DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[pocaracas]

I think it's how you define it.  To me if any part of the truth isn't such, then it is a lie.  If you suggest it there can be "partial truth" then maybe, but that would be contextual. 

Very well, then allow me to explain my definitions.
To me, reality is that which is, that which exists, the physical world, its interactions and emerging properties.

A statement has a truth value attributed to it. A statement is true if it is an accurate representation of reality.
The partial truth you speak of may be an inaccurate description.
An example I like is how Newtonian relativistic motion is not exactly accurate, but, when it was developed, it was as accurate as possible. Nowadays, we have refined it to include relativistic effects from Einstein. Is our current description the most accurate possible? Maybe, maybe not. But it is the best we have.

Some people are convinced that their description of some aspect of reality is accurate, when it is far from it. I wouldn't label statements from such people as lies, but rather honest mistakes. I think most believers speak of gods from this stand point.

To me, a lie is a deliberate fabrication conveying an erroneous description of reality, masked as an accurate one.

I don't think it works any different for "reality", and the two can be synonymous.  For me "truth would be "what we assert" and "reality" would be "how we live", but someone may come along and define those things differently. 

As I said above, I don't think those are synonyms. They should be close, but these two words describe different concepts.

I'm interested to hear more of your concept of reality. Care to elaborate a bit more, please?

The bit about being responsible to others. I agree. I think social responsibility is important.  But not everybody talks how we are talking where there's an attempt for mutual understanding.  In fact, I would assert more times than not it ends up in a tug-o-war type situation where the end goal is to try and beat the other party. The more they tug, you tug, but that tug-o-war ends up leading to ignorance because the end goal is to win, not learn.

LOL. I'm not sure what there is to win, in here
I'm mostly trying to understand your point of view on these things, while conveying my own in the hopes that any misunderstandings that arise from us attributing different connotations to particular words can be straightened out.

Also, I welcome the change of pace on this thread.

In "reality" you win tug-o-war when you give a little.  My dogs do this. They pull, then they give some slack. That's how they win because by giving slack, they can exert more force when they pull the next time. So back to discussions, that same thing is optimal in conversations. If you give a little slack here and there for the sake of understanding and learning together, it can potentially be win-win. You come to a conclusion that makes sense, even if it's not 100 percent of what you started with.  More times than not, that is where the solution lies.  "Mom, he hit me"  No, Mom he hit me" When they probably both hit each other.

True, true!