Is Lying Ever Justified Research Paper

What is lying? It may seem simple but its slight connotations can be confusing. Lying is a form of deception, but not all forms of deception are lies. Lying is giving some information while believing it to be untrue, intending to deceive by doing so. Whether lying is justified or not is a debate that goes back to the 1800s. I believe that lying is never justified because it causes harm to the victim, the liar, society, and it will increase the liar’s stress.
First, lying is harmful to the liar and the victim. The victim suffers if they don’t find out because they are deprived of some control over their future. Therefore, they can no longer make an informed choice about their issues. For example, there is a test tomorrow. If someone tells others
The entire society is hurt as the generic truthfulness and others might be encouraged to lie. Also, it would be hard to trust anyone. When a human being chooses to lie, they accept these effects/harms. As Kant says, “Something is only good if it can become a universal law”(BBC Ethics, Philosophers on Lying, Immanuel Kant). This statement goes a long way as a society based solely on lying cannot exist. This is because there can never be a serious conversation as a person will never know whether to take someone seriously. Another example of this is a line from Immanuel Kant, “A lie…always harms mankind individually, ‘for it vitiates the source of law’ ”(Rejecting All Lies: Immanuel Kant, Line 3). This shows just how large the implications of lying are. This shows that lying in court or lying so one can keep the robber, murderer, etc. hidden can occur and will make the innocent guilty and the guilty
Yet, since the damage are groundless, to carry out the lie could only be justified if the good sought were a greater than the harm caused by the lie. Such an idea is at the heart of the reasoning of those who believe it permissible to lie to save a life. The good of life must be greater than the good of personal integrity on such an account. However, it is illogical to think such weighing in court is possible; by what measure is there more in life than integrity? And if the “scale” exists then how should the “scales” be calibrated? Won’t a human to give up his/her faith, or abandon the truth, to save his/her life? Also, how would one apply it to the real world? Yet if this scale does not exist, then the conclusion is clear: there can be no “exceptions” to the norm against intentionally lying, even for serious reasons. Now for white lies, these white lies tend to spiral outwards and must be maintained with an even larger web of lies, which continues the cycle to continuum lying. Even though it looks trivial, small things add up and eventually a monster of lies is out of