|TYPES OF LIES
|Page 1 of 1|
|Author:||Catherine [ Sun Mar 25, 2007 6:34 am ]|
|Post subject:||TYPES OF LIES|
Types of Lies
Omission: Leaving out facts that contradict or weaken one's argument.
Exaggeration: Puffing up actual facts in such a way as to distort them, to the point they are no longer facts.
Distortion: Twisting existing facts, statements or arguments in such a way as to obtain a false conclusion.
Fabrication: Manufacturing "facts" out of thin air.
Intentional: Deliberate dishonesty. This is when the liar knows the truth yet chooses to deceive anyway.
Unintentional: This is a bit trickier to define, because it appears subject to debate. I personally believe that an unintentional lie is one in which one makes a statement or an argument in honest error, but having been shown the correct facts refuses to acknowledge those facts, and correct himself.
One may presume that someone said something believing it to be the truth, but once he is shown the actual facts has a choice: he may believe them or not, correct himself or not. If after making a statement or argument in error one persists in standing by it, the mistake becomes a lie. The reasons for this may be summed up thusly: stubborn obstinacy. The person promoting the initial wrongful argument or statement sticks by it not because he necessarily believes the counterargument to be weak or wrong, but because he is simply too stubborn to admit -- even to himself, that he might have been mistaken. I think this attitude may be explained by alluding to Orwell's writing in the book, 1984: "Ignorance is strength."
The liar believes that any admission of error is a sign of fallibility and, therefore, weakness. To be weak is to invite or embrace death or servitude, because in the morally relativistic world view of the liar the Law of the Jungle is the only one that applies; the strong survive and prosper, while the weak perish or survive under the yoke of exploitation by the strong.
Now one can ask how you can determine when a lie is intentional or unintentional; how do you know? By looking at the categories, one can begin to apply the tactics used by liars. The Straw Man falls under the category of distortion and/or exaggeration. An Ad Hominem may fall under any one of the above-listed categories, any combination thereof, or perhaps even one I haven't thought of.
I think by being able to correctly identify and understand deception, we are better able to determine when it comes into play.
THE TRUTH ZONE
I thought this information from the Truth Teller In Chief at the Truth Zone fits well in this particular forum.
|Author:||dee35ann [ Sat Aug 11, 2007 2:54 pm ]|
|Post subject:||Bush Lies|
Listened to Bush on TV yesterday.
In response to a question he said the senate was not appropriating a proper amount of money to see to it our troops in Iraq has the proper equipment to keep them safe.
Who in Washington is responsible for kicking (up to 3 a day) of our tired brave volunteer soldiers out of the service with a so called pre-existing post tramatic brain syndrome condition - taking their benefits from them - billing them for part of their enlistment money to be returned and also billing them for lost equipment?
These soldiers are volunteers - right or wrong ? Yet , have they any control of their lives ? Can they un-volunteer , resign or just plain quit ?
I am asking Pelosky to conduct a full scale investigation into this matter and if she refuses to remove her finger from her behind and honor her constituents I would like to have her resignation tendered so someone with balls can get some things done.
If no one here in the private sector does nothing to come to the defense of our brave young troops then they are fighting the illegal war for the wrong people. Are you getting the message folks????
|Page 1 of 1||All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]|
|Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group