Lies, Liars and Lying

[wring]

In another thread, some one (doesn’t matter who, I’m not necessarily addressing the particular person, just the thought) posted this:

[/quote]
Companies however are not “entitled” to lie to the customers.
[/quote]

To which I asked “cite”. and got insulted. Now, I am not saying that a company is allowed to lie on corporate documents, tax filings etc. Certainly there’s legal consequences for that.
And if a company is dishonest in their business actions, they should not be surprised when customers flock away.

however, to flat out assert that companies are not “entitled” to lie to their customers? So, when I go to Sears and see the tag “regular price $200, sale price, $150”, there’s no chance that Sears is hiding the fact that they never charge $200? When I go to the car dealer and they advertise that the car’s sticker price is $18,000, that’s an absolute truth? When Art Van advertises that this is my absolute last chance to get that couch w/o paying sales tax, their not hedging a bit? when the infomercial tells me I must call within the next 30 minutes in order to get the deal for half as much and twice the product, I sure better not wait 35 minutes, huh?

and if that isn’t enough, the poster goes on to assert:

No one is entitled to lie to anyone.
Try it sometime, maybe in a court of law

well, yea, in a court of law, you’ll get in trouble for lying. I’ve never even suggested that wasn’t true, but “no one is entitled to lie to anyone”? entitled, as in

To furnish with a right or claim to something

(dictionary.com 2nd definition)

I have no right to lie to anyone? bullshit. in the thread, I replied

I’ve lied to save my skin from time to time for example. and felt fully entitled to do so, thank you so much.
I’ve not told the truth about a surprise present for some one from time to time for another one.
I’ve not told the truth on occasion when I thought the person wasn’t entitled to the information they were seeking and weren’t taking the answer “I don’t want to talk about it with you”.
There’s also occasions where it does indeed seem that the person asking wants you to lie (“does this make my butt look big?” “what do you think about my new dress?”)
I would prefer not to lie. But if my safety or wellbeing is on the line, some wonderful surprise would be ruined, some innocent’s feelings would be hurt (and more than the lie) etc, all bets are off.

and I would add: In certain cases, with my clients, I would be obligated to lie - “Do you know so and so?” Unless I have a written release allowing me to admit to knowing them, I cannot answer correctly. And if I said “I"m not allowed to tell” that can also disclosing the information.

Again. I am not defending people (Or companies) doing morally reprehensible things. I am, however, suggesting that somehow neither is ever allowed to lie is an idiotic statement.

[wring]

fucking coding.
fucking forgot the link

[Giles]

I’m not sure whether the argument is about morality (companies ought not to lie to their customers) or about the law (companies may not lawfully lie to their customers).

If it’s a matter of morality, then I agree that companies ought never to lie to their customers. I can’t understand the circumstances where it would be permissible. They may be able to keep some stuff secret, but they should never lie.

If it’s a matter of law, then jurisdictions will vary. My feeling is that companies are prohibited from engaging in “false or misleading conduct” under Australian trade practices law that is permitted in the United States, and it annoys me that you have to discount claims made by companies in the US because the way that they are allowed to stretch the truth here.

[Bricker]

There is no general legal principle forbidding lying in all circumstances.

There are plenty of specific circumstances in which lying is forbidden or carries consequences.

The discussion involved “rights.”

The problem with using the word “rights” is that different people use the word in different ways.

I have long been a proponent of an absolutely objective definition of “right:” A right is that entitlement which may be enforced by legal remedy.

In short - there is no “right” without a legal remedy.

So… may a company lie on its 10Q and 10K filings? No, it does not have the right to do so.

May a company lie about whether or not it’s cereal tastes the best? Sure.

And other specific questions about whether a company can lie? Just ask yourself, “If they do lie, is there a legal consequence?”

Simple.

[smiling_bandit]

While I believe there are regulations against out and out deceptive advertising, companies do push this a little bit (not too much). They probably ought not to, but it’s one of those First Amendment things.

[Thudlow_Boink]

@wring

I am, however, suggesting that somehow neither is ever allowed to lie is an idiotic statement.

It’s not an idiotic statement, just a lie. But if you’re entitled to lie, then that’s okay.

[wring]

exactly the distinction I was drawing, Bricker. and Thudlow - actually, I’d say it was “incorrect”, not a lie. There is no doubt to me that the poster who posted that statement believes it’s veracity. I simply think they are mistaken, to a HUGE fucking degree, mind you, but not that they’re lying.
actually in my first draft (with bad coding still of course), I had in the OP a statement about how sometimes folks will say “Liar” here when they really mean “you are wrong”. The two statements are not necessarily the same thing.

If I say “the US never landed on the Moon”, the statement is wrong, certainly but if I was one of the loons who believed it, I would not be lying. Mistaken yes.

[Jackmannii]

You think that you’re such a smart girl, and I’ll believe what you say.

But who do you think you are girl to lead me on this way, hey?

Lies, lies
I can’t believe a word you say
Lies, lies

[Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor]

Fraud is oft-times defined as “theft, by deception”.

Roll that around in your frontal lobes for a while, there’s a good chap.
:rolleyes:

[Bricker]

@wring

If I say “the US never landed on the Moon”, the statement is wrong, certainly but if I was one of the loons who believed it, I would not be lying. Mistaken yes.

That’s a useful distinction… but I’d argue as well that there is an objective component as well as a subjective one.

MOON CONSPIRACY NUT: We never landed on the Moon!

RATIONAL BYSTANDER: Yes, of course we did.

MCN: No, and I have the evidence to prove it! No stars, no blast crater, dust near the ladder, shadows aren’t utterly black, no flame from the rocket, blah blah blah…

RB: But I can refute each of your charges: light washed out the starlight on the pictures, no air on the Moon means the dust doesn’t swirl…

MCN: (Hands over ears) LA LA LA LA, I’m not listening!

At some point, the wilful refusal to so much as weigh and evaluate the evidence should, in my view, push someone over into the liar camp, even if their view is honestly and subjectively held.

[wring]

willfully ignorant yes. I’d still have a tough time calling them a liar if they truly believed it to be true. (note the distinction between ‘believe it to be true’ and believe it is useful for others to believe it to be true’ ) But I promise I won’t yell too loudly at you calling the twit a liar at that point.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@wring

willfully ignorant yes. I’d still have a tough time calling them a liar if they truly believed it to be true. (note the distinction between ‘believe it to be true’ and believe it is useful for others to believe it to be true’ )

I’m with you. I think lying has got two necessary components:

1. I’ve got to say something untrue; and
2. I’ve got to know that what I’m saying to you is going to mislead you.

If I do one but not two, then I’m mistaken (or, in the extreme case that Bricker described, a crazy asshole). If I do two but not one, I’m a sleazeball who’s not to be trusted, but not technically a liar.

Daniel

[ElvisL1ves]

@Bricker

At some point, the wilful refusal to so much as weigh and evaluate the evidence should, in my view, push someone over into the liar camp, even if their view is honestly and subjectively held.

How, then, should we assess a statement such as this?

@Bricker

Your view regarding WMDs has seemingly proven to be the correct one.

I just ask that you view the other side as reasonable as well.

[D_Odds]

Good example of thread-shitting, Elvis.

[wisernow]

@Bricker

MCN: (Hands over ears) LA LA LA LA, I’m not listening!

MCN:(Hands over ears) LA LA LA LA, I’m [b/lekatting**!

[ElvisL1ves]

Just an exercise in considering the source, D.

Would you really have preferred yet another discussion about how what’s legally allowable isn’t the same as what’s morally allowable, a distinction I’m sure wring had in mind? Or is yet another attempt by **Bricker ** to make every discussion solely about the law any less “thread shitting” than yet another attempt by **Liberal ** to make every discussion about epistemology and himself?

[wisernow]

Shitty coding!

Fixed -

MCN - (Hands over ears) LA LA LA LA, I’m lekatting!

[Miller]

@ElvisL1ves

Just an exercise in considering the source, D.

Would you really have preferred yet another discussion about how what’s legally allowable isn’t the same as what’s morally allowable, a distinction I’m sure wring had in mind? Or is yet another attempt by **Bricker ** to make every discussion solely about the law any less “thread shitting” than yet another attempt by **Liberal ** to make every discussion about epistemology and himself?

Both would be preferably to yet another attempt by you to hijack an innocent thread into something about George Bush.

[wring]

the distinction I’m attempting to make is that stating “no one is entitled to lie to anyone else” is idiotic, and frankly untrue. I listed several occasions where I’d not told the truth, but felt that I was “entitled” to do so, wasn’t being immoral.
But more importantly, that a statement that companies aren’t “entitled to lie” is also iditic and frankly untrue from the standpoint of there is absolutely no law that forbids (universally) lying by companies. Yes, they may not lie (under penalty of law) about on certain corporate documents, filings and so on. But can they state “this is the best deal you’ll ever get”? you betcha. Is it the truth ? most probably not. Is there any consequence for their behavior? Well, customers can (if they like) boycott. but certainly there seems to be no such thing they’ve “no right” to lie, deceive.

[Syntropy]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

I’m with you. I think lying has got two necessary components:

1. I’ve got to say something untrue; and
2. I’ve got to know that what I’m saying to you is going to mislead you.

If I do one but not two, then I’m mistaken (or, in the extreme case that Bricker described, a crazy asshole). If I do two but not one, I’m a sleazeball who’s not to be trusted, but not technically a liar.

Daniel

Yyyyyyeeeesss…mostly.
I know there have been several studies about lying, most of them refuting each other, but all agreeing that people lie all the time. According to this one, it averages out to twice a day. Sometimes it’s intentional, but I also believe that a great deal of the time, it’s merely that people have selective memory; they believe something happened the way they want to remember it, not the way it really happened, and end up lying, even though they are normally honest people.

The study I cited above goes on to say that some lies act as a buffer:

Though some lies produce interpersonal friction, others may actually serve as a kind of harmless social lubricant. “They make it easier for people to get along,” says DePaulo, noting that in the the diary study one in every four of the participants’ lies were told solely for the benefit of another person.
<snip>
Not surprisingly, research also confirms that the closer we are to someone, the more likely it is that the lies we tell them will be altruistic ones. This is particularly true of women: Although the sexes lie with equal frequency, women are especially likely to stretch the truth in order to protect someone else’s feelings, DePaulo reports. Men, on the other hand, are more prone to lying about themselves–the typical conversation between two guys contains about eight times as many self-oriented lies as it does falsehoods about other people.

There are also lies people tell, trying to be kind, when frankly, it’s just none of the other person’s damn business. I’m told this is called diplomacy; I wouldn’t know, I rarely practice it.