and realized that I was doing the same thing and - if I am not careful - I am still doing it.
Here we can drill down further on my point as well. You do not have to 'be careful'. You don't have to 'try' to 'not lie'. You simply to not put forth any information which you cannot prove, as 'fact', or 'truth'. This is the muddy water we are in now as a species. We Tolerate, LIES. Intention does not matter. All one has to do, is stop regurgitating the things they hear, as 'the truth'. It is perfectly ok to say "I am not sure", or "I heard this, but have not verified". If this is not ok for someone to say to themselves, then they have an underlying personality issue, which is not Virtuous. They need to work on their 'Self' first an foremost, and thus, I DISMISS them as 'Not Credible', until such time as I have seen (if ever) that individual take the steps necessary to toss their Ego aside for a moment, and let LOGOS prevail.
If one 'spreads' a lie not knowing, then they should not have spread that lie should they? Why did they spread it?? Why did they not validate their claim first? Why, murder part of the world with another lie? What keeps Lies continuing?
I spread this message as a Truth, because, it 'is'. The 'thing' 'is'.
Nature itself demonstrates. Intention matters not to Truth. We can be nice and we can 'Tolerate', but I agree with Aristotle "tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society"
This is a good conversation though :)
So if I talk to you and let you know that I am not flawless, about me believing something that I believe to be true that you believe to be false, and I am supposed to prove my truth to you even though it is my conviction, we have a problem. Something that I cannot recognize as a lie in myself, I would not admit it as such. In this context, we can no longer talk about truth and lie, but about our worldview that we have adopted in the course of our lives. It is impossible to give you proofs of my world-view or facts, for you will dismiss them and call them inferior.
Very well, however, we can agree that a plain and deliberate lie, which I am actually able to recognize as such in myself when I am about to speak it, and which harms another, must be regarded as to be refrained from.
But precisely because I know that I have lied in my life, out of insecurity, spontaneous anger, carelessness, etc., I cannot throw the first stone at you. If it were as simple as you say, that everyone immediately and without doubt recognizes an unproven information as a lie, we would have a beautiful world.
How am I supposed to recognize you as a serious interlocutor if you don't take your own weakness into consideration - having lied and being carried away in time - spreading information for which you have no proof?You've never ever done that?
It would be as if you were claiming to be without fault. That would be a lie, wouldn't it?
Aristotle said something I can agree with (except that I understand "tolerance" as something positive not negative), just as one can agree with Heinz von Förster, for example, who titled: "Truth is the invention of a liar."
If you have produced proof and counter-proof to the end of all days, and you are still in dispute with the one with whom you are having this draining argument, then you will recognize on this profound bottom that, finally and irrevocably, all conversations come down to your world view, for which there is no ultimate proof. It's an experience we've all made, haven't we?
The so-called proof is merely a generally accepted varnish for the concept of truth. The camouflage, for example, is called "science" and is itself the highest instance, but we suspect that it cannot be so high because it may be knowledge, but not wisdom.
Therefore I laugh with you, since I revealed to you my faultiness, which you immediately use against me, and point out to me that the attempt not to lie is ridiculous. No, it is not a cheap attempt, but a self-view which, if I can master it, is to save me from my own lies. I cannot save you from yours, that much should be clear.
Having said all this, I go along with the fact that ignorance, vanity, greed and pain cause people to cause suffering to others. Undoubtedly. Since I cannot meet all these people, not being in real contact with them, I can only lead my tangible human encounters to the extent that I want to follow the universally accepted rules.
Yes, a good conversation I always am interested in. :)
Well stated.