Communication Ethics

If communication is known as an indispensable prerequisite for human individuation and at the same time for society as a whole, then it is clear how important is an advanced and critical discussion about criteria, scales, and standards of communication. This assignment is precisely the central task of communication ethics. It asks about the eligibility and justification of the norms that guide our communicative actions and behavior. Indeed questions of communication ethics are simultaneously questions of the moral and quality of our communicative actions and behavior.
We can sometimes ask ourselves, does lie have any ethical problems in the communication context, or it is permitted to use it?
A lie viewed as intentional deception. With a lie, In the communication context, the purpose of communication is pursued, that others believe something, that the liar knows, that it is not correct. To do this, the communication partner must understand the formulation of the liar. He must first understand what he is supposed to believe in the sense of the construction of meaning. In this view, the prerequisite for achieving the purpose of communication is to act successfully communicatively at the level of understanding the communication purpose. Understanding appears in these explanations, independently from the problem of truth.
Before-mentioned Lies can create and increase problems, but also can avoid or solve them.
There are many proverbs in all languages, which determine that the lies are admitted in literature. For instance, there is a proverb in my native language Persian that the translation into English is; Expedient lies are better than seductive truths. It is very complicated to define such a lie as part of morals in our communication or our speech, but there is some red line to differentiate it. For example when there is a danger to one’s life, or when there is some big problem, which can be changed simply with a lie than it is permitted to use it, and, it should not impair our morals. I draw it in an example. A man hat with his wife conflicted. He goes to his friend to talk to him about that accident. His friend is also his wife’s friend. While he was angry, he has told some untrue words about his wife. His wife also comes to him, and she narrated the same things as her husband, and moreover asks him; was he here, what he said to you, and so on. I ask you this question if you were in his place, what would you have done?

• Should you tell her, all that, what her husband told you? Does it impair your morals, if you change the harsh words in a softer form, or to rewrite it, or to ignore simply some parts of them? Or,
• You tell her all that, what her husband told you, one to one, without any change or ignorance?

As a human with the filling for a peaceful life, love, and friendship, assuredly, the first one is more rational than the second one. Ultimately, it is our decision, what to do to be able to answer to our conscience, and not to harm our conscience, reputation, and personality.

The above information is mostly taken from Wikipedia. https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/communication-ethics