The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

It's possible to be dishonest if you believe what you say is true.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Jfran has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/10/2016 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 146 times Debate No: 94604
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




I have some obnoxious friends, who keep throwing around the word dishonest, when we debate a topic. Its hard to explain how they use it.

E.G. Like the sky is blue. No, its light blue or sky're so dishonest.

I don't believe a person can be dishonest if they truly believe in what they said. I mean, they could pass a polygraph right. Im sorry if it sounds stupid, it does to me, but i need an outside opinion.


According to Merriam-Webster, 'Dishonest' means something or someone is "characterized by lack of truth, honesty, OR trustworthiness"( Because of the 'OR', anything displaying a lack of truth can be considered dishonest. You might not believe a drunk person that says they can safely drive, not because you think they are maliciously trying to decieve you, but because they are incapable making a good decision. I understand this argument may be criticized for going into semantics but one has to in order to answer the question definitively. Finally, in response to the mention of the polygraph, "most psychologists agree that there is little evidence that polygraph tests can accurately detect lies"(
Debate Round No. 1


Ok like he just showed me a link about the Republican party being against Trump. Saying "Even his own party thinks he's a joke."

I respond: "Not all of them but I been knew this." (He doesn't watch t.v. but i do)

Then he responds: "No, not all, but the majority, and I doubt you "been knew" very little as you're evidently an ignorant, dishonest f*ckt*rd."

Then he responds (sorry for the language) : "Sure...
The evidence shows you're ignorant, that you're petulant, that your comprehension skills are abysmal, and that your critical thinking skills are worse. Combine these with the fact that you grammar skills are garbage, only beaten in terribleness by illiterate people, I see no reason to trust anything you claim.

Further, I knew it's old, too, but it being old doesn't disprove it, she that's not a valid reason to dismiss it, herring."

I respond: I didnt dismiss it. (Insert insult here) I just said not all of the Republicans. (Insert insult here) and that i been knew it. (Insert insult here). What did you want me to say. (Insert insult here)

Then he responds: "Yes, you did. You obviously don't know what dismissive statements are, lol.
"Been knew it"
Your learning is bad because your reading is bad, so your knowledge is necessarily bad.

I wanted you to not say stupid sh*t, or falsehoods, or make claims without, probably just shutting your retard hole altogether (by and large)."

Then I responded: "About what? Why they're against trump? I thought your point of showing me this was to inform me that even they are against him. Okay soo what are you saying with this post then we can debate."

He hasnt responded yet


When your friend called you dishonest for saying "not all of them but I been knew this" responding "no, not all but the majority" he may have been saying that your phrasing deliberately obfuscated the amount of republicans against Trump. Assuming that is not what your friend meant, if your friend meant that you had been lied to or misinformed deliberately and then repeated that lie not knowing it was a lie then what you said would still be a lie or at least false, and according to the definition of dishonest in my last argument that would make you dshonest.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by questioneverything2001 2 months ago
I think the debate is broken
Posted by vi_spex 2 months ago
thats lying to yourself, everyone else would pass the test on the truth of his dishonesty
Posted by joshuroar 2 months ago
Dishonesty has a variety of meanings:

- lacking of moral or ethical integrity
- cheating
- being deceptive or corrupt
- untrustworthy
- lying

Calling the sky blue doesn't fit any of these. Your friends are being dishonest by twisting your meaning. When you call the sky blue, you are making a general statement about the color of the sky. They're most likely doing one of two things.

1) They're purposefully twisting your meaning as if you had made a more specific statement about the exact shade of blue, even though they understand your intended meaning. In this case, they understand what the word 'dishonest' means, but are actually being dishonest themselves.

2) They're complaining that you aren't being specific enough, and they aren't using the word 'dishonest' correctly.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.