Keeping all other’s opinions in mind, I believe that lying is a deficient way of solving problems and is a bad thing. I claim that only certain situations allow the usage of lies and that otherwise, lying is bad. Dishonesty is bad because it makes it harder to serve justice, harms the liar individually, and messes up records. Furthermore, it should only be said to protect someone from grave danger. The article “Rejecting All Lies: Immanuel Kant by Sissela Bok also presents the same argument.
Kant’s ethical view is that suicide is wrong no matter what the reason. The first reason that Kant gives as to why he believes this is the quote “It is forbidden by God because it is an abomination” (Kant). Kant mentions that it is abominable because it shows the “abuse of man’s freedom of action; he uses his freedom to destroy himself” (Kant). The second reason to believe is pointed out by Kant when he mentions that by making bad choices, people defy god and misuse their own. The third reason is mentioned in the quote “Man is free to dispose of his condition but not of his person” (Kant).
In particular, it robs those who disagree with these silenced opinions. Mill then turns to the reasons why humanity is hurt by silencing opinions. His first argument is that the suppressed opinion may be true. He writes that since human beings are not infallible, they have no authority to decide an issue for all people, and to keep others from coming up with their own judgments. Mill asserts that the reason why liberty of opinion is so often in danger is that in practice people tend to be confident in their own rightness, and excluding that, in the infallibility of the world they come in contact with.
It is used to justify extreme actions, just for the sake of it. Pyle is clearly the representation of idealism, and Greene goes on to write how there is no place for idealism in warfare. It is selfish and impractical; nothing in the world is ideal, nor is it capable of becoming so. The Quiet American seems unusual in that it presents a case against innocence, a characteristic that is usually seen as virtuous. Idealists present a particular predicament because the nature of their principles excuses them from blame for the destruction, which they certainly cause, which is why it is described as "a kind of insanity."
Therefore, it is not appropriate to morally condemn someone for holding a particular belief. However, when the particular belief leads to “race-based hatred...actions...or institutions” that is when it becomes appropriate to hold the individual with the belief morally culpable for racism. Shelby suggests that Jorge Garcia presents an inadequate conception of racism, hence a new, more nuanced concept of racism is necessitated. Garcia contends that “racism is always wrong” and that it is an “individual moral vice” (479). Garcia’s “infection model” explains that an “act is racist insofar as a racist heart infects the conduct of the racist; and an institution is racist insofar as it is rooted in the racist attitudes and the resulting racist-infected actions of its founds and/or current functions” (479).
When someone appears to be doing evil or claims to be evil, this person is really doing what they truly believe is the better way to conduct. Since this false belief is due to the lack of proper knowledge ignorance can be put to blame, contrary to what some would view as weakness of will. This reflects well with racist extremists, who will go as far as killing or bombing an entire nation based on the strong belief that they are doing what is better for the world, letting only the best race live in peace. Socrates also based his statement on intellectualism. He agreed that behaviour is guided by beliefs to do what is good.
Philosopher Immanuel Kant has a completely different perspective on the moral righteousness of lying. Kant believes it is unethical and sinful to lie no matter what situation presents itself. “Kant finds it especially offensive, contrasting the ‘dim, moles’ eyes fixed on experience’ with the ‘eyes belonging to a being that was made to stand erect and look at the heavens’. Kant believes in the ideology of promise keeping and if you break your promise, it is considered
Michael J. Sandel makes such an argument by suggesting that misleading truths meet the requirements of the CI and the perfect duty to tell the truth (133). He also notes that Kant himself employed such a strategy when giving a promise not to write anything more that criticized Christianity (134). This position leaves much to be desired. Although it does appear to conform to the letter of the CI and the duty to truth telling, it does so by effectively gutting the intended spirit of the CI. The apparent maxim this position generate is, “Perform a verbal end-run around moral laws you find inconvenient.” It seems doubtful that such a maxim could survive rigorous scrutiny under the CI’s universalization test.
People may try to justify its use by claiming it can be used to gain critical information or in similar situations; this is a feeble attempt to use possible results in order to justify the terrible use of torture as a means of getting there. To deontology, torture is morally wrong, and more than that, it is always morally wrong. There is no situation in which torture should be used, period. The way torture grossly outstrips people’s human autonomy and right to be treated as ends in themselves makes it a moral evil in the eyes of deontology. In addition, torture’s maxim of allowing for one person to harm another for gain is also not universalizable, making it an even more morally corrupt action.
September 11 and the Death of Moral Judgment The nation is in crisis: a national security crisis and a crisis of moral judgment. What is the right thing to do? People disagree. Then comes the big mistake: observing disagreement, people conclude that there is no right answer, no way to make a judgment. Worse, they conclude that to judge is arrogant and dangerous, so that in an odd twist, the only thing that appears to be morally irresponsible is the attempt to make a morally responsible judgment.