truth Hurts

604 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Deontology versus utilitarianism

Truth Hurts

In this paper, I shall argue against Kant’s opinion that one should never lie. First I shall present Kant’s argument. Then I will present a weakness in his argument based on the idea that one should not ignore the consequences of one’s actions.There are some recurring terms that may need clarification: When I use the term Categorical Imperative (CI), I mean either the first or third formulation. The First being that “One must act only in a way such that they could will that action’s maxim to become a universal law, and they could still have what they desired” (662). The third formulation being that “One must treat other humans as ends in and of themselves, and never a means to an end”(663). Also, when I use the term “utility”, I mean the ratio of good to bad consequences an action will bring about (Williams 588).

Kant’s opinion that one should not lie comes from the ethical philosophy called Deontology. This philosophy presumes that one should only perform actions that are his duty to perform. How one determines which action falls under his duty is by putting the action to the categorical imperative and see said action passes. Lets say, for instance that a person wondered if they should lie to obtain something they wanted. First that agent would have to make a maxim out of his action, specifically “If I want something, I should lie to obtain it”. The next step is to “make this maxim a universal law of nature”, meaning that one must attempt to imagine a world that in which every single person would have to follow that maxim (FP 662). According to Kant, if every single person in the world lied to get something they wanted, the whole concept of truth would break down. Nobody could obtain what they wanted, because ...

... middle of paper ...

...ant’s philosophy in this case would be associated with madness.

Ultimately, Always telling the truth does keeps one’s hands clean of what may happen if the person the agent lied to does an action based off the lie. However, Kant’s proposition that one should never lie proves itself to be unrealistic in application because it calls for an agent to not take into account the consequences of their actions. By disregarding consequences, an agent is being irresponsible with their choices by potentially causing themselves or others harm.

Works Cited

Bailey, Andrew. First Philosophy: Fundamental Problems and Readings in Philosophy. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview, 2002. Print.

Langton, Rae. Duty and Desolation. New York: n.p., 1991. Print.

Williams, Bernard. "A Critique of Utilitarianism." Ethics: History, Theory, and Contemporary Issues 3 (2006): 585-601. Print.

Show More
Related

  • 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

  • The Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals

    1055 Words  | 3 Pages

    Categorical imperatives are the basis of morality because they provoke pure reasons for every human beings actions. By the end of his work, one will understand Kant’s beliefs on morality, but to explain this, he goes into depth on the difference between hypothetical imperatives and Categorical Imperative, two different formulations of the Categorical Imperative, and a few examples. According to Kant, there are two types on imperatives, categorical imperatives and hypothetical imperatives. The Categorical Imperative is based on relation and not by means, which hypothetical imperatives are based on.

    Read More

  • Bernard Williams's Critique Of Kantian Moral Theory

    1104 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this paper, I will argue that Kant provides us with a plausible account of morality. To demonstrate that, I will initially offer a main criticism of Kantian moral theory, through explaining Bernard Williams’ charge against it. I will look at his indulgent of the Kantian theory, and then clarify whether I find it objectionable. The second part, I will try to defend Kant’s theory.

    Read More

  • Mill’s Objection to Kant’s Moral Theory

    1356 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kant argued that the Categorical Imperative (CI) was the test for morally permissible actions. The CI states: I must act in such a way that I can will that my maxim should become a universal law. Maxims which fail to pass the CI do so because they lead to a contradiction or impossibility. Kant believes this imperative stems from the rationality of the will itself, and thus it is necessary regardless of the particular ends of an individual; the CI is an innate constituent of being a rational individual. As a result, failure ...

    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

  • Categorical Moral Imperative Analysis

    1256 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kant’s categorical imperative can provide a set of rules to formulate what a good person is and should do. Kantian philosophy is deontological and it requires people to always do their duty. Kant does not forbid feeling good or happiness, but it must be the case that each person can fulfill their duty even if they did not enjoy doing it. In summary, in order to determine whether or not a particular act is good or bad, morally speaking, we must apply the categorical imperative and I have provide justifications to use it in our daily day lives.

    Read More

  • Ethics in Nursing

    1924 Words  | 4 Pages

    Kant made a distinction between two types of duties which are hypothetical imperatives and categorical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are rules or duties people ought to observe if certain ends are to be achieved. Hypothetical imperatives are sometimes called “if-then” imperatives, which are condit...

    Read More

  • Metaphysics of Morals

    1153 Words  | 3 Pages

    Through his discussion of morals in the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant explores the question of whether a human being is capable of acting solely out of pure duty and if our actions hold true moral value. In passage 407, page 19, Kant proposes that if one were to look at past experiences, one cannot be certain that his or her rationalization for performing an action that conforms with duty could rest solely on moral grounds. In order to fully explain the core principle of moral theory, Kant distinguishes between key notions such as a priori and a posteriori, and hypothetical imperative vs. categorical imperative, in order to argue whether the actions of rational beings are actually moral or if they are only moral because of one’s hidden inclinations.

    Read More

  • Three Formulations of the Categorical Imperative

    1530 Words  | 4 Pages

    In conclusion, Kant’s three formulations of the categorical imperative are great examples of how we should live our lives. Along with living our lives by the formulations of the categorical imperative, we should also treat every rational being as an end in itself. It is quite obvious that Kant’s theories are still in existence today.

    Read More

  • Kant's Categorical Imperative

    1532 Words  | 4 Pages

    If we desire X, we ought to do Y. However, categorical imperatives are not subject to conditions. The Categorical Imperative is universally binding to all rational creatures because they are rational. Kant proposes three formulations: the Categorical Imperative in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morality, the Universal Law formulation, Humanity or End in Itself formulation, and Kingdom of Ends formulation. In this essay, the viability of the Universal Law formulation is tested by discussing two objections to it, mainly the idea that the moral laws are too absolute and the existence of false positives and false negatives.

    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

  • Is Lying Always Bad?

    675 Words  | 2 Pages

    Growing up, we are always told to never lie because it is the worst thing you could ever do. “Lying will only lead to a horrible situation with less than mediocre results. While lying is not always good, it is not always bad either. Samuel Butler once said “Lying has a kind of respect and reverence with it. We pay a person the compliment of acknowledging his superiority whenever we lie to him.

    Read More

More about truth Hurts

Open Document