Charitable interpreters of David Hume set aside his sprinkles of piety. Better to read him as lying than as clumsily inconsistent. We argue that the attribution of lies can pay dividends in historical scholarship no matter how strongly the theorist condemns lying. Accordingly, we show that our approach works even with one of the strongest condemners of lying: Immanuel Kant. We argue that Kant lied in his scholarly work and even in the first Critique. And we defend the claim that this lie attribution, strange as it may sound, amounts to a kind of scholarly charity.

中文翻译：

---

消除谎言的释经归因的污名化：康德的案例

大卫·休谟的慈善诠释者抛开了他的虔诚。把他解读为撒谎，而不是笨拙地自​​相矛盾。我们认为，无论理论家多么强烈地谴责谎言，谎言的归因都可以为历史学术带来好处。因此，我们表明，即使对于最强烈谴责说谎的人之一：伊曼纽尔·康德，我们的方法也有效。我们认为康德在他的学术著作甚至第一本批判中撒了谎。我们捍卫这种说法，即这种谎言归因虽然听起来很奇怪，但却相当于一种学术慈善。