. The statement can be technically correct.
4. The lie is done legally.

I wonder if there is a book that does more analysis on this.

I will give you a sample.

An insurance salesman sell "investment" to a customer. The customer specifically ask that he wants only small insurance and the rest can be investments. The salesman says that all money are invested. Turns out, only 47% of the money are invested like regular mutual fund. The rest are gone in fees that the customer doesn't know when buying.

Is this lying?

Is this excusable?

How many are like this?

Are so many things grey area like this?

"Excusable lies" huh ??

Where did YOU go to Sunday School ??

Hillary lied her whole life and it cost her the Presidency.

The women voters would not vote for her.

They did not want another Nixon.

 

[gipper]

A lie is a deliberate attempt to mislead someone with information you know to be false.

If you say something you believe to be true, and it's not, that's a mistatement, or an honest mistake, not a lie.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

That is one definition.

What about if you don't know that something is false but you actually have no evidence it is true anyway? Religions are a sample. Are religions lies?

Also what about things that are technically true but make people believe things.

For example, "Cancer is the leading cause of death since industrialization."

It's technically true. However, it leads to false impressions that industrialization cause cancer. The truth is, industrialization reduces cancer. Industrialization simply reduce all other cause of death even more than cancer. We simply live longer. We simply no longer die to starvation, poison, disease, etc. We got to die somehow and that's why cancer becomes "leading" cause of death.

Is saying "Cancer is the leading cause of death since industrialization" a lie?

What about if people that says that doesn't know about the fact that industrialization actually reduces cancer? Is he still lying when he says "Cancer is the leading cause of death since industrialization"?

Religions are based on faith, not on evidence, science or facts. If you believe something to be true because of your religious beliefs, you need to qualify your statements in this regard so that others know why you hold this belief without evidence.

When given a "fact", such as "Industrialization causes cancer", it is our responsibility to question the veracity of such facts. Evidence of this belief? Veracity of the source provided?

We have just watched a candidate lie his way into the White House repeating the most proveably outrageous lies, and he has indicated that he will continue lying to the American public, via huge public rallies, and his tweets. This is the very definition of propaganda. Tell the people what they want to hear to get power, and continue to lie to them to keep power.

Trump's repeated assertions that is the media which is lying and he's telling the truth, proves the old adage "You can fool some of the people, all of the time".

When called for his numerous lies, called Clinton "Lying Hillary", when Trump was called on the fraud charges he faced as a result of his dealings with the public and promotion of Trump University, he responded by calling Clinton "Criminal Hillary" and chanting "lock her up".

Lies about the Clinton Foundation being a "pay for play scheme" were all over the media, but the cease and desist order issued to the Trump Foundation for illegal fundraising, and the request that the Foundation make proper filings with the State of New York to obtain the proper license to raise funds and solicit donations, or return the money donated, was barely mentioned.

As a non-American, I wondered why this supposed criminal hadn't been locked up, and I researched all of the charges against her. All of these allegations go right back to the Republican Party making something out of nothing, or making something out of what could be something, but upon closer examination, proved to be nothing.

For example, the allegation that the Clinton "stole" $200,000 worth of furniture from the White House when they left. No they didn't. When every President leaves office, there is always some confusion about gifts the President receives while in office. Whether the donor intended the gift to be to the President personally, or to the American people, is often fuzzy, and record keeping isn't good. Nancy Reagan tried to take a $125,000 china service which was donated and the donor said "No". No one accused Mrs. Reagan of trying to steal the dishes.

Furthermore, the record keeping on such gifts by the government department charged with keeping tabs on such gifts, is fuzzy at best, leading to much confusion as to which gifts are personal and which are not.

There was some dispute as to whether a sofa the Clintons were taking was such a gift, and Republicans made a big deal about the amount of personal gifts they were taking (which really was no different that other Presidents have taken), so to end the matter, the Clintons agreed to pay for everything they were taking, and Republicans continue to say that they tried to steal $200,000 worth of furniture from the White House.

All of the Clinton "crimes" are like this. There may be a small nugget of truth in there somewhere, but then it becomes wrapped in such speculation, innuendo and out-right falsehoods that it becomes something else.

Bill Clinton was the most successful, popular president since JFK, until the Republican Party machine decided to destroy the man. Now you have people calling the Clintons "criminals", and Bill Clinton, a "rapist", even though $100 million dollars of taxpayer money has been spent investigating these people and not one witness came forward with one piece of evidence.

Ken Starr has apoligized to the Clintons about his role in the Republican witchhunt, which started before Bill Clinton was elected, and continues to this day. The 7 Benghazi hearings were a political move to rag on Clinton and keeping her from ever being elected.

And after 20 years, people believe the lies. Hillary Clinton is a criminal who should be locked up.

Are you lying?