Of course lying is wrong, its always wrong, even if you really need to. However, by "if you really need to" that doesnt apply to everything, if you hae stolen something that doesnt blong to you, then lying is definatley wrong. But there are those personal lies, such as, if someone comes near the door whilst your masterbating and you dont want to get caught? Well, its not like you gonna say: "dont come in! Im masterbating!" you say like, "oh god please dont come in, iv trumped" or soemthing. I understand that that was a strange answer but im not being sily, im just examplifying. So no reporting please it was just an example.
Immanuel Kant believed that lying and cheating were always wrong, as he argued that moral actions should be guided by a sense of duty and adherence to universal moral principles, such as his categorical imperative which states that individuals should act only according to principles that can be universalized.
The rule I use is the golden rule. I do not do what I do not want the kids to do to me. There is a difference between lying and omitting some details too though. One last thought - they always figure out what is wrong.
If you had things on there that you know were wrong then you are going to have to face the music. Lying and cheating are wrong and when doing so you always get caught. Learn from your behaviour and this mistake.
saying wrong
absolutely, unless there is another adult that can teach this child that lying is wrong and not to be condoned.
Immanuel Kant believed that lying is always wrong, regardless of the situation, because it goes against the moral principle of treating others with respect and dignity. According to Kant, lying undermines trust and the ability to communicate truthfully, which is essential for a moral society.
Riddle: What answer is always wrong? Answer: Wrong!!
No, he is lying. If he were saying the truth, then, in theory, as he is a chicken, he would be lying. Then, he cannot tell the truth. So, he is lying. But, if he is lying, then all chickens say the truth, and he cannot be lying. The key lies in the word "all". He is lying that ALL chickens always lie, therefore not necessarily all chickens say the truth. It could be that some chickens always lie. The truth does not have to be the opposite. Therefore, he is lying that chickens always lie, and the truth is that "some chickens always lie".
He cannot say "I am lying." (if he always tells the truth, he's lying - if he's always lying, he's telling the truth). This is known as the Liar's Paradox.
If you are lying about seeing someone else when you shouldn't be the it's cheating. If you are lying so you don't hurt someone's feelings or you're lying to protect yourself from something you did wrong it is not cheating.
If you claim that your compass is reading wrong, the person would simply have to check the device. A correctly functioning compass will always display the correct direction.
Immanuel Kant would argue that lying undermines the rational consistency of moral principles. He would evaluate a lying promise as morally wrong because it contradicts the categorical imperative, which states that one should always act according to principles that could be universal laws. Kant would consider lying to be irrational because it would not be acceptable for everyone to make lying promises.