Criminal Justice Essay Paper on Morality Rules

Morality rule

Kant interpreted that lying despite the consequences resulting from telling the truth is always wrong. Kant believed that there cannot be an exception case regarding the universal duty not to lie basing his argument on the following factors. He argued that human beings should perform the acts that conform to rules and be adopted by all members of society. He argued that if people were allowed to lie in certain situations, they would be following the rule that, it is allowed to do so. If the rule that it is permissible to lie was to apply universally, Kant stated that people would not believe each other hence it would not help to lie (Lee, 2004).

According to general ethical rule of Categorical Imperative, lying could not be a universal law since once it is, it has to apply across the world and is necessary. The categorical imperative holds for all rational agents despite the consequences and different ends of a situation faced by a person. Rules in general terms apply uniformly and equal to all. The categorical imperative is an analysis of anticipated maxims and does not establish a list of its duties alone. Kant’s view about lying is complicated since it does not give a disclaimer of situations. It treats all situations uniformly irrespective of the magnitude and ends results. Even if a duty to tell the truth, would not agree to the Kant’s view of treating lying universally as impermissible. The truth matters to those who have unconditional right to it (Laidlaw, 2004).

In a situation where not lying would be ethical even if generally ethical, it would be personally ethical to lie if the end results would be saving person’s life. For instance, in a scenario that a murderer nocks at the door and ask for a victim hiding in the room, it would be worth lying that person is not around (Lee, 2004).

References

Laidlaw, J. (2002). For an anthropology of ethics and freedom. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute8(2), 311-332.

 Lee, S. K. (2004). Freedom and anthropology in Kant’s moral philosophy. The Journal of Value Inquiry38(4), 569-574.