5 ms·

but would not that make you feel a little guilty as you are lying to the person just to cancel a subscription?

inetknght 8y ago
Why should we feel guilty when companies like this do their best to hide important things from the people they're billing?
manfredo 8y ago
I don't. The only reason why this deception is necessary is because of the company's scummy cancellation policies. Heck, one could argue that it actually reduces labor costs because emails are usually less time consuming than phone calls.
__jal 8y ago
Why would one feel guilty about it? This is a utility-maximizing lie. You're saving both yourself and the other person time. Unless you subscribe to some belief-system that holds truth-telling to be some sort of moral good in and of itself, everyone is better off. And that's aside from the fact that the patter you'll hear trying to keep you paying is going to be full of, at the very least, deceptive statements lacking any objective truth or falsity.
petercooper 8y ago
As guilty as saying "I can only pay $X" or "$X is my final offer" when buying or selling a car despite knowing it's a negotiation tactic and not a real limitation.
- JackCh 8y ago
  Incidentally the price tag was invented by Quakers who considered haggling immoral. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_tag#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_tag#History
  - barking 8y ago
    After yesterdays thread on the anki system I'm tempted to get into that and this bit of trivia is just the sort of thing I'd love to remember.
  - dwaltrip 8y ago
    That is fascinating, thanks for sharing.
- perl4ever 8y ago
  An interesting question is whether a car dealer that says "we paid $Y for this car, we're losing money if we sell it to you at $X" is committing fraud if Y is a false figure aka negotiating tactic. I think a lot of people would be unsurprised that such a thing would happen, but should it be a crime? I was reading a Matt Levine column in which he described some litigation over selling bonds that was very analogous to the car dealer situation. And apparently what happened is that it was decided that lying about the price paid was ok per se, but creating falsified documentation to back it up was fraud. Which seems weird!
noonespecial 8y ago
Why? Its just a machine. You're trying to find the right buttons to press to get it to give you the desired results. The "person" is just part of the interface. They have no choice at all what to say. If you saw that a soda machine always dispensed a Coke when you pressed the Dr. Pepper button would you feel bad pressing that button to get the Coke you wanted?
JackCh 8y ago
Despite what we teach small children, lying is not immoral. Lying is amoral. The circumstance and motivation of a lie determine whether that particular lie is moral or immoral. There are times when it's moral to lie, other times when it's immoral to lie, and still other times when morality hardly has anything to do with it at all (such as the above scenario.) We tell small children that it's immoral to lie because we don't trust their moral judgement and would prefer they always tell us the truth.
- rrauenza 8y ago
  Reminds me of Kant’s Axe ... Is it ever morally acceptable to tell a lie? Kant thought not. His example of the would-be murderer explains his reasoning. Read by Harry Shearer. Scripted by Nigel Warburton. https://youtu.be/x_uUEaeqFog https://youtu.be/x_uUEaeqFog
  - JackCh 8y ago
    Thankfully most people have more sense than Kant. In truth, I doubt Kant himself would be so hardline if he were actually put to the test in such a scenario. Talk is cheap, would he actually be so depraved in practice? I can't rule it out, but I doubt it.
    - fjsolwmv 8y ago
      Kant's philosophy is universal, not individual. His morality (and many others!) accepts that people may becomes martyrs. Should you kill a person to save two? Kill two to save one? Does matter who the people involved are? Anti-Kantian philosophies don't have good consistent answers to this -- at least they don't live according to their philosophical answers.
- perl4ever 8y ago
  I don't think people grow out of the need to follow moral rules as much as you imply. Sooner or later, there comes a time when it is overwhelmingly in a person's interest to lie (or some other transgression). If they are purely rational, they will do it. If they think deeply about morality, they will rationalize why it is right to do what is in their interest. The point of inculcating honesty and other virtues is so one is habituated to the point that dishonesty is preempted when it really counts. Reasoned moral judgement is not an unmitigated good, because it opens the way for bias and hinders the operation of trust needed for relationships.
olliej 8y ago
They bank (much like sales people) on human nature making you feel bad when they’re screwing you. It’s like the squares/grid stuff used by car salespeople to get you to get a car loan instead of buying the car with cash.
welly 8y ago
No more guilty than corporations feel for making customers jump through hoops just to cancel a service they no longer need or want. You can take that as "not at all guilty".
otakucode 8y ago
"Make game of that which makes as much of thee." They are playing you, manipulating you, and not dealing with you as a person. They are treating you like a factor to be optimized and played with. It is entirely a moral response to respond in kind and out-play them.

Why should we feel guilty when companies like this do their best to hide important things from the people they're billing?

manfredo 8y ago

I don't. The only reason why this deception is necessary is because of the company's scummy cancellation policies. Heck, one could argue that it actually reduces labor costs because emails are usually less time consuming than phone calls.

__jal 8y ago

Why would one feel guilty about it? This is a utility-maximizing lie. You're saving both yourself and the other person time. Unless you subscribe to some belief-system that holds truth-telling to be some sort of moral good in and of itself, everyone is better off. And that's aside from the fact that the patter you'll hear trying to keep you paying is going to be full of, at the very least, deceptive statements lacking any objective truth or falsity.

petercooper 8y ago

As guilty as saying "I can only pay $X" or "$X is my final offer" when buying or selling a car despite knowing it's a negotiation tactic and not a real limitation.

JackCh 8y ago
Incidentally the price tag was invented by Quakers who considered haggling immoral. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_tag#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_tag#History
- barking 8y ago
  After yesterdays thread on the anki system I'm tempted to get into that and this bit of trivia is just the sort of thing I'd love to remember.
- dwaltrip 8y ago
  That is fascinating, thanks for sharing.
perl4ever 8y ago
An interesting question is whether a car dealer that says "we paid $Y for this car, we're losing money if we sell it to you at $X" is committing fraud if Y is a false figure aka negotiating tactic. I think a lot of people would be unsurprised that such a thing would happen, but should it be a crime? I was reading a Matt Levine column in which he described some litigation over selling bonds that was very analogous to the car dealer situation. And apparently what happened is that it was decided that lying about the price paid was ok per se, but creating falsified documentation to back it up was fraud. Which seems weird!

noonespecial 8y ago

Why? Its just a machine. You're trying to find the right buttons to press to get it to give you the desired results. The "person" is just part of the interface. They have no choice at all what to say. If you saw that a soda machine always dispensed a Coke when you pressed the Dr. Pepper button would you feel bad pressing that button to get the Coke you wanted?

JackCh 8y ago

Despite what we teach small children, lying is not immoral. Lying is amoral. The circumstance and motivation of a lie determine whether that particular lie is moral or immoral. There are times when it's moral to lie, other times when it's immoral to lie, and still other times when morality hardly has anything to do with it at all (such as the above scenario.) We tell small children that it's immoral to lie because we don't trust their moral judgement and would prefer they always tell us the truth.

rrauenza 8y ago
Reminds me of Kant’s Axe ... Is it ever morally acceptable to tell a lie? Kant thought not. His example of the would-be murderer explains his reasoning. Read by Harry Shearer. Scripted by Nigel Warburton. https://youtu.be/x_uUEaeqFog https://youtu.be/x_uUEaeqFog
- JackCh 8y ago
  Thankfully most people have more sense than Kant. In truth, I doubt Kant himself would be so hardline if he were actually put to the test in such a scenario. Talk is cheap, would he actually be so depraved in practice? I can't rule it out, but I doubt it.
  - fjsolwmv 8y ago
    Kant's philosophy is universal, not individual. His morality (and many others!) accepts that people may becomes martyrs. Should you kill a person to save two? Kill two to save one? Does matter who the people involved are? Anti-Kantian philosophies don't have good consistent answers to this -- at least they don't live according to their philosophical answers.
perl4ever 8y ago
I don't think people grow out of the need to follow moral rules as much as you imply. Sooner or later, there comes a time when it is overwhelmingly in a person's interest to lie (or some other transgression). If they are purely rational, they will do it. If they think deeply about morality, they will rationalize why it is right to do what is in their interest. The point of inculcating honesty and other virtues is so one is habituated to the point that dishonesty is preempted when it really counts. Reasoned moral judgement is not an unmitigated good, because it opens the way for bias and hinders the operation of trust needed for relationships.

olliej 8y ago

They bank (much like sales people) on human nature making you feel bad when they’re screwing you. It’s like the squares/grid stuff used by car salespeople to get you to get a car loan instead of buying the car with cash.

welly 8y ago

No more guilty than corporations feel for making customers jump through hoops just to cancel a service they no longer need or want. You can take that as "not at all guilty".

otakucode 8y ago

"Make game of that which makes as much of thee." They are playing you, manipulating you, and not dealing with you as a person. They are treating you like a factor to be optimized and played with. It is entirely a moral response to respond in kind and out-play them.