If Pinocchio says his nose will grow and he is telling the truth (i.e. his nose actually grows) than his nose will grow independent of the nose-growing spell. If Pinocchio says his nose will grow and he's lying and specifies a period in which the event will happen, then his nose will grow once the period of time has passed and his statement has become practically false. If Pinocchio says his nose will grow and he's lying and does not specify a period for the event to happen, then his nose will always be "on the brink of growing" because he will always be "on the brink of lying", but never quite lying since his statement is not yet untrue for every moment in time.
This of course takes a consequentialist view of lying - a lie only qualifying as a lie once it is false in a factual sense, whatever the intention of the liar.
In an intentionalist sense of lying the actual consequences are irrelevant to the matter: a lie would be defined as a statement intended to be false, no matter if it proves false or not. If Pinocchio intends his statement as false then his nose will grow, which would make it consequentially true, but intentionally false. If he intends his statement as true, then his nose will not grow due to the nose-growing spell, even if it doesn't grow due to other factors, and is therefore consequentially false, since Pinocchio intended his statement to be true, and thus it is not intentional lying, but it is consequential lying.
If we take a mixed definition of lying: where we should call "lying" that which is both intentionally and consequentially false, "telling the truth that" which is both intentionally and consequentially false, and "making an uninformed statement" any case where the intentional and consequential truth of the statement differ then we'd have the following cases: If Pinocchio is intending to lie and his nose does not grow – then he has told a lie and his nose would once again be "on the brink of growing" since even if he tells an intentional lie, it is not yet a consequential lie, and therefore not a mixed-type lie. If Pinocchio is intending to lie and his nose does grow, then he made an uninformed statement. If Pinocchio is intending to tell the truth and his nose does not grow he once again makes an uninformed statement, which is not affected by the anti-lying spell. If Pinocchio is intending to tell the truth and his nose does grow, then he told the truth, so his nose would not grow further due to the anti-lying spell, despite having grown due to other circumstances.
If Pinocchio says his nose will grow and he is telling the truth (i.e. his nose actually grows) than his nose will grow independent of the nose-growing spell.
If Pinocchio says his nose will grow and he's lying and specifies a period in which the event will happen, then his nose will grow once the period of time has passed and his statement has become practically false.
If Pinocchio says his nose will grow and he's lying and does not specify a period for the event to happen, then his nose will always be "on the brink of growing" because he will always be "on the brink of lying", but never quite lying since his statement is not yet untrue for every moment in time.
This of course takes a consequentialist view of lying - a lie only qualifying as a lie once it is false in a factual sense, whatever the intention of the liar.
In an intentionalist sense of lying the actual consequences are irrelevant to the matter: a lie would be defined as a statement intended to be false, no matter if it proves false or not. If Pinocchio intends his statement as false then his nose will grow, which would make it consequentially true, but intentionally false. If he intends his statement as true, then his nose will not grow due to the nose-growing spell, even if it doesn't grow due to other factors, and is therefore consequentially false, since Pinocchio intended his statement to be true, and thus it is not intentional lying, but it is consequential lying.
If we take a mixed definition of lying: where we should call "lying" that which is both intentionally and consequentially false, "telling the truth that" which is both intentionally and consequentially false, and "making an uninformed statement" any case where the intentional and consequential truth of the statement differ then we'd have the following cases:
If Pinocchio is intending to lie and his nose does not grow – then he has told a lie and his nose would once again be "on the brink of growing" since even if he tells an intentional lie, it is not yet a consequential lie, and therefore not a mixed-type lie. If Pinocchio is intending to lie and his nose does grow, then he made an uninformed statement. If Pinocchio is intending to tell the truth and his nose does not grow he once again makes an uninformed statement, which is not affected by the anti-lying spell. If Pinocchio is intending to tell the truth and his nose does grow, then he told the truth, so his nose would not grow further due to the anti-lying spell, despite having grown due to other circumstances.
Anyone else's thoughts on this?