When misleading is not a lie?

[Doctrine1st]

If I were to have full knowledge of certain situation, and in imparting this knowledge on a given individual, I only reveal what I think they need to know, and in turn when I do disclose the information in full, the previous information becomes blantaly misleading. Is this considered a lie being that it's not a fabrication, or just a case of being disingenuous?

How does one categorzie this act?

D1st

 

[SBfaithful]

It's only misleading if you meant it to be.

 

[Quath]

I looked up the definition of "lie" and got "a statement that deviates from or perverts the truth." So I would say that the truth was perverted if only enough was told to manipulate someone. But is ounds like a gray area.

Scott (Quath)

 

[Osiris]

I would have to say that it is a lie, even though you didn't mean it. Since a piece of the the truth is not the same thing as the whole truth (and nothing but the truth so help me god!)

 

[Arikay]

Yeah, it would be a half truth. Sometimes a half truth is just as bad as a lie.

What is the saying, NoInformation is better than MissInformation.

 

[foolsparade]

what was your intention?

 

[cre100382]

Depending on the situation a half true is better than a lie. Such as the situation when a child asks where babies come from.

 

[Doctrine1st]

23rd March 2003 at 01:32 AM foolsparade said this in Post #6

what was your intention?

If I had full and complete knowledge of how things were going to turn out, and yet still held back information that could have aleviated the problem in the first place, are my intentions well meaning? How can one describe my intentions?

 

[cre100382]

Without more specifics of the situation I have come to the conclusion that if you had full and complete knowledge of how it was going to turn out and the information you had could have alleviated and possibly avoided the situation then you did not give out the information for personal reasons. Whether it was to spite someone involved or just to manipulate people for some other purpose, I think that what you did was morally wrong.

If I am mistaken and there was a good and honestly right reason for letting the events play out the way they did then I apologize and ask you to give more specific details of the situation.

 

[jon1101]

19th March 2003 at 10:36 PM Doctrine1st said this in Post #1

If I were to have full knowledge of certain situation, and in imparting this knowledge on a given individual, I only reveal what I think they need to know, and in turn when I do disclose the information in full, the previous information becomes blantaly misleading. Is this considered a lie being that it's not a fabrication, or just a case of being disingenuous?

How does one categorzie this act?

D1st

Well, if you're question is simply "is x act a lie," then it's just a matter of coming up with good definitions for our language. If, as I suspect is the case, you're asking "is x act unethical," then we have to invoke some kind of ethics theory.

My cursory opinion is: if your intent is to deceive, then I think it is certainly unethical. If you innocently withhold information and that leads to negative consequences, then I think that it was an honest mistake, but a mistake nonetheless and therefore unethical insofar as ethics are defined as that which one ought not to do (one ought not to make mistakes, even though we all do).

-jon

 

[Rafterman223]

i agree w/ jon

 

[num_me_vexo]

What if u did not disclose all the information allowing the other person to make assumptions on their own with the information u provided, is that a lie because u did not tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

 

[The Bellman]

Depending on the situation a half true is better than a lie. Such as the situation when a child asks where babies come from.

Why would you not tell them the whole truth, or, depending on their level of understanding, that part of it that they could understand?

 

[num_me_vexo]

well i wouldnt tell them the whole truth depending on the situation. sometimes to avoid getting in trouble i simply answer the questions they ask without disclosing all the details because i think if they didnt ask and i didnt tell then its not a lie right? i could be very wrong here

 

[billwald]

God misquoted Sarah to Abraham for the sake of peace in the family.

 

[mpshiel]

It is an interesting dilemma and one I struggle with: what is the difference between "personal" information and deception. For instance, if I adopt children - unless I tell people, they will assume that they are mine by childbirth- but as I would see them as my children what does that matter.

I see keeping "personal" information as not a lie unless it is made to purposely decieve - another example - a woman has breast cancer and wears a breast prostethic - now that will make others think she has full natural breasts - I don't believe she is lying, she is just not disclosing personal information. Which is different than an intentional act of misrepresentation - like for instance letting people think that you are still seeing someone you broke up with 2 months ago.

 

[bliz]

How do you now that you have full and complete knowledge of a situation? How often can any of us be sure that we ever know all there is to know about any situation?

How do you determine what someone else needs to know? what makes you qualified to make that determination? Do you throughly understand other people's needs, desires, emotions and circumstances?

How can you ever have complete knowledge of how anything is going to turn out? Do you know all, see all and have the ability to predict the future? If so, yo are claiming an awful lot of qualities that I thought only God had.

This is a bit hard to wrestle with and be helpful to you all in the abstract. No one knows who you are or where you are... why not tell the story?

 

[Silent_minstrel]

In gray areas like this, the best way to go about things is to say to yourself: If Jesus were standing in front of me, would I do it? Nowadays, people have abbreviated that into WWJD.