Where do you stand on false accusations?

[F1fan]

Being non-creedal, Druidry (and Paganism more broadly) doesn't typically prescribe human behavior in moral terms, but virtue ethics is common. Virtue ethics is more about focusing on the character one cultivates through behavior rather than rigid rules.

What reputation do you want to have in your community? What do you want to be known for, or known as? What virtues do you wish to embody in the relationships you express through your behavior? And at the end of the day, you must accept the consequences of how you manage your relationships regardless of what virtues you embody.

I think can be a complex question where one person might follow laws and rules just to avoid getting in trouble versus a person who has a moral code that considers certain ethical goals. A good example is the character of Mike Ermantraut in the Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul series. His character has a strong ethical code which included murder. The show writers were very clever in how they created a character with a strong set of virtues that also had serious moral vices. The feeling about the character was ambiguous because in one sense there was an attraction, but also reupulsion.

 

[Nimos]

Quoted from linked video:

"So, as always, when you come across a sensational but short clip on social media, it's always a good idea to look for the extended footage."

Words to live by.

But the funny thing is those politicians or what they are, that instantly goes on twitter and start complaining, they probably have a lot of followers that then read this without ever checking up on it again.

 

[Rachel Rugelach]

Just one question here, as I'm sure the subject will be fully covered. I know gossip is considered to be a big deal in Jewish thought (the story of the feather pillow comes to mind). However, a Rabbi of my acquaintance states that gossip is worse if it is true than if it is false. As that seems counter intuitive to me, I wonder if you (or any Jewish contributor) can say if you agree and if so explain the logic behind it?

I've always thought that gossip, whether true or false, can be equally harmful. I would need to ask my rabbi about this question of yours, or perhaps @rosends might have an answer, as I know that he is a rabbi.

My own thought on this is that, even if the gossip is true and not intentionally harmful (such as: "I heard from Shayna that Zelda is expecting twins! Mazal Tovs will soon be due!"), it could be that the person who is the subject of even "good gossip" may not want to have her personal business discussed out of hand. And, if she were to discover that she had been the subject even of "good gossip," it might cause her undue anxiety that could lead to health issues.

This is only my own take on it, as a Jew who tries to be good but, admittedly, sometimes falls short of the mark.

 

[Rachel Rugelach]

I think can be a complex question where one person might follow laws and rules just to avoid getting in trouble versus a person who has a moral code that considers certain ethical goals. A good example is the character of Mike Ermantraut in the Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul series. His character has a strong ethical code which included murder. The show writers were very clever in how they created a character with a strong set of virtues that also had serious moral vices. The feeling about the character was ambiguous because in one sense there was an attraction, but also reupulsion.

Mike Ermantraut is a good example! I think another example of a somewhat similar, criminal character from TV would be Raymond Reddington from Blacklist. I still don't know what his exact relationship is with the FBI character named Elizabeth Keen (who has become his "frenemy"), but Reddington has stated that he would never lie to her (and so far it seems that he hasn't).

I've only finished watching the first season and some of the second season so far, so please don't give away any spoilers! I'm really hooked on the series, as the complexity of the plots and Reddington's character have me fascinated.

 

[F1fan]

Mike Ermantraut is a good example! I think another example of a somewhat similar, criminal character from TV would be Raymond Reddington from Blacklist. I still don't know what his exact relationship is with the FBI character named Elizabeth Keen (who has become his "frenemy"), but Reddington has stated that he would never lie to her (and so far it seems that he hasn't).

I've only finished watching the first season and some of the second season so far, so please don't give away any spoilers! I'm really hooked on the series, as the complexity of the plots and Reddington's character have me fascinated.

I like Spader and Blacklist is on my list to watch.

 

[Brickjectivity]

To quote the late Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks: "There is no freedom without justice, and no justice without each of us accepting individual and collective responsibility for truth-telling."

He is not wrong, but look where truth is coming from. He is imploring individuals to be truthful. If they have no feeling, no concern, no depth then his entreaties are not enough. If they do not feel as he does, then his words will not resonate with them.

How seriously does your own religion (or code of behavior) view lying and spreading false accusations against others?

The bigger the liar, the more they stress the importance of absolute honesty and truth -- in my experience both religious and secular. (No I am not referring to Jonathan Sacks or calling anyone in particular a liar.) Talking about being truthful can be a cover up for being a two faced layered-onion ant lion. Truth is an adult thing. If as a child you believe in truth too much then you can become gullible and overconfident in what you think you know. For example if you always believe everything your dad says, well then you aren't thinking for yourself. If you find yourself dismissing or excusing evidence that a trusted authority has lied, then you are in trouble.

There is also a difference between teaching children to tell the truth and teaching children that truth is absolute. It is not absolute, nor is it the most important thing, but from many children and adults you will hear otherwise.

I suggest that truth proceeds out of good will. Truth is a gift from people who have given it to us. It is not something we can demand or be owed. Therefore good will is more important than truth, and without it there is no truth available. Without truth there may yet be good will, and that is better than nothing. Nothing is what you will get if you demand truth from yourself and others but have no good will.

There are times when a lie is required. You can lie to chidren about this, but it cannot be hidden long from adults.

In Judaism, we are taught about a pretty big sin referred to as lashon hara -- which broadly covers negative speech, gossip, the spreading of rumors, and outright lying.

Christianity has different schools, and so I cannot say for sure. Negative speech is discouraged in our scripture, however there are ways of poisoning wells indirectly. You can, for example, warn someone about other ministries or suggest that people are safest listening to you. You can thank God that you have been given such rich truth as many others are not privy to or are blinded to.

 

[Alien826]

I've always thought that gossip, whether true or false, can be equally harmful. I would need to ask my rabbi about this question of yours, or perhaps @rosends might have an answer, as I know that he is a rabbi.

My own thought on this is that, even if the gossip is true and not intentionally harmful (such as: "I heard from Shayna that Zelda is expecting twins! Mazal Tovs will soon be due!"), it could be that the person who is the subject of even "good gossip" may not want to have her personal business discussed out of hand. And, if she were to discover that she had been the subject even of "good gossip," it might cause her undue anxiety that could lead to health issues.

This is only my own take on it, as a Jew who tries to be good but, admittedly, sometimes falls short of the mark.

A thought I have is that countering lies is easier than countering truth. So if you want to "get rid of" the gossip (impossible!), if it's not true you can go round and present evidence to that effect. If it's true that option is not available.

The problems I see are first, why would anyone not want a good thing to be spread (you answered that) and second, how about if it involved warning others about some threat that the person poses?

 

[Rachel Rugelach]

A thought I have is that countering lies is easier than countering truth. So if you want to "get rid of" the gossip (impossible!), if it's not true you can go round and present evidence to that effect. If it's true that option is not available.

The problems I see are first, why would anyone not want a good thing to be spread (you answered that) and second, how about if it involved warning others about some threat that the person poses?

I guess that one would have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Or, simply ask your rabbi (if you have one). He's the one who gets paid the big bucks to research stuff like this and provide responsa (written decisions and rulings based on Halacha, or Judaic Law).

Actually, I'm kidding. I don't know any rabbis who get paid "big bucks." But, speaking of my rabbi, here's something I found online that I'm planning to gift to my rabbi (I know that it'll crack him up):

It also fits the theme of this discussion here, as that idiot shrew Marjorie Taylor Greene once circulated a lying conspiracy theory about Californian forest fires being caused by "Jewish lasers from space."

Sometimes, you've just got to laugh at the stupidity, am I right?

 

[DNB]

I'm curious to know what your religion (or non-religious code of behavior -- atheists are welcome to participate) says about making false accusations against others?

I'm familiar with how Christians have adopted the Ten Utterances in the Torah, which Christians call the "Ten Commandments" and which comprise the most basic principles of morality. (For those who don't already know, there are actually 613 Commandments in the Torah that observant Jews follow). Of the "Ten Commandments" that Christians follow, there is included the one about not bearing false witness against others.

In Judaism, we are taught about a pretty big sin referred to as lashon hara -- which broadly covers negative speech, gossip, the spreading of rumors, and outright lying. I think (though I could be wrong) that the only sort of lie that is maybe permissible is a lie spoken in order to keep peace -- the so-called "white lie" that is not intended to harm anyone. But I sometimes wonder whether the good intentions behind even a white lie can backfire into becoming something genuinely harmful to the very people whom one thought one was protecting.

How seriously does your own religion (or code of behavior) view lying and spreading false accusations against others?

To quote the late Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks: "There is no freedom without justice, and no justice without each of us accepting individual and collective responsibility for truth-telling."

Well, that's a peculiar question, isn't it?
In other words, what good can come out of bearing false witness against another? This is not synonymous with a white lie - a false accusation as an deliberate attempt at injuring another party.
The only good that I can see to be derived from such an act, and highly hypothetical, is that one may charge another with an transgression that is of a lighter sentence that the one that they are imminently about to receive. That is, put someone in jail to protect them from a life threatening situation that would occur if they were left out in public.
But, outside of that, which, again, is very hypothetical, a falsehood is a perversion of the truth. Even if we feel that telling a white lie is the lesser of two evils, as maybe Abraham and Isaac to Abimelech in protection of their respective wives, maybe there were other options?

 

[Alien826]

I guess that one would have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Or, simply ask your rabbi (if you have one). He's the one who gets paid the big bucks to research stuff like this and provide responsa (written decisions and rulings based on Halacha, or Judaic Law).

Actually I'm not Jewish and don't have a Rabbi in that sense. I get a weekly Email davar from a Rabbi who is friendly enough to answer my questions, but I try not to bother him too much.

Actually, I'm kidding. I don't know any rabbis who get paid "big bucks." But, speaking of my rabbi, here's something I found online that I'm planning to gift to my rabbi (I know that it'll crack him up):

It also fits the theme of this discussion here, as that idiot shrew Marjorie Taylor Greene once circulated a lying conspiracy theory about Californian forest fires being caused by "Jewish lasers from space."

Sometimes, you've just got to laugh at the stupidity, am I right?

As an alternative to crying, yes.

 

[F1fan]

Well, that's a peculiar question, isn't it?
In other words, what good can come out of bearing false witness against another? This is not synonymous with a white lie - a false accusation as an deliberate attempt at injuring another party.

When Christians tells non-Christians that they are going to hell, that is self-service. It's often a case of the Christian being indocrinated into this dogma, and they feel powerless to believe otherwise, but they can keep this belief to themselves. It doesn't matter that the Christian believes their dogma is true, of course they do, just as Muslims believe they are on the righteous path of God. The fact is none of these ideas are factual, thus not true in a reasoned sense. A theist who uses their dogma as a weapon against others in this way are troubled people with much to learn.

It does hurt others when they are condemned by believers. The believer who does not understand the harm they cause are not very good theists.

 

[Viker]

The means makes the end.

Lying is generally frowned upon. Only exceptions are with protecting or helping another.

 

[Rachel Rugelach]

When Christians tells non-Christians that they are going to hell, that is self-service. It's often a case of the Christian being indocrinated into this dogma, and they feel powerless to believe otherwise, but they can keep this belief to themselves. It doesn't matter that the Christian believes their dogma is true, of course they do, just as Muslims believe they are on the righteous path of God. The fact is none of these ideas are factual, thus not true in a reasoned sense. A theist who uses their dogma as a weapon against others in this way are troubled people with much to learn.

It does hurt others when they are condemned by believers. The believer who does not understand the harm they cause are not very good theists.

Yes, I agree. I was taught from childhood that one serves God best by working to make oneself a better person towards others, rather than thinking that we should have any business trying to makeover others. Nobody -- and I mean nobody -- can speak for God and tell somebody else that they're going to "hell." I can only imagine God perhaps finding that pretty presumptuous.

 

[dybmh]

Just one question here, as I'm sure the subject will be fully covered. I know gossip is considered to be a big deal in Jewish thought (the story of the feather pillow comes to mind). However, a Rabbi of my acquaintance states that gossip is worse if it is true than if it is false. As that seems counter intuitive to me, I wonder if you (or any Jewish contributor) can say if you agree and if so explain the logic behind it?

There are two examples I'm aware of that render true gossip worse than false.

1) If the gossip is true, it encourages the listener to seek out more gossip. Also, the listener might tell others that the source of the gossip is "in the know" and that triggers more and more gossip from the source, as well as more and more listeners to gossip. Thus the true gossip triggers much more gossip in the future than would have resulted if the gossip were false. If it's false, when people figure that out, they stop listening to the source of the gossip and possibly stop listening to gossip altogether.

2) This example is a little weird, it's for positive compliments that are true. If someone hears those compliments, gets jealous, this might trigger the spread of multiple lies about the other individual to tarnish their reputation. If it's true, then in order to slander the other person it would require multiple lies, of an increased magnitude, perhaps over the course of weeks or months or longer. However, if the compliment is false, it will not trigger the same amount of backlash.

And this is the logic behind most of the discussion around the gossip in Jewish thought. One act of gossip compounds into multiple transgressions.

 

[Rachel Rugelach]

2) This example is a little weird, it's for positive compliments that are true. If someone hears those compliments, gets jealous, this might trigger the spread of multiple lies about the other individual to tarnish their reputation. If it's true, then in order to slander the other person it would require multiple lies, of an increased magnitude, perhaps over the course of weeks or months or longer. However, if the compliment is false, it will not trigger the same amount of backlash.

This example that you gave regarding positive compliments and how they might create jealousy reminds me of our older generational members, who would carefully avoid complimenting a child in the presence of others for fear of attracting "the evil eye" of jealousy. If someone forgot about the evil eye of jealousy and made the mistake of complimenting one's child, the mother would spit three times into her hand to ward off evil. I don't think they actually spit, but instead made the noise of spitting into their hand.

 

[Rachel Rugelach]

Actually I'm not Jewish and don't have a Rabbi in that sense. I get a weekly Email davar from a Rabbi who is friendly enough to answer my questions, but I try not to bother him too much.

As an alternative to crying, yes.

@Alien826, you're not Jewish? Well, nobody's perfect.

Just kidding! That's an old Jewish joke. (Or probably just an old joke told by members of a different ethnicities.)

And, yes, the "Jewish Space Laser Corps -- Mazel Tough!" picture that I posted is illustrative of a lot of Jewish humor -- which consists of laughter from tears.

 

[Alien826]

@Alien826, you're not Jewish? Well, nobody's perfect.

Just kidding! That's an old Jewish joke. (Or probably just an old joke told by members of a different ethnicities.)

And, yes, the "Jewish Space Laser Corps -- Mazel Tough!" picture that I posted is illustrative of a lot of Jewish humor -- which consists of laughter from tears.

I'm not anything religious, though I've shopped around a bit.

One of my dearest friends was Jewish. Passed on now to my great loss. He was never very observant, but after his divorce he remarried and his new wife was very much so, with separate cookware for meat and milk, and so on. I moved abroad, and on one visit I made to England, I called to see if I could visit, not knowing it was Yom Kippur. His wife hesitated a bit, then invited me to join in. It was much later I realized what a compliment that was.

So I have a soft spot for Jewish people and a great interest in their religion.

 

[pearl]

Even the simplest of lies may take on a life of its own, becoming the spread of false witness
and the web we weave.......

 

[DNB]

When Christians tells non-Christians that they are going to hell, that is self-service. It's often a case of the Christian being indocrinated into this dogma, and they feel powerless to believe otherwise, but they can keep this belief to themselves. It doesn't matter that the Christian believes their dogma is true, of course they do, just as Muslims believe they are on the righteous path of God. The fact is none of these ideas are factual, thus not true in a reasoned sense. A theist who uses their dogma as a weapon against others in this way are troubled people with much to learn.

It does hurt others when they are condemned by believers. The believer who does not understand the harm they cause are not very good theists.

We are in the realm of life and death, salvation and perdition - why do you not see the catalyst behind evangelism as stemming from concern and compassion?
If a self-righteous theist wants to play the hell card, that's circumstantial, and inconsequential to the veracity of heaven and hell and Jesus' commission to preach. If we don't, we will be considered as selfish, apathetic and hypocritical. When one finds the pot of gold or fountain of youth, shame on them if they keep it to themselves.

But, many exploitive and misguided adherents may use this enlightenment for self-serving reasons. But, they should not, and cannot, tarnish or undermine the true sentiment of evangelism.

 

[F1fan]

We are in the realm of life and death,

This is true.

salvation and perdition - why do you not see the catalyst behind evangelism as stemming from concern and compassion?

This isn't based on fact, so not relevant.

If a self-righteous theist wants to play the hell card, that's circumstantial, and inconsequential to the veracity of heaven and hell and Jesus' commission to preach. If we don't, we will be considered as selfish, apathetic and hypocritical. When one finds the pot of gold or fountain of youth, shame on them if they keep it to themselves.

The hell card is irrelevant since the idea is absurd. But that a Christian will use it indicates a lost soul.

But, many exploitive and misguided adherents may use this enlightenment for self-serving reasons. But, they should not, and cannot, tarnish or undermine the true sentiment of evangelism.

As if the dogma is more important than the person.