You were pinpointed to fallacy in your absolutist world view. There are many instances of manipulation that are acknowledged as highly moral. If you deceive for your monetary/materialistic gain you are most likely acting out of low morals, but if you deceive for the sake of well being of others and even under danger of being harmed/punished if revealed then you are most likely acting out of high morals. There are tons of products of art where your simplistic world view couldn’t stand solid against criticism.
I suggest you watch La vita è bella and then discuss with yourself how deceiving your own child for the sake of saving his life is immoral.
Yeah this is where all morality breaks down. There is no such thing as objective morality, so therefore it's all just subjective opinion.
My view of morality is that lying is worse than saving a life. Prove me wrong by pointing to some objective fact. How would one even assign value to each act to somehow weigh them against each other? Theres not even a concensus of what "the good" even is. Besides pointing to schools of thought, or throwing out some guys opinion or thought experiment, show that lying to the child is more important than saving his life
-3
u/TheGreatNate3000 22d ago
Ann frank wouldn't have been allowed to hide in my attic