So it’s that I do understand – that most lies hide under cover of moral pretense w/o intent, but is always failure of due diligence, assumed or by intent, that are the basis for sophistry, plausibe denial, and esp abrahmic deciet.
Source date (UTC): 2019-12-17 11:07:45 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1206893740763336706
Reply addressees: @james__jenko
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1206892789478371328
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@james__jenko Speaking a lie does not require intent, but a failure of due diligence not to lie. Speaking the truth does not require one intends to. Intent determines punishment, harm does not, and so restitution does not. Difference between permisssive ingroup moral and scientific judicial.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1206892789478371328
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@james__jenko Speaking a lie does not require intent, but a failure of due diligence not to lie. Speaking the truth does not require one intends to. Intent determines punishment, harm does not, and so restitution does not. Difference between permisssive ingroup moral and scientific judicial.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1206892789478371328
Leave a Reply