Persuasive Essay On Lying

1398 Words3 Pages

Lying is intentionally misleading a single person or group of people with a deceptive statement or action. “The moral question of whether you are lying or not is not settle by established by establishing the truth or falsity of what you say. In order to settle this question, we must know whether you intend your statement to mislead.(Chapter 1 pg. 6) When it comes down to trying to decide whether you should justify or reject a lie there are several steps you should take. You need to be able to defend your arguments for your lie in a public setting against an audience or your peers, or what Bok considers “reasonable persons”. You cannot just be able to justify your lie to yourself because then it is automatically invalid. As humans we tend to …show more content…

Can you do something else instead and come out with a positive outcome that doesn’t involve lying? There are times in the world where it is necessary to tell a lie or deceive someone. But if you are going to tell a lie you need to look at the long term repercussions of that said lie. “If lies and truthful statements appear to achieve the same result or appear to be as desirable to the person contemplating lying the lie should be ruled out”. (Chapter 2 pg. 31)
Next you need to look at what the context of your lie is? The circumstances that form the reason for the lie, because you cannot fully understand your reason for lying until you look at all aspects surrounding the lie. Are you doing it to anger someone? Is it just a little white lie? “Many small subterfuges may not even be intended to mislead”. (chapter 5 pg. 58) Is it to save some one’s life? These circumstances that surround the lie matter to the motive behind the …show more content…

As he reads through the case he begins to realize that the officers have arrested a well-known serial rapist known in the media as “The Cross Country Rapist”. Ten years ago The Cross Country Rapist was known for using high doses of GHB to drug women before raping, them all over the country. Officers ran DNA against past cases after the man was arrested and they matched 8 other cases in 6 states. The prosecutor keeps reading more into the evidence and after reading all the reports of the past victims, he realizes that there was no way this recent victim was raped by him. When the victim had her blood taken after reporting the rape and her blood showed levels of GHB in it, but they were far too low, and there was not DNA left at the scene. As a prosecutor he really wants to be the one that puts this guy away. The statutes of limitations have run out on all the past cases and he knows they have the serial rapist in custody. The prosecutor knows that he shouldn’t put a victim on the stand and have her lie about who raped her. Should he keep the information he knows to himself and try the case and put away a known serial

Open Document