jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
If at the moment they promised to never lie, they had some sort of wrong information, thinking that they had some sure fire way they could go through the remainder of life ahead of them without ever lying only to find some incredibly unforeseen situation in which they had no reasonable choice but to lie and therefore intentionally did so, then I'd say they weren't necessarily lying at the moment they made the promise. Lying (prima facie) seems like it would require some sort of awareness or else premeditation (knowledge that one was lying or intending to lie) I would think.
If they told the truth, falsely thinking they were telling a lie, then it seems like that would count as an unsuccessful attempt at "lying". They accidentally told the truth instead.
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
Why 'a child'?
Would the answer to your question be different if the question was about 'an adult'?
And, why do you say, 'and then lie'? If anyone says that they will never tell a lie again is obviously telling either 'a lie', or 'an impossible to know thing'.
It would be like anyone saying, 'i do not lie', they are are obviously, saying 'a lie', at the very moment of saying, or writing, those words.
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
More to the point [mine, for example] what lie in particular? In regard to what particular set of circumstances? In other words, did the child in fact lie or not?
Again, that crucial distinction between believing something is true and being able to demonstrate that, in fact, it is true.
Otherwise, we are dealing with what may well be just more language games. The gaps that pop up over and again between words and worlds in regard to value judgments.
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
If at the moment they promised to never lie, they had some sort of wrong information, thinking that they had some sure fire way they could go through the remainder of life ahead of them without ever lying only to find some incredibly unforeseen situation in which they had no reasonable choice but to lie and therefore intentionally did so, then I'd say they weren't necessarily lying at the moment they made the promise. Lying (prima facie) seems like it would require some sort of awareness or else premeditation (knowledge that one was lying or intending to lie) I would think.
If anyone, as an adult, does not yet have enough 'self'-awareness to know that saying, 'i will never tell lies', is 'a lie', in and of itself, they so be it. But, how far behind in 'growing up', and 'knowing' are they?
Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 9:16 pm
If they told the truth, falsely thinking they were telling a lie, then it seems like that would count as an unsuccessful attempt at "lying". They accidentally told the truth instead.
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
More to the point [mine, for example] what lie in particular? In regard to what particular set of circumstances? In other words, did the child in fact lie or not?
I thought this is, exactly, what "jason lava" is asking here.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 9:43 pm
Again, that crucial distinction between believing something is true and being able to demonstrate that, in fact, it is true.
Well the 'thing' in question here, that is; never lying again, like 'all things' is not just able to be demonstrated 'as true', but are all also very easily and very simply able to be demonstrated 'as true'.
If absolutely anyone cannot demonstrate absolutely any thing 'as true', which they claim, then this just a sure sign of one's beliefs, and/or assumptions, getting in the way of very clear thinking and understanding.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 9:43 pm
Otherwise, we are dealing with what may well be just more language games. The gaps that pop up over and again between words and worlds in regard to value judgments.
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
Of course. In fact, if the child knew full well that he/she was going to lie in the future whilst stating "I will never tell lies again" - they have told TWO lies.
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
A breakdown of the above;
Assuming the child is 10 years old, not 3 years old.
1. "a child were to say that they will never tell lies again"
That is a promise.
2. then, the child lied.
he had told a lie.
In this case, the child had broken a promise and he did tell a lie.
Scenario 2
If a child [10 years old] is aware and knows lying is favorable to him [based on past experiences] and will lie where necessary, then make his promise to not to lie would be a lie.
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
A breakdown of the above;
Assuming the child is 10 years old, not 3 years old.
1. "a child were to say that they will never tell lies again"
That is a promise.
2. then, the child lied.
he had told a lie.
In this case, the child had broken a promise and he did tell a lie.
Scenario 2
If a child [10 years old] is aware and knows lying is favorable to him [based on past experiences] and will lie where necessary, then make his promise to not to lie would be a lie.
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
And if I tell you that I am intellectually dishonest does that make me intellectually honest; or intellectually dishonest?
It's all a variation on liar's paradox and logical undecidability.
Putting it in a box makes no difference once you understand that a promise has been broken in the telling of a lie. Trust has been eroded - however you classify it.
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
And if I tell you that I am intellectually dishonest does that make me intellectually honest; or intellectually dishonest?
It's all a variation on liar's paradox and logical undecidability.
Putting it in a box makes no difference once you understand that a promise has been broken in the telling of a lie. Trust has been eroded - however you classify it.
What is this bullshit of "paradox"?
1 . If the child knew full well that he/she was going to lie in the future whilst stating "I will never tell lies again"
= 1 lie.
2. The child then lies, AGAIN.
= 2 lies.
Thus, definitely 1 lie, possibly 2 lies...is the answer.
Why the f' is everyone complicating something so simple
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
And if I tell you that I am intellectually dishonest does that make me intellectually honest; or intellectually dishonest?
It's all a variation on liar's paradox and logical undecidability.
Putting it in a box makes no difference once you understand that a promise has been broken in the telling of a lie. Trust has been eroded - however you classify it.
What is this bullshit of "paradox"?
1 . If the child knew full well that he/she was going to lie in the future whilst stating "I will never tell lies again"
= 1 lie.
2. The child then lies, AGAIN.
= 2 lies.
Thus, definitely 1 lie, possibly 2 lies...is the answer.
Why the f' is everyone complicating something so simple
Uummm... while many think they know the future, noone "knows" the future, though many guesses about the future end up being correct (which is a different thing).
jasonlava wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2024 8:32 pm
If a child were to say that they will never tell lies again and then lie, would they have told a lie?
And if I tell you that I am intellectually dishonest does that make me intellectually honest; or intellectually dishonest?
It's all a variation on liar's paradox and logical undecidability.
Putting it in a box makes no difference once you understand that a promise has been broken in the telling of a lie. Trust has been eroded - however you classify it.
What is this bullshit of "paradox"?
1 . If the child knew full well that he/she was going to lie in the future whilst stating "I will never tell lies again"
= 1 lie.
2. The child then lies, AGAIN.
= 2 lies.
Thus, definitely 1 lie, possibly 2 lies...is the answer.
Why the f' is everyone complicating something so simple
When and where was it ever stated that the child knew that it would like again.
Obviously no one knows if the child would ever lie again.
Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 2:19 pm
And if I tell you that I am intellectually dishonest does that make me intellectually honest; or intellectually dishonest?
It's all a variation on liar's paradox and logical undecidability.
Putting it in a box makes no difference once you understand that a promise has been broken in the telling of a lie. Trust has been eroded - however you classify it.
What is this bullshit of "paradox"?
1 . IF the child knew full well that he/she was going to lie in the future whilst stating "I will never tell lies again"
= 1 lie.
2. The child then lies, AGAIN.
= 2 lies.
Thus, definitely 1 lie, possibly 2 lies...is the answer.
Why the f' is everyone complicating something so simple
When and where was it ever stated that the child knew that it would like again.
