The Ethics of Lying

This afternoon we met at the Kensington Library to hear Tony's talk on "The Ethics of Lying," followed by Constance's colloquy on the theme "Truth." As always, Tony regaled us with some funny one-liners and then some humorous and thought-provoking quotes on lying. Then he launched into the main body of his talk, in which he analyzed various types of lies. He spoke about bald-faced lies, where it's obvious to both parties that one of them is lying. My question would be, then why bother?

There are lies of commission and lies of omission, verbal and nonverbal lies. One example of a nonverbal lie (or deception, as one of our newcomers preferred) would be wearing the religious symbol of a religion not one's own, thus fooling people into thinking you are a member of that creed. Impersonating an officer is not only a nonverbal lie, it's a crime.

There are some lies that are "noble" and can be considered ethical since they harm no one and work to someone's benefit. An example of this might be the deception carried on by Miep Gies and the other helpers who hid Anne Frank and her family from the Nazis. As Tony pointed out, to decide whether a lie is ethical or unethical, you have to look at the context and the intent behind the lie.

We discussed campaign lies and lies in religious doctrine, social lies that avoid hurting feelings, and so on. Remi brought up myths and told us that sometimes children ask whether a myth is a true story. While technically it isn't because it never happened in real life, the myth can be true in another way, in that it has symbolic or emotional content that is very real. I mentioned that primates have been observed in the wild "lying" by their actions, fooling each other into believing, for instance, that there is no more food left when they don't want to share.

We took a short break and then switched gears for Constance's colloquy on "Truth." Using Dr. Arthur Dobrin's book, Spelling God With Two O's, we read a passage on Truth and a parable, and then had a Quaker-style meeting where everyone was welcome to speak up and say whatever the readings moved us to say.

Once again, our warmth, camaraderie, and thoughtful consideration of the topic made this a memorable afternoon. And that's no lie!

Time Out New York

The Brooklyn Humanist Community has made the big time! "Time Out New York" interviewed Tony about his upcoming talk on "The Ethics of Lying," and published a short article based on his explanation of most acceptable to least acceptable types of lies. You can find the article here: "The Ethics of Lying" and hear Tony's talk at the Kensington Branch of the Brooklyn Public Library on Sunday, September 21st at 1 PM.

September Reflection

On Saturday night, we gathered at Ruth S.'s apartment for our September reflection with Dr. Kurt Johnson. Constance was researching a Dorothy Thompson online and unexpectedly stumbled across several Humanist Poems by a Dr. Dorothy B. Thompson, a completely different person. We based our discussion around them.

Dr. Thompson's poems, written in the 1930's or so, were in perfect sync with the type of humanism that flourished in that era: a complete denial of religion, and a surety that science and nature are all that there is. As Kurt pointed out, that era was heavily invested in either/or thinking, and today we are moving past that. Science and spirituality can co-exist, just as the physicists have put their argument over the nature of light to rest: "Is light a wave, or is it a particle? It's both, dammit!"

While I agree with Dr. Thompson about religious dogma, I don't agree with her attitude. Her poems portray an arrogant scientist looking down on those foolish people who believe in God, calling their beliefs "ant faith."

I mentioned the book I read recently about evolution, Only a Theory. While the author showed a number of examples that provide very clear evidence of evolution as the answer to the riddle of species origin and gradual change, he also calls himself a Christian and does not say there can't be a grand design, but he does say, we can't simply explain away anything we don't understand by calling it "intelligent design," because to do so is unscientific and a denial of what has already been researched and subjected to experimentation.

His conclusion is that the "intelligent designers" are not only creationists in sheeps' clothing, but that their ultimate aim is not just to discredit evolution. Their own documents show that their intent is to bring down the scientific method and replace it with Christian dogma. That's a frightening thought, and if Dr. Thompson had read this book her poems might have been even more vehemently anti-God and anti-religion.

We talked about how moving away from that either/or dichotomy can be seen playing itself out in politics as well.

The food was delicious as always, and the company was delightful. We have two more events this week, a planning meeting on Thursday evening, and Tony's talk on "The Ethics of Lying" on Sunday afternoon. Our second season is off to a great start!