Talk:Mental reservation

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Ethics Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

examples

Can you give any examples from the trials?--Shtove 12:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess mental reservation should be merged here, shouldn't it? Spirals31 (talk) 21:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merged

Merged content from "Mental reservation". Will proceed to cleanup. Leushenko (talk) 16:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So help me God

"So help me God" means what to those who believe there is no help to be had from God? --Pawyilee (talk) 04:25, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:42, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doctrine of mental reservation → Mental reservation – The current title is curiously descriptive. We have Evolution, not Theory of evolution. We have Gravitation, not Law of gravity. And we have Universalizability, not Concept of universalizability. I think this borders on a technical request; it seems to have resulted from a merge where Mental reservation was a more prudent destination. The only other topic with a similar name is Mental Reservation (album), which is easily dealt with through a hatnote (For the Scanner album, see...). The proposed title is also more concise. --BDD (talk) 23:39, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Based on search trends and book results for Doctrine of mental reservation vs Mental reservation. --RA (talk) 21:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Plagiarism

Compare the text in:

Mentalis restrictio in moral theology

The traditional teaching of moral theologians is that a lie is intrinsically evil, and therefore, never allowed. However, there are instances where one is also under an obligation to keep secrets faithfully, and sometimes the easiest way of fulfilling that duty is to say what is false, or to tell a lie. Writers of all creeds and of none, both ancient and modern, have frankly accepted this position. They admit the doctrine of the "lie of necessity", and maintain that when there is a conflict between justice and veracity it is justice that should prevail. The common Catholic teaching has formulated the theory of mental reservation as a means by which the claims of both justice and veracity can be satisfied.

To its source (https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm)

According to the common Catholic teaching it is never allowable to tell a lie, not even to save human life. A lie is something intrinsically evil, and as evil may not be done that good may come of it, we are never allowed to tell a lie. However, we are also under an obligation to keep secrets faithfully, and sometimes the easiest way of fulfilling that duty is to say what is false, or to tell a lie. Writers of all creeds and of none, both ancient and modern, have frankly accepted this position. They admit the doctrine of the lie of necessity, and maintain that when there is a conflict between justice and veracity it is justice that should prevail. The common Catholic teaching has formulated the theory of mental reservation as a means by which the claims of both justice and veracity can be satisfied.

This is plagiarism and should be dealt with immediately. The rest of the article's information should be compared with its corresponding sources.

Thanks,

Skzt (talk) 22:34, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]