H8tank Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Greg had about 30 min before he got off work, a co-worker called, and said they needed to talk to greg about something, that they would be there in 40 min. Greg stated: "My father in law is flying into town in about an hour, I won't be here much longer." Greg may or may not actually be leaving by then, his father in law truely is flying into town in one hour, but someone else is picking him up. Did Greg lie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 I don't have any friends named Greg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Greg stated: "My father in law is flying into town in about an hour, I won't be here much longer." It's all about the comma. If he had said two separate sentences, then it wouldn't be a lie... it would be two factual statements. The comma implies a "therefore" which basically means that the first part of the sentence has a causal relationship with the second part of the sentence. So, yes, he lied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Now if I knew someone like Greg and he later explained the reson he blew me off was that he was duct taped to a box of Saddam's VX and was in Syria all would be forgiven. Greg makes two factual statements. What you do with them is on you, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted June 16, 2007 Author Share Posted June 16, 2007 It's all about the comma. If he had said two separate sentences, then it wouldn't be a lie... it would be two factual statements. The And to think, all this time I thought that was jiz flying outa your mouth when you spoke, now to find they were comma's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thews40 Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 I voted no, and am not a lawyer. There is no lie here. Implying he’d be leaving because his father in law was coming into town doesn’t imply he needs to leave to pick him up. Maybe he needs to cover something for the person that is picking his father in law? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBalla Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 (edited) Greg had about 30 min before he got off work, a co-worker called, and said they needed to talk to greg about something, that they would be there in 40 min. Greg stated: "My father in law is flying into town in about an hour, I won't be here much longer." Greg may or may not actually be leaving by then, his father in law truely is flying into town in one hour, but someone else is picking him up. Did Greg lie? Sounds like he's clean. Edited June 16, 2007 by SuperBalla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 It's all about the comma. If he had said two separate sentences, then it wouldn't be a lie... it would be two factual statements. The comma implies a "therefore" which basically means that the first part of the sentence has a causal relationship with the second part of the sentence. So, yes, he lied. I disagree. The comma represents "and". You could assume that that the 2 statements are connected but I don't see how its implied that they are connected. I don't believe he lied. He may have said something in a manner with the intention of it being misinterpreted but its not a lie. The listener's assumption was incorrect. My wife does that all the time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Greg had about 30 min before he got off work, a co-worker called, and said they needed to talk to greg about something, that they would be there in 40 min. Greg stated: "My father in law is flying into town in about an hour, I won't be here much longer." Greg may or may not actually be leaving by then, his father in law truely is flying into town in one hour, but someone else is picking him up. Did Greg lie? no lie....did someone assume that greg was picking his dad up? well you know what they say about that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 I think I saw this episode once. Mike tries to explain to Greg that you can't always live by "exact words" and at the end the frog jumps onto his date's pizza at the drive-in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 I think I saw this episode once. Mike tries to explain to Greg that you can't always live by "exact words" and at the end the frog jumps onto his date's pizza at the drive-in. holy flashbacks Oliver! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 holy flashbacks Oliver! The last-season addin who could have passed off as John Denver Jr. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 The intent was to mislead regardless of jargon. Lie. How about Greg having the cajones to say I'm leaving in a half-hour without the phony excuse. Veronica. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 nancy pelosi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boat_hacked Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 QUOTE(H8tank @ 6/16/07 12:08pm) Greg stated: "My father in law is flying into town in about an hour, I won't be here much longer." It's all about the comma. If he had said two separate sentences, then it wouldn't be a lie... it would be two factual statements. The comma implies a "therefore" which basically means that the first part of the sentence has a causal relationship with the second part of the sentence. So, yes, he lied. More like a cause/effect relationship. Because someone assumes these two are related does not make it a lie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 The intent was to mislead regardless of jargon. Lie. How about Greg having the cajones to say I'm leaving in a half-hour without the phony excuse. Veronica. I disagree, and agree. What if he had to go pick something up related to his FIL's arrival? But yeah, dude just needed to provide a better reason... or more specific. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Misleading, yes. Out-and-out lie, technically no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.