Random question:

[conuly]

If you randomly make something up to settle an argument or to get your way, and by sheer chance you happen to be correct, does it still constitute lying?

Like, consider all those signs swearing that the only reason you cannot wear shoes in this store is because of the big mean health department. The health department doesn't actually care, and the store owners don't have any clue whether it cares or not, they just want a way to back up what is really an arbitrary dress code. (Which is fine, they can have as many rules as they like in their own establishment.) But what if, by coincidence, they happened to be in the one tiny municipality that happened to have that rule? Even though they really ought to have known that they didn't know the law, is it still a lie if it's accidentally true?

Comments

[steorra]

I believe that is something that I have heard another name for...

[mc776]

I'm inclined to say yes though steorra's assessment is more accurate.

If it were a criminal offence we'd at least have an attempt.

In a normal setting, it makes no sense not to start with the presumption that the health department will micromanage any specific act of a customer entering the store, and on a balance I would say the owner knew or ought to have known that there was no such requirement. So by trying to convince others that such a thing does exist, it's deceitful and misleading and thus a lie.

[rachelkachel]

I think lying is more about intent than actual truthfulness. If you tell somebody something that's not true, but you thought it was, that's not lying, that's just being wrong. If you tell someone something you don't believe, but it happens to be true, I think that counts as a lie.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

That's what I think, too.

The museum I used to work with has - as part of their exhibition - a children's museum which focuses on different rites of passage for children and teenagers. Among many other things, there is a mask from Sierra Leone, worn by girls initiated into a specific secret society. When you ask the museum why they're using this mask, from this country, to represent African traditional secret societies in general, they will say something along the lines of "It neatly illustrates some typical features of these masked societies, but it is also different from the norm in that this is one of the rare women's societies, most of them are for men. So it's both typical and atypical, all in one object."
If you ask the same question behind the scenes, the answer will be "Because we happened to have this mask from Sierra Leone lying around in the cellar."

Factually, the statement about the mask being both typical and atypical is true. But as they only made that up because you can hardly write "We used this one so we didn't have to buy or borrow something new" in the catalogue, it's still a lie, or at the very least, an excuse.
[/long random story]

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

I agree.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's necessarily arbitrary, even if the Health Department has no such rule. It's probably the insurance lawyers who insist on shoes being worn so that nobody can sue the store because they stepped on a nail or something.

For sure, it's possible to lie and be wrong simultaneously. If one thinks the capitol of Ohio is Cleveland, but says it's Columbus, one is lying - trying to deceive somebody - and one is also wrong, even though what one actually says is true and accurate.

[conuly]

Interesting. I've yet to find the store that issues us all work boots upon entering in case something drops on our toes, nor insists that patrons wear helmets (in case you slip) and protective gloves (because you might slam your fingers in a door or cut them on the edge of a shelf or in a bookstore, on some paper), nor disallows people from picking their own produce because that is how germs spread.

Surely insurance companies could regulate all those as well under dubious safety grounds, but I don't see that.