When do We have a Moral Obligation Not to Lie?

[Sunstone]

Under what circumstances or conditions, if any, do we have a moral obligation not to lie? Why?

Under what circumstances or conditions, if any, do we have a moral obligation to tell the truth? Why?

Offhand, I think we have a moral obligation not to lie when doing so would harm an innocent person. I have read that that principle is relatively ubiquitous.

For instance, I think we might have a moral obligation not to lie when doing so would cause an innocent person to form a false or misleading view of affairs, for such a view, if acted upon, could bring harm to them, or through them, to others. Of course, I do not mean we have a moral obligation not to lie in cases when someone might thereby form a false or misleading view that cannot possibly harm them (yet how are we to determine when that's indeed the case?).

As to the second question, I think we might have a moral obligation to tell the truth when doing so would likely benefit someone -- perhaps so long as doing so would not lead to harm for us or others.

I am not fixed in my opinions on this subject, though, but rather am looking for insights.

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[Aupmanyav]

It is prudence rather than morality. As they say "to hide one untruth you will need to lie a hundred times", so why do that? That is why 'honesty is the best policy'. You have already mentioned the exception. Apart from that, if one's nation's welfare depends on speaking a lie, then that too will be exempt.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm uncertain about the exact boundaries. But Sam Harris convinced me that most lies are unnecessary and, in fact, counterproductive. They erode other people's ability to trust us and confuse their understandings of what to expect of us.

 

[LuisDantas]

Apart from that, if one's nation's welfare depends on speaking a lie, then that too will be exempt.

When exactly would that apply? How do you define a nation here?

 

[Aupmanyav]

For me, India. I am a simple person, do not expect complicated definitions from me.

 

[LuisDantas]

Well, that leaves me with no choice but to point out that I find nations too artificial a concept to be worth defending.

 

[LittlePinky82]

It is prudence rather than morality. As they say "to hide one untruth you will need to lie a hundred times", so why do that? That is why 'honesty is the best policy'. You have already mentioned the exception. Apart from that, if one's nation's welfare depends on speaking a lie, then that too will be exempt.

I would agree with this. Not just your nation but your own too in some cases. But then you'd have to keep up the lie and, as you pointed out, how long can you do that? Is the lie worth it? I think the good exception to a lie is if you know it would do damage to someone else if you told the truth.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Under what circumstances or conditions, if any, do we have a moral obligation not to lie? Why?

Under what circumstances or conditions, if any, do we have a moral obligation to tell the truth? Why?

We have a moral obligation not to lie unless telling the truth would cause significant amounts of harm to other human beings than telling the truth would.

Because telling the truth spreads knowledge which in turn reduces ignorance which in term causes delusion which causes most human evils.

 

[LuisDantas]

Why would a nation deserve any special privilege far as lies go?

I am blanking on a reason.

 

[columbus]

I am not fixed in my opinions on this subject, though, but rather am looking for insights.

I see no moral issue with lying. People do it all the time.

From telling stories to complimenting someone on their new hairdo to saying "It'll be alright because I love you and I will take care of you", people do this a lot.

The moral issue is when people use their verbal skills to degrade the human situation. The usual way is to simply say nothing. Worse is the partial truth. Then you can get what you want, without the risk of being caught out. Because you didn't actually lie, so God won't be angry and who cares what humans think....


I really learned how to lie when I was the facilitator of a gay/HIV support group. People would ask me questions that were totally out of bounds, given my nondisclosure thing. But I could not just say stuff like, "You should ask them, not me". I knew what they would assume from that sort of answer. So I learned how to lie point blank to someone's face. "Of course that's not true. And I would know, now wouldn't I? "
Ask me a question that is none of your business, but juicy gossip, and I will lie to you. Because lying is the right thing to do, sometimes. The flip side of that is "Don't ask me a question if the honest answer will upset you. Because I will tell you the truth".

Lying is not a bad thing. Deceiving people, or saying things that are not in the human races best interests, or whatever, is what is immoral.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

Good lies....
- To keep your money from govenment
- To spare the feelings of a dying person
- To win the war

Bad lies....
- To cheat someone
- To violate a deserved trust
- To your landlord
- When there's no need

 

[allfoak]

Without an absolute to hold up as a standard for everyone, morality is arbitrary.

 

[Milton Platt]

Under what circumstances or conditions, if any, do we have a moral obligation not to lie? Why?

Under what circumstances or conditions, if any, do we have a moral obligation to tell the truth? Why?

Offhand, I think we have a moral obligation not to lie when doing so would harm an innocent person. I have read that that principle is relatively ubiquitous.

For instance, I think we might have a moral obligation not to lie when doing so would cause an innocent person to form a false or misleading view of affairs, for such a view, if acted upon, could bring harm to them, or through them, to others. Of course, I do not mean we have a moral obligation not to lie in cases when someone might thereby form a false or misleading view that cannot possibly harm them (yet how are we to determine when that's indeed the case?).

As to the second question, I think we might have a moral obligation to tell the truth when doing so would likely benefit someone -- perhaps so long as doing so would not lead to harm for us or others.

I am not fixed in my opinions on this subject, though, but rather am looking for insights.

What are your thoughts on this?

Take this further....can there ever be a moral obligation to lie?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Why would a nation deserve any special privilege far as lies go? I am blanking on a reason.

Prudence again. The welfare of my nation is connected with the welfare of my family, my society. I would want them safe. So, do not want Germans attacking France or Russia. Why should you ask, is not it obvious?

Take this further....can there ever be a moral obligation to lie?

I would say, yes.

 

[Milton Platt]

Prudence again. The welfare of my nation is connected with the welfare of my family, my society. I would want them safe. So, do not want Germans attacking France or Russia. Why should you ask, is not it obvious?I would say, yes.

I think you are correct.
Thanks

 

[LuisDantas]

Prudence again. The welfare of my nation is connected with the welfare of my family, my society. I would want them safe. So, do not want Germans attacking France or Russia. Why should you ask, is not it obvious?I would say, yes.

No, not obvious at all. I would instead assume that avoiding lies is necessary in order to further the welfare of your family and, by extension, your society and your nation.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I would instead assume that avoiding lies is necessary in order to further the welfare of your family and, by extension, your society and your nation.

Yes, as far as possible, honesty IS the best policy, I whole-heartedly agree to that - but I would not bind myself to the idea, I will give myself a wriggling space. Who knows what situations may arise in future? That is why Krishna advised against taking vows without keeping future in mind. I might have to lie in order to harm the enemy of my family, my society or my country. If such a situation occurs, I would not dither and say 'Ashwatthama hatah, iti. Naro va Kunjaro va' (Ashwatthama is dead, sure. Perhaps the man or the elephant).

"Vyavasāyātmikā buddhih ekeha, Kuru-nandana;
bahu-śākhā hi anantah ca, buddhayah avyavasāyinām." BG 2.41

Those who are on this path are resolute in purpose, and their aim is one, O Scion of the Kurus; the intelligence of those who are irresolute is many-branched (they will uselessly think about many things).

 

[Nous]

Under what circumstances or conditions, if any, do we have a moral obligation not to lie? Why?

Under what circumstances or conditions, if any, do we have a moral obligation to tell the truth? Why?

Offhand, I think we have a moral obligation not to lie when doing so would harm an innocent person. I have read that that principle is relatively ubiquitous.

For instance, I think we might have a moral obligation not to lie when doing so would cause an innocent person to form a false or misleading view of affairs, for such a view, if acted upon, could bring harm to them, or through them, to others.

I agree with your criteria. We have a moral obligation to tell the truth or to not lie when doing otherwise would result in a wrong to someone. Exactly how to determine when not telling the truth or not lying would result in a wrong to someone is not always easy.

Whether or not one has a moral obligation to lie in order to save an otherwise innocent person from being wronged (e.g., to save a person from being convicted for a crime that you know that person did not commit) is an interesting question.

I often tell people that I'm the Queen of France in drag. It's a lie, but I get a lot of mileage out of it.

 

[Smart_Guy]

In my beliefs, the moral obligation to not lie is there when there is no serious life or honer threat against me or others.

An examples is in cases like someone is pointing a gun at and what I say depends on it and I have no choice but to lie to prevent that.

 

[HonestJoe]

It seems to me the focus should be very much on the consequences (or potential consequences) than the act itself. It’s easy to come up with hypothetical situations where not lying would cause great harm and vice-versa. I think there is a general principle where if you’re not aware of any great consequences either way, honesty is the best option, if only to avoid “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” situations. If we have established that there are situations where being able to lie convincingly could be vital, being someone who is known to be generally trustworthy becomes a moral duty.