Ethics WK 3 D2- Respond to 4 classmates 200 words per person
Im working on a Writing exercise and need support.
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? Consider what Immanuel Kant would say, and explain that with reference to this weeks readings. Then, offer your own perspective. If you agree with Kant, consider and respond to an objection to his view. If you disagree with Kant, explain why. Discuss the positive and negative aspects of deontological theory as it relates to another of the theories you have encountered in this course. Respond to 4 peers, 200 words per person.
It is always respectable to show moral honesty this shows good values and earns trust. However people may lie for their own selfishness and happiness.A circumstance that can contribute to lying making people happy then telling the truth can be seen in the workplace. When there are hostile work environments and you are given your workplace evaulation you lie and state that it is the best place ever.This is stating based on your experience internally you are lieing. The true facts rely on the visual perspective . You have to keep your job until another job opportunity becomes available.This is considered telling a lie to cover the truth in order for the company to not scruntize you as an employee.Lieing should’nt be an option in this circumstance it should be an moral duty in this instance to make the company better.Kants view was that moral actions can’t bring contridictions and expections. In the text Kant considered authority and dignity of moral laws does not change(Thames,2018 Sec4.3). When telling a lie it allows you to make exceptions in other situations. I’m split believe the deontological theory and the utilitarnism theory . I believe that of the utilitarianism greater good in this world. If people followed the deontological theory we would be living as if the bible implicates. However we are not perfect and always have experiences through trial and error.
Thames, B. (2018). How should one live? An introduction to ethics and moral reasoning (3rd ed.). Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu
Deontology states that the morality of actions should be based on whether or not that action is moral under a set of rules rather than the consequences of the action. In the case of lying, someone that believes deontological theory would argue that it is okay to lie in some situations. For instance, lying to save someone’s feelings is morally acceptable because the alternative of telling the truth would actually hurt someone’s feelings and cause more harm than good. I believe this is true. If your wife asked you if you liked her new dress, and the truth is you found it to be unflattering, you could lie and say it looked great. You wouldn’t be hurting her feelings and the lie would not be hurting anyone in the end. If you decided to tell the truth, you would hurt your wife’s feelings, possibly damage her self esteem, and prevent her from having a nice time. This would end up causing more harm than telling a “white lie” and allowing her to believe you liked the dress. This isn’t a very serious situation, our text describes a much more meaningful situation of lying to spare someone’s life, but it still applies.
Lying is moralized as wrong. It is also one of the ten commandments. Although Kant felt despite religion or cultural, humans have universal moral duties and would know to lie is wrong. However, there are circumstances where a lie must be told to protect an individual, an image, or traditions such as Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy, or the Easter Bunny. Our textbook provides an example of telling a lie to spare a person’s feelings. The lie is to benefit someone else, not yourself. However, Kant questions what would stop you from lying to benefit yourself if you chose today to spare someone’s feelings. Kant states humans are different because we are able to make our own decisions. We should be trusted to decide the harm a white lie would do. Ultimately, the person lying will have the consequences to consider.
Applying the Categorical Imperative test to determine if a lie is a negative duty, you would ask yourself if others would do the same. However, I must disagree with Kant’s moral philosophy that the rule of “do not lie” would be applied regardless of the situation.
Thank you for an honest and thoughtful response. It really is a difficult thing to work through because I think we all know that lying is really really wrong and terrible, but we all also really want to lie sometimes. As a result, I think we find comfort in working through these “extreme” examples in order to justify our lying to one another. I am reminded of Corrie Ten Boom and the book “The Hiding Place.” Here, she has to make a choice as to whether or not she is going to lie to the Nazi SS when they come to her door and they ask her if she is hiding Jews. She is hiding Jews, and she knows that she is going to be tempted to tell a lie, which as a Christian is not OK. In the end, she ends up telling them that she is hiding Jews, trusting that God will take care of the outcomes. the SS soldiers end up laughing at her response and walk away, leaving the Jews unharmed.
When we think of lying and instances where lying is the “right” thing to do (an ax murderer or something of that sort) can we ever say that lying is a “good” thing to do? I really look forward to hearing your thoughts on this.
All the best,