Categorical Imperative, philosophy homework help
Is it ever morally permissible to lie to someone?Describe a circumstance in which it seems that lying might make more people happy than telling the truth.Would lying be the right thing to do in that circumstance, or is it our moral duty to tell the truth, even then?
Categorical Imperative
Kant believed that logic leads us to conclude that one should act according to the categorical imperative. This concept is so labeled because it is categorical, meaning absolute, and an imperative, meaning a requirement to act. According to Kant, the categorical imperative states that we should always act in such a way that our act can become universal law. In other words, Kant said that any time we have an ethical decision to make, we need to make the decision that should be an absolute law for everyone. For example, if we were faced with the choice to lie, the categorical imperative would require us to ask if it would make logical sense to say that it is permissible for everyone to lie in all situations. If we say yes, then we are saying that it is morally permissible for everyone to lie at any time; yet if this is the case, then no one can trust what anybody else says, and the concept of speech and communication breaks down. Thus, it would make no logical sense to say that everyone can lie at any time, so it makes no logical sense to say that you can lie at any specific time.
It is important to keep in mind that by applying the categorical imperative, Kant is not saying that we should consider the consequences of our action. In our example above of lying, we are not saying that we should consider the consequences of our particular lie. Instead, Kant is saying that we need to consider whether it is logical to apply our specific actions on a universal level; thus, the categorical imperative is not a consideration of the consequences of our actions, but a thought experiment to determine if a certain choice can be followed by all people at all times.
A second version of the categorical imperative states that we should always treat others as an end in themselves, rather than as a means to an end. What this means is that in deciding our actions, we need to make sure that we treat other human beings as moral agents rather than as tools for our own gain. Kant believed that these are simply ways of saying the same thing – in both cases, we are trying to decide if our actions are respectful of other people’s autonomy, in the first case by asking whether we can hold ourselves up to the same standards that we would expect of others, and in the second case by asking ourselves if we are treating other people as reasonable people or as simple tools.
In order to get a better understanding of Kantian ethics I suggest watching the following videos:
