100% true ... yet a vile lie

Suppose that someone says, "I had a pretty good day at work today ... the boss came in sober". And suppose that the statement is 100% factually true. And further suppose that the statement is a vile lie.

How can that be? How can a statement that is 100% factually true be nonetheless a vile lie?

Well, consider: what is this person *really* saying? He is saying by implication that it's remarkable that he had a good day at work, and he is saying by implication that it's remarkable that that the boss came in sober, and he is is saying by implication that there is a linkage between the two. That is, he is saying by implication that he doesn't always have a good day at work, AND he is saying by implication that the boss doesn't always come in sober, AND he is he is saying by implication that the second "fact" is among the causes of the first.

But, the boss *always* comes in sober. He is, in fact, a tee-totaler, and has never once in his life been drunk.

My point is that there is more to honesty that simply always making statements that are 100% factually true. My point is that one can indeed lie and slander, one can indeed behave grossly immorally, while always making statements that are 100% factually true.

As I've pointed out somewhere or other, the "best" lies are 100% factual, and the "best" liars *always* speak factually.

And my deeper point is that just as one may be behaving immorally *even as* one is making statements that are 100% factually true, so too, one may be behaving fully morally *even as* one is making statements that are 100% factually false (as, for example, in the famous dilemma of lying to the Nazis that one doesn't know where any Jews are, even as one is hiding a Jewish family in the basement and another in the attic).