(on lying) We teach the tradition of ‘not lying’ and do it poorly. You might thi

(on lying)

We teach the tradition of ‘not lying’ and do it poorly. You might think your intentions matter. But they don’t.

Whether you win the debate is determined by the audience. Whether you misled the audience is determined by the audience. Whether you lied is determined by the jury. So, make sure when you speak, the jury will agree you didn’t lie.

We learn the moral lesson against lying that’s discovered in legal custom: in crime it MIGHT require you had motive and intent. But in tort it only matters that you caused a harm, regardless of intent. In other words, you can lie intentionally, or by a failure of due diligence. Meaning you can lie by enthusiasm or incaution by your own words, or you can unknowingly transmit a lie you obtained from someone else by failing due diligence against ensuring you’re not lying.

It took about eight years (a phd worth of time) to ‘science’ lying, whether intentionally, irresponsibly, and ignorantly. Because believe it or not, some cultural traditions and some ideas in cultures teach you to lie.

So the lesson is. It doesn’t matter your intentions. It only matters whether you failed due diligence against the transmission of a falsehood – regardless of whether it’s legal, whether it’s ethical, whether it’s moral, or whether a matter of manners.

(Sarcasm: Under tort, all leftists are guilty. 😉 )

Cheers
Curt Doolittle

Reply addressees: @pmarca