Hypothetical. Let's say you know Jews are hiding from the Nazi's in an attic of the home next door to you. An SS officer asks you if you know if any Jews are hiding nearby. Do you tell the truth?

Absolutely not. So lies can be ethical, as you pointed out. I'll have to think about that some more. That's a great example.

Thats the problem principal based ethics, when certain actions are prohibited (ethically speaking). Lying, killing, stealing…as soon as you suggest a particular action is “wrong”, its trivially easy to come up with clear exceptions to the rule.
In the nazi scenario above the person who tells the truth about the jews because its “the ethical thing to do” is a moral monster. These principal based ethics, by which I mean “so and so action is ethically wrong”, lead to logical contradictions and therefore should be rejected imo.
I would add further that principal based ethics are lazy (or hopelessly ambitious) as well. A proper ethical consideration should be case by case, the specifics of each moral situation logged and analysed. While Its understandable that that isnt always practical and ethics will inevitably lose out to practicality at times I would say that in general these sorts of dogmatic servitude to whatever principal don’t even qualify as an ethical principal. In the nazi example we all imagine the truth teller to be quite the opposite of an ethical person and Im not sure the vast majority of ethical principals people have function any different logically speaking/

“Do you think I’m prettier than her?” — Nicholas Mihaila

"What is ethical" isn't always obvious.

An objective evaluation of appearance is not being sought here. What is being requested is validation. The questioner wants to hear that she is an attractive person. Is there some reason you can not validate this person by saying "yes"?

The SS officer asking you about Jews hiding nearby is a clearcut ethical conflict between a simplistic, rigid rule (always tell the truth) and a higher requirement that one protect the innocent or that one preserve life.

Sort your ethical priorities in descending order, from what is the most important ethical consideration; to what ethical considerations are of middling importance, and which ethical considerations are least important. What can you live with, and what can you not?

The key ethical consideration should help you determine the course of action for lesser ethical considerations. So, what is your top ethical consideration?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

I like the Buddhist take on ethics - it's an amalgamation of utilitarianism and deontological ethics.

Take @Tom Storm's example of the person who lies to save some Jews from a horrible fate at the hands of Nazis. As per Buddhist ethics, you are rewarded for saving those people but...also punished for the lie you told. Interesting, right?

A white lie, as the name itself suggests in my humble opinion, is both good (white) and bad (lie). Dialetheists and paraconsistent logicians should feel vindicated for claiming there are true contradictions! Amazing, don't you think?

To appreciate the contradiction, you need to consider both utilitarianism and deontological ethics, together, as one system of morality.

@Wayfarer, anything to add/delete/modify?

My wife has the uncanny habit to wanno know everything of my whereabouts. I tend to forget taking my phone with me when I go to Amsterdam to visit my mum and granny. Now she is worried that Im gonna buy oxazepam at a local pharmacist. She should be, as I left an addiction to that shit behind me. I took 10 50 mg pills a day. I quit when my provider died (and let me tell you, quiting cold turkey can better be framed as a zero Kelvin turkey!). But I can also buy it on the net. During that zeroK turkey I lost even the ability to buy a train ticket at the automat... But a few months ago, I couldnt resist. I bought some of it on the net (I had to buy bitcoins first). To my surprise an envelope did indeed arrive. She gave me the envelope. "This one's for you. What's in it?". I told her I bought some stamps I saw at an auction. That they were very cheap and I could sell them for more. Now Im not sure what happened the following 24 hours. I cant remember. But certainly she must have noticed something. I couldnt find the rest of the 3 strips of 10. I surely didnt eat them. She didnt say anything about it. Was it wrong to lie about the stamps?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

I will kill myself. Thanks for this cheering comment!

My axiom is that an addict, as addict, is not a person, and it is a fundamental and dangerous mistake to treat or regard the addict as a person — tim wood

You must change axiom. Im proof its wrong. As far as I (and others) can tell, im a person!

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

an addict, as addict — tim wood

Explain! You are the kind of person who never weeps. For sure. I know your kind!

commit yourself. — tim wood

Wtf you know about commitment?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

No. Its unethical. But should this stop me?

And I'm not interested. — tim wood

The why did you start?

I did my weeping, until I saw the uselessness — tim wood

Typical!

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

turn around and face the storm — tim wood

Thats exactly what I do! Its causing the tears.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Then you know the truth of it. So don't bulls**t! — tim wood

Which truth?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Go ask the people you've committed yourself to. — tim wood

My wife is fine with me... She LOVES me... If you know the meaning of that word. The corporate you are talking about "was" indifferent. They give me a daily dose of metaphy.... eeeh, methadone but when I was deep in the hole they didnt care about me. Had they supplies me with oxazepam I wouldnt have been awake and feeling shit for four months. On the other hand, Im free of that stuff now, so maybe it has been good. But they know I could have died from it. Its bad for your memiry, say they.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Are you that addict? — tim wood

Im not sure. Lets say, Im not standard. Addicted, in Dutch, is "verslaafd", meaning "enslaved". I dont feel as a slave of methadone though.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Goodnight. In fact it was better talking to you than the "caring" corporate.

From an ethical standpoint, what is an appropriate level of honesty? — Nicholas Mihaila

Based on a thread I spun a few weeks ago it comes down to analysis of two parts. One is strict morality and the other one permissibility. It's immoral to lie and permissible to do so if no value is lost as a result. Since, lying to your wife about another woman's appearance doesn't devalue your wife or the other woman; then it is permissible to do so. If for some reason your wife needs objective input and this is some complex gaslighting it would be a hypothetical exception.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Kant has a legal definition of lying that is misunderstood. To lie in Kant's legal sense entails cheating some one in some way. It's been misunderstood from people only referencing the secondary arguments against it. Banno gave me a link to a great paper on it a year ago. Verda I want to say is the author.