Is Lying Immoral (Sinful, Illegal)?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



coberst

Grand-Moff-Gav
All lies are sinful.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
All lies are sinful.

What if your lie saves people's lives. For example: the lie that the allies told to trick the Germans into believing that the invasion of Normandy in WWII would happen further north.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What if your lie saves people's lives. For example: the lie that the allies told to trick the Germans into believing that the invasion of Normandy in WWII would happen further north.

They didn't lie, they let the Germans draw their own conclusions.

Originally posted by coberst
Is Lying Immoral (Sinful, Illegal)?

Well it's certainly not illegal, except in certain circumstances.

coberst
The purpose of this OP was to compare the nature of categorization in traditional objectivist thinking and the thinking that is recognized by new cognitive science theories.

Traditional objectivist, one might call it positivist, thinking considers that the world is made up of things that fit neatly and completely within containers and that these categories express that which is necessary and sufficient for any object that fits into that category.

SGCS (Second Generation Cognitive Science) has developed revolutionary new theories about the functioning of the mind. SGCS informs us that in many cases categories do not fit neatly into containers. Lying is one such category fits sloppily within containers. There exists fuzzy overlap and difficult things that must be considered.

All this is to say that if SGCS is correct then we are all very far off base when we think of categories as always fitting neatly within containers.

One has to read the OP and think about it a bit in order to get the idea. The idea is very important. Reading is fundamental.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
They didn't lie, they let the Germans draw their own conclusions.

No, they actively lied. They took a dead bum off the streets of London, made up an identity, and dumped him off a sub with papers that lied. They then sent a women to lie about being the mans lover, and she morned at the grave. They then set up a fake army and put Patton in charge of it. Then the president of the US got on the radio and lied to the people of the US giving indications that an invasion was being planed for the north of Europe.

Deja~vu
Yes they DID lie.

coberst
We can comprehend only what we are prepared to comprehend.

New social theories move very slowly into the culture because they are seldom taught in our schools and colleges unless they help us get a good job.

The only way that people can prepare them self to comprehend the world and the self is to learn whatever new theories might be available. All this requires curiosity, concentration, and caring.

I try to introduce new ideas in the hope that the reader will be influenced sufficiently to go to the books and learn what is necessary to become sufficiently sophisticated intellectually so as to comprehend our ever changing world.

inimalist
Originally posted by coberst
I try to introduce new ideas in the hope that the reader will be influenced sufficiently to go to the books and learn what is necessary to become sufficiently sophisticated intellectually so as to comprehend our ever changing world.

well, aren't you the good samaritan
'
if only we could all be enlightened like you! Hell, you didn't even need a lotus tree to sit under.

Darth Exodus
It could be said that all lies are sinful, but sometimes not lying is moreso.

Although personally I just straight-up don't think its intrinsically sinful/evil to lie.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What if your lie saves people's lives. For example: the lie that the allies told to trick the Germans into believing that the invasion of Normandy in WWII would happen further north.

Still sinful.

inimalist
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Still sinful.

"they'll always tell you how much good you can do with dirty money"

- Daniel Berrigan

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Still sinful.

Would you like to be speaking German and not being allowed to be a Christian? That sin made your life possible.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Would you like to be speaking German and not being allowed to be a Christian? That sin made your life possible.

Still sinful.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Still sinful.

WOW! you are calling good sinful. I'm glad I'm a Buddhist.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
WOW! you are calling good sinful. I'm glad I'm a Buddhist.

I assume he also believes it's a considerably lesser sin than letting the Nazis win.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I assume he also believes it's a considerably lesser sin than letting the Nazis win.

Indeed, a lie is a sinful no matter what...however it is sometimes the lesser of two evils.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
WOW! you are calling good sinful. I'm glad I'm a Buddhist.
Why? Because being a Buddhist allows you to change your moral understanding of everything based on the drop of a hat, thus you have no real moral credibility...

Deja~vu
Wait, wait, I'm sinful too! Don't leave me out. big grin

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Indeed, a lie is a sinful no matter what...however it is sometimes the lesser of two evils.


Why? Because being a Buddhist allows you to change your moral understanding of everything based on the drop of a hat, thus you have no real moral credibility...

No, being a Buddhist frees me from delusions like that one you are suffering from. Good and evil are not fixed, they are relative.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, being a Buddhist frees me from delusions like that one you are suffering from. Good and evil are not fixed, they are relative.

No they are not, that is the delusion that leads to the greatest of suffering and evil.

backdoorman
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
No they are not, that is the delusion that leads to the greatest of suffering and evil.
And how do you figure that?

occultdestroyer
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, being a Buddhist frees me from delusions like that one you are suffering from. Good and evil are not fixed, they are relative.
huh

No they aren't. WTH have you been smoking?
You seem to be as delusional as all the rest of the theists.

And yes, lying IS a sin.

But who gives a rat's ass?
Everyone -- every single soul -- has one way or the other lied during the course of their lifetime.
Everyone is tainted with sin. Even I (ie. I tell my parents I don't masturbate even if I do regularly)

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by occultdestroyer
huh

No they aren't. WTH have you been smoking?
You seem to be as delusional as all the rest of the theists.

And yes, lying IS a sin.

But who gives a rat's ass?
Everyone -- every single soul -- has one way or the other lied during the course of their lifetime.
Everyone is tainted with sin. Even I (ie. I tell my parents I don't masturbate even if I do regularly)

I never said anything about sin. I said that good and evil are relative. Sin is another matter.

Sin - transgression of the law of God.

The Christian god is man made therefore, the idea of sin is also man made. Sin is not even relative; it's arbitrary.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by backdoorman
And how do you figure that?

Since people believe sins are sometimes acceptable it creates a justification for doing evil. In a world where such a word view is tolerated great acts of evil are manufactured.

Red Nemesis
Delusional? It doesn't sound smart to call an entire worldview as 'delusional' to me.



I'm trying to get my head around this. Are you saying that any sin opens up the possibility of more? This post was (presumably) intended to explain why good and evil are not relative.

Doing "good" in one situation may require an action that would be considered "bad" somewhere else. Is that situation one in which it is impossible to do good? (Is a subjectively good act that could be evil somewhere else still evil?)

backdoorman
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Since people believe sins are sometimes acceptable it creates a justification for doing evil. In a world where such a word view is tolerated great acts of evil are manufactured.
At best, in such a world great acts of evil COULD be manufactured. I still doubt it's a philosophical belief of the flexibility of morality that drives people to do evil and at any rate that belief, or "delusion" as you call it, is most certainly not what leads to the greatest suffering and evil

Grand-Moff-Gav
Since you have both decided to jump on the delusional comment I invite you to visit the comments initial context and note that it is clearly a reference to the use of delusional by Shaky.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
Delusional? It doesn't sound smart to call an entire worldview as 'delusional' to me.



I'm trying to get my head around this. Are you saying that any sin opens up the possibility of more? This post was (presumably) intended to explain why good and evil are not relative.

Doing "good" in one situation may require an action that would be considered "bad" somewhere else. Is that situation one in which it is impossible to do good? (Is a subjectively good act that could be evil somewhere else still evil?)
Certain acts are always sinful, i.e. lying. In a world in which there was no sin there would never be lies. Ergo any arguments based on the merits of telling a lie (merits of a sin) would fall apart.Originally posted by backdoorman
At best, in such a world great acts of evil COULD be manufactured. I still doubt it's a philosophical belief of the flexibility of morality that drives people to do evil and at any rate that belief, or "delusion" as you call it, is most certainly not what leads to the greatest suffering and evil
In a world where some sins are considered acceptable in some situations, you would have the apparatus for reasoning for evil. In a world where all sins are considered evil all of the time that apparatus would not exist.

Red Nemesis
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Since you have both decided to jump on the delusional comment I invite you to visit the comments initial context and note that it is clearly a reference to the use of delusional by Shaky.

My bad, I was responding to

Still, there was a larger context that I hadn't noticed. *drops subject*

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav

Certain acts are always sinful, i.e. lying. In a world in which there was no sin there would never be lies. Ergo any arguments based on the merits of telling a lie (merits of a sin) would fall apart.

But we live in a world in which there is sin. (By your definition.) Therefore lies can sometimes be used to avert other sins or minimize the damage of other sins. In the case of a choice between two evils isn't choosing to lie (and therefore sin) less bad than not doing anything? (and therefore allowing a greater 'evil' to occur?)

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Red Nemesis

But we live in a world in which there is sin. (By your definition.) Therefore lies can sometimes be used to avert other sins or minimize the damage of other sins. In the case of a choice between two evils isn't choosing to lie (and therefore sin) less bad than not doing anything? (and therefore allowing a greater 'evil' to occur?)

As I said, sometimes lying is the lesser of two evils...that doesn't make it good though.

backdoorman
And since when is a solid foundation of reasoning the motive behind an evil action?

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by backdoorman
And since when is a solid foundation of reasoning the motive behind an evil action?

Are you telling me Hitler's eugenics wasn't well thought out and based on coherent arguments?

Any sin is evil, so that white lie you tell your wife is considered evil. I suppose though that it was well thought out and such.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.