Advertisement

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 961–972 | Cite as

Respectful Lying

  • Alan StrudlerEmail author
Article

Abstract

I argue that there are instances in which lying to an innocent and generally competent person respects her autonomy, contrary to arguments by Christine Korsgaard and Onora O’Neill. These authors say that respect for a person’s autonomy requires treating her in a way consistent with the possibility of consent, but I contend that the possibility of consent condition is unworkable. I maintain that lying can respect individual autonomy when being truthful to a person undermines her choices and lying gets her what she would reasonably see herself as having most reason to choose in the circumstances. I make my case by reflecting on lying invitations to a surprise party and on negotiation phenomena.

Keywords

Lying Consent Autonomy Deception 

References

  1. Aparly N (2003) Unprincipled virtue. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Buss S (2005) Valuing autonomy and respecting persons: manipulation, seduction, and the basis of moral constraints. Ethics 115:195–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carson T (2010) Lying and deception. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dworkin G (2014) Paternalism, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2014/entries/paternalism/>
  5. Fallis D (2015) Are bald-faced lies deceptive lies after all? Ratio 28:81–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hill T (1984) Autonomy and benevolent lies. J Value Inquiry 18:251–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kagan S (1997) Normative ethics. Westview Press, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  8. Korsgaard C (1986) The right to lie: Kant on dealing with evil. Philos Public Aff 15:325–349Google Scholar
  9. O’Neill O (1985) Between consenting adults. Philos Public Aff 14:252–277Google Scholar
  10. Raiffa H (1982) The art and science of negotiation. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Shiffrin S (2014) Speech matters. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  12. Stohr K (2014) Keeping the shutters closed: the moral value of reserve Philosophers’. Imprint 14:1–25Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wharton SchoolUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations