Skip to main content

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Skip banner

Web Content Display Web Content Display

INCET logo

Web Content Display Web Content Display

BIOUNCERTAINTY - ERC Starting Grant no. 805498

ERC logo

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

1st of December 2022 – Izabela Skoczeń – Deceptive implicatures in the courtroom

1st of December 2022 – Izabela Skoczeń – Deceptive implicatures in the courtroom

We have the pleasure to invite you to another research seminar in the ‘BIOUNCERTAINTY’ research project. This week Izabela Skoczeń will give a talk: "Deceptive implicatures in the courtroom". The seminar will take place on Thursday 1st of December at 5:30 p.m. in the room 25 on Grodzka Street and via MS Teams.

Abstract

This talk investigates with empirical studies whether there is a difference between the folk concept of a lie and a perjurious statement (roughly a willful lie during court proceedings). Classical philosophical theories usually define a lie in a standard, seemingly cooperative conversation. This talk investigates a different context of mistrust, namely the courtroom context. Previous studies (for example Skoczeń, 2021) showed that lying judgments in a courtroom are inconsistent – in uncertainty contexts, participants judge a false implicature a lie irrespective of whether the speaker had the intention to lie. However, the vignettes and questions used the ordinary language term “lie”, rather than the technical term “perjury”, which could suggest that only moral rather than legal responsibility of the speaker is at stake. This issue is important because in the lay juries system the results might hint toward an over-extensive criminalization of false statements in the courtroom. In order to verify whether it is the case, the present vignettes will use both the terms lie and perjury interchangeably, to check whether perjury ascriptions are equally inconsistent as lying ascriptions. Finally, perjury is defined as a willful lie which concerns only the material facts of the case. Material facts are facts relevant to the court’s decision. The talk will investigate whether immaterial lies can unjustifiably affect folk ascriptions of responsibility of the ‘immaterial’ liar.

 

Link to MS Teams meeting