Is this considered lying?

[RogueWarrior]

Girl (21) tells me that any male friend who has feelings for her but doesn't express them is a liar. He's being a friend under false pretenses. Is this lying?

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

What's worse, you being a liar or your friend being a manipulator???

 

[McKindley]

This is actually one of the best questions I've seen on this site. Ever.

There are different types of lies. You have Lies of comission, and lies of omission.

-Lies of comission are lies wherein you knowingly give someone false information with the intent of decieving them.

-Lies of omission are lies wherein you knowingly leave out pertinent information that could alter a person's perception of a given situation with the intent to decieve.

So it seems she is arguing that any male friend who does not tell her he has feelings for her (and he in truth does) is comitting a lie of omission.

She is arguing that the foundation of the friendship itself is built upon a lie of omission (she falsely believes you are her friend simply because you enjoy being around her, whereas you are truly her friend because you want to bone her).

This information would be pertinent to her judgment of the friendship, and since you do not divulge it, you are comitting a lie of omission.

I would have to go with her on this. It is technically a lie of omission. So if you don't tell her, you are a liar.

 

[RogueWarrior]

Assuming that you wanted nothing more than to "bone" her from day one, I would agree. (Nevermind the pointless argument that all guys want to bone any girl they see).

However, what if you've been friends for a long time? The connection grew, became stronger and deeper. What if she was dating someone during this period or was otherwise unavailable? Why would you then tell them from the moment you realize you have feelings for them knowing that they wouldn't even consider it? Shouldn't you wait for a more appropriate time? And isn't telling them going against the precepts of the DJ Bible?

Taking this a step further, isn't resorting to "you lied to me" a defense mechanism, a way of avoiding dealing with the question of whether or not she sees relationship potential?

 

[Life-Trainee]

It's not much of a lie or ommision just a strategic friendship!

 

[McKindley]

(This is all theoretical. I'm not saying you should actually put any of this into action. Just a fun little debate).

If you've been friends with her for a long time, and you had feelings for her that whole time, then you are guilty of lying by omission the whole time.

If the connection grew deeper then you only quit lying once you hit the point of NOT having feelings for her anymore as anything but a friend. But having lied to her that whole time she could still justly call you a liar.

As far as being unavailable, she's only TRULY unavailable once she has a ring on her finger. Up to that point she is still available. Trying to steal a guy's girl might not be the brightest of ideas, but it can happen.

She would probably argue that you are being dishonest and calculating by scheming and waiting for the most opportune moment to try to snatch her up. She could argue that waiting for the moment that she would be most susceptable to your advances is immoral.

She could say that it would be better for you to tell her once you realized you had these feelings, and let her weigh out her options.

(I totally agree that if she actually used any of this as an argument against you in real life it would be a defense mechanism).

 

[TonyTheTigerOI]

Its a lie... assuming he doesnt like her enough to be her friend as well. But seing as Ive only liked a handful of girls enough to spend time with them aside from the sexual (or events leading to it) Im certain that its a lie. Yup. But shes still a crazy ***** for analyzing it so anally.

 

[RogueWarrior]

A very interesting result

Well folks, I have interviewed a number of people outside of this forum on the subject. The list of people includes: six women; five of whom are married and one who is a psychiatrist, two men, and my own parents believe it or not. Unanimously, they said that in this case, it is NOT a lie of omission. The reason being that this is an extraordinary case where the person is taking a HUGE risk in telling the other person how they feel. They are risking the friendship and making themselves completely vulnerable so it is only natural to be cautious. Furthermore, it is wholly unfair of the other person to accuse them of lying.

What I personally find very interesting is that every single person who believes this case not to be lying is 35 years old or older. Everyone who does is in their early twenties or younger.

Draw your own conclusions.

 

[TillTheEndOfTime]

Re: A very interesting result

Originally posted by RogueWarrior
Well folks, I have interviewed a number of people outside of this forum on the subject. The list of people includes: six women; five of whom are married and one who is a psychiatrist, two men, and my own parents believe it or not. Unanimously, they said that in this case, it is NOT a lie of omission. The reason being that this is an extraordinary case where the person is taking a HUGE risk in telling the other person how they feel. They are risking the friendship and making themselves completely vulnerable so it is only natural to be cautious. Furthermore, it is wholly unfair of the other person to accuse them of lying.

What I personally find very interesting is that every single person who believes this case not to be lying is 35 years old or older. Everyone who does is in their early twenties or younger.

Draw your own conclusions.

I am 21 and I don't believe it is lying in any sense imaginable. Tell your friend I said she's a moron.

 

[TillTheEndOfTime]

For all those who said it is a lie think about this:

If you befriend another guy for example, but you only use him for rides, money, food etc, then THAT is a lie of omission. You don't really see him as a friend. You're just using him.


If you befriend a girl because you like her....well how is that a lie? Friendship is often the first step to a relationship in many cases. Are you using her for something? Is the friendship not mutually beneficial? Do you not talk about stuff together and have fun together? Liking a girl and wanting to be friends is hardly a crime and is hardly a lie. This girl is basically demonizing a guy for liking her. What a b1tch. I hope she stays single all of her life while avoiding these "liars"!

 

[JonJack]

I agree with McKindley's version of the 2 types of lies. Key word though is deceive. If a "friend" doesn't state his true feelings because he knows for a fact that the girl will not like it or respond positively, and so he puts on an act all in the hopes of getting her in bed, then it is an obvious lie of ommission. Most of the time, this is the case and I wonder if you people can actually call what this girl and guy have a friendship. A friendship based on what? False behavior and hidden intentions?

If the guy truly doesn't care whether he gets to bed the girl or not, and so he doesn't even think it important to bring the matter of his feelings up, then it ain't being deceitful. And thus it isn't lying. It's like you don't simply tell people how many times you masturbate and stuff like that cause it ain't important.

 

[squirrels]

Originally posted by RogueWarrior
Girl (21) tells me that any male friend who has feelings for her but doesn't express them is a liar. He's being a friend under false pretenses. Is this lying?

Yeah pretty much.

This doesn't mean you should spill your guts to her, but the idea is if you're into a girl, you should SHOW her that by the way you act toward her.

If you're acting like "just a friend" in the hopes to get in close and "strike", then it's dishonest and cowardly. And yes, it's a lie. You're essentially being a "fake friend". You're not REALLY her friend, you're masquerading as a friend to try to increase your chances of being her boyfriend.

 

[McKindley]

(the people I talked to all feel not telling her) is NOT a lie of omission. The reason being that this is an extraordinary case where the person is taking a HUGE risk in telling the other person how they feel.

Just because it is risky does not make it not a lie.

There are instances where telling the truth is riskier than lying. That does not mean that you AREN'T LYING. It just means that lying is less kisky than telling the truth.

If you cheated on your girlfriend and you didn't tell her, that is a lie of omission. Now it is much more risky to tell that you cheated on her than not telling her, but that does not mean that you are not lying (I'm not equating cheating with not telling your friend you dig her in terms of severity, I'm just showing an instance where telling the truth is risky, yet not doing so still makes you a liar).

Furthermore, I do not feel like this is an extraordinary case in any sense of the word. This happens to almost everyone. Therefore, it is not extraordinary. You can't say you have special circumstances worthy of lying here.

(For the record, though, telling a girl you have feelings for her the second you realize you do would probably be a bad idea. The arguments I'm making here are more rational ones than ones that are most applicable in real life. I'm arguing for the sake of arguing).

 

[DJDamage]

-Lies of comission are lies wherein you knowingly give someone false information with the intent of decieving them.

-Lies of omission are lies wherein you knowingly leave out pertinent information that could alter a person's perception of a given situation with the intent to decieve.

Thanks for breaking this down McKindley. This is an excellent definition. This chick I once dated always gave me lies of omission (The lie was either half truth, not the full truth or had a positive spin that made her either the angel in the end of the story or the victim).

Its very hard to catch lies of omission because there are some truth to it but the deception is still there. It takes a few lies of omissions until you fully understand what and who you are dealing with.

As for the original question. It is not a lie unless you act on it.

 

[McKindley]

I think it would worthwhile to look at some different ethical theories here.

I am arguing ethics from a deontological perspective. A deontological normative theory holds that moral worth is an intrinsic feature of human actions, determined by formal rules of conduct. Thus, moral obligation rests solely upon duty, without requiring any reference to the practical consequences that dutiful actions may happen have.

However, it seems that your friends and parents are arguing a consequentialist normative theory. Consequentialism argues that human actions derive their moral worth solely from the outcomes or results that they produce. For instance, a utilitarian would argue that happiness or pleasure are the desirable outcomes one should take into account when trying to employ a Consequentialist model. One of the difficulties inherent in the practical application of any such theory is our notoriously feeble ability (or willingness) to predict accurately what consequences our own actions will produce.

So basically, if you are a consequentialist, you feel that it could hurt too much, or not result in a favorable outcome (thus, not maximizing happiness) if you tell the girl you dig her. However, I think that spending all your time wanting to go further with a girl, and remaining friends with her in reality will not increase happiness. It will leave you stuck in the friends zone. And that sucks.

However, if you apply a deontological model here, you would tell her you dig her, because you feel that you are morally obligated to tell her the truth not because it could have a favorable outcome, but because you feel that telling the truth is intrinsically worthwhile. You tell the truth because telling the truth is virtuous, not because you think it would net a favorable consequent.

(I took the definitions for these for these terms loosely from http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/ )