权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Lying, Misleading and What is Said

谎言、误导和所说内容

基本信息

批准号：
AH/F002408/1
负责人：
Jennifer Saul
金额：
$ 3.53万
依托单位：
University of Sheffield
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2007
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2007 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FF002408%2F1
关键词：
Lying Misleading What Said

项目摘要

The distinction between lying and misleading is an immensely natural one. One who shoots his parents and then phones the police, saying 'Someone shot my parents' has misled, but he has not lied. Opinions vary as to the moral significance of this distinction, but few doubt its existence.The distinction between lying and misleading turns on the notion of what is said. One cannot lie unless one says something false (or at least something one believes to be false). But the notion of what is said is the subject of tremendous controversy in philosophy of language, with many competing notions hotly contested. Some maintain that what is said must be psychologically real-- easily accessible, and playing a clearly defined role in the mental lives of speakers. Others argue that it is merely a theoretician's notion, of no significance in the lives of speakers. But whatever notion of saying is involved in the lying/misleading distinction, it is clearly one of genuine intuitive significance to ordinary speakers-- why else would we find it so natural to struggle for a way of stating something that is not a lie, when we feel the need to mislead? One part of my project will concern the notion of what is said: First, I will examine the current controversy with the lying/misleading distinction in mind, arguing that none of the available candidates can do the work needed to capture this immensely intuitive distinction. Next, I will offer my own conception of saying, specifically formulated with the lying/misleading distinction in mind. The second part of my project concerns the ethical significance of the lying/misleading distinction. As I've noted, many people assume that misleading is preferable to lying, and it is very natural to work hard to craft utterances that merely mislead rather than lie. Nonetheless, this is really quite a puzzling preference. Both the liar and the misleader deliberately work to bring it about that someone else has a false belief. Why should it matter whether they do this by saying something false, or by saying something true? A number of justifications have been given for preferring mere misleading to lying. I will begin by examining these, bearing in mind the nature of saying. The nature of saying turns out to be surprisingly important to this ethical question, because the arguments that single out lying for special condemnation tend to turn on claims about the way that saying works. I will argue that close attention to the ways that communcation works reveals that existing justifications are untenable. Nonetheless, I do think there is moral significance to the distinction between lying and misleading. I will argue that the moral significance of this distinction can be justified, but that this requires a far more complicated picture of communication than has previously been employed.Finally, I apply the results of my investigation to a variety of famous and interesting cases of lying and misleading, including the Clinton sex scandal, various other political utterances, and some interesting historical cases.My project, then, uses insights from ethics to shed light on the linguistically significant notion of what is said; and it uses insights from philosophy of language to shed light on the moral distinction between lying and misleading.

谎言和误导之间的区别是非常自然的。一个射杀了他的父母，然后打电话给警察，说“有人射杀了我的父母”的人误导了他，但他没有撒谎。关于这种区别的道德意义，人们有不同的看法，但很少有人怀疑它的存在。一个人不可能说谎，除非他说了假话（或者至少他认为是假话）。但是，在语言哲学中，“说了什么”的概念是一个有着巨大争议的主题，许多相互竞争的概念都受到了激烈的争论。有些人坚持认为，所说的话必须是心理上真实的--容易理解的，在说话者的精神生活中起着明确的作用。另一些人则认为这只是一个理论家的概念，在演讲者的生活中没有任何意义。但是，无论谎言/误导的区别中涉及什么样的说法概念，它显然对普通说话者来说具有真正的直觉意义--否则，当我们觉得有必要误导时，为什么我们会发现努力寻找一种不是谎言的说法是如此自然呢？我的项目的一部分将涉及所说的概念：首先，我将研究目前的争议与谎言/误导的区别，认为没有一个可用的候选人可以做的工作，需要捕捉这个巨大的直觉区别。接下来，我将提供我自己的说法概念，特别是在考虑到谎言/误导的区别时制定的。我的项目的第二部分涉及谎言/误导区别的伦理意义。正如我所指出的，许多人认为误导比撒谎更可取，努力制作只是误导而不是撒谎的话语是非常自然的。尽管如此，这确实是一个令人困惑的偏好。说谎者和误导者都是故意让别人相信自己有错误的信念。他们是通过说假话还是说真话来达到目的，这有什么关系呢？人们提出了一些理由，说明宁愿误导也不愿撒谎。我将开始通过检查这些，牢记说的性质。事实证明，言语的本质对这个伦理问题的重要性令人惊讶，因为那些将撒谎列为特别谴责的论点往往会转向对言语运作方式的主张。我认为，密切关注交流的方式揭示了现有的理由是站不住脚的。尽管如此，我确实认为区分谎言和误导是有道德意义的。我将论证这种区分的道德意义是合理的，但这需要一个比以前所用的复杂得多的传播图景。最后，我将我的调查结果应用于各种著名和有趣的撒谎和误导案例，包括克林顿性丑闻，各种其他政治言论，以及一些有趣的历史案例。我的项目，然后，运用伦理学的观点来阐明语言学上的重要概念;运用语言哲学的观点来阐明说谎和误导之间的道德区别。