The title “Lies for the Public Good” is chapter 12 of Sisiella Bok’s “Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life.” In this section, Bok attempts to analyze the primary distinction between lying and secrecy. She does so by covering three essential areas including noble lies, political corruption, and deception, and consent. According to the scholar, a noble lie is permissible and justifiable if it meets three demands (Bok 166). She names them as if it can assist in averting harm in time of a crisis if it protects one’s secrets and if the fabrication is harmless and trivial (Bok 166). Bok identifies that political lies are not justifiable and only serves as a means to electioneering.
On deception and consent, Bok reports that a lie is validated if it is intended to prevent panic among the members of the public (Bok 174). As such, the public may allow the government to lie. However, the government must inform the community about the lie when the plague situation is contained. Bok also accounts for the case of black projects, which are essential for national security. Bok identified that “dangerous circumstances where the state of crisis is such as to justify lies to the public for its own protection” (174). In this, Bok implies that lies on Black Projects are justifiable since they are essential for national security. According to her, for the sake of the state’s security, lying about such projects is justifiable (Bok 174).
Several news articles closely relate to Bok’s findings. “No Secrets” by Raffi Khatchadourian and James Bamford’s “They know much more Than You Think” are good examples of such articles. The editorial by Khatchadourian is related to Bok’s thoughts in that it serves to clarify on the nobility of a lie. Khatchadourian writes:
Moments later, two unarmed people entered the building. Though the soldiers acknowledged them, the attack proceeded: three Hellfire missiles destroyed the building (Khatchadourian par. 27).
In this case, the soldiers lied about the men who entered the partially constructed building by labeling them as combatants. If they were indeed combatants, it would be justifiable for the soldiers to attack them since it could have averted possible harm. However, the men were neither armed nor had they any intention to attack. Aside from this, the lie cannot be acknowledged as harmless or trivial since it caused the demise of the six civilians. In the light of this, the lie by the soldiers is not justifiable as it does not meet the three demands of a noble lie.
Bamford’s article relates to Bok’s notions in that it offers a further account of lying for the public good. Bamford indicates, “NSA continued to deceive the American public about the extent of the spying” (par. 14). Collecting conversation data is for common good since it could potentially help in preventing the occurrence of crime such as terrorism. Therefore, lying to the public through the NSA is a noble lie. However, as reported in the article, years after its implementation, the program has not yet prevented any crime from taking place. Indeed, as the reporter states, a series of high-profile crimes have taken place thereafter and this shows the program’s inability to fulfill the intended purpose. Therefore, the NSA’s lie is not noble. Additionally, the article also makes a case for Bok’s idea on deception and consent. NSA is a black project given that it is a matter of American’s security. Contrastingly, as it has been mentioned, it has not yet contributed towards reinforcing the country’s security. As such, it does not qualify as a valid deception and consent.
Works Cited
Bamford, James.They Know Much More Than You Think. 2013. Web.
Bok, Sisiella. Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2011. Print.
Khatchadourian, Raffi.No Secrets: Julian Assange’s mission for total transparency. 2010. Web.