>If I see a lie being told, I have no particular moral reason to remain
silent.
That you think you see a lie being told does not mean a lie is being
told. Three things lead me to suspect your perceptions are flawed:
1. I have not seen you make a convincing case to support your
moralistic judgmentalism;
2. You strike me as somewhat of an extremist, willing to adopt inflammatory
language to score rhetorical points against your perceived foes;
3. Experience teaches me that "out of context = lie" accusations
tend to be accusations that rely on subjective impressions. What
we usually have are different people with different perspectives that
result in different points of emphasis. We assume that people should
see and think like we do and thus, when they don't, we attribute
evil intentions to them.
Like Bertvan, when people start dipping into the "you're a liar" well,
this poison's the well of reasonable dispute and thus I have a hard
time taking them seriously. Yet if Susan persists in clinging to her
moralistic accusations as the one true explanation, this amounts to
a high standard that I will happily adopt in my discussions with her; if she
ever misrepresents anything I write, we shall agree that she was
lying.
Mike