{"id":1010,"date":"2024-01-20T05:55:49","date_gmt":"2024-01-20T05:55:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2024\/01\/20\/politics-lies-and-counterfactuals\/"},"modified":"2024-01-20T05:55:49","modified_gmt":"2024-01-20T05:55:49","slug":"politics-lies-and-counterfactuals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2024\/01\/20\/politics-lies-and-counterfactuals\/","title":{"rendered":"Politics, Lies, and Counterfactuals"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">Suppose I say<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">1) Had Jeb Bush won the 2016 Republican&#0160; nomination for president, Hillary Clinton would have won the presidential election.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">We know, of course, that Donald J. Trump won the 2016 election. Suppose an Anti-Trumper calls me a liar for asserting (1).&#0160; Have I lied?&#0160; That depends on what a lie is. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">What is a lie?<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">A lie is not the same as a false statement. For one can make a false statement without lying: one may sincerely believe that what one is asserting is true when in fact it is false. The intention to deceive is essential to a lie.&#0160; No lie without the intention to deceive. A lie, then, is an intentional misrepresentation of what one either knows to be the case or sincerely believes to be the case for the purpose of deceiving one&#39;s audience. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">Now what <em>is<\/em> the case is actually the case as opposed to possibly the case. So on the definition just given, one cannot lie about the merely possible.&#0160; It follows that one cannot lie about what might have been or what could have been. Therefore, I cannot be fairly accused of telling a lie if I assert (1). There simply is no fact of the matter as to whether or not, had Jeb won the nomination, Hillary would or would not have won the election.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">On my analysis, then, there are two necessary conditions for a statement&#39;s being a lie.&#0160; (i) The statement must express a person&#39;s intention to deceive his interlocutor(s), and (ii) there must be some actual fact about which the one who lies intends to deceive them. Note that one who lies on a given occasion need not be a liar because a liar is one who habitually lies, and one who lies needn&#39;t be in the habit of lying.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">Can one lie about a counterfactual state of affairs?<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">It follows from my analysis that there cannot be any lies pertaining to counterfactual states of affairs. Counterfactual conditionals, however, have as their subject matter counterfactual states of affairs, which is to say, states of affairs that are really possible but not actual.&#0160; So no counterfactual is a lie. Note that I said <em>really<\/em> possible, not epistemically possible. I am assuming that Reality, with majuscule &#39;R,&#39;&#0160; is not exhausted by the actual or existent: there are merely possible states of affairs that subsist mind-independently. (That which subsists <em>is<\/em> but does not <em>exist.<\/em>)&#0160;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">But what I just wrote is not self-evident: I don&#39;t want to paper over the fact that the problem of the merely possible and its ontological status is deep and nasty and will lead us into a labyrinth of <em>aporiai<\/em> and <em>insolubilia<\/em>.&#0160; More about this later.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">Now (1) is either true or if not true, then false, but no one knows, or could know, which it is. So no one can rightly call me a liar for asserting (1).&#0160;&#0160;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">If I am not lying when I assert (1), what am I doing?&#0160; I am offering a reasonable, but practically unverifiable, speculation.&#0160; And the same goes for a person who denies (2). Consider a second example.&#0160;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">Donald Trump famously boasted,&#0160;<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">2) Had it not been for all the illegal votes, I would have won the popular vote as well as the electoral college vote.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">Leftists, who compile long lists of Trump&#39;s supposed lies, had among their number some who counted (2) &#8212; an accurate paraphrase of what Trump said, not an exact quotation &#8212; as a lie.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">But it is obviously not a lie. The worst you could call it is an unlikely, self-serving speculation.&#0160; He did not assert something he knew to be false, he asserted something he did not know to be true and could not know to be true. Again, there is no underlying fact of the matter.&#0160;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">Trump haters who compile lists of his &#39;lies,&#39; need to give a little thought as to what a lie is; else their count will be wrong.&#0160;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">Before proceeding to a third example, let me record an aporetic pentad&#0160; for later rumination and delectation:<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 13pt;\">1) Counterfactuals have truth-values: some are true and the rest are false.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 13pt;\">2) The true ones are contingently true.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 13pt;\">3) Contingent truths have truth-makers.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 13pt;\">4) Truth-makers are obtaining, i.e., actual states of affairs.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 13pt;\">5) Counterfactuals are about non-actual, merely possible, states of affairs.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">These propositions are individually plausible but collectively inconsistent. Is the problem genuine or pseudo? If genuine, how solve it? Which proposition should we reject?&#0160; I hope to come back to this problem later.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">A third example. London Ed quotes and comments upon a <a href=\"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.typepad.com\/maverick_philosopher\/2024\/01\/dueling-articles.html\">recent assertion<\/a> of mine:<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p class=\"yiv7690512013MsoNormal\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 12pt;\">\u201cHe [David Frum] neglects to observe, however, that the devastation of that country [Ukraine] would not have occurred had Trump been president.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p class=\"yiv7690512013MsoNormal\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 12pt;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14pt;\">Ed comments<\/span>:<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p class=\"yiv7690512013MsoNormal\" style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 12pt;\">Trump\u2019s presidency ended January 20, 2021. The invasion of Ukraine was 24 February 2022. What might have happened (another counterfactual) under a continued Trumpian presidency that would have prevented Putin\u2019s invasion? The build up of Russian troops began March and April 2021, although the Russian government repeatedly denied having plans to invade or attack.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 14pt;\">What might have happened is that Putin would have been dissuaded from invading&#0160; Ukraine out of fear of what Trump would do to him and his country should he have invaded.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia, palatino; font-size: 13pt;\"><em>Related<\/em>: <a href=\"https:\/\/web.stanford.edu\/group\/fearon-research\/cgi-bin\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/10\/Counterfactuals-and-Hypothesis-Testing-in-Political-Science.pdf\">Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Suppose I say 1) Had Jeb Bush won the 2016 Republican&#0160; nomination for president, Hillary Clinton would have won the presidential election. We know, of course, that Donald J. Trump won the 2016 election. Suppose an Anti-Trumper calls me a liar for asserting (1).&#0160; Have I lied?&#0160; That depends on what a lie is. What &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2024\/01\/20\/politics-lies-and-counterfactuals\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Politics, Lies, and Counterfactuals&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[421,56,228,125,90],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1010","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-counterfactuals","category-politics","category-truth","category-truthfulness","category-truthmakers"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1010","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1010"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1010\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1010"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1010"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1010"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}