I have to admit, I felt torn today. During the conversation, I was being pulled in two directions. I felt myself wanting to argue on behalf of both sides at different times. Did anyone else feel that way? I can't say that I agree fully with either philosopher on all points. I certainly think both of them have interesting ideas and concepts, but I myself would never draw conclusions from those ideas and concepts. In particular, I felt that I was drawn to argue for Plato on multiple occasions regarding the noble lie. I felt that there were some situations in which it was justifiable, but also many that were not. For Aristotle, I felt compelled to make a point at the end, but was unable to. The Plato's of the room were pushing back, and had asked if it is plausible and right to tell the truth in every single situation. From the standpoint of Aristotle, I felt that the correct answer would be no. I'd defend this answer by saying that it falls in the lap of the decision maker. In this way, it could almost be considered a virtue, though in and of itself, the act of lying is not. However, the person who had to decide whether to lie or not, is indeed in a state that decides; so then, if the scale for the golden mean was shifted depending on the situation... what if the golden mean was to actually tell the lie?
Ultimately, as I previously mentioned, I don't think either side is completely correct; and as a human being with a moral code, I disagree with the act of lying.
What are your thoughts? Is it okay to lie?
I too felt like I was torn between both sides during the discussion of the Noble Lie. I found that when Aristotle's concept of the Golden Mean was applied to the proposed situations, that lying wasn't always necessary. By this I mean that it is sometimes better to tell the truth, but in a way that is considerate to the other person's feelings. This made me question whether it was ever appropriate to tell a Noble Lie over saying something in a more conscientious way. Overall, I still consider "white" lies to be appropriate in some situations, but should only be used if absolutely necessary. As mentioned in class, no one likes to be lied to and being caught in the act of lying only leads to more lies and more trouble.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think you ask some interesting questions. I agree that I was on the fence and wanted to argue on the side of both philosophers. I think it is possible that lying might be The Golden Mean sometimes. In the instance that telling the truth would ruin someone's life, then I think lying would be a virtue since it would be the right thing to do. If the person knowing what the lie was would ruin their life, but if them not knowing wouldn't change anything for them -- for better or for worse -- then why ruin their life? Telling them would not be a virtuous thing to do -- it would be a vice. So while I don't believe in lying, I think there are instances where it might be better to lie. The flip side of that is that it could easily weigh on your conscience which would also make lying a vice. I think that the particular situation makes the decision of lying or not lying virtuous or not.
ReplyDeleteYou are not alone in this situation. I also felt that in some situations, Aristotle was right but in another instance Plato was. To me, it is all depending on the situation whether or not it is "okay" to lie. As I stated Friday, when your son or daughter comes up to you with a terribly drawn picture, what will you do? Will you tell your child the truth and hurt his or her feelings, or will you preserve their imagination and creativity? It all depends on the scenario at hand.
ReplyDelete