“ALittle Inaccuracy Does Not Save a World of Explanation”
Prompt: “ALittle Inaccuracy Saves a World of Explanation.”
Assignment: “IsIt Always Essential to Tell The Truth, or Are There Circumstances inwhich It Is Better to Lie.”
Quote: “Man isLeast Himself when He Talks in His Own Person. Give Him a Mask and HeWill Tell You the Truth.” (Wilde 167).
Since time immemorial, lying has become intrinsic to the making ofpeople’s predispositions, values, and traits. Perhaps, lying andwhite lies have become the pedestals through which people measuretheir wit and assert their authority. Every person has articulated alie at one time, medical tests lie, scientific studies lie, diversesituations lie, and best friends lie in fact, everything or everyperson has ever endured lies. The manifestation of the lie has becomeinexorable and people have asserted that some scenarios requirelying, for instance, surgeons have to lie to kids to give themmedications. However, lying may let someone avoid a difficultsituation, but it does not become a decent thing since the liar isnot true to himself and others. Lying is addictive and gives peoplean illusion and a false pleasure, driving one to a world where thelie cannot save one. As such, a white lie does not save a person thepain to explain as it will always appear as it is ultimately, a lie.In this regards, Ayer’s assertion that “A Little Inaccuracy Savesa World of Explanation,” is weak and unwarranted since it is alwaysessential to tell the truth as most scenarios demonstrate.
Lying is neververacious and it does not become the lesser of the two devils at anytime. When instances of telling a lie comes to one’s mind, the mostimperative question to deliberate upon is whether the lie will save aperson a world of elucidations in the short run or in the long run.Lying does not save an individual any explanation as ultimately,people will ask questions about the assertions made. For example,when surgeons lie to kids to give them medications, the kids willultimately ask questions that will embarrass the doctors. In fact,Ayer’s assertion contends that going into greater detail is much ofa hassle and unnecessary. In fact, cultivating a little inaccuracycan actually create a scenario of explanations rather than a momentof silence.
The case ofGalileo Galilei refutes the claims of Ayer to a great extent. Insteadof bettering a relationship, endearing oneself to people, or savingone a lot of explanation among others, a lie inhibits people’sliberties, inhibits people’s capacities to make wise decisions, itcan never become a universal principle, and diminishes trust. Infact, Quintilianus and Gernhard assert, “A liar should have a goodmemory,” (Book IV, 2 line 91). This means that although a liar maysucceed in telling a lie he or she will in most cases forget the lie,eventually getting into a lot of problems trying to explain the lie.Galileo’s case shows that truths reveal the fundamental nature ofnature and pursues values that progresses a society rather thancultivate scenarios of retrogression (Castro 8). For example, whenlies propagate and become the conventional motifs of reasoning andthought only a veracity can build trust and save people fromthemselves and situations. The conflict between the church andGalileo exemplifies how people should regard the truth as well asillustrates how people should avoid telling little imprecisions in abid to save themselves from a world of explanations as Ayer suggests.
Galileo, aphilosopher, physicist, and an astrophysicist, became a strongexponent of the heliocentric notion during the 16thcentury, in which he asserted that the sun lay in the middle of thesolar system (Castro 8). Then, cosmology bore a strong interlinkageto the church, which forced Galileo to repudiate his notions and heedto the inaccuracies endorsed by the church. However, when offered thesame occasion, Galileo did not blunder, but mounted courage, stood upagainst the church and proven a scientific truth, over the falsepropagated by the church. Supporting the ideas of the church wouldhave saved Galileo’s life, as he was placed under house arrestwhere he died, but it would not have saved him from the truth. Infact, by telling the truth, Galileo allowed people to understand thesolar system thus, understand the fundamental nature of the nature.
Lies whether told by choice or under compulsion do no uphold virtueas they project a false image, which ultimately requires people toquestion the lie. For example, when the church perpetuated theinaccuracy about the solar system, Galileo developed a notion thatproved the inaccuracy as there were, lies. Ayer argues that someinstances require people to advocate fallacies or inaccuracies tosubdue turmoil, but those lies do not become right or save people.Had Galileo not exposed the truth, the world would have remainedunder the york of a dark age and unable to construe the correctdecisions regarding the solar system (Castro 8). Lies whether whitelies or inaccuracies, are not a good thing as they deprive people ofimperative information as Galileo demonstrates as well as developinto a habit. In this regards, Ayer’s assertion is wrong and aprojection of the illusion people live in regarding the truth a liedoes not save a situation or a person as it only creates an illusionof security and deliverance from problems.
Castro, Kristina Terkun. "Religion as a Credence Good and theCase Against Galileo." IJRR 8 (2012): 8.
Quintilianus, Marcus Fabius, and August Gotthilf Gernhard. Book IVCicero’s Oration. In De institutione oratoria: 2. Vol. 2.Teubnerus, 1830.
Wilde, Oscar. The Critic as Artist. In Intentions. No.14. Thomas B. Mosher, from the New York Public Library, 1904. Print.