Archive through August 18, 2003
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

TV ClubHouse: ARCHIVES: Big Brother USA 2003 General Discussions Part 1: Do you think you could compete effectively without lies?: Archive through August 18, 2003

Sanfranjoshfan

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 01:35 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Spunky - I see your point about how giving an obscure answer could keep someone from *proving* that you are lying in court.....but a lie is a lie whether you prove it or not...in court or anywhere else . For example, just because OJ was not *proven in court* to have lied to the authorities about murdering his wife.....well, that doesn't mean that he didn't do it! It simply means that they couldn't *prove* that he did it. :)

At any rate, as I recall, last year when Saint Jason played the game, even though he was the most liked and respected BB player of all time (by many)....he still admitted to lying at one point near the end of the game.

I don't think one can effectively play BB without outright lying, lying by ommision, or misleading the other players....all of which are "lies" because they are words designed to mislead and portray a false situation or idea.

edited to add - as for whether I think anyone could compete without lying, I'd have to say it's possible but he or she couldn't win. Even if telling the truth garnered the most respect throughout the entire BB season and even if you got all the way to the end, the most honest and respected player would never be taken to the final 2....*everyone* would know that a liar going up against an honest HG at the end would be a fatal mistake! The only way for Jason to have won last year would have been if he had won the last HOH.

Spunky

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 05:22 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Sanfran...
again, we'll never settle this one...
you say "but a lie is a lie whether you prove it or not".... (forget about murder cases) we are discussing "intentions", someone asking me a direct question, would I do this? and I say "I'm not sure", there is no way in hell you can prove I was sure or not.
So, we just can't win this... I learned with BB that I could be a better diplomat by using this tactic in life as well...and it's working!

But Justin claims he didn't lie in this game, can someone point out when he did lie? I just can't remember an instance where he did.

Sanfranjoshfan

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 05:35 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Spunky - "(forget about murder cases) we are discussing "intentions", someone asking me a direct question, would I do this? and I say "I'm not sure", there is no way in hell you can prove I was sure or not."

If I ask you a question such as "Are you going to nominate me?" in the BB game, and then if you answer "I'm not sure."...that means one of two things:

1. Either you *truly* are "not sure", hence you are telling the truth.

or

2. You actually "ARE sure "(one way or the other) and you are telling me that you are "not sure", in which case you would be *lying*....it wouldn't even matter whether I could ever actually prove it or not! It would still be a "lie".

It sounds like, according to your definition, a lie is not a lie unless it is *proven* to be a lie. I know for a fact that is not the case. I have actually called in sick at work when I actually was NOT sick at all (way back in my irresponsible youth, of course:)) and my boss never proved that I was lying. Heck, I don't know if he ever even *suspected* it! Of course, the bottom line was that it WAS a LIE....I just wanted to take a day off from work and laze around!:)

As for Justin, right offhand, I have no personal recollection of him lying either....

Xarph

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 05:36 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Speaking lof lies....

I hear a lot of people saying that Will lied during his game but it was okay because he said he was going to lie.

I do remember that Will told a lot of lies about his background and life. Many of his stories came directly from various TV shows. He was very clever about creating an interesting and sometimes scary background for himself.

I also remember that Will was very good about getting under some people's skin. He really knew how to push the buttons of Nicole and Hardy and he delighted in doing it.

What I do not remember is Will ever telling lies about the game. He was never really in a position to lie about the game. He never said who he was voting for thus never needed to lie. He was never HOH and thus never has to back to down on a "I will not put you up" promise.

The closest Will ever came was when he promised Hardy that he would not put him the following week if he (Will) got HOH. He made this promise in exchange for Hardy keeping him around when he was HOH. Will did screw Hardy by giving the HOH to Monica but he did not lie. He did not become HOH thus he did not lie.

Can anyone give me a specific incident where Will did lie about the game?

Spunky

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 05:55 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Aaahhhhh!! See, you too are saying it's either true or false, you just can't never be sure... eh, eh...

About your 'I'm sick' lie,that was a blatant lie because you actually were okay but said you were sick. There is no question about that and if your boss was truly mean he would have gotten the proof he needed to say you lied.

In my case you cannot prove it because:
1: When I reply to you "I'm not sure" the deed was not yet done
2: When the deed is done and I actually voted you out you can't say I lied to you because I didn't tell you one way or the other.

Anyway, we just can't win this one..

Cangaroo

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 06:15 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
To answer the question the thread is named after...NO. I think Jason proved that...he came closes to succeeing in NOT and still admitted he did one time.

Sanfranjoshfan

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 06:53 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Spunky - But....my boss did NOT prove anything at all....and I DID lie.

When you say "I AM not sure", it IS a lie if what you are thinking is "I am sure, but I will not admit that to you." That sentence uses the verb "am" in the *present tense*, so that deed indeed HAS been done! :)

Why do you keep interjecting the idea of "proving it" in order to define what is a lie? A lie is saying something that is not true.....can't a person say something that is not true...and get away with it? Sounds to me that you just found a way to lie with plausible deniability, but it's still a lie!

(I realize that this is just a debate on semantics, but it's fun....no disrespect intended!:))

Cangaroo

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 06:56 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Wow Sanfran...my head is spinning after reading that last post of yours...had to read it twice (maybe three, I think I got dizzy in the process), but I see your point, LOL.

Philamom

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 07:33 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Interesting about the lying debate ... this reminds me of something sort of relevant that I went through with my daughter last year. She goes to parochial school, and they (naturally) have religion classes. Last year, they were talking about lying and what constitutes a lie, about whether some lies were worse than others, etc. In her religion textbook, there was an example: "Suppose a telemarketer calls, and you answer the phone. You know your mother and father don't want to talk with the telemarketer. So when they ask to speak to your parents, you say they're not home. Is that a lie?"

I said yes, it was a lie ... but apparently I was wrong, because the textbook said it wasn't a lie (this really floored me, by the way). The explanation was that the unspoken message was: my parents aren't home FOR YOU (the telemarketer) right now. And that the telemarketer understood the unspoken message, and therefore it wasn't a lie. I admit, I still have trouble with that one ... and this was in a theology textbook. Go figure.

Sanfranjoshfan

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:06 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Philamom - "I admit, I still have trouble with that one ... and this was in a theology textbook."

It seems to me that telling an untruth, using the assumption that the person you are telling it to will automatically *know* that it is, in fact, untrue....well, that's just asking for problems! Besides, according to the dictionary it actually is a "lie". The explanation in that theological lesson book sounds like it's just saying that a "little white lie" isn't actually a lie.....and maybe *in religious terms* it isn't, but in factual terms, it really is, don'cha think? :)

From www.dictionary.com:

lie n.

A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.

Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.

To present false information with the intention of deceiving.

To convey a false image or impression: Appearances often lie.

Tobor7

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:09 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Is there a commandment that says; "Tho shalt not lie unless you are on a network game show"?

Philamom

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:16 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Yes, I also thought it was lying, whatever yardstick you use to measure it, Sanfran ... but, then again, this was all in the context of the "severity" of lies, how some lies were "worse" than others. But I thought it was a very poor example, especially in a kid's textbook.

So I simply avoid that particular problem by having the kids tell the telemarketers that Dad said if Mom buys one more thing, he's going to have a fit (and that's no lie, LOL).

Cangaroo

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:16 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Well no, there's not a commandment that says that, but there may be amendments...you know, one of those "add-ons"

Cangaroo

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:18 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I've told my kids to ask the telemarketer's for their home phone #'s so I can call them during their mealtime to do business. If they say okay, then maybe we'll deal.

Teachmichigan

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:43 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
WOW...what theology book was that? We were always taught that even if you're telling the truth but omitting certain details (to "obscure" the truth) even THAT is lying!

Sounds like "situational ethics" to me...

I usually just let telemarketers listen to the TV while I go about my business. (They usually don't listen long. :) )

Sanfranjoshfan

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:48 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Here's a story about lying....I *think*! Apparently my home phone number is the same number as that of a property management company in Alameda, which is right here practically in the lap of SF where I live. The phone numbers are the same *except for the area code*....which is different in Alameda, just a couple of miles from my apartment.

Well, for the last year or so, I have been getting phone calls from prospective renters early on weekend mornings when all I want to do is sleep all day! It drove me NUTS! I finally changed my outgoing message saying "If you are calling about the apartment for rent, I'm sorry, but it has already been rented....if not, please leave a message." (They never call back like they used to!)

Well, in fact I have NO IDEA if the durn apartment is rented or not....so I may be lying but then again I may be telling the truth....only the property management company knows for sure!

My excuse for this evil message was simply that if the person calling and waking me up is too stupid to dial the right area code...well, then they deserve to be misled....if indeed my fake message misled them, which would only be the case if, in fact, the apartment had actually been rented as I claimed in my message! Who knows? I sure don't! LOL:)

In this case...I dunno if I am actually "lying" or not! LOL

Cangaroo

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:53 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Well, Sanfran, if you're going by that theology book stated earlier, you're not lying because what you're doing is just pre-emptively telling the truth. I see your point, LOL.

Sanfranjoshfan

Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 08:55 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Teachmichigan - "WOW...what theology book was that?"

Maybe it was one that was written by folks for a company that sell their textbooks through telemarketing and they have some really high strung and/or sensitive employees working the phones! :)

Jolly_Penguin

Monday, August 18, 2003 - 07:01 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Why would you want to play BB without telling lies? Isn't misleading people and them stabbing them in the back half the fun of the game?

Jolly_Penguin

Monday, August 18, 2003 - 07:27 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Actually the example from your theology textbook is not wrong, IF and only IF the telemarketer indeed does know this unspoken code, which I doubt.

If the telemarketer does know this magic code, then your dictionary.com definitions posted above fail to fit what the child said as being a lie.

The child did not deliberately present a false statement as true. She thought the telemarketer knew the unspoken code, and was simply speaking that language. By the same token, the child did not mean to decieve, mislead, or present a false image.

If we both agree that in our coded language Yes means No and No means Yes, then my answering "Are you dead" with "yes" is not a lie.

Puzzled

Monday, August 18, 2003 - 07:46 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I think that's a lot of theological gobbledy-gook. I assume what they were trying to teach the kids was that every untruth uttered out of one's mouth is not a big deal, or necessarily wrong.

Why not just give them examples?--like if your friend has a sitz on her face the size of an egg, it's kinder to tell her it doesn't look that bad than to crack up and tell her that she looks like Godzilla.

Jolly_Penguin

Monday, August 18, 2003 - 08:18 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I think as theologist type people they can't do that. They're locked into this whole ten commandments thing. Black and White world, no room for grey.

Spunky

Monday, August 18, 2003 - 09:26 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Yep, this thread was surely fun for me....AND I'M NOT LYING!!!!! :)

Anyway, the movie True Lies... what are 'true' lies, does it meant that some other lies are not true lies...eh, eh... (that confirms my theory).

I was watching Tears of the Sun last night (yeah! way to go Spunky, when I could have been here!) and when Monica Bellucci (the doctor) yelled at Bruce Willis "You lied to me! You lied to me!" I thought of this tread and I had to laugh, because that's exactly what we've been discussing about. Bruce Willis, in order to convince Bellucci to get away in a hurry before the rebels arrived, agreed to have the natives of the mission brought to safety as well, but when they reached the helycopters they left the natives behind... Cool Bruce never denied the lie. Now we could talk all night why that kind of lying is necessary or not... but even Bruce felt bad and did a daring thing right afterwards.... I'm not gonna say it... you'll have to watch for yourself... just try not to laugh too hard.

Sanfranjoshfan

Monday, August 18, 2003 - 09:44 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Jolly_Penguin - Huh? It sounds to me that teaching a child to tell a telemarketer (or anyone, for that matter) something that the child knows is untrue, under the assumption that the telemarketer understands the "unspoken code"....well, that just seems so NOT black and white. Black and white is telling the truth or *not* telling the truth. Grey is telling a lie and then looking for a loophole to change the definition of what a "lie" is, so it appears to be the truth wrapped up in some "unspoken code".

I agree with them that "little white lies" are not evil or even wrong....("No, that dress doesn't make you look fat!")...but I can't agree with them that they are not "lies" just because they are well intended.

Btw, I'm 52 years old and *I* never knew that the "unspoken code" for someone not wanting to come to the phone was to tell the caller, "I'm sorry, they aren't home right now". When my folks told me to tell that to a caller, they said to "lie and say I'm not home." (I'd have to add that it's not good to teach a kid to lie....but it's worse to teach a kid to lie while explaining to them that it isn't a lie at all!)

At any rate, out of all the schools of thought I've ever encountered, theology is last one I could describe as "black and white".

Sanfranjoshfan

Monday, August 18, 2003 - 09:56 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Spunky - "Now we could talk all night why that kind of lying is necessary or not... but even Bruce felt bad and did a daring thing right afterwards.... I'm not gonna say it... you'll have to watch for yourself... just try not to laugh too hard. "

I totally agree that some lies may be necessary....but my point all along has been that the intent behind a statement determines whether or not it is a lie. It doesn't matter if it's necessary or if it can be proven. If a person knows that he has said something that is untrue...then that person has told a lie.

In your example, I'm betting that Bruce Willis knew that he told a lie, even if he did so for justifiable reasons )...and even if he found a way to "make things right" after the fact. His original statement was still a lie, right?

As for "true lies"....? Would Will Kirby looking another BB player in the eye saying "I am lying to you" be one of those? LOL:)