• HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    No. Otherwise everyone lies constantly by not telling everyone everything they are aware of at all times. Granted I met some people that would be pretty honesty by that metric. And everyone wants to get away from them.

  • 「黃家駒 Wong Ka Kui」@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Reminds me of Wheel of Time

    Something like “shall speak no word that which is not true” is one of the 3 oaths… but they can still deceive without technically lying…

  • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I think it depends on the context. If it’s like a close friend and the deception screws you over and was an unexpected betrayal, then it’s basically a lie. If there’s some reason someone might suck at a job and they don’t mention it in the interview and were not asked, that’s different because it’s an adversarial situation and looking out for yourself means not showing all your cards, and everyone should understand that it’s like that.

    • Reygle@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Hrm. I can see that point of view, but reeeeeaaaaly still feels like a lie to me. Thanks

  • Kommeavsted@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    If the person lying by omission has the intent of causing the recipient to have false understanding (e.g. to provide basis for a choice) then it’s at least as dishonest as a blatant lie.

    If they omit information because they think it’s irrelevant then it’s just ignorance or negligence. Dishonest in the sense that it’s not forthright.

    Neither lies nor omission are inherently unethical without some basis for the relation between the two people being honesty/loyalty.

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    The core of dishonesty is disrespect for others and the truth. That’s the core issue. Focusing on the method of prevarication is academic.

  • cattywampas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    A lie is based on intent. If you’re purposely intending to mislead someone, whether by omitting information or by outright stating false information, then it’s a lie.

  • Sarah Valentine (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    I wouldn’t consider it in a vacuum. I also look at intent and consequences. Did they omit info to gain advantage over others, or were they refusing to tell a Nazi where they hid the jews? Did their choice lead to a better outcome for everyone, or did it cause chaos and disrupt lives needlessly?

    Everyone going “duh it’s still a lie” - calling someone a liar carries a specific connotation which I don’t think applies in all cases of so-called “lies”. To me, a lie carries with it not just an intentional falsehood but an accusation or an accusable misdeed. I wouldn’t call someone a liar because they hid jews from nazis.

    • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Pretty sure not telling the nazi is still a lie. But an example of when it is ethical to lie.

    • SaltSong@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      You are either answering the wrong question, or are defining a lie based on some criteria I don’t recognize.

      Telling a Nazi there are no Jews in my basement is a lie. The only way it’s not a lie is if there are, in fact, no Jews in my basement. But it is not wrong to lie to a Nazi.

    • charokol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 hours ago

      A lie is still a lie, even if it’s told to a Nazi or if there’s an otherwise good outcome

    • rynn@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Your point highlights the fact that lies are a tool. The intentional omission is a lie.

      Judgment about the tool’s use is subjective.

      Everyone uses this tool. Calling someone a liar is either calling them a human or it means you’re saying they use the tool more than they should which is yet another subjective judgment.

        • rynn@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I agree, and it’s hard to educate because people don’t want to admit to using this tool at all.

          Doesn’t change the fact that it is a tool and its use is subject to judgment.

  • YoFrodo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Omission can be a lie as long as the intent is to deceive. Thats an important element to making something a lie