The Instigator
papayarocx5
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
abbassiadam
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Lying is Sometimes Justified.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/8/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 480 times Debate No: 43613
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

papayarocx5

Pro

First off, I know that I already have a debate like this, but my opponent is not able to complete it, so I am making a new one.

I will be arguing that lying is justified under certain circumstances.
My opponent will be arguing that even under the worst case scenarios, lying is not acceptable.

Lying: saying a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.

Justified: show a satisfactory reason or excuse for something done.

Religious references shall not be used (such as Bible or Qur'an).

When a scenario is presented, it can not be argued invalid.

By accepting, you agree what I am debating for, and what you are debating for. You agree to the rules and definitions.

With that said, let the debate commence!!

If you accept this debate, Then you are agreeing to all of the above information, and there are no changes or add on's.
abbassiadam

Con

I believe that the truth is painful, because the truth is reality and lying toys with reality, creating minor and fake perceptions.
The more the lye is prolonged the worse it becomes when the truth (Reality) hits. That is why I believe that you should define the certain circumstances in your answer, even under the worst of circumstances, a lye will only rescue you for a moment but he truth will bring peace upon you forever.
Debate Round No. 1
papayarocx5

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting. Note: My opponent agrees to everything that was said in the first round.

--Argument 1: Legitimate reasons--

Scenario 1: Sam is a street medic. His job is to save people no matter what.
One of his patients is dying. To keep the patient from giving up, Sam must tell the patient a lie. This lie would give the patient confidence, and he could live long enough for the medic to save him. But is lying justified here?

Is this lying, and is it justified?

Would this really be lying? First we need to look at the definition. The definition of lying is saying a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood. Sam is intentionally saying a false statement in order to deceive the patient, so yes this is lying.

Now what we need to look at next: Is this really justified? In other words does Sam have a legitimate reason to lie to the patient? Yes he most certainly does. If he lies to the patient, he will keep him alive, and will be able to save him. His reason to lie is to save lives.

If I am correct, then saving lives is a legitimate reason to lie. For example, stealing has sometimes been justified, when it was for the reason of saving one or multiple lives. Stealing and lying are at about the same level as far as how bad the crime is, but even if they were not, they would both still be justified because of the Supreme Court justifiable system, where saving lives is a justifiable reason.

Therefore my resolution has been proved in the scenario.


Scenario 2:
Rose is a seven year old girl. Her mother had been kidnapped two weeks ago, and recently they found her body. She had been beaten, and suffocated.

The guardian, Tom has to tell the child that her mother died, but he lies to her and simply says she was hit my a car, so that the child is not scared, and doesn't have emotional problems in the future.

First we need to look at if this would be considered lying. Is Tom saying a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive? Yes he is intentionally deceiving the child, so that her pain and suffering are minimized.

How is this Justified? Tom would be saving a life, but in a different way than Sam in the previous scenario. He would be preventing Rose;s Future from becoming ruined. He would be giving her a chance at a more normal life.

This proves my resolution to be true.

Thanks for reading


(1) http://www.debate.org.........
(2) http://www.scu.edu......
abbassiadam

Con

abbassiadam forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
papayarocx5

Pro

papayarocx5 forfeited this round.
abbassiadam

Con

abbassiadam forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.