In particular, it robs those who disagree with these silenced opinions. Mill then turns to the reasons why humanity is hurt by silencing opinions. His first argument is that the suppressed opinion may be true. He writes that since human beings are not infallible, they have no authority to decide an issue for all people, and to keep others from coming up with their own judgments. Mill asserts that the reason why liberty of opinion is so often in danger is that in practice people tend to be confident in their own rightness, and excluding that, in the infallibility of the world they come in contact with.
It might seem that lying to get yourself out of trouble is a situation that makes the lie justified. But I think that is a selfish reason for your own good and that people are thinking less about the society and more about their own good. Lying to get out of trouble is one of those many lies that are not justified.
Being comfortable in living a lie endangers our ability to be inspired, hence limiting our actual self from thriving into something much more than we already are. We obviously are conscience and aware when we lie to others, but we don’t like to believe the fact we commonly lie to ourselves as well. Humans are both the deceivers and the deceived. We do not initially realize that we are lying to ourselves, because we distort the truth to justify our actions. We don’t tell the lie aloud to anybody, and nobody knows it so we just pretend that the lie didn’t happen.
He disagrees with the Aristotle approach because it ignores the damages that is done to the liar by trying to cover up such as loss of credibility if the truth is realized, use of a lot of energy in attempt to cover up, damaging of overall trust in the communication in the society and it increases a propensity to lie in the future. In addition, Bok also points out that the liar is also likely to be biased on the sense that he or she is likely to underestimate risks of being discovered and at the same time overestimate consequential benefit of lying (Bok 63). The liar is also likely to ignore the lies that become institutional and those that are isolated
Currently, there is an outcry for honesty. But in truth honesty is not enough and not quit what we are looking for. Honesty is often used to deceive, to induce harm and to avert blame. What people are really searching for is integrity. Carter’s article address the difference between honesty and integrity and how honesty can be used dishonestly.
The Truth How can we define truth when we don’t even know the interpretations of what truth is? What I found very interesting was this quote "Half of a truth is not the Truth". I believe that when we tell the truth we never tell 100% of the truth. We might be embarrassed about the whole truth or maybe we just don’t want to tell how we handled the situation so we remove our part or change our part from the truth. Telling the truth is hard, we never know how the opposite side will react on the truth.
Personally, I think some people simply do not deserve truth. Why should a stranger deserve to know my secrets? Truth may be a duty, but only to those who have the right to it. If I spoke the truth all the time, I would destroy most of my societal relationships. If truth is a duty, which according to Kant it is, then it is a duty I don’t want, because sometimes one simply must lie, to protect themselves and
People use these small lie to hide the truth from themselves, and that can hurt them in the long run. If a person can not see that they have a drinking problem and they keep ignoring reality they could wind up dead or in the hospital. This is something no person would want to go through to get to a point in life where you do not see the true reality anymore. How long does it take for a person to get the hint and be sick of there own lies? Even Gunderman feels we should not lie to ourselves, as he says “Whenever possible, however, we should be honest with others and ourselves” (Gunderman).
The truth as creation of an individual can also be changed or rejected by him once he no longer believes in it. Eyes can not be used when one searches for the “truth” because the truth is what one wants it to be. And no human can ever look at the thing objectively. The things that one sees are defined variables and their understanding and interpretation is assigned from the “inside” where the “truth” lies. Different people will have unique comments on the same event because of their biases, yet they are all right because the “truth” holds only for a single person.
Your moral compass forms an ethical norm, and this is very much an impulsive decision, not one made based on knowledge. Human beings’ belief systems don’t always work according to evidence. Belief is made up of many different factors and many times we can very easily believe something simply because it is embedded in our belief system, with little to no evidence. Blind faith is hard for many. Clifford takes the side of Evidentialism, which is the assertion t hat for a belief to be true knowledge, it must be supported by evidence.