• Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It depends on how one defines violence but personally I think of it as intentionally causing harm to others. It can be both physical or psychological. If you can de-escalate a threatening situation by telling a lie then I think that it’s justifiable assuming the alternative would’ve been physical violence. I think rules like “don’t lie” or “don’t be violent” are good rules of thumb but not absolute. Almost nothing is. There’s always exceptions to these rules. Another example that comes to mind is if a severely depressed and perhaps even suicidal person is showing you a painting they made and you don’t like it at all. If you have a valid reason to worry that they legitimately can’t handle the truth right now then you probably should lie. Again, you’re intentionally causing harm (lying) but honesty would cause even greater harm so choosing the lesser one I think is justifiable.

    It’s a bit slippery slope argument but I think it applies in the most obvious extreme cases that might happen only a handful of times in ones lifetime if even that. I mostly don’t believe in absolutes so that’s why I hesitate to say that lying is always to be avoided. It’s still a good rule of thumb though.

    • Lvxferre
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      It might be a bit slippery slope, but it sounds practical. I personally don’t consider them in the same spectrum but I don’t see any inconsistency in doing so.

      Thank you for the reply!