Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Hem0g0blin t1_jdw7fp2 wrote

Reply to comment by Advanced_Car1599 in I see your “everything is Jewish” posts and I raise you the worst I’ve ever seen by sammyf0712

What would you call something that is true, but presented in a way that omits critical information about the truth?

In a sworn testimony, you swear to tell the "whole truth", which implies the existence of partial truths.

3

Advanced_Car1599 t1_jdwh9gz wrote

So the way I'm reading this, you're combining a truthful/non-truthful comment as well as evidence or context of that comment. Those items are non synonymous. From a legalistic standpoint, "the whole truth" refers to the truthful statement plus context or suggested evidence to support the truthful statement. The "whole truth" does not imply there is any ambiguity around the factual occurrence of the event/etc in question based on context.

−1

Hem0g0blin t1_jdx13wg wrote

I'm just saying that I think a "half truth" is a thing, and not just media jargon. Don't take my word on it though, it's in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary and the Collins Dictionary.

>From a legalistic standpoint, "the whole truth" refers to the truthful statement plus context or suggested evidence to support the truthful statement. The "whole truth" does not imply there is any ambiguity around the factual occurrence of the event/etc in question based on context.

TheLawDictionary.org defines a half-truth as:

"a deceitful act where only part of the truth is told where all of the truth will lead to a different conclusion."

This reads to me like there is ambiguity due to the lack of full context.

1