[saghm]

I don't agree with your definition here. Good faith means trying to be correct but potentially not being by accident. Intentionally lying is bad faith and by definition trying to trick people; you know the truth is one thing, but you're saying something else to try to get them to believe it.

[LoganDark]

What I'm saying is that even lying is only bad faith depending on the intent of the lie. That doesn't mean others can't be upset regardless of the lie's intent, but I wouldn't say all lies are bad faith.

[pseudalopex]

> I wouldn't say all lies are bad faith.

No one said this.

[saghm]

I'm saying this: I don't think a lie can be in good faith by definition. Trying to make someone believe something you know isn't the truth is fundamentally bad faith.

[pseudalopex]

I thought you said Intentionally lying and bad faith is by definition trying to trick people. But you said Intentionally lying is bad faith and by definition trying to trick people.

I thought your point was intent. Most people would not say to hide Jews from Nazis was bad faith I think.

[LoganDark]

> Most people would not say to hide Jews from Nazis was bad faith I think.

That would be perfectly bad faith to the Nazis. There's no such factor as moral good or bad here; bad faith has more to do the intent you have towards each party. If the intent is to explicitly trick someone towards something you want or away from something you don't want, that is usually in bad faith. (There are some exceptions.) If the intent is just to explain something in a way others will understand, even if your explanation turns out to be (knowingly) inaccurate, that can sometimes be in good faith, though I wouldn't call it good practice.

[pseudalopex]

I said most people. Not you.

[swiftcoder]

> even lying is only bad faith depending on the intent of the lie

And the intent here is to intentionally mislead, so how is that not bad faith?

[saghm]

Yeah, I'm pretty confused about what point they're trying to make. Given that a lie is intentionally saying something untrue, there are three possibilities:

1. A is lying to B, and they know that B doesn't know the truth. The intent is to make them believe the lie, which is intentionally misleading them and bad faith

2. A is lying to B, and they aren't sure if B knows it's a lie. The intent is to make them believe the lie, which is intentionally misleading them and bad faith

3. A is lying to B, and they know for sure B knows it's a lie. The intent is either to provoke an emotional reaction from either B or someone observing (which is bad faith), or performative for others who will see the lie and might fall into categories 1 or 2, which is bad faith

I don't understand how anyone could plausibly argue that lying to someone intentionally isn't bad faith. Maybe I'm the one falling for category three here

[LoganDark]

It mostly has to do with the potential effect of believing the lie and your reasons for telling it. If you know that believing the lie results in your advantage and/or someone else's disadvantage, then it's probably bad faith. If you don't know that however, and the intent is not necessarily to mislead, that's not always bad faith. You could argue that the very act of claiming a falsehood to someone is knowingly deceptive and therefore bad faith by definition, but I don't agree that's unconditional.

For example, if I lie to protect both myself and all other parties involved, that sometimes can be in good faith! It can be bad faith if I know that it hurts them and also know a less hurtful alternative, but if I really believe the less immediately hurtful alternative will lead to a worse overall outcome then I can still be acting in good faith. It's really a lot more nuanced than "deception bad". I have to deceive myself all the time to achieve good outcomes! now I wouldn't say my treatment of myself is good faith but I try sometimes.