Now, that's the beginning of a good argument! If I'm arguing that the noble lie is morally good (I didn't say as much, but I think it's fair to read my stateme

Now, that's the beginning of a good argument! If I'm arguing that the noble lie is morally good (I didn't say as much, but I think it's fair to read my statements as moral agreement), presumably I'm arguing in favor of a teleological moral system. Does the utility of the reduced suicide outweigh the utility of the ignorance and mistrust created by the lie? I'd concede that a noble lie is difficult to justify in other moral systems. If I'm going to convince you that a noble lie is morally good, I need to both convince you that (1) a teleological moral system is superior to the alternatives and (2) that the noble lie has net positive utility. The first is very difficult to argue if we disagree, so I shouldn't even start if I can't provide good evidence that the second is true in practice. HWR_14 makes some strong arguments that the utility is a net negative. I think I've been convinced by you and HWR_14.