I think @avalmez hit it on the head, but let me expand. I was also in a discussion about whether or not you would return money if a store gave you too much change, and almost everyone was “oh, ALWAYS” and I was one of the few who said it would depend, and this led to a discussion of honesty. The conclusion I drew was that integrity (which is NOT the same thing as honesty) is more important to me. Integrity is a strict adherence to one’s moral code, and my moral code put simply is “do the RIGHT thing”. Some times the RIGHT thing is not the HONEST thing. If I’m dishonest, I am so intentionally and it serves a specific purpose. I gave an example of how I allowed a store’s utter incompetence and dishonesty lead to a situation where I received something very expensive at no cost. I did not correct their error basically because I felt if this was their level of customer service, then they need to start having a few product attrition issues, because nothing wakes a company in America up to it’s own shortcomings than the loss of the almighty dollar. I did not feel guilty about it because they ran me through the absolute ringer up through that point, skipped no opportunity to fleece me and then even though I way overpaid for something, I did not get the correspondingly awesome customer service (and I WILL pay more to shop at a store that provides excellent service…you get what you pay for). As I didn’t get what I paid for, and this mistake made it more equitable to me in the long run, AND it essentially provided them with a lesson they desperately needed, I lied by omission, and to me, that action had more integrity overall than it would have if I’d just let them continue their awful practices without exacting a price from them. Overall, I thought it was the RIGHT thing to do, and it had the most INTEGRITY, but it was not HONEST.
And certainly, as I pointed out in this other thread as well, sometimes a lie (or avoidance of the truth) can serve to protect someone’s feelings….some times telling the truth causes more problems than it solves. Consider if someone’s a real prick. And you know they will always be a real prick. You have two options, you can go along in life and let them be a prick and just kind of do the jerk off sign behind their back, pretty much give them as much regard as they earn. Or you can tell them, “you’re a prick”. If you do the later, you’re being more honest. But the prick is just going to become an uberprick to you after that, he’ll achieve heretofore unknown levels of prickosity, and will defend his prickishness by being an insufferable prick, all the while denying his prickitude. If a person is not open to hearing the truth about himself, then marginalizing their influence is a better option than confronting them him with the truth.
Another example. It would be ‘honest’ to go to the police every time I learned that someone used marijuana. And though I don’t use it myself, never have, I believe its prohibition is an unjust law, and I support anyone’s right to break it. My moral code is to do whatever is right for you, as long as you don’t hurt anyone other than yourself. So I’m not a fan of rules against self harm, if someone wants to do something to themselves, it’s a personal choice…if you want to interfere with my rights, then it should be a legal issue.
Or to spare someone’s feelings…a woman asks you, “do these jeans make me look fat”, you say “no”, not “no, your ASS makes you look fat,” even if the later is the truth.
Or someone used the Anne Frank example…yeah if the government started another bullshit war in the middle east over oil and started to draft young men say 12 years from now when my son’s 19, damn right I’ll hide him and his friends and lie to the military about their whereabouts.
If lie serves the greater good, I’ll tell one in a second. However, 99.99% of the time, I’m completely honest about everything.