Why does Kantian ethics hold that there is something inherently wrong about lying? Is this a problem for the view, do you think?
Introduction
Kantian ethics elucidate that human beings are rationally independent in terms of determining right or wrong actions. Without freedom, morality doesn’t exist. When people don’t know the reason they are enslaved by their appetites, specific actions such as theft, lying, and murder can be reasoned out prior to undertaking even if they will result in a more gratifying experience than if not accomplished. The unique characteristic of lying is the foundation of the significant glitches, such as murder and corruption.
This discourse ascertains that predominantly the appropriateness or grievance of actions doesn’t depend on their impact but on whether they fulfill the moral obligations. The paper seeks to emphasize that the categorical imperative, which applies to all people regardless of their desires, is appropriate in decision making. Unlike non- humans, rational beings can choose moral behavior. The discourse navigates lying as a choice and its consequences.
Lying has been a common trait passed on amongst the human beings, by their parents and society as a way of preventing them from facing the consequences of dealing with the truth, and not wishing to appear vulnerable. When deceit is engaged for the first time, it lodges in the subconscious, then becomes more robust as one persists lying due to the power of habit. This creates a self-preservation mechanism that is quite an individualist and focused only on saving one’s skin.
Kant’s theory showcases the deontological moral theory, whose emphasis is not stressed on the rightness or grievances of a deed and doesn’t solely depend on the consequences but mainly on the fulfillment of the right duty at hand (Shelley & Cameron, 90). He believed that there are superlative standards to morality that are described as the categorical imperative. This defines and determines our ethical judgments. Hypothetical imperatives, according to Kant’s theory, are guided by a maxim and demand that one should have a relevant desire. A good example is if you want to venture into a medical field, then you must learn biology in the university. Consequently, if one isn’t interested in the medical field, then the rule does not apply to their situation. The categorical imperative is a command that is unreserved. A crystal clear example being that one shouldn’t swindle in exams.
The association of morality and categorical imperatives suggests that morality should be embedded in the categorical imperative. This is because morality is a principle that instructs use in such a way that one cannot dissociate or claim that it is not involved in any aspect. The workingsS of categorical imperative works in three focal provisions from Kant’s assertions (Baiasu & Sorin 164). It is the formula of the universal law accepted in the world with an emphasis on maxim as the principle on which individuals act. An example would be to give to charity as much as one spends eating out. The other basic idea is not to do what you are not willing just because of malice and fear of getting in danger. The other form of the imperative category is the fact that one is held accountable for all their promises if they expect their promises fulfilled. Finally, it should be that everyone is willing to replicate every act when in a similar situation.
When acting on a situation, an example being of a politician who wants to get even with the other politician they lie. This happens to get them in trouble so that the liar is perceived as the one on the right. Many have the mentality that every politician lies to get into the position they are in (Doyle & John 1). Having that mentality supports the school of thought that to achieve a political position is only achieved by backstabbing and propaganda. This renders it impermissible to lie from the basis of the imperative category.
Lying reduces the moral worth of an individual, mainly due to the actions undertaken that undermine their ethical value. This emanates from the fact that the standards are usually set by other persons thus acts as a basis of either morally wrong or right. A sense of worthiness is hence created and determined by the action taken. Kant argues that a person is either good or bad based on the motive of their action and not on their goodness or consequence of their deeds. The creation of moral worth occurs when one is motivated to grow in morality. Endorsing a person’s emotions and desires make them act in a desirable manner (Baiasu & Sorin, 159). I am in agreement with Kant’s theory of using a motivation to drive morals. That if one is engaging in lottery then the desire or motivation to get the cash and spend to fulfilling one’s desires makes it pleasant to try their luck several. They overlook the risk of losing the money they repeatedly use in the lottery. Moral worthiness therefore only emanates from doing the right regardless of the outcome. Following closely is taking personal responsibility for the action. This calls for doing the right thing irrespective of the feeling at the moment of execution of the act, and not lying to cover up for one’s inability to perform the task.
Consequences don’t play a pertinent role in developing morality like in a case of two friends out drinking in a club late in the night. Later on, they decide to drive themselves home in spite of drunkenness. One arrives home safely due to lack of any encounter on the way home despite irresponsible driving (Ward, 26). The other one is out of luck and runs over a pedestrian crossing the road. Both of them are morally wrong, even the ones who didn’t cause an accident and can’t lie to themselves of being right.
Conclusion
Lies are of different types and the one most dangerous is the one tells themself and believe to true. Individuals who lie inherently become more dangerous on persistent lying as they have become numb on the side effects. They also breed a concept of greed and guilt by destroying relationships built on trust. It also destroys public network fabric and the way people view the liar. Therefore, society needs to embrace the culture of Kantian ethic theory. All members should be taught how to embrace telling the truth and diligence in the performance of all duties. It makes life much easier and less stressful without hiding issues from each other rather than ensuring focus on the right priorities.
Then hiding the lies, the truth makes you venerable and transparent therefore easy to identify the role of every person and how to complement each other’s skill.