When is it Ethical to Lie?

Carey’s Terrible Punctuality

Let’s say you set up your friend Carey with your other friend Emerson, and they get to know each other really well. Eventually, they make plans to go out for dinner, and the reservation made, but Carey is ALWAYS late. She has the bad habit of being 30 minutes late to every event she attends. Because Carey is nowhere near punctual, what would happen if you told them dinner was at 6 PM instead of 6:30 PM? Should you lie?

Kant vs. Mill

If you lie, it’s because you think Carey and Emerson would turn into a good relationship and you don’t want it to get ruined before it’s even begun. You believe there’s a chance the relationship could be happy But is it morally wrong to lie? German philosopher Immanuel Kant says it’s ALWAYS wrong to lie, showing the absolutist philosophy. Does this stance, however, overstate the moral importance of lying? Suppose a murderer tries to kill Carey and asks where she is hiding, do you lie about her whereabouts to protect her? Here absolutism doesn’t seem like the best framework to work with. Utilitarian philosopher John Stuart Mill, on the other hand, says lying is wrong only if it results in less happiness overall. Lying typically means believing in something false, and trying to conduct life on the basis of false information doesn’t usually go well. In some circumstances, it might produce more happiness, meaning it isn’t morally wrong, and it might actually be your moral duty to lie in some cases Does this stance, however, understate the moral importance of lying?

Paternalism

Most people regret lying even if it was the correct thing to do, suggesting that there is something wrong with it, even if it does create more happiness. In this case, lying to Carey is an instance of Paternalism, meaning interfering with choices for someone’s “own benefit.” It might be fine to treat someone in a paternalistic manner if they are a child, but it seems unfair to do to a peer. Lying to Carey takes away her opportunity to handle the situation as she wants, and trying to protect Carey shows a lack of respect for her autonomy, which can also shown as a lack of respect for Emerson since you would be purposely giving him a false impression Carey on the first date.

Evaluation?

How does one weigh POTENTIAL happiness versus GUARANTEED disrespect? Kant says respect is key to moral conduct, while mill emphasizes the importance happiness. These dilemmas vary on a case by case basis, so how would you evaluate it?