What you don't know, won't hurt you --- it's ok to lie

Having read and digested my opponent's argument I persist with my proposition as stated in the first post. I now turn to my opponent's argument. 1. That lying undermines trust in our society might be, to an extent, true. However, trust is only affected if the person lied to finds out that they have been lied to. Furthermore, even in those situations, that person might still continue to trust the person who has lied to them. This will depend on whether the lie and the reason for it has been sufficiently explained. As stated in my opening argument, we are to look at lying objectively and on the assumption that the person lied to does not find out that what was said to them was a lie. I was not suggesting that it is ok to lie in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES and I have made that very clear from the outset. The circumstances I have referred to were rather narrowly defined. Lies can only undermine trust if they are found out to be lies. The majority of lies are never found out. Furthermore, one can quite easily limit lying to matters that are very unlikely to be found out in any event. The same argument applies to the contention that lies will make a person unpopular. 2. The ramifications of answering the question "Do you like my haircut" with "I do not" can be quite upsetting to the person asking the question. It is accepted and customary that people compliment each other, even if those compliments are somewhat stretched (ie LIES). In the least the person might shrug this off. Or they might feel hurt for the duration of the day. Or they might take great offence and decide that the person who answered the above question truthfully is rude and unpleasant and this might affect their entire relationship. The effect of lying (and telling the person their haircut is nice) would be somebody feeling good about themselves. 3. The example of hiding a friend in the basement should be considered on two levels. a) if telling a lie in this example in fact is likely to increase any risk to our friend's safety then by that very fact that example does not apply to this debate (see Resolution). The scope of this debate is limited to lies that are not intended to and it is not reasonably foreseeable that they will cause harm to another person. If the situation is such that it is reasonably foreseeable that lying to the man with the gun will result in our friend being shot then by that very fact this is not a situation where lying would be ok (as per the resolution) b) I contend that on its merits this is a perfect example where one not only could but in fact SHOULD tell a lie There are two possibilities when we open the door. i) the man is here to show the gun (or something to that effect) to our friend and has no evil intentions If that's the case, lying to the man by telling him that our friend is not in the house will not foreseeably cause any harm to anyone. The man's attitude towards our friend is amicable and the situation will resolve itself once he has an opportunity to find out that we were worried about our friend's safety. It is likely that all three will then go for a beer and have a laugh about the situation. ii) it is more likely (and can be probably ascertained from the man's demeanor) that the man is here to hurt our friend If that's the case, we have two options. (1) tell the truth and say our friend is in the basement. Chances are the man will then enter the basement and hurt our friend, possibly kill him. It is of some relief that my opponent would then feel comforted by the fact that he did not tell a lie. I would not. What the observers of this debate would feel is for them to decide. (2) tell a lie and say our friend is not in the house My opponent then argues that the man could come back and shoot both us and our friend. Yes, that is a definite possibility. I would suggest that a person in this situation should tell that particular lie, lock the door, tell the friend that a man with a gun was looking for him, depending on what the friend says possibly call the police and ask for an immediate deployment of a SWAT team. My advice: DO NOT let gun-wielding maniacs near your friends. I will conclude this section of my argument by the following proposition: In the above scenario, the risks flowing from lying are in fact lesser than the risks of telling the truth. Even if those risks were equal, this would not go to support my opponent's argument. That is because this factual scenario could then (and definitely can now) be used both for and against my opponent's contention that it is unacceptable to lie under any circumstanes. As things stand, however, I submit that the scenario in fact supports my argument. 4. The concept of reasonable foreseeability exists in law as well as in real life. Essentially it means just what it says. It relates to a future event which has a reasonable possibility of taking place. If I tell my girlfriend a lie and say I went to work last night whereas in fact I went for a quick bourbon and coke with my best friend, a reasonably foreseeable result is that she will feel comforted and that I will not get yelled at. If I tell a well known violent criminal that Joe Smith has threatened to break into his house, rape his daughter and kill him a reasonably foreseeable result is that the criminal and a few of his friends will pay Joe Smith a rather unwelcome visit.