4 ms·

> There is nothing civilized about failing to point out that the claim "he took more pictures" is a lie. Was it? Or did she misunderstand his need to justify h

by chc 14y ago

> There is nothing civilized about failing to point out that the claim "he took more pictures" is a lie. Was it? Or did she misunderstand his need to justify himself as a way of indicating that he did not intend to stop? You assume she lied -- probably because that's what you are most comfortable believing -- but it's not necessarily true. People make false claims all the time that they really, genuinely believe to be the truth. Based on the scant evidence as we have, your accusation toward the flight attendant could even be an example of the same thing she did -- automatically assuming the worst of someone.

PavlovsCat 14y ago
If she assumes him possibly indicating intent to not stop to be actually taking pictures, then maybe you're right, she didn't lie... because as Chomsky pointed out in a talk I saw recently, the accusation of lying implies the capacity to tell the truth, which requires a level of mental processing out of the reach of the FA... so as you can see, at least for me saying she lied is the kindest one of all available options.
lusr 14y ago
Perhaps this is just my opinion, but if you make a statement that you don't know to be true and assert it as a true statement, you have lied.
- lutusp 14y ago
  > Perhaps this is just my opinion, but if you make a statement that you don't know to be true and assert it as a true statement, you have lied. No, this is not correct. If the speaker doesn't know that a statement is false, the statement is not a lie. Lying requires knowledge that the remark is false and must include an intent to deceive. ---------------------------------------- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie Quote: "To lie is to deliver a false statement to another person which the speaking person knows is not the whole truth, intentionally." http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Lie http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Lie Quote: "1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood. 2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression." ---------------------------------------- See the role of knowledge and intent?
  - jules 14y ago
    While lying requires intent, it does not require knowledge that the statement is false. If I say "lutusp killed JFK" then that is a lie, even though I do not know that it is false. It is a lie exactly because I do not know it to be true. Something can be a lie if it is true! Suppose the FA said "he took more pictures" without having seen him taking more pictures, with the intent to deceive the captain to get this guy off the plane. That is a lie even if he did take more pictures, because the FA does not know it to be true.
    - lutusp 14y ago
      > While lying requires intent, it does not require knowledge that the statement is false. Yes, it requires both -- both knowledge that the statement is false, and an intent to deceive. Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie Quote: "Lie : noun : 1 : a : an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive" Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/lie[noun] http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/lie[noun] Quote: "Lie : noun : a statement known by its maker to be untrue and made in order to deceive <he wanted to deny the accusation, but he couldn't tell a lie>" Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie Quote: "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood." Here's how this works. If you have an idea about how a word is defined that conflicts with another's claim, before objecting, look up the word. EDIT: also, think for a minute about your claim: > While lying requires intent, it does not require knowledge that the statement is false. How can a person be said to have an intent to deceive if he isn't aware that his remark is false? How does he form an intent to deceive using a statement he believes to be true?
      - jules 14y ago
        Because, when we say "he took more pictures" we really mean: "to my knowledge, he took more pictures". Just think that you are the FA, and you know that you didn't see the guy take extra pictures, but you want to get him off the flight, and you say "he took more pictures". That would feel like lying, even though it is possible that he took more pictures when you were not looking. You are also selectively quoting from the dictionaries. E.g. from the merriam-webster dictionary you only quoted meaning 1 a. The other meanings clearly contradict what you claim. 1 : a : an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive b : an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker 2 : something that misleads or deceives 3 : a charge of lying (see 3 lie) By this definition, selective quoting qualifies as a lie (meaning 2: something that misleads or deceives). This definition also shows that intent is not even necessary. As written, something that is both true and thought by the speaker to be true and said without intent to mislead can still be a lie if it is misleading the listener. I'm not sure if I agree with this definition, but that's what it says.
- xyzzy123 14y ago
  So by this definition, the OP is a liar because he accused the FA of being intentionally deceptive? I assume he can't read her mind. Anyway, this is all a bit too meta. It sounds like a huge misunderstanding and an awkward and somewhat confrontational social situation to me.
- chc 14y ago
  This definition would seem to make it impossible to be mistaken without lying. If you're wrong, the thing you said isn't true, so it's a lie. That hardly seems like a reasonable definition. I would bet that you say things all the time that you do not know with 100% certainty but which seem likely enough than you assume them to be true. I have never met someone who does not. For example, have you ever told somebody that you were meeting somebody else when you were not looking right at them as you prepared to sit down for the meeting? What you actually mean is that you believe you will meet them based on your understanding of a conversation you had. You could have heard the wrong day, they could be right about to cancel, your car could break down — you get the idea.

by chc 14y ago

PavlovsCat 14y ago

If she assumes him possibly indicating intent to not stop to be actually taking pictures, then maybe you're right, she didn't lie... because as Chomsky pointed out in a talk I saw recently, the accusation of lying implies the capacity to tell the truth, which requires a level of mental processing out of the reach of the FA... so as you can see, at least for me saying she lied is the kindest one of all available options.

lusr 14y ago

Perhaps this is just my opinion, but if you make a statement that you don't know to be true and assert it as a true statement, you have lied.

lutusp 14y ago
> Perhaps this is just my opinion, but if you make a statement that you don't know to be true and assert it as a true statement, you have lied. No, this is not correct. If the speaker doesn't know that a statement is false, the statement is not a lie. Lying requires knowledge that the remark is false and must include an intent to deceive. ---------------------------------------- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie Quote: "To lie is to deliver a false statement to another person which the speaking person knows is not the whole truth, intentionally." http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Lie http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Lie Quote: "1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood. 2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression." ---------------------------------------- See the role of knowledge and intent?
- jules 14y ago
  While lying requires intent, it does not require knowledge that the statement is false. If I say "lutusp killed JFK" then that is a lie, even though I do not know that it is false. It is a lie exactly because I do not know it to be true. Something can be a lie if it is true! Suppose the FA said "he took more pictures" without having seen him taking more pictures, with the intent to deceive the captain to get this guy off the plane. That is a lie even if he did take more pictures, because the FA does not know it to be true.
  - lutusp 14y ago
    > While lying requires intent, it does not require knowledge that the statement is false. Yes, it requires both -- both knowledge that the statement is false, and an intent to deceive. Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie Quote: "Lie : noun : 1 : a : an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive" Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/lie[noun] http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/lie[noun] Quote: "Lie : noun : a statement known by its maker to be untrue and made in order to deceive <he wanted to deny the accusation, but he couldn't tell a lie>" Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie Quote: "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood." Here's how this works. If you have an idea about how a word is defined that conflicts with another's claim, before objecting, look up the word. EDIT: also, think for a minute about your claim: > While lying requires intent, it does not require knowledge that the statement is false. How can a person be said to have an intent to deceive if he isn't aware that his remark is false? How does he form an intent to deceive using a statement he believes to be true?
    - jules 14y ago
      Because, when we say "he took more pictures" we really mean: "to my knowledge, he took more pictures". Just think that you are the FA, and you know that you didn't see the guy take extra pictures, but you want to get him off the flight, and you say "he took more pictures". That would feel like lying, even though it is possible that he took more pictures when you were not looking. You are also selectively quoting from the dictionaries. E.g. from the merriam-webster dictionary you only quoted meaning 1 a. The other meanings clearly contradict what you claim. 1 : a : an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive b : an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker 2 : something that misleads or deceives 3 : a charge of lying (see 3 lie) By this definition, selective quoting qualifies as a lie (meaning 2: something that misleads or deceives). This definition also shows that intent is not even necessary. As written, something that is both true and thought by the speaker to be true and said without intent to mislead can still be a lie if it is misleading the listener. I'm not sure if I agree with this definition, but that's what it says.
xyzzy123 14y ago
So by this definition, the OP is a liar because he accused the FA of being intentionally deceptive? I assume he can't read her mind. Anyway, this is all a bit too meta. It sounds like a huge misunderstanding and an awkward and somewhat confrontational social situation to me.
chc 14y ago
This definition would seem to make it impossible to be mistaken without lying. If you're wrong, the thing you said isn't true, so it's a lie. That hardly seems like a reasonable definition. I would bet that you say things all the time that you do not know with 100% certainty but which seem likely enough than you assume them to be true. I have never met someone who does not. For example, have you ever told somebody that you were meeting somebody else when you were not looking right at them as you prepared to sit down for the meeting? What you actually mean is that you believe you will meet them based on your understanding of a conversation you had. You could have heard the wrong day, they could be right about to cancel, your car could break down — you get the idea.