Analysis Of Kant Telling The Truth

700 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Immanuel kant on lying

Kant’s chief argument is telling the truth is paramount, when speaking: “Truthfulness in statements which cannot be avoided is the formal duty of an individual...however great...the disadvantage accruing to himself or to another.” Lies, Kant claims, always hurt people, violating the duty of truth, so telling them, even to protect another, harms mankind. He gives the example of telling a murderer searching for your friend they have left, if the friend is there: you should tell the murderer the truth, because if you do not, you are responsible for the consequences. If you tell the truth, law cannot hold you accountable for the friend’s murder, but if you lie, and the friend dies, you can be considered the cause of death, because your lie lead to their death.
The principle of truth must never be abandoned, even though people abandoned it because of dangers it poses to polite society. Kant further states one must understand the danger going against the principle of truthfulness presents is not hurting someone but doing wrong. According to Kant, the statement “to tell the truth is a duty...to him who has a right to the truth” is false, because truth is not a right but a requirement. This includes the murderer hypothetical. If the …show more content…

Some forms of deception are worse than others. Generally, the wrongness of a lie is how much it hurts people. Kant says all lies hurt people, because they destroy our duty of truthfulness. This may be true, but generally lies said to protect others are acceptable, because protecting people weighs more than truth. Personally, I think some people simply do not deserve truth. Why should a stranger deserve to know my secrets? Truth may be a duty, but only to those who have the right to it. If I spoke the truth all the time, I would destroy most of my societal relationships. If truth is a duty, which according to Kant it is, then it is a duty I don’t want, because sometimes one simply must lie, to protect themselves and

Show More
Related

  • Lying vs. Truth-Telling in Genesis, Othello, and The Lie

    1135 Words  | 3 Pages

    Although it is considered wrong to tell lies, it seems that literature has offered us situations where telling lies isn’t necessarily bad. Of course, lying often has a tragic outcome, but not always for the person or people who told the lie or lies. Oftentimes, these unfortunate outcomes are directed at the person about whom the lie was told. Furthermore, these stories have explained that dishonesty can result in success for both the liar and the target. Maybe we have been teaching the wrong values to our children.

    Read More

  • When is Lying OK? Rejecting All Lies: Immanuel Kant by Sissela Bok

    677 Words  | 2 Pages

    With different views on when it is OK to lie, the people continue to debate. But personally, I respect Kant’s views on the idea that lying is bad. Lying weakens the purpose to serve justice, destroys the liars’s dignity, and messes up the records. But I think that rare situations justify lies. I believe lies to save someone's life or just to protect someone from a big danger is the only type of lie that is justified. Those situations are the only times I think it is OK to lie. It might seem that lying to get yourself out of trouble is a situation that makes the lie justified. But I think that is a selfish reason for your own good and that people are thinking less about the society and more about their own good. Lying to get out of trouble is one of those many lies that are not justified.

    Read More

  • Kant Vs Mill on the Issue of Lying

    1763 Words  | 4 Pages

    Firstly, by looking at the first patient, whether she gets a kidney from her father or a “cadaver kidney” , there will be no difference because she needs a kidney nonetheless. The second patient however, cannot agree to give his kidney away because one of the main reasons is that he’s scared and lacks “the courage to make this donation”9. So right at this point, it can be seen that it would be better if the father didn’t give his kidney away because it wouldn’t cause him any happiness, whereas the daughter has two options to gIn everyday life, whether on a personal base or on a professional base, difficult scenarios, or also known as moral dilemmas, are present. Depending on whom the person is or what their belief and value systems are, the issue can be ‘resolved’. In this particular case, questions arise about whether it is morally right to lie to family members when something can be done, ignoring the fact of its after effects. The case will be explained in details later on including the patient’s state, but to answer this ethical question, two theorists will be presented for the con and pro side. For the con side, the deontologist Immanuel Kant will be presented with his theory that lying is prohibited under all circumstances, as for the pro side, John Stuart Mill will be presented for the utilitarian theory stating that whichever decision brings out the most happiness is the right decision. After discussing the case, my personal view of what is right will be stated with my own reasons, which is that lying is the right decision to be taken.

    Read More

  • Grounding For The Metaphysics Of Morals, By Immanuel Kant

    1044 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kant proves this by coupling it with the universal law, as one “can indeed will the lie but can not at all will a universal law to lie” (Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, 15). He reasons this in an intellectual way, which leans heavily on the law of universalizability, as “by such a law there would really be no promises at all” (Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, 15). He therefore reasons that this maxim “would necessarily destroy itself just as soon as it was made a universal law” (Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, 15). Kant has therefore proved conclusively that lying is always wrong, but has only done so if his opinions on universal law remain

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill Ethical Analysis

    552 Words  | 2 Pages

    He universalizes this by saying that if one person lies then everyone lies. Kant says “lying is throwing away and, as it were, the obliteration of ones dignity as a human being” (Kant, 91). Kant then provides us with many strong examples on why he believes lying is unethical. Kant explains the two different kinds of lies, internal and external. Internal lies are worse because man convinces himself that a lie cannot harm anything and can possibly be useful (92). If one does not have a doubt about lying it can be dangerous. Kant says the only fear of man with an incentive to lie is the fear of punishment (92). If lying were to become a universal law the society would be in harm because no one could trust each other and life as a whole would be corrupt. Kant’s explanation of lying remains valid because it goes back to the categorical

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The Categorical Imperative And The Problem Of Truth

    942 Words  | 2 Pages

    Kant argues that a lie makes you potentially liable for the consequences or your lie, while truth telling cannot be punished (“Lie” 2). Part of what makes this argument so odd is that it seems to argue for truth telling on consequentialist grounds, rather than the pure obligation to duty he claimed to be the source of moral action. Essentially, he’s saying to tell the truth so you won’t be prosecuted. By justifying in this way, he also opens the door for judging the CI on similar contingent

    Read More

  • Is Lying Bad For Us

    543 Words  | 2 Pages

    The article, “Is Lying Bad for Us,” accurately describes the intentions of a “liar.” The author says, “Though liars do not tell the truth, they care about it, while the bullshitter does not even care about the truth and seeks merely to impress” (Gunderman). This statement proves that lying should not be viewed as out of the ordinary, or unacceptable, and that liars should not be viewed as bad people. Lying can be shown as a way of protecting or caring

    Read More

  • The Morality of Lies and Deception

    875 Words  | 2 Pages

    We lie all the time, lying is not something new to our culture. We lie to our parents, we lie to our friends, we even lie to our significant other, but why do we do it? There is not one set reason on why we lie but they can vary from an insignificant reason to something more nefarious. A good operational definition of a lie is “A lie is a false statement to a person or group made by another person or group who knows it is not the whole truth, intentionally.” (Freitas-Magalhães) We have been raised to know that lying is usually a bad thing, and it’s better to tell the truth, not to mention the circumstances get exponentially worse if you are caught lying. No one wants to be labeled as a liar, or untrustworthy. This may sound unorthodox but I personally think lying is perfectly fine; depending on the situation. If you have a prima-facie duty to be dishonest it’s perfectly acceptable. Ross says a prima facie duty or obligation is an actual duty. “One’s actual duty is what one ought to do all things considered.” (Carson) I’m not the only one who finds this too be true. Ross would also agree with me, He says “Lying is permissible or obligatory when the duty not to lie conflicts with a more important or equal important prima facie duty.” (Carson) As I was doing research on this topic I did read one extremely compelling argument on why we ought not to lie. Aristotle basically said a person who makes a defense for lying could never be trusted. (King.)

    Read More

  • Case Study Of Kant's Deontology

    1113 Words  | 3 Pages

    Over the course of this essay, I will present the reader with information on Kant’s Deontology, including, but not limited to, explaining how Immanuel Kant discerns what is morally right and morally wrong. I will then apply these criterion to case number two, and attempt to accurately portray what Kant’s Deontology dictates is the morally correct response. Following this determination, I will show the reader that although Kant’s moral reasoning will lead us to a definitive answer, we should not be so quick to accept it. Interestingly enough, he seems to lead us to what would generally be the correct answer, but perhaps not in the given circumstance and not for the right reason.

    Read More

  • Kant and Deontological Theory

    1240 Words  | 3 Pages

    Immanuel Kant was a moral philosopher. His theory, better known as deontological theory, holds that intent, reason, rationality, and good will are motivating factors in the ethical decision making process. The purpose of this paper is to describe and explain major elements of his theory, its essential points, how it is used in the decision making process, and how it intersects with the teams values.

    Read More

  • A Lie To Save A Life

    1074 Words  | 3 Pages

    Using Kantian philosophy a lie is always immoral and wrong, no matter what the situation is. Kantian ethics establishes the idea that good will be based on the action itself rather than outcome or any inclination one may have to perform an act could be good will.

    Read More

  • Deontology Versus Kant's Ideas

    1631 Words  | 4 Pages

    He states that in no case should you lie (Bennett 2). What Kant focuses on is deontology, this focuses on duty-based ethics. What duty-based ethics consists of is, doing what you should do for the right reasons, your moral obligations (Bennett 2). Sometimes people will do something they know is right to do but, for the wrong reasons. Someone may save someone’s life because they know they will get money out of it while they should be doing it to save that person with or without a reward. Kant believes that lying is wrong and immoral for anyone in any case, no excuses. Kant believes in a good will (Bennett 5). He believes that happiness cannot be achieved through a bad will. A good will must consist of truthfulness, doing the right thing and doing it because you care to help. Kant believes that along with having a good will, you should be morally good. Being “morally good” has to do with following the moral law. Under any circumstance, a person should never corrupt the moral law (Bennett 2). Everyone should live their life knowing and living by this moral law, never making mistakes and always making the right decisions for the right reasons. With the scenario given, telling a small lie to a friend, Kant believes that lying is against the moral law. Bentham wanted to optimize happiness, in that case lying was the answer. Whereas, Kant says that people deserve more than that, each person deserves to know the truth and should

    Read More

  • The Importance Of Telling The Truth

    876 Words  | 2 Pages

    Telling the truth teaches one person self- respect for themselves and others as well. Telling the truth also sets a good example for others to do the same thing and make a “chain reaction”. People can make a “chain reaction” by passing on what they have done from one person to another, and before you know it, everyone is changing greatly, and the world is progressing tremendously. Lies are told all around the world, and they are told every day. One lie can often lead to another lie and cause you to be caught up in one big lie that will be hard to get out of if people do not tell the truth. If a person thinks that is okay to lie, they better think again, the truth always comes out no matter how hard a person tries to keep it in, or how much someone thinks that they can get away with lying. No person can keep in or hold a grudge with what they have done. After all, telling the truth is the right thing to do, and everyone should do it. Telling the truth is always much easier than the trouble of a

    Read More

  • Moral Exemplar Essay

    1176 Words  | 3 Pages

    What I mean by this extent is telling the truth unless it is going to lead to the harm of another. I wanted to draw this line because in the reading we discussed Kant’s argument which states in short, that we are obligated to the truth in all circumstances regardless of the outcomes. Kant believes this to be true because he is looking at the means to the end, which to him is doing what is right because it is right and not for any other reasons. This led us to taking about the example of the axe murderer looking for someone he’s trying to kill and we know the undisclosed location of this person; if we followed Kant’s view then we would be obligated to tell the axe murderer the location of the person. In Kant’s perspective our morality isn’t affected by disclosing the location of the person to the murderer, but instead the morality of the murderer trying to kill the person is in question. I don’t agree with this, I believe that Kant is on the right track; however, I would take a slightly different approach to his view of morality. This being that it is morally acceptable to be dishonest as long as the reason for this dishonesty is to save or help the life of another person, because in my perspective being a moral person is to look out for the benefit of others. By looking out for others in my personal opinion you are on the right path to living a good

    Read More

  • Is Lying Always Bad?

    675 Words  | 2 Pages

    Secondly, it is okay to be untruthful if you are trying to protect people. In certain situations, it is safer, and more practical for you to tell a lie rather than putting a loved one in jeopardy. To illustrate you may be in a situation where you are in a serious or dangerous situation, and you do not what anyone else involved, to keep them safe. For example, if you are getting held up for ransom, would you tell the truth to a loved one and get them involved, or lie and keep them safe? The obvious answer is to keep them safe at all costs, even if it means lying. Also, you do not want to put someone in harm’s way, so it would be ...

    Read More

More about Analysis Of Kant Telling The Truth

Open Document