A lie involves the use of conventional truthbearers (i.e., statements made by words or symbols) and not natural signs. Intentional deception involving natural signs, such as wearing a wig, shamming a limp, or wearing a fake arm cast, is not usually classed as "lying", but as "deception".
A true statement may be presented as a lie. If relevant deceptive intentions are present to make the statement appear false even though the statement is true, then this is an example of lying. However, if one who makes the true statement genuinely believes it to be false, this is rather a genuine "mistake" and must not be confused with lying. When a person lies they necessarily intend to be untruthful, but they are not necessarily making a false statement.
A lie-to-children is an expression that describes a lie told to make an adult subject, such as sex, acceptable to children. The most common example, though not currently in widespread use, is "The stork brought you."
A white lie is a lie which is believed harmless or innocuous, or in is accordance with the conventions of the culture. A common example of a white lie is, "You look marvelous."
Lying by omission means allowing another to believe something that one knows is false, by failing to reveal the truth, rather than by stating an untruth.
Perjury is the legal term for the offence of lying under oath, for example in court or in an affidavit. It is normally restricted to lies that are also false statements.
Each of these philosophers gave several arguments against lying, all compatible with each other. Among the more important arguments are:
(1) Lying is a perversion of the natural faculty of speech, the natural end of which is to communicate the thoughts of the speaker.
(2) When one lies, one undermines trust in society.
(3) When one lies, one uses the humanity of another person as a mere means to one's end -- one bypasses the person's rationality and in effect makes a decision for the other person, instead of allowing the other person to use her/his own rationality and make her/his own decision.
(4) When one lies, one uses humanity in oneself as a mere means to one's ends.
Some philosophers have argued that lying is not prohibited in certain circumstances, such as when telling a lie will save an innocent life. They have in mind here such circumstances as lying to Nazis in WWII that there are no Jewish children in one's house. Some philosophers have also argued that paternalistic lying, or lying for the good of those lied to, is justified, even if it violates their autonomy. They have in mind here a case such as that of lying to someone who is terminally ill that he is not terminally ill.
Schopenhauer, in On the Basis of Morality, §17, asserted that lying is permissible at times. He cited the case of Jesus Christ telling a lie in .
Although the Bible commands, “Do not lie to one another” (Leviticus 19:11; Colossians 3:9), it also contains accounts that appear to condone lying, e.g.,
While some see these examples as support for the idea that lying can be justifiable as the lesser of two evils (see above section), others (Davids et al 1996) disagree, arguing that the correct Biblical response is to pray that God will provide a way to avoid the greater evil without lying.
As indicated in the previous section, Jesus Christ lied in .
Frankfurt acknowledges that "humbug", as discussed in Max Black's "The Prevalence of Humbug" (1985), is close in meaning to bullshit.
Augustine divides lies into eight kinds: lies in religious teaching; lies that harm others and help no one; lies that harm others and help someone; lies told for the pleasure of lying; lies told to "please others in smooth discourse"; lies that harm no one and that help someone; lies that harm no one and that save someone's life; and lies that harm no one and that save someone's "purity". Importantly, however, Augustine holds that "jocose lies" are not, in fact, lies.
Thomas Aquinas divides lies into three kinds: the useful, the humorous and the malicious. All are sinful according to Aquinas. Humorous and useful lies, however, are venial sins. Malicious lies are mortal sins.
Young children learn from experience that stating an untruth can avoid punishment for misdeeds, before they develop the theory of mind necessary to understand why it works. In this stage of development, children will sometimes tell fantastic and unbelievable lies, because they lack the conceptual framework to judge whether a statement is believable or even to understand the concept of believability.
When children first learn how lying works, they lack the moral understanding to refrain from doing it. It takes years of watching people lie and the results of lies to develop a proper understanding. Propensity to lie varies greatly between children, some doing so habitually and others being habitually honest. Habits in this regard are likely to change into early adulthood.
Some view children as on the whole more prone to lie than adults. Others argue that the amount of lying stays the same, but adults lie about different things. Certainly adult lying tends to be more sophisticated. A lot of this judgment depends on whether one counts tactful untruths, social insincerity, political rhetoric, and other standard adult behaviors as lying.
Elementary explanations tend to be simple, concise, or simply "wrong"—but in a way that attempts to make the lesson more understandable. (Sometimes the lesson can be qualified, for example by claiming "this isn't technically true, but it's easier to understand.") In retrospect the first explanation may be easy to understand for its inaccuracies, but it will be replaced with a more sophisticated explanation which is closer to "the truth". This "tender introduction" concept is an important aspect of education. Such statements are not usually intended as deceptions, and may, in fact, be true to a first approximation or within certain contexts.
Are they lies—or are they merely exaggerations, misleading statements, mistakes, rhetorical excesses and so on? Linguists study such matters. The most startling finding is that, in considering whether a statement is a lie, the least important consideration for most people is whether it is true! The more important considerations are, Did he believe it? Did he intend to deceive? Was he trying to gain some advantage or to harm someone else? Is it a serious matter, or a trivial one? Is it "just" a matter of political rhetoric? Most people will grant that, even if the statement happened to be false, if he believed it, wasn't trying to deceive, and was not trying to gain advantage or harm any one, then there was no lie. If it was a lie in the service of a good cause, then it was a white lie. If it was based on faulty information, then it was an honest mistake. If it was just there for emphasis, then it was an exaggeration. Lakoff (2004) p. 76.
More recently, neuroscientists have found that lying activates completely different brain structures during MRI scans, which may lead to a more accurate (if impractical) method of lie detection. Brain fingerprinting is a related way of using the brain to determine if a person is telling the truth.
In "Human, All Too Human" philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche suggested that those who refrain from lying may do so only because of the difficulty involved in maintaining the lie. This is consistent with his general philosophy that divides or ranks people according to strength and ability. Thus some people tell the truth only out of weakness.
While most human societies have developed moral, ethical or religious codes prohibiting lying it would appear that other animals on this planet engage in lying quite regularly, and that the lie has been the result of and promoted by all the usual evolutionary forces. Specifically, predation often employs lying, as does avoidance of predation. A predator is lying if in the process of acquiring prey it conceals its location, uses camouflage capabilities of its skin and appendages, or dangles an appendage as a bait. A prey is lying if it uses camoflage to conceal itself or make it seem to be larger than it is or seem to be another species that is poisonous or distasteful to the predator(compare vicory butterfly, to, monarch butterfly).
Such capabilities to lie likely developed very gradually during evolution and likely began as very small changes in the appearance or behavior of some organisms. As the changes brought advantage to the organism it may therefore have increased in number due to that advantage, and due to continued pressure from a predator or scarcity of prey the advantage locked in and became a trait of that creature.
This incorporation of the lie into schemes of evolutionary advantage is a concept treated in the study of Game Theory of Evolution. Game Theory of Evolution assumes that creatures are often in resource conflict or in predator/prey realtionships with each other and develop strategies for advantage gain or loss reduction. These strategies may or may not be the result of some reasoning capabilities of the creature. In some cases the environment interacting with the way a creature has evolved so far creates the strategies for the creature without it needing any reasoning faculties. In other cases, there may be a combination of some reasoning and some environmentally formed lying abilities. The crocodile seems to know that if it drifts slowly, like a log, towards a wildebeast drinking at the edge of the river the wildebeast will not be alarmed and run away. The crocodile both resembles a log, having been shaped that way by evolutionary forces, and has some reasoning faculties.
Over eons this ability to lie became built into and a natural part of many species. Humans have used the word "cunning" to represent this ability in the non-human animal world, and then when the word "cunning" is applied to a human it is meant to connote sub-human behavior.
Sub-human behavior is of course just a value judgement. The case remains that lying is likely a natural, normal behavior for homo sapiens. People lie to attain advantage or to escape loss. This is no different from being a predator or a prey.
Lie-to-children:
Core issues in ethics | Deception | Educational philosophy
Lež | Løgn | Lüge | Ψέμα | Mentira | Mensogo | Mensonge | Bohong | Melas | Hazugság | Leugen | 嘘 | Løgn | Mentira | Ложь | Lögn