Lying v. telling the truth

[instantc]

My question is, does telling the truth have moral value in your opinion? The problem is that even if I'd say yes, people tend to acknowledge that in certain situations one should not tell the truth. For example, suppose that a person is dying within a few hours, and he is asking you about his son. Now, you happen to know that his son was just in a terrible car accident and is not going to make it. Should you deliver the bad news to this dying person? I for one don't see any reason to do so, why should we deliberately make his last moments that much worse?

If we accept this line of thinking, then is lying justified at anytime it would result in a greater good? If not, where should we draw the line and why?

[Divine Insight]

For one thing I don't believe that everything needs to be either moral or immoral. Some things are simply neither. And lying is one of them.

For me it's not the lie that is immoral, but rather the intent behind the lie that might be immoral.

If the lie is being told for immoral reasons, then the lie is immoral.

If the lie is being told for moral reason, the the lies is moral.

Period. I have no problem at all telling moral lies. Especially if they will save a life.

A lie that saves a life is an extremely moral lie, IMHO.

[jeager106]

I don't lie.
As a general rule that is. If I strive to be truthful it's so much easier to get by in
life without worrying about what lie I told to whome.
I don't like to lie and don't really think it's a moral issue, probably an ethical issue.
In by former life I lied a LOT. A whole lot. The LIE was a tool to serve an end.
I was a police officer for 22.5 years before being disabled on the job.
I was a criminal investigator (detective) for 10 years.
I learned to lie really well, to pit one crook against another to get information to
prosecute and put these nasties in jail.
The Supreme Court ruled "decepetion is the tool of the skillful constable" or words to some such effect.
Lying to a crook is a perfectly acceptable & legal tool.
"I got 'cha Fearless Freddie, your girl friend squealed her guts out on you".
Or show the suspect a set of lifted fingerprints and say "these are YOUR fingerprints Freddy Fuddpucker, so you might as well confess and lessen you punishment". It works.
I don't see a moral or ethical issue with the lie used in such a manner.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

If we accept what you are saying is true for you - which one of your 7000 posts on this forum is not a lie?

[jeager106]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

If we accept what you are saying is true for you - which one of your 7000 posts on this forum is not a lie?

Seriously what you said is a point worth consideration.
This is, after all, the internet where anyone can be anything to everyone at any time.
This is why I tend not to get emotionally involved in any way with what people write on any internet forum.

[Jashwell]

[Replying to post 4 by Wootah]

"I have no problem telling lies" does not mean "I lie all the time"

More to the point, would it matter even if ALL of his posts were lies?
Whether or not he believes what he says doesn't affect its truth one iota.

The only thing I can think that would matter is anecdotal evidence - which is poor evidence in the first place. That's ignoring that many (if not most) anecdotes used in comedic routines and in political debates are known to have been made up.

[jeager106]

Great points Jashwell.
Would it really matter is all 7000 posts were simply emotional outbursts by someone with a real agenda against religion?
Would that matter?
Would that carry any weight in the way of evidence that the poster was factual?
No! It would not.
I dealt with simple minded criminals all the time and learned the easiest way to spot
a liar or one with an emotional/mental fixation, disorder, was to simply listen to them talk.
It was the criminal that gave s/himself away by constantly harping about how "tough life was, the "government" won't give me more, my mother beat me" and so on.
The more they ran off at the mouth the more about themselves they exposed.
Oddly the more educated, the brighter, the easier it was to break them.
Eventually the lies stopped, then they began to vomit their real feelings.
Letting the person talk and talk and talk trips them up every time, thus exposing the truth underneath the lies or outrageous negativism.
Criminals lie for unethical purposes, to cover their crimes, to hide guilt.
Let them talk and talk and hey expose themselves every time.
It matters not how educated or smart they think they are, they trip over their lies every time.
The more crimes committed, the more lies that are told the easier it is for the skillful investigator to trip them up.
The more they talk, the easier it is to see inside them, to uncover their most terrifying secrets.
I've let them talk & talk to the point that I caught lies and said nothing.
Eventually I've had them realize they'd been caught and spew up confessions of crimes I had NO IDEA they'd committed!!!
So it is with the lie. I feel there is something deep inside our brains that want us to expose ourselves, perhaps a cry for help?, to help them fix why they do what they do.
Studying the person that goes on and on and on about a subject in an attacking, negative way exposes that persons deep hidden secrets. Every time!
Of course I dealt with criminals not internet posters.
Let the crook lie ane lie and eventually the truth MUST come out or it drives them crazy.
Those lies are unethical and morally corrupt. ( my opinion ). MY lies were for ethical purposed, to feed the criminal spewing off at the mouth until the criminal s/himself realized s/he'd talked themselves into prison.
A person that attacks an institution constantly, i.e. the government, often is troubled in many psychological ways. The person that commits crimes and when questioned lies and lies, is being untruthful, unethical, immoral, and trying to survive. That compounds the criminals lying and aids in getting the truth out of them.
The more they talk, rant, rave, lie, the easier they are.

Honest: A true story, I'll be brief. I went to a home to interview a man about being a possible WITNESS to a crime.
I was a detective in suit, tie, looked like a salesman.
I was greeted by the man of the home. I badged him, was my usual extroverted really nice man and the fellow admitted me with a shrug and sigh.
I thought he was tired. MY mind was "is the nice man a witness to something?"
HIS mind was awww, crap, caught at last".
The man confessed to an armed robbery he'd committed years before and I just listened, took notes, said nothing.
Then I placed him under arrest and took him in.
It was in court that the man realized he'd confessed to a cop that didn't know doodley squat about the original crime.

[Youkilledkenny]

My question is, does telling the truth have moral value in your opinion? The problem is that even if I'd say yes, people tend to acknowledge that in certain situations one should not tell the truth. For example, suppose that a person is dying within a few hours, and he is asking you about his son. Now, you happen to know that his son was just in a terrible car accident and is not going to make it. Should you deliver the bad news to this dying person? I for one don't see any reason to do so, why should we deliberately make his last moments that much worse?

If we accept this line of thinking, then is lying justified at anytime it would result in a greater good? If not, where should we draw the line and why?

If it makes you feel good, sure it would have moral value - if you value 'feeling good'
Most people would say (honestly or not) being truthful is ALWAYS the best way to be.
Though I find it funny that many would amend their criteria if it were to impact them directly.
Or, in other words, they'd be liars

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

If we accept what you are saying is true for you - which one of your 7000 posts on this forum is not a lie?

Would it matter?

According to Christians they are all sinners and cannot be trusted to tell the truth.

Besides, the bulk, if not all, of my 7000 posts merely point out truths that anyone can verify for themselves.

A Christian who claims that Jesus was the Son of some God, or that even some God actually exists has already told a lie.

All they can say truthfully is that they heard rumors of these things and have personally chosen to believe them on pure faith even though they can't possible know whether or not they are true.

If Christians told the TRUTH they could confess that the can't even know whether Jesus ever lived as a real person. Much less that he was the son of God.

Any Christian who "confesses" that Jesus is the son of God has already lied. To claim to confess that something is true they can't possibly know to be true is a lie.

If a Christian claims to be a "Witness" to God, when in truth they have never seen hide nor hair of God, then they are actually lying.

As far as I can see Christians lie all the time. Not only do they constantly tell lies about Jesus and their God, but they try to get other people to lie about these things too.

If I tell you that I see absolutely no reason to believe in the Bible and that it appears to be totally contradictory falsehoods to me, then I have spoken the TRUTH.

And ironically there are many Christians who feel that I should be condemned to hell for having told this TRUTH and that some imaginary God that they can't possibly know exists would somehow be "righteously justified" in condemning me to hell for having told the TRUTH.

~~~~~~

The problem is Wootah, that these ancient scriptures proclaim that those who merely do not believe that Jesus was the son of God will be condemned.

But if an honest person confesses TRUTHFULLY that they cannot possibly believe these absurd stories, then where is there any righteous justification for condemning these people for merely telling the HONEST TRUTH?

This religion cannot possible be true. And that is the TRUTH, and its a truth that you can figure out for yourself. You don't need to take my word for it. You can figure it out for yourself if you simply stop and think about it rationally.

If you can't honestly and trustfully believe in the Biblical claims being made about God, then how can that be held against you? How can HONESTY and TRUTHFULNESS be held against you and used to condemn you?

A God who is said to condemn people for merely being honest and truthful is clearly a fake religion.

There can be no doubt about it.

You shouldn't need me to see the TRUTH in this. It's not rocket science.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 9 by Divine Insight]

Which sentence of your post are you saying is true and I'll address that bit.