Does lying violate the no harm principle?
Does lying violate the no harm principle?
Hi all,
I will propose no it doesn't. The transmission of information in no way damages the cells of another being.
Naturally I want responses.
But if I am right then does that mean that the no harm principle is insufficient because it cannot cover lying.
I will propose no it doesn't. The transmission of information in no way damages the cells of another being.
Naturally I want responses.
But if I am right then does that mean that the no harm principle is insufficient because it cannot cover lying.
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
It depends how you qualify "harm" and "consequence".
If you mean by "harm" just the physical damage to an organism and are limiting impact of lying to just immediate and direct consequences then your proposition is probably true, but I personally would not interpret harm or consequence in this way.
If you mean by "harm" just the physical damage to an organism and are limiting impact of lying to just immediate and direct consequences then your proposition is probably true, but I personally would not interpret harm or consequence in this way.
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
MGL wrote:It depends how you qualify "harm" and "consequence".
If you mean by "harm" just the physical damage to an organism and are limiting impact of lying to just immediate and direct consequences then your proposition is probably true, but I personally would not interpret harm or consequence in this way.
Who give a shit about silly questions about humans lying.
I mean where have you been.
The entire world is based on a god damn lie.
Politicians ,salesmen and bitches.
People lie - get over it.
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
I guess you must be lying then.a Shark wrote:
Who give a shit about silly questions about humans lying.
I mean where have you been.
The entire world is based on a god damn lie.
Politicians ,salesmen and bitches.
People lie - get over it.
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
Great - what is your definition?MGL wrote:It depends how you qualify "harm" and "consequence".
If you mean by "harm" just the physical damage to an organism and are limiting impact of lying to just immediate and direct consequences then your proposition is probably true, but I personally would not interpret harm or consequence in this way.
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
I understand harm to be pain & suffering or the reduction of an organism's ability or opportunity to thrive and an action ( such as lying ) causes harm if any of its ultimate consequences do.
- Bill Wiltrack
- Posts: 5468
- Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:52 pm
- Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Contact:
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
.
Human beings are lying animals.
We cannot tell the truth.
All thoughts, all words. are an estrangement of reality. A lie.
Could you tell me about the no harm principle?
Are you actually referring to the harm principle?
Can you understand that something that is not a lie can be completely harmful?
.
Human beings are lying animals.
We cannot tell the truth.
All thoughts, all words. are an estrangement of reality. A lie.
Could you tell me about the no harm principle?
Are you actually referring to the harm principle?
Can you understand that something that is not a lie can be completely harmful?
.
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
You really want to get a life mate because that question is pathetic .MGL wrote:I guess you must be lying then.a Shark wrote:
Who give a shit about silly questions about humans lying.
I mean where have you been.
The entire world is based on a god damn lie.
Politicians ,salesmen and bitches.
People lie - get over it.
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
To get a life, I suppose I should troll through a philosophy website, insult people for considering philosophical questions, then use patronising, abusive language that has the level of articulation commensurable with an outraged baboon. This, presumably, is not pathetic.a Shark wrote:
You really want to get a life mate because that question is pathetic .
- Bill Wiltrack
- Posts: 5468
- Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:52 pm
- Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Contact:
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
.
.....................................................
.......................................Well done...
...no harm.
.
.....................................................
.......................................Well done...
...no harm.
.
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
Sorry to burst your delusional bubble , that you have linguistic skills ,superior to mine ,but that idea is hilarious ,particularly given that loquacious sentence .MGL wrote:To get a life, I suppose I should troll through a philosophy website, insult people for considering philosophical questions, then use patronising, abusive language that has the level of articulation commensurable with an outraged baboon. This, presumably, is not pathetic.a Shark wrote:
You really want to get a life mate because that question is pathetic .
Your question on this is crass and stupid. Wake up you dumb fucker . The world
is transparently a place where people lie.
- Bill Wiltrack
- Posts: 5468
- Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:52 pm
- Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Contact:
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
.
................................................................................................
Point well taken.
I think both of you defended your positions in a philosophical and courteous way. Well done.
That type of dignified discussion has been uncharacteristically rare here of late.
Thank you for renewing my faith in the Philosophy Now Forum memberships' abilities.
.
................................................................................................
Point well taken.
I think both of you defended your positions in a philosophical and courteous way. Well done.
That type of dignified discussion has been uncharacteristically rare here of late.
Thank you for renewing my faith in the Philosophy Now Forum memberships' abilities.
.
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
To be honest, who is the most BANAL poster, on this forum ?Thank you for renewing my faith[/b] in the Philosophy Now Forum memberships' abilities.
Yes ,it is one Bill Wiltrack with his asinine puerile videos .
- Bill Wiltrack
- Posts: 5468
- Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:52 pm
- Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Contact:
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
.
.............................................................
Thank you for renewing my faith in the Philosophy Now Forum memberships' abilities.
...yeah, you just stand there... I'll do the heavy lifting.
.
.............................................................
Thank you for renewing my faith in the Philosophy Now Forum memberships' abilities.
...yeah, you just stand there... I'll do the heavy lifting.
.
- SpheresOfBalance
- Posts: 5688
- Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
- Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis
Re: Does lying violate the no harm principle?
OK, you ask me, is there a man eating shark at the PNF and I say no, then no problem, as it's actually a minnow, but if you ask me if there are man eating sharks in the pacific ocean, not to far off the coast, well now if you jump in because of what I said (can you say Great White), well I see harm a plenty. A lie can lead to harm, here if you don't believe me, take this gun and put it to your head, and then pull the trigger, don't worry it's not loaded....Wootah wrote:Hi all,
I will propose no it doesn't. The transmission of information in no way damages the cells of another being.
Naturally I want responses.
But if I am right then does that mean that the no harm principle is insufficient because it cannot cover lying.
Can one then say that one has done harm in the above cases? I think so. One could also harm one mentally, with a lie.
I for one agree with the following definition of harm.
harm [hahrm] noun
1. physical injury or mental damage; hurt: to do him bodily harm.
2. moral injury; evil; wrong.
As long as the lie is intended to do harm, then I see that it is definitely harm. Of course if the lie harms unintentionally, well I guess it can be considered a gray area. But I see that caution must be observed if one cares and sees potential for harm to be done as a result of a lie.