--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote:
All good points. The broader issue is one of credibility. That evaluation is made in a more full context than the simple telling of a lie within its strictest definition. We build an impression of a person's integrity and what the value of their word is in more ways than a simple lie. So if in the interest of accuracy my statement should have been "Maharishi broke his promises so often that I have no reason to trust his vow of celibacy" I would be comfortable with that. I am not stuck on the concept of him being a "liar" in the strict definition of the term. As you and I have often discussed his actions are open to a range of legitimate interpretations. A financial agreement broken shows more of a lack of integrity than a simple breaking of a promise. In some states verbal contracts are upheld in a court of law. So reneging on those are for me a better indication about a person's relationship with truthfulness. So is a broken financial contract a "lie" per se? Maybe not. But if you had a history of them it might give a person pause about your credibility in other areas. At least it does for me, YMMV. Using Clinton as an example we have few cases where he actually told a flat out lie about his extracurricular activities. But his intention to deceive was present throughout that whole mess. And the intention to deceive, though not as clear cut as proof, tells a story. > But assuming it *was* after, and therefore an > outright lie, ED11 is asking you to document other > such outright lies. > > So far, you haven't done so. I gave my examples and you pointed out that I can't prove some of them are lies because we can't prove Maharishi's intent. That doesn't prove that many of my examples are not lies, just that I can't prove it here to your satisfaction because his intent is impossible to prove. We all make our choices about Maharishi's credibility. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M" <compost1uk@> > wrote: > <snip> > > > If I say to you "tomorrow I think it might snow > > > some", and then it> doesn't. What do you think - > > > that I LIED to you? A child might think that of > > > its parent. "Mummy you lied to me, you promised > > > snow!". > > > > Agreed. The reneging on course promises directly > > made were outright lies, or were turned into lies > > by his lack of integrity to be a man of his word. > > A broken promise is not the same thing as a lie, > Curtis. > > (If he said, "I have never broken a promise," *that* > would be a lie.) > > ED11 asked you for examples of lies, i.e., when he > said something he knew wasn't true. You and others > claim he told lies all the time, as justification for > thinking the claims about his hanky-panky are likely > to be true--in other words, that he was lying when > he said he was a life celibate. > > I'd be curious to know whether he can be documented > to have made this claim *after* the alleged hanky-panky > is supposed to have taken place. If it was only before, > then that wasn't a lie either. > > But assuming it *was* after, and therefore an > outright lie, ED11 is asking you to document other > such outright lies. > > So far, you haven't done so. >
