Going off on the discussion of where does lying start and where does it stop, It is really really hard. War is one where tangible bullets, where they end up, and how they are fired, is dictated by certain rules. How does one write some rules or guidelines for lies? Each lie and circumstance is so different that I think of it almost impossible.
Is a lie a deception if there is no knowledge of intentional deception? There is no track record of lying unless you are Nixon and like to record things. What and how many exceptions are there to rules? If they are well, thought out rules, maybe they can hold some weight. I am going to work over spring break on kicking out some rules or guidelines on lies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It reminds me of the just war theory, that once you make guidelines for something being acceptable (war, or lies) then you have made it much easier to justify the act. I feel that it would be impossible to make a set of guidelines for when it's okay to lie, because there are so many loopholes. Not only this, but if you said something like "you can only lie for the greater good" it's all completely subjective. Who gets to decide what's for the greater good? At the same time, I don't think it makes sense to have an absolute rule that lying is never okay, because clearly there are must be exceptions. I think you make a good point that every circumstance is so different that it's impossible to create a set of rules. I guess my only answer would be to hold politicians to a higher standard than us, forcing them to risk their job in order to tell lies. This way they would only take the risk if they really believed it was for the greater good. I'm not sure how well this would work in practice, but in theory I think it makes sense.
ReplyDelete