It takes more bravery to tell a highly inconvenient truth than a highly risky lie.

My points are as follows: 1. Philosophers who suggest paradigms that a contrary to the dominant belief system are usually publicly destroyed, vilified, banished and in many cases killed. I will be providing a few examples from history. -Socrates -Giordano Bruno -Uriel De Costa -Baruch Spinoza -Nicolaus Copernicus -Galileo -Hypatia In each case these philosophers risked it all to speak the truth. They did so because they believed the truth to be more important than even their own lives. Some fled and hid, trying to make nice with the church, some died, but all were persecuted for speaking a truth that was highly inconvenient to the governing paradigm. They did not take on these risks for profit or personal gain, but for a much loftier and noble reason, they did so in order to further and uplift the whole of human understanding. However. .. .should my opponent wish for a more contemporary example of someone who risked it all in the name of truth, I will offer up: -Bradley Manning -Julian Assange Both of these men face serious legal consequences for their actions, and in the case of Bradley Manning, I would say he sought to gain little for himself personally, his bravery then was solely realized in the aim of a selfless and moral act 2. Telling highly risky lies doesn't require as much bravery because you have only to evade those you lied to, or possibly law enforcement. In fact, recent history clearly shows us that those who tell the biggest and most risky lies of all, do so with impunity and have nothing to fear from law enforcement as the lack of indictment against Wall Street players who brought the world economy to the brink of collapse illustrates. Has any CEO from JP Morgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo or Fannie and Freddie suffered legal consequences? No. This award winning film "Inside Job" explains completely how the biggest financial fraud in the history of the world was perpetrated by men who walk free today: . http://www.sonyclassics.com... 3. In a society that no longer values any universal truth referent the highly risky lie is admired, even exalted. - Fox News - advertising - cosmetic surgery The general public cares little whether a statement is true or false, they only care if something contradicts a comfortable idea they themselves wish to believe. Conclusion: In fact the greatest risk in a society of spectacle and lies, is to the purveyor or truth who represents the single greatest threat to the status quo. Those who illuminate the base structure in a house of cards do so at great risk to themselves, but they do it not for immediate profit or notoriety, but they do so out of concern for the value of truth and the greater good of posterity. Therefore I assert that the decision to speak a highly inconvenient truth requires more bravery, because 1. it is a more noble thing to do, since such an act is rarely motivated by money, it must be motivated by an altruistic concern for others, or the good of society as a whole. AND 2. carries a far greater liability because it threatens not just one person or group, but the very foundational beliefs of an entire society. AND 3. this is particularly true in contemporary global society where mainstream media saturates humanity with lies and suffers very few consequences, if any.