The intent matters. Did you omit something on purpose to serve your own agenda/narrative or did you omit something for some other reason.
If you’re omitting something to serve yourself it’s a lie.
I’d say it’s technically a lie: an intentional misleading. Paltering is its close cousin.
yin-lies & yang-lies are on the same spectrum, but at different ends of it.
It isn’t a binary/dichotomy.
_ /\ _
Depends. Intentionally omitting information in order to mislead? That’s a lie. Simply not mentioning something? Or not mentioning it because it’s embarrassing for you or someone else, because you didn’t think it was relevant, or because it’s not their business or not your business to share? Not really a lie. Not in the same way anyway.
Disagree
All lies are deceptions, but not all deceptions are lies
Lies are specific acts that are done, not acting is in itself not an act
Conservation of energy cannot be called an expenditure of energy
When people call something a “lie by omission” it’s an attempt to shift the blame wholly to the other person rather than deal with the fact that part of the blame belongs to themselves
My silence was not a lie; you guessed about reality, and I just didn’t correct you
You can still use it as a basis for future distrust and you can still use it as a reason to cut off or minimize future encounters
But it is not and should not be considered a malicious action against you as you would a lie
The his just feels like mental gymnastics to me
You can absolutely fail to disabuse people of incorrect notions for malicious reasons.
I would disagree that omission is not malicious; the intent of the omitter can be any reason. Perhaps not malicious in every case, but it could be as ill-meaning as any lie.
It really depends on context.
A lie is based on intent. If you’re purposely intending to mislead someone, whether by omitting information or by outright stating false information, then it’s a lie.
according to my exes it the intent was for us to be together.
Disagree. It’s deceptive, but not a lie. A lie is a deliberately false statement, which omission cannot be.
A deception is a lie though, they’re synonyms.
That’s not totally true. Usually a lie by omission is implying something, and that something isn’t true. It is deliberately instilling a sense of false knowledge. You didn’t specifically say it, but you still conveyed it. It’s still a lie.
Saying something sarcastic is not the same as saying it non-sarcastically, for example. What is conveyed is what’s important, not what is said.
It is deception, it is not a lie. Not all deception is lying.
I like this, it helps a lot
All lies are deceptions, but not all deceptions are lies
My silence was not a lie; you guessed about reality, and I just didn’t correct you
I wouldn’t consider it in a vacuum. I also look at intent and consequences. Did they omit info to gain advantage over others, or were they refusing to tell a Nazi where they hid the jews? Did their choice lead to a better outcome for everyone, or did it cause chaos and disrupt lives needlessly?
Everyone going “duh it’s still a lie” - calling someone a liar carries a specific connotation which I don’t think applies in all cases of so-called “lies”. To me, a lie carries with it not just an intentional falsehood but an accusation or an accusable misdeed. I wouldn’t call someone a liar because they hid jews from nazis.
Pretty sure not telling the nazi is still a lie. But an example of when it is ethical to lie.
You are either answering the wrong question, or are defining a lie based on some criteria I don’t recognize.
Telling a Nazi there are no Jews in my basement is a lie. The only way it’s not a lie is if there are, in fact, no Jews in my basement. But it is not wrong to lie to a Nazi.
A lie is still a lie, even if it’s told to a Nazi or if there’s an otherwise good outcome
Your point highlights the fact that lies are a tool. The intentional omission is a lie.
Judgment about the tool’s use is subjective.
Everyone uses this tool. Calling someone a liar is either calling them a human or it means you’re saying they use the tool more than they should which is yet another subjective judgment.
An interesting take, but not one that can be leaned on to navigate daily life as it doesn’t reflect an understanding of how most people wield the label of “liar”.
I agree, and it’s hard to educate because people don’t want to admit to using this tool at all.
Doesn’t change the fact that it is a tool and its use is subject to judgment.
Ooh I like that perspective.
Omission can be a lie as long as the intent is to deceive. Thats an important element to making something a lie
I run into this with my wife because we put different importance on different information, and I tend to go for succinct rather than take an hour to get something across.
I think the issue with this situation is often one person assuming they know what’s important and what’s not instead of letting the other person decide for themselves once they’re given the full info, it’s why omissions are often considered lies.
If Jean-Luc Picard says it’s so, it’s so.
Completely serious - I often use WWJLPD to inform a decision I have to make.
Jean-Luc Piucard demands you make it so
the crucial element of a lie is intention to decieve, either by ommission or commission
I think omission can be used for misleading/deception, but that it’s distinct from a lie.
If the person lying by omission has the intent of causing the recipient to have false understanding (e.g. to provide basis for a choice) then it’s at least as dishonest as a blatant lie.
If they omit information because they think it’s irrelevant then it’s just ignorance or negligence. Dishonest in the sense that it’s not forthright.
Neither lies nor omission are inherently unethical without some basis for the relation between the two people being honesty/loyalty.
Reminds me of Wheel of Time
Something like “shall speak no word that which is not true” is one of the 3 oaths… but they can still deceive without technically lying…
Your dress is green.
There is no Black Ajah.
