'honestly mistaken'
How were you 'mistaken'? How did you arrive at declaring something as fact, when it was not? Why did you choose to not instead say 'evidence suggests that...'? So, yes, you would deserve to Pillory yourself, and if you did not do that, then you would deserve to be pilloried by COMMUNITY. If the community was 'healthy' that is. An unhealthy community would 'Tolerate' your lack of self-pillory.
In such pillory, you can of course, avoid the abuse, and focus on metaphorically 'ridiculing' the 'error' that caused you to unknowingly choose to Lie. All the while, the Lie could have been avoided simply by being 'not sure', or 'requiring further evidence'.
What is Truth?
Stand on your roof, drop a rock, it falls to the ground. Truth.
Ironically, "Not Sure" was the smartest man in all of the Idiocracy!
He was 'not sure'. Genius.
A true paragon of epistemological prudence.
OK, SO, LIE = UNJUSTIFIED CONFIDENCE = EVIL?
What's your position on "problematic" opinions?
Hmm. A Lie can equal "UNJUSTIFIED CONFIDENCE" but does not make it 'so'. More along the 'accidental' lie yes. Or as I like to call it, the "Lesser Evil"....which is still....evil.
Need an example. Depends on what caused such opinion to be deemed 'problematic' in the first place. Problematic would have to be something on a 'path to hell', for myself to issue that label.
For example, what if someone had an opinion that "all americans are ugly".
This is not exactly provably-false, would you consider this opinion "problematic"?
No that would not be problematic at all.
If that person started spreading narrative that 'ugly people should suffer', then that would enter into the realm of 'problematic'.
That still sounds like an opinion.
Does it? Are you ears ringing?
But it doesn't matter what it sounds like. What matters is the result of the equation.
Publicly advocating, "all ugly people deserve to suffer" is a crime?