When you form a belief that is based on wrong information/knowledge then your entire belief is wrong.
When you are told a lie then form a belief based on that lie then you entire belief is a lie and has no truth.
"When you are told a lie then form a belief based on that lie then you entire belief is a lie and has no truth."
Take the story of the Little Red Hen. You know, the one about how nobody would help her plant the seeds, or harvest the wheat, or thresh the wheat, or grind the wheat to flour, or bake the bread. Then there was a loaf of bread and everyone wanted to help her eat it. She said, "No way: you didn't help me make this bread, so you aren't entitled to any of it."
Now, based on the events this story (a fictional one) I can draw the conclusion that if you want to share in the fruits of labor, you ought to participate in the labor.
Is my belief flawed because I base it on a fictional story?
Something that is not truth.
But, you didn't base your conclusion on the events, you based them on the morals of the story. The story itself may be made up, but the value you concluded is not, so the belief is true, even if the story isn't.
That just helps prove that morals can have a true value.
I wouldn't say the belief is a lie but it would be wrong based on an untruth.
Untruth is a lie.
Edit: Thus the belief is a lie, perpetuated based on a lie.
I don't consider an untruth to be a lie, an untruth could be as simple as a mistake.
No. A mistake is not a lie. A mistake is a mistake, an error. A lie is not an error.
It is still a lie. Mistakes are accidents. Perpetuation of a lie is ignorance.
You can only perpetuate a lie by knowing it is a lie, otherwise you are perpetuating the truth as you know and understand it.
And once you are told that you are lying....? Then what?
Then you question your knowledge and understanding, and you question whether or not the person who said you were lying really understands what a lie is.
And, your point being? Before you can question them, without doing anything else, such as leaving the conversation and going to learn more and then coming back to the conversation...then and only then, can you even try to determine whether or not, they were right or wrong, with regards to the subject.
Who or What is "them"?
Again, I have to say you're wrong. As soon as someone calls you a liar you are capable of questioning anything and everything in regard to your knowledge and understanding of not only your beliefs but also of the person who called you a liar. Then, and only then, can you begin a quest to increase your knowledge.
untruth is a lie but if you were not aware of the lie then the belief formed as a result is not a lie. misguided perhaps but since the believer is not the one that originated the lie then they are only misguided.
Not quite, but nice try Ohma. Ignorance is not a justification.
I agree...but there are other forms of deception then outright lying, evasion, euphemism and exaggeration; and the often unconscious forms of deception with no intent to harm or lead astray. such as the disguises, silence and inaction.
A common temptation is to define a lie as a statement that isn’ t true. But things are more complicated than this. Such things are subjective.
Who said; "a person is to be judged as lying or not lying according to the intention in his own mind, not according to the truth or falsity of the statement.”
I would disagree with your last statement, simply because the action of speaking a lie, is the intention to deceive or be dishonest.
Truth isn't subjective. Truth comes and is derived by wisdom.
Therein lies the question. Truth is only an observation of certain person. There is no such thing as an absolute truth, at least not one recognized by all in terms of subjects -such as life after death. Extraterestrial life. etc. tThus there is no such thing as an absolute lie either. Only speculation
Lie is, then, telling someone something different from what YOU believe is true, not necesseraly what IS true without proof...here it is subjective.
Again, not true. That's what you've been told all your life and all you've done is constantly repeated it. Yet, lack wisdom to discern truth. Your usage of life after death? Once you're dead, best believe your dead dear. As for ET/Aliens, best believe the probability is too great to say no there is not. That is wisdom giving truth.
If you tell someone something that is different than what you believe, then you are lying. That is correct, but then again, a belief is only believed true. It is not wisdom discerning truth.
Let's use the colorblind analogy for a moment.
Consider this...suppose the person saying the sky is green is telling the truth and everyone else that has learned the sky is blue through wisdom an knowledge (your words) were actually wrong all along.
Someone had to come up with the word blue and green what if everyone after them were actually the ones who are colorblind?
Would the person saying the sky was green be lying?
It's very simple you can't believe everything people say is the truth...you have to decide for yourself.
That's where wisdom comes into play, so as to discern truth.
Truth is truth.
Are you saying wisdom comes from observation or experience?
Comes from everything, not one thing or another. It's a collective of all knowledge and experience.
What about the things you haven't experienced or observed...this is what I'm trying to get at...and I'm not talking about religion. I know how you feel about that subject.
I mean other things that haven't been experienced but only imagined...can they be discarded simply as lies?
I think the only truth to be derived by wisdom is personal truth and the only other truth would be factual truth - meaning, based on fact and is indisputable. Such as, 2+2=4 is a factual truth. 2.5+2.5 does not equal 4, it equals 5.
Yes there is. My personal truth is, I don't understand your erroneous argument.
There is no error in the argument. Hence, what you believe is a lie you tell yourself so as to feel better about yourself, so as to not let yourself down. It's called "chosen" ignorance.
But, Thank you.
Yes, there is an error in your argument. The statement is wrong. You stated:
When you form a belief that is based on wrong information/knowledge then your entire belief is wrong.
When you are told a lie then form a belief based on that lie then your entire belief is a lie and has no truth.
Your entire belief is not a lie. Your entire belief cannot be a lie until you discover or learn it is, in fact, based on an untruth. At that point your entire belief is no longer the same, therefore, no longer based on an untruth and cannot be called a lie.
If you speak it as truth, it is still a lie. Ignorance is not a justification. The action of speaking and claiming it as truth, makes it a lie.
Cags I am not sure we are even on the same planet on this one.
A person who is color blind may believe that the sky is green based on his erroneous perception of the truth. That does not make him a liar.
Even a color blind person knows the sky is blue and not any other color, simply due to the fact of experience and knowledge accumulated, so as to discern truth. That is why perception is never truth in itself. If a color blind person said that they sky was green, because that is what they perceive it, then it is obvious that they lack knowledge and wisdom to discern truth. Thus, they perpetuate a lie by saying it is a different color than it is actually.
The blind person may perpetuate the lie but they are not a liar due to the fact they were lied to, they were misled, they were given an untruth.
So, you're trying to say, that a color blind person who enters a conversation with a non-color blind person, believing they were told the truth about the sky being green, is now to be considered a liar because they repeat the false information they were given previously, even though they are now asking the other non-color blind person for their opinion on the shade of green the sky really is?
I believe you're wrong! The color blind person is perpetuating a lie, but is not a liar, The color blind person is only mistaken for trusting the person who told him an untruth as fact.
You make no sense. A color blind person would see the sky as green. They wouldn't be told it is green. That is where your argument fails. If they said it was green and said it was truth, then they are lying. Yes!
Now you're just being silly. A Blind person? You're using a sad argument to try to prove your point. A Blind person wouldn't be told that the sky is green. You completely moved the argument from perception of one person to deception of one to another. Therefore, your argument has no basis.
So, I still say, just because one person is told an untruth does not make them a liar for repeating it.
Lying is an intentional wrong. The formal definition is telling an untruth with intent to deceive. Minus the intent to deceive, it's not a lie. It's just a mistake.
Mistakes are accidents without intent. Lying is anything that is untrue. It's an action based on ignorance.
Then you think everytime someone makes a mistake in arithmetic that makes him a liar? People repeat their mistaken opinions. Unless they meant to deceive others, it is not a lie.
That's why we have two different words: untruth and lie. Not every untruth is a lie. Some are completely unintentional.
Mistakes are accidents without intent. Therefore not a lie.
If they claim it as truth, then it is a lie.
Untruth and lie? Untruth comes from religion, not developmental language. Untruth is a word NOT used anymore, except from religious folks.
Some spoken words claims as truth, but are untruth is a lie.
Cagsil, please read your own words....
Ignorance is not justification
A mistake does not equal a lie. A lie, which is done on purpose, cannot possibly be a mistake. Therefore, a person who repeats what they were misled to believe is not a liar.
What is your point?
Mistakes are accident. Please pay attention.
Only if they claim it as truth are they a liar.
Um, please pay attention, Cagsil. If they believe it, they obviously will claim it to be true.
And that would be because of ignorance that they believe a belief is true, when a belief is not truth. Knowing is truth achieved through wisdom.
Knowing is truth?
achieved through wisdom?
Ignorance is a lie?
Not so much.
If a person knows what the real truth is and claims it is something else they are lying. If a person does not know the truth but tells what they believe the truth to be they are not lying.
This conversation is going around in circles. There really is no great mystery here. A person who forms a belief based on their understanding of a situation and then retells that belief is not lying. It may later be discovered that the information was faulty or incorrect but the persons original belief based on the evidence at hand is not a lie. It was what they knew to be the truth based on the facts at that time.
Ohma, you are right of course.But words mean different things to different people.'Lies' ' truth ' 'facts'are words that will always wind people up.
I think that the real problem is not in our individual interpretation of the words but rather a totally differing set of opinions about people and the way they see things.
I believe that Cagsils understanding of life has led him to question things that most of us would not even think about in the course of our daily lives.
Knowing is truth achieved through wisdom
So, now, according to this statement of yours, it seems, you are implying it isn't possible to know truth. This statement tells me Ignorance is Bliss. I don't agree at all.
The action of speaking and claiming an untruth to be a truth is not a lie until it has been called into question by the speaker and at such a time would no longer be able to be considered a lie since it is under question by the speaker.
Above, we have a person who has knowledge - which is truth achieved through wisdom. However, this person is called a liar and questions his knowledge and beliefs, as well as the person who called him a liar (does this second person know what it means to lie?).
Knowing is truth achieved through wisdom
So, according to your statements, when understood together, you are implying that it isn't possible to know truth because A) anytime any one person calls you a liar you must question your beliefs or be known as a liar for the remainder of your life because B) if 1 person calls you a liar you are obviously living a lie because C) you aren't wise enough to know and understand the truth. D) In other words, Ignorance Is Bliss.
Sorry, can't agree. Still.
IMO things\life is not this cut and dry. A lie happens when someone knowingly perpetuates a falsehood.
The keyword being knowingly.
I believe you to be a well educated and considerate person. From my perspective and from what I know of you this is the truth. If you know otherwise then you are perpetuating a lie, but I am only believing in what I know and see.
I mean, this is generally true on a surface level, but I disagree on a philosophical level.
If someone believes that, say, the earth is round because the goblins in their head showed them a beach ball and said it was the earth, their belief that the earth is round is still correct.
The problem is when someone takes a confirmation of a belief created through incorrect information as a verification of everything else they might hold true. Just because the earth IS in fact round doesn't mean that the everything the goblins tell you is fact.
Their wisdom would allow them to see it as true. Remember, wisdom comes from experience and knowledge accumulated, so as to discern truth.
The belief would still be a lie, not based on truth.
Correct, because wisdom grants the ability to see truth as it really is to be.
Oh, for heaven's sake, two people can disagree about a factual matter without either of them being a liar. For that matter, they could even both be wrong, and still neither need be branded a liar!
It all depends on the strength of our belief.Since we create our reality through observation of information and the brain processes over two million bytes per second and our senses are only capable of twenty five hundred,it seems that what we access and convince our selves to be true requires a commitment then the strength of our belief will bring it into being and make it true.
Two problems with your statement (a) reality is not affected by what one believes or thinks - (b) a belief is not knowing.
A belief is really only an assumption. Knowing is based on wisdom which discerns truth.
the only connection we have with what is outside of us is perception.Since each person perceives subjectively we each experience a different reality.Reality does not exist without being perceived,it is only a field of possibilities until it is experienced.Please prove that there is a reality without using your observational self to do it.In Physics it's known as the measurement problem.If you can solve that...you got Einstein beat cause he,or anyone else couldn't get around it...to this very day.
Belief is a total absence of doubt.Since each of us perceives a different reality each persons belief is just as valid as an-others.The statement can be made that those observations held by the majority comprise reality but that is just the herd mentality at work.Some of the greatest creations of man kind came and come from the minds of people who's reality and beliefs are considered ridiculous....Like when the Wright brothers said"Man can fly through the air"
Cheaptrick, you are confusing consensus with reality. There is but one reality, but it's hard to reach a consensus as to what it is.
Very well put.I apologize for the misdirection of the term.The one ultimate reality you are referring to must contain all possibilities[the scope of which must be staggering if not infinite] and have some sort of focus upon it.I do not believe there are many if any human beings capable of that focus.There is a suspicion among physicists that ultimate relationships at the most basic level are kept constant by some sort of quantum particle[Higgs boson?]or a back ground of intelegence.Sorry...just had to get that off my mind.
Btw ladies, this single conversation is the most fun I've had since I've come to HubPages. Thank you all.
The important thing to understand here is that the truth is absolute, so a mistaken statement is in fact untrue - but not necessarily a lie.
If the truth where as you say absolute there would be no cause fo disagreement of any type.
What one person knows to be the truth based on their experience and education can conflict with what another person knows to be the truth on the same basis. This does not make either of them liars. It means that possibly one or both of them are incorrect but being wrong does not make a person a liar.
The truth is absolute. But people disagree about it all the time, because we are capable of being mistaken. The fact that we may be mistaken at any given moment does not make us liars. It is saying something we believe is untrue with intent to deceive which makes the untrue statement a lie.
There is a difference between a belief and knowing.
There is indeed. The difference is this: when we know something, our belief is true.
Belief is simply thinking that something is true. When we think something is true (i.e. believe it to be true) sometimes we are right and sometimes we are wrong.
Even if we are wrong, and we repeat our mistaken belief to others, this does not make us liars. Liars are those who intend to deceive.
Haven't you ever been mistaken about something, Cagsil?
The only absolute truth in existence is called an indisputable Fact.
Facts can change when compared to other facts, but a fact is still a fact and can be indisputable.
It is a fact 1+1=2. An indisputable fact. An absolute truth.
that is not technically (1+1=2) it is in fact (1+1+x=3) x being the act that created the child.
Sure, if protection is used or other measures are taken. No specifics were involved. However, if not, then equates to 3, guaranteed.
Edit: Then again, it's not talking about a belief. It's talking about a physical act with results.
Right now there are 2 Humans in my home.
One Human (1) in the kitchen + One Human (1) in the bedroom = 2 Humans in the home.
Specifics aren't necessary when we are talking about addition of numbers.
as I pointed out earlier, and you just acknowledged, there is an additional factor in this equation which proves the statement the 1 human + 1 human = 3 humans incorrect.
1 human + 1 human can never = 3 humans without the additional factor.
So we are still waiting for you to disprove that 1+1=2
Of course there would a cause for disagreements, it's called ego.
One is right and the other is wrong.
It makes one of the a liar.
Only if the claim it is truth and it is not.
Cags by your ideology everyone posting here, who are conflict with your opinion are liars because you have given us the knowledge to recognize the truth. Is this really what you intend to be implying?
No, my intention is show how chosen ignorance plays a major factor in people's lives and how unnoticed it is actually.
I am not sure that is any better.
Chosen ignorance because of differing opinions? really?
If i tell three people in three different places to mix red and blue paint together and report the results to me here I will get three different completely truthful answers.
I will be told the first made purple, the second made maroon, and the third made lavender. All of which would be the truth because I did not supply them with instruction in regard to proportion.
No lie involved on anyone's part yet three separate versions of the truth.
The only reason for a differing opinion? I'm not discussing opinion. I'm discussing truth. There is a difference. Not once did I say anything about opinions.
Not separate versions of truth, because each person lacked knowledge or wisdom, with regards to specifications.
Yes, you would have them telling you the truth, because YOU didn't get more specific. It's not a lie.
So now you are saying that because of a lack of information or knowledge it is not a lie. This is what we have been saying all along. Welcome aboard!
You tell someone to mix two things together, of course they are not going to be the same, if each person doesn't have the correct information. Thus, technically you lied to them for a specific purpose, beit, whatever reason. It could be a test or something. It's also not forming a belief, it's producing physical results.
Cags you know I really think you are reaching for this one. I did not lie I gave an instruction on specifically what I wanted them to do. They did not lie they each did as instructed and got varying results.
What a person believes to be truth because of a lack of knowledge is not a lie.
And again, I must point out, you are no longer talking about a belief, you are talking about physical results. Like apples to oranges or did you miss that?
*hand to face*
Regardless of what truth is sought the underlying equation is still the same. Had one of the participant reported that the got yellow they would have obviously been lying. Since all reported results are absolutely possible and still different they are not lies just different versions of the truth.
Don't be silly, Cags, my message is obviously a reply to Ohma's post of 12 minutes prior.
Planes flew perfectly well under Newtonian laws but Einstein proved Newton was wrong.What is truth?
Cagsil, suggest you read some works by the scientific philosopher karl Popper. Your eyes will pop.
Basically, he argues that we should constantly try to test things to destruction. We should subject everything to the falsafiability test.
Later philosophers have argued that we never arrive at the truth. We are constantly being confronted with revolutions in science that further our understanding but are at best the closest we can come to the truth.
sean, I think the truth was the one with the least variables. Some truths have more variables than others making them further from the truth.
Ohma, you cannot use a physical result test, and compare it to forming a belief. They're two separate things.
Hijack. Prob not the tech term.
a man comes to a crossroads. One road leads to heaven and one road to hell. Right or left is his choice. Two people are at the crossroads. One is a mendacian, who always lies , the other is a veracian, who always tells the truth. The man wants to get to heaven. What question can he ask to ensure he goes the way to heaven?
This must be your nightmare religious question cags.It's also a good example of the philosophy and logic behind lies.
To make this simple we formulate beliefs on what is right for us. To further look at this, differing parts of society may disagree......Family, friends, government, etc.
What a person believes is what they think is right. Whether they are right or wrong will depend on whose making the assessment. Even many of society's outside elements will disagree.
Ethics will be a conforming standard that is generally accepted. Law will also define a conforming standard that describes what society demands is right and what is wrong.
Outcomes are the ultimate determiner of right and wrong? ie Had he not run across the railroad tracks he would not have died. What compelled him to do that? It must have been his childhood.
He could have been chased by someone holding a gun. Then was he wrong? Kind of a damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Okay lets get back to the center of the point. What is wrong is going to be different according to the vantage point of the observer. Some acts or thoughts will have society and legal standards that will be defined right or wrong. In these cases generally speaking what a person does is going to be considered wrong.
For the most part, any decision a person makes will be because this person believes what they are doing or thinking is right at that moment. So in this case what the person did or thought was right. Legal as well as societal elements may judge the person differently.
Now when we want others to conform to our standards, this can create a dangerous idea. We can call a person wrong based on anything including sex and race.
The bottom line is that a person and society may view what is right and what is wrong differently. If a person creates a belief, they will do so because they think it is right. So a person does not formulate an belief based on something that is wrong. Society will look at it differently and could actually judge an action of the person as wrong but as a belief being right. This may seem cloudy but the bottom line is right and wrong can be judged by us and tolerance allows us to let the person do what they wish unless it seriously affects us. A person will always be right in their mind however in our mind or others minds they may be wrong.
belief is carried on from one culture to another -- generation to another -- and belief is the absence of solid scientific basis. most belief are not scientific in nature. However in scientific testing, they believe first then test it.
The next question will be, how will you know if the foundation is wrong, what is a wrong foundation?
I don't think I agree with science believing first....science puts forth a theory and tests it. Is a theory believable? Is a theory a belief? I don't think so....I think a theory is a question to be proven.
Hi Rafini, I think that scientists believe first in the last proven premises, then test them, then they proceed to test again -- unless it is their job and they can;t say NO,
Scientists conduct experiments to test "predictions" not beliefs. Those predictions are based on observations or data, not beliefs.
Wouldn't you say, then, that all people believe in the past first and then test it when a new question comes up? Because there would be no point in testing a prior belief unless there were a question regarding it's validity. Right?
Why must we always focus on the word 'wrong'?
Why must we always focus on the 'do nots'?
by quietnessandtrust6 years ago
If you believe a lie for a given period of time and then find out the truth about it and realize you believed a lie all along and all the while called it "your truth"...then how do you know that what you now...
by Ray Choiniere aka Cagsil6 years ago
Hello everyone,I was just in another forum and I've got to tell you this.I have noticed that many people are under the assumption? that their belief system cannot be changed.I find this to be interesting and wanted to...
by Dave Mathews5 years ago
Is lying Wrong? Is lying a sin? Is the ommission of the truth or facts a lie, is it a sin? Are there degrees of lying and sinning, if so where should the line be drawn?
by mischeviousme4 years ago
I could choose any number religions and I'm pretty sure that it would be the right choice, depending on my base belief system and whether or not I'd buy into it. Many men have claimed to know the way and the result was...
by marriedwithdebt4 years ago
So, I generally try to stay away from religious topics, but I just got to thinking after reading an article about people who won't vote for Romney or Huntsman because they are Mormons.Is it really wrong to discriminate...
by just_curious3 years ago
I don't have anything against fundamental Christianity, per se. But I don't understand why none but a very tiny number stand up for the integrity of their faith and the memory of the words of Jesus.When someone posts...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.