Yes, unwaveringly so. I never try to rationalize situational exceptions.

I don't disagree with your parking approach and think it's reasonable but if it were me in your situation and if there were a sign saying "CVS customers only", I probably would go in and buy something I could use but might not have stopped to do otherwise. Then on to other errands. That would make me feel better.

By the way, I think (but not with certainty) you can post in more than one forum to include this one by making the post in the other one and add this one to the list. The other way around doesn't seem to work. Petalique seems to have done that this morning.

Well, I haven’t turned in the Pandora ring that costs about $35 that I found the other day in town. I dropped it in the car console and then forgot about it. Thanks for the reminder, I will do that today. When I drop off the expired meds whose discovery was prompted by the Pantry thread.

(some forums don’t show up for me in the list to cross-post in, namely Home Decorating Conversations, Kitchen Table, and Cooking. I don’t know why.)

Yes I am an honest person. I just cant deal with the guilt, and when it's other people it makes me mad. I had a friend that always parked in a handicapped spot cause she had her dead mother's tag. I finally refused to ride with her, and met her places.

I am, I believe, almost always an honest person.

The exception for me comes into play where someone else's feelings are at risk and I feel the truth would do more harm than good. "Do these pants make me look fat?" will never get a 'yes' answer from me. Sometimes I will outright lie if I feel their ego needs a boost and the 'thing' can't be changed, other times I will sugar coat a similarly resulting answer -- "you know, I think those black jeans would be SO flattering on you for this event."

I can't think of another situation where I would not be honest.

I don't disagree with your parking approach and think it's reasonable but if it were me in your situation and if there were a sign saying "CVS customers only", I probably would go in and buy something I could use but might not have stopped to do otherwise. Then on to other errands. That would make me feel better.

Elmer, clearly the intent of that sign would be to have customers use the parking lot while shopping there. Not for customers who go to CVS sometimes. Not for customers who shopped at CVS earlier in the day, left and came back to town. And not for customers who went in for some items then left their car there as they went about shopping the rest of town.

You’re making that small purchase to “rationalize situational exceptions.” Just like the OP is justifying parking there because the lot is huge and there are plenty of open spots for customers.

I’m not judging either one of you; I’ve done the same many times. Usually at bank parking lots where I am a customer after all. I’m just saying we probably rationalize more exceptions than we're aware of.

If you disagree with me, I’ll ask where where you draw the line. If I buy aspirin at 7am, how long do my parking privileges extend? 8am? Noon? 9pm? Leave the car for a week? The sign says parking is for customers. Anything beyond using it while shopping is rationalizing. To make you feel better.

I think I am an honest person and feel I'm fair. I'm not sure 'guilt' plays into it, I have little reason to feel guilty over anything. The parking is pretty much a non issue for me though. 1) I don't want to add any distance to walking on cement (hard on my back) carrying packages, and 2) with DH retired he's often with me and driving - he drops me at doors and fights the parking lots as I shop. He'll come in when he's found some place reasonable to leave the car or truck, find me. He'll often go back out as I'm paying and drive close to the store's door again. 'Reasonable' to him is somewhere out in the back 40 acres. He's always afraid someone will ding or damage one of our vehicles, he's incredibly picky about them and would be horrified at any hint of a scratch or mark while I'm comfortable slipping my Explorer into a compact cars spot. A little OCD about our cars, but I can't complain, I have never found mine dirty or needing vacuuming in 50 years.

Mother had a handicap pass but I didn't use it without her with me. More than once I used a handicap space with her when I didn't have it with me and no ticket ever. My brothers wife would often have it in her own car and not within my reach when I needed to take mothers to an appointment. I was never called on to explain to anyone. One look at Mom with her walker was explanation enough.

I once dropped my mother at the grocery store with her walker and got her seated on a bench inside the door, then parked in the handicap space. An officer came by and I remembered to hang up the placard. He came over to inspect. Oops, it was my dad’s. Put up mom’s placard. Oops, expired. He told me I couldn’t park there because mom wasn’t in the car at the time. I tried to explain, as I hustled back to the store (at a carefully selected pace that was rapid but not like I was trying to flee him), that not only could mom not walk that far but also that she has dementia so I can’t park far. He still insisted. So I had him explain to her.

I get it, I do, it’s the law and it’s even written on the placard, but come on!

I am an honest person & I do believe the majority of people are. I also believe that the more important and more difficult quality to find in too many people is integrity. There is a difference between the two qualities. I think a person who practices a high level of integrity is by default an honest person. But, the reverse isn’t true.

I think that many decisions we make are in a gray area. If I found a quarter on the street I'd put it in my pocket without a second thought. If I found a wallet with no ID but $100, I would devote considerable time to trying to figure out how to find the owner, or watch the local social media to see if someone posts such a wallet missing, or make a post myself and ask responders to describe the wallet.

Is it because I think the loss of $100 might be a real financial burden and it is worth reaching out and trying to help? Yes. Is it because of the staggering amount of work and small chance to find the owner of the quarter? Yes to that also. But what if the quarter is one of those rare coins one hears about, worth zillions to a collector? A lot can depend on facts and circumstances.

I come across this a lot where I question...how honest should I be.

ie: A man selling his deceased wifes jewelry on Ebay listed a ring for $35 + $15 shipping. He said it had 19 crystals.....uh no. The markings indicated it was solid 18K gold with .99 ...almost a carot of diamonds. So...do I bid? The ring would retail for $2500.....or do I say something? (I emailed him. He thanked me. Ended the listing. Said he'd go get it appraised) But.....I liked the ring at the $35 price....and isn't that why I shop Ebay...to get a deal!

Last year I purchased a 14k & diamond ring for $29. Link It was from a BIG jewelry seller...same ring was selling for $715 on another listing...but...it was listed correctly...just no one bid against me. It was an honest sale.

I won't park at one store to shop another. I'm a runner. I can park blocks away and walk in...and I do. That's just me. Other people may be busier than I am...or can't walk that far.... it's OK....

@User In your example of how you responded to the Ebay sale of the undervalued ring, you described the difference between honesty and integrity. Even though you and the seller are strangers to each other and to me, reading your story gave me a nice feeling. Thank you.

Long ago -- when a company called Service Merchandise was in business -- a man we knew shopped their "Going Out of Business" sale. He saw a pearl necklace 'marked down' to (I'll say $100) with the admonition "All Sales Final". and "No Refunds". He paid for it, received his bill of sale (with the admonitions in red) and was at his car when an employee came running after him. There had been a mistake! The necklace was $1000. He pointed to the receipt, got in his car, and drove away.

I don't think I could have done that, @chisue. Technically he was right, but ethically...grey area for me.

I try to always be honest. I have a handicapped permit for myself, but only use it if there is no regular parking close to where I am going. I can walk with my cane for a little distance, but not from the other end of the parking lot. When I was younger and not having mobility issues, I would ferry my stepdad and my mother. They had handicapped permits, but I would only park in the handicapped spots if they were actually getting out of the car. If they preferred to wait in the car while I ran an errand I would just park in a normal spot.

@Chisue....THAT happened to me once. DH & I went into an Electric supply company, wholesale only. We purchased two things, a yellow handled shovel and a balast for a garden light. He wouldn't tell us what the items cost, he said he had to mark them up because we didn't have an account there. $56. Got home hours later and we had an ANGRY message on our machine that they'd only charged us $.27 cents instead of $27 for the shovel...said.."We'd ripped them off!" We called him back and gave him our credit card over the phone...but...I really think he ripped US off!

We went to The Best closeout sale AND The Hart Jewelry closeout sale. Jewelry was 80-90% off! $100 sounds about right for a pearl necklace. I wonder if these places think you can pay more...the price goes up?

" I lie like hell. I'm not an honest person. "

How very sad.

" Lying is ubiquitous in human social and emotional interactions "

Nope.

I was in the handicap parking dilemma this past year. My DH and I would go grocery shopping and he would go into the store without me and usually we parked in a handicap spot. I had broken my leg and had to use a wheelchair and then a walker. So was it morally right for me to sit in the car in a handicap spot? When I had the wheelchair I could not have gotten out of the car without help but could when I upgraded to the walker. The idea was I could perhaps need to go into the store. You cant get a wheelchair out of the car unless you use one of those spots with space beside it. I just decided I was overthinking the whole thing. Moral laxity? These days I get dropped off at the door and hobble inside to get one of those electric carts. I then proceed to menace the lives of everyone in the store. Which is worse?

Patricae, DH and I often comment on the number of handicapped spots available and not filled.

I guess if you parked at a place that only had one of two maybe re evaluate parking else where?

Sorry for you to feel anxiety in addition to the stress of an injury.

I shop solo and have an ADA sticker. If the ADA spots are more convenient, I will use them (surprisingly, sometimes they aren't really any closer). Some days it's more painful to walk than other days. But I have to say it does irk me to see someone drive in with an ADA tag, obviously leave the disabled person in the car and then sprint into the store. Obviously, no need to take up an ADA spot if the ADA tag holder isn't going to get out of the car. If they've had someone drive them and feel like they have to get out of the car at some point when the driver is away, they could call the driver to come back.

" DH and I often comment on the number of handicapped spots available and not filled. "

Why?

There's nothing more to think about other than if there are empty ones, the lot has an adequate number of such spots and if they're all taken, there aren't.

The number and location of parking spots reserved for disabled people is a matter of building code regulation. I suspect they're formulated with some rule of thumb that, based on the size and nature of the structure(s) the parking lot serves, anticipates how many spots are needed to provide adequate availability. I think it goes without saying that when someone has a disabled parking sticker they're not entitled to (as from a deceased parent or friend, or for a past condition that's healed) or one for use for occasional mobility problems, it's selfish to use one when not needed.

Life for the disabled is hard enough without bashing them for perhaps parking in a Disabled parking spot. It was and still is a real education as to how difficult it is to negotiate even hospitals.

I should add that the pearls appraised for more than $1000, and that the man was a professor of philosophy.

@chisue - a professor of philosophy took the philosophical route with the erroneous undercharge of the pearls. Hmm. I’ve been thinking about the situation you told us about since I read it. I think he was technically correct & certainly not dishonest in his action. But, I can’t say I’d have done the same. I ’feel’ like I’d have negotiated a cancel of the sale & full refund or, maybe a split the difference of price by my paying $400 additional. I’m leaning towards the former resolution. It’s a tough call given what we know about markup prices & true costs. But, this comes down to an ethical decision doesn’t it? Do we go back to the store when we discover they failed to charge us for an item? And, if we do or don’t is that decision based on cost of the item? How far away from honesty is morality or the practice of ethics? No easy answers in any of this.

Twice I've forgotten to pay for something at Trader Joe's. I have a Kool Bag that has a small zippered section on the outside and one time I stashed a perfectly ripe pear that I didn't want to get dinged up in the check out process, but then promptly forgot it was there. I found it when I unpacked the bag at home...mortified not so much because of the minimal loss to the store, but the thought that I could have been detained for shoplifting. Yikes! I don't recall the other item, but it was something similar. Both times I went to the 'office' check out area and confessed my sin, prepared to pay. But both times they said forget it and thanked me for my honesty, but wouldn't take any money for the item. One time I was entering the store and dropped my keys into that same pocket and discovered two tins of mints that I always buy from them. I had paid for them and when I unloaded the groceries, I stuck them in that zippered pocket to carry back out to the car (where I keep mints). I forgot to unload them to the car and was carrying them back into the store. So I immediately went to the closest checker and told him I was bringing in previously paid for merchandise and need him to be a witness should there be any question or attempt to make me pay for them again. He was quite amused!

KW -- Perceptions and attitude were at play in the story of the pearls.

Our friend was highly educated (by Jesuits) and was fluent in several languages. He had a very slight European accent and a formal manner.

The brusque salesperson's attitude was condescending, as though this couldn't be a serious customer for a $100 necklace. It was, "Do you want it or not? I'm a busy man."

Although our friend never said so, I'm pretty sure he believed the pearls were valuable from the outset. He might not have risked $100 to find out had the salesperson not been so rude. I think he enjoyed 'teaching a lesson' as much as coming out ahead on the value of the necklace.

^^^Sounds like a lot of rationalization there. I’m not impressed.

Chisue - I appreciate your additional detail. Hearing them certainly helps set the scene for your friend’s experience. I still can’t say what my response would’ve been except that I’m pretty certain I’d have found it difficult to restrain myself from responding negatively to the salesperson’s demeanor given that the error wasn’t mine. As the adage goes - So many ways to peel an onion…...

At best, the company got screwed. At worst someone’s livlihood was put at risk. All rationalized with the salesman’s demeanor, real or percieved. It’s irrelevant to me that the customer wss a jesuit-educated immigrant philosophy professor, you can add scumbag to the list of adjectives as far as I’m concerned.

And this is what makes this an impossible question. No doubt said scumbag felt justified in his actions, and confidently considers himself a fine specimen. And the mere fact that I disagree doesn’t necessarily make him wrong.

My brother in Texas went into a Sears store wearing a jacket that he had bought there a few weeks earlier, and when he was leaving the store, he was detained for shoplifting. He had no receipt because he had not bought the jacket that day. I don't know what happened after that, but I do know that he was not happy.

I would say that I am not brutally honest but rather that I am more flexible - partly because I believe that life is not fair, and sometimes rules need to be bent. I am also reminded of Molière's "The Misanthrope", which contrasts a woman who tells white lies to spare people's feeling with the Misanthrope, Alceste, who is brutally honest. I read this play when I was in high school and had my sympathy for characters who spared other people's feelings to their faces, even if they might tell the truth about them behind their backs. I tended to identify mostly with Célimène.

Not everything is black and white, and most situations have gray areas. In Mexico City, I was told never to tell anyone my real age (I was 31 and did not feel old), and I did have many friends who lied about their age. The only time this bothered me was when I was doing astrological charts for them and needed accurate information.

I used to park in a far corner of a shopping center parking lot when going to see my dentist in Marina Del Rey so that I would not have to pay $10 for parking, and that end of the parking lot was in front of Ralphs Marina Waterside store, where I did most of my grocery shopping. There were never any other cars near where I parked, and so I was never preventing anyone from parking who wanted to go to Ralphs. If it had been a crowded parking lot, I would not have parked there, and the signs only said "Three hour limit". Who can spend three hours in a grocery store? They must have expected people to visit other places.

I'm a volunteer tutor in a group where we help immigrants practice their English. There is a lot of encouraging, telling people that they are speaking very well even when they mix up a word or two. Building confidence is important for gaining fluency. We discuss idioms, and the term "white lie" was explained as a little lie told to avoid making a person feel bad. It turns out the same idiom in Russian translates as "sweet lie." I like this term.

Earworm alert!

🎼Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies…🎶

I think different definitional notions are at play here.

There's a difference between being honest (which to me also implies having integrity) and being frank. The difference also surfaces depending on the context.

Q: Are you an honest person?

Elmer: "Yes, unwaveringly so. I never try to rationalize situational exceptions."

Would you lie to the murderer at your door? He's after your friend, who's inside your house. He's asking you if your friend is in the house. (Attaching link to Kant's text)

I'm curious, given "unwaveringly" and "never try to rationalize situational exceptions".

http://philosophical.space/f325/KantLies.pdf

@foodonastump -- tempted to change my weekend music theme now, but I just did a search and see that we just did it in July. People may need a break from the topic anyway..... : )

wintercat, what a ridiculous question.

When I encounter the wild hypothetical circumstances your overactive imagination has misled you into thinking is relevant to the conversation when it's not, I may let you know. Don't wait to hear from me.

i like to think i'm an honest person although i lie to my dogs pretty much every single day...sorry, guys, no leftovers, you can't have that because it'll make you sick, blah blah blah.

just yesterday, i was parked in the space reserved for "curbside pick up" at the pet store. the handicapped space is right next to that spot. a car pulled in with a handicapped sign on the mirror. the driver got out and walked into the store carrying a huge bag of dog food that i assume he was retuning for whatever reason. he certainly didn't have any trouble slinging it over his shoulder and going up the steps...

i assumed the woman who remained in the passenger seat must have been handicapped but then, she opened her door, got out of the car, leashed up a sizable dog and trotted it over to the grass to go potty then proceeded to walk it all around the parking lot. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Sometimes one can't tell how a person is handicapped by looking at them. I'm not saying people don't unfairly/dishonestly use other people's handicap tags, sometimes they do, but you can't really judge by looking whether someone has a handicap.

Elmer J Fudd: "wintercat, what a ridiculous question. When I encounter the wild hypothetical circumstances your overactive imagination has misled you into thinking is relevant to the conversation when it's not, I may let you know. Don't wait to hear from me."

The dilemma of lying or not lying to a murderer at the door isn't the product of my "overactive imagination". Had you taken the trouble of opening the the link I posted, you'd have realized it's a discussion of the moral justification of lying - or the absence of such moral justification.

I think it's especially relevant to you, in view of your categorical statement that you "never try to rationalize situational exceptions."

Here's the first paragraph.

[German philosopher Immanuel Kant:]

In the work called France, for the year 1797, Part VI. No. 1, on Political Reactions, by Benjamin Constant, the following passage occurs, p. 123:— “The moral principle that it is one’s duty to speak the truth, if it were taken singly and unconditionally, would make all society impossible. We have the proof of this in the very direct consequences which have been drawn from this principle by a German philosopher, who goes so far as to affirm that to tell a falsehood to a murderer who asked us whether our friend, of whom he was in pursuit, had not taken refuge in our house, would be a crime.”

http://philosophical.space/f325/KantLies.pdf