Introduction
The study on white lies will apprehend the policy of moral obligation in investigating the influence of white lies. The study’s literature will focus on identifying the factors that affect people associating with white lies in decision-making. The thesis will seek to certify the eligibility of the taxonomy of lies in Erat and Gneezy (2012) or the framework of ethical predispositions highlighted in Feess et al. (2022) articles to justify white lies. On the one hand, Feess et al. (2022) anticipate developing a behavioral game in the experiment to recognize the significance of white lies and how payoff decisions impact the ethics of lies. On the other hand, Erat and Gneezy (2012) comprehend the adoption of a deception game to isolate the gender that mostly incorporates white lies to benefit majority groups.
Hypothesis 1
If the outcomes of the card selection would result in criticism, then both individuals in the room would lie on the card they picked.
Hypothesis 2
If the outcomes of card picking do not determine the prize tag issued to the winner of the green card, then both parties would tell the truth.
Literature Review
The research on the ethical choices and justification of particular life actions will depend on an experiment between two individuals enclosed in a room. In this experiment, two hypotheses would lead participants to make white lies or not. According to Feess et al. (2022), utilitarianism will advocate actions that bring joy, pleasure, and feelings of happiness and opposes behaviors that result to harm in by making white lies. The two gamers in the room might apply the concepts of Jeremy Bentham to justify their choices of white lies. Research on white lies will weigh the benefits vs harms and consequences of actions of happiness vs unhappiness to justify their positions of engaging white lies (Erat and Gneezy,2012). The lack of monitorial value associated with the red card will impact both individuals from speaking the truth even when they picked it. Lies are only justifiable through ethical considerations. If an action leads to the overall happiness of the majority group without causing harm, lies should be apprehended (Feess et al., 2022). The policy of moral obligation also permits people to lie because the outcomes of such choices lead individuals to be flexible and considerate in decision-making.
Relevance of the Problem
The research’s findings will demonstrate that everyone lies; however, it will stress the differences and motives behind such choices. The falsehood of the white nature hides truthful information from the public for the benefit of a few needy individuals. Poor liars are vague, while expert liars weave their lives with strands of truth (Erat and Gneezy, 2012). Prolific liars will rely on their oratory skills to examine the reactions of individuals supporting or criticizing white lies. Although both individuals will know that only one winner would access the green card, they will lie to convince the needy people about their concerns through donations.
Conclusion
The justification of white lies depends on the consequences of the induvial actions taken or committed by participants. The experiment exhibits a few cases of lies happening in society through the roles delegated to the two gamers. The red card acted as the control experiment to determine the justification of lies. The green card was the source of conviction for why the men lied.
References
Erat, S., & Gneezy, U. (2012). White lies. Management Science, 58(4), 723–733. Web.
Feess, E., Kerzenmacher, F., & Timofeyev, Y. (2022). Utilitarian or deontological models of moral behavior—What predicts morally questionable decisions?European Economic Review, 149(12), 104–264. Web.