The Morality of Lying in Contrast to the Philosophies of Kant Essay

The young girl gazes at you helplessly from within the tangled wreckage. You witnessed the crash – a massive truck careened into a minivan as it passed on the highway, killing the driver on impact, and virtually tearing the girl in half. Now she hangs from the car, held together by the seatbelt. Her nervous system critically damaged, she can’t feel much pain, but she knows that her situation is not optimal, to say the least. She is six years old – she probably doesn’t understand the concept of death. As you stare equally helplessly into her fear stricken eyes, the only words that you can muster are: â€Å"Don’t worry, everything will be okay.† This is obviously a lie – there is absolutely no chance that the dying girl will indeed survive and have no cause for worry – but this lie contains ideas to sooth her fear, allowing a comparatively peaceful passage out of this life. Surely few would argue that the little girl did not deserve to be comforted, as the alternative seems somewhat heartless – â€Å"Why should I help you? You’re not worth my time, you’ll be dead in a minute.† Indeed, telling the truth, in this case, appears even less moral than the lie. There is, however, at least one who would disagree with this scenario: a certain Immanuel Kant, whose philosophy insists that lying is wrong in every circumstance. But despite Kant’s fervent belief, it is not hard to see how lying can be a beneficial, mutually advantageous, and in fact moral act that still consistently complies with Kant’s own moral imperatives. Because Kant’s philosophy does not specifically define what a â€Å"lie† is, we are led to believe that speaking an untruth, no matter what the context, is strictly immoral. But speaking untruth does not necessitate the negative conno... ...lf to a degree, allowing room for leniency. Lies can be perfectly acceptable, selfless, and moral in the face of a greater evil, or when no harm is being done on any side. Bibliography Gass, R. H., & Seiter, J. S. (1999). Persuasion, Social Influence, and Compliance Gaining. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Henningsen, D. D., Cruz, M. G., & Morr, M. C. (2000). â€Å"Pattern Violations and Perception of Deception.† Communication Reports. Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 1-9. http://www.allwords.com/word-white%20lie.html Kant, Immanuel. "The Foundations of Ethics." Moral Philosophy: a Reader. Ed. Louis P. Pojman. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Company, 1993. 194-213. Pruss, Alexander R. "Lying, Deception and Kant." Alexander R. Pruss Ethics Blog. 30 Aug. 2001. Baylor U. 8 Mar. 2008 .

Kant Deontological Theory Essay

The Formula of Humanity- Act so that you use humanity, whether in your own person or that of another, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means. The Formula of the Kingdom of Ends- Act in accordance with the maxims of a member giving universal laws for a merely possible kingdom of ends. The moral duty is what we should be doing. Good is defined as doing what is right and avoiding doing wrong. We have a duty to act in such a way that our actions are moral even if it produces unfavourable results. What is good, according to Kant â€Å"Nothing is good but a good will†. (Good intentions). It is good to be creative or to have good fortune with good outcomes the world becomes a better place. Goodwill is having the good intention to perform one’s duty. The consequences of our actions do not make an action good but rather the goodwill. What is having a good will? Kant proposes that when someone acts out of goodwill that is when someone is acting out of duty. According to Kant â€Å"Duty should be done for the sake and duty alone†. How do we know our duty in a certain situation? Duty has nothing to do with a certain situation or what happens all that matters is the decision is good and the outcome is good. Kant suggests act as if our decision applies to all people at all times. It is always in order to tell lies if the outcome is favourable? Kant would disagree with this. When we act purely out of duty we act reasonably in a manner that we fulfil our duties. Having goodwill is to perform one’s duty It is our duty to do our duty even though we might not be rewarded in this life but we will be rewarded in the next life. Deontological Ethics. Kant Deontological theory of ethics it is linked to moral law of ethics, especially that branch dealing with duty, moral obligation, and right action. Origin: 1820–30; Greek deont- that which is binding (stem of deo) (Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913), edited by Noah Porter. ) The word deontology comes from the Greek word meaning duty (deon) and science (or study) of (logos). In moral philosophy, deontological ethics Ethical are theories that maintain that the moral rightness or wrongness of an action depends on its intrinsic qualities. (Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913), edited by Noah Porter). A Quote from Kant â€Å"Awe and wonder fills the mind†. â€Å"Starry heavens a metaphor (scientific absolutism) above and the moral law within†. Like gravity and science these are laws which are absolute as well as moral laws. We have a choice we can all still identify the moral law: e. g. do not steal. Kantian deontological theory of ethics is an absolutes theory something which is considered wrong i. e. suicide will always be wrong. Kant argues that morality is rooted in reason; he states that the demands of morality are unconditional or categorical and it presupposes freedom, we have a choice and can identify and rationally identify morality. Kant states that morality must be unconditional it has to be categorical. Kant distinguishes between categorical imperatives from hypothetical ones. The categorical imperative is not about desires or goals but rather about personal well-being. Categorical imperatives are absolute and universal. Categorical imperative is necessary truth and cannot be without self-contradiction or irrationality. The Universal Law Act only in accordance with that maxim through that at the same time, will that it become a universal law. One’s actions must be universal. The Universal law is that one should act on the maxim a law which can become a universal law in nature when acceptable and sustainable. We know that lying and stealing is wrong. If everyone did this society would fail. Perfect duties are without exceptions, but we understand that torture and suicide is always wrong. Suicide is always wrong if this was universalized society would fail. We know that making False Promises that cannot be fulfilled, is always wrong if we cannot regard this as a universal law society would fail. Breaking promises when it in my interest he states that this inconsistent and therefore cannot be a moral imperative. Imperfect duties is seeking the perfection of our duties are contradictions to our will. We ought to be seeking to promote the happiness of others. We understand that this is not always possible. He does not exclude pleasure in doing duty, but that pleasure should not be the guide to what one’s duty is. What is duty? Kant says â€Å"Duty is the necessity of acting from respect for the Law†: Kant believes that duty should be crowned in the end with happiness. Obedience he says is a maxim that is universally binding as a law to all rational beings. Treat humans as ends to themselves and should respect and never to treat others as a means to an end but only as an end. This means that we should respect others, because every human possesses an intrinsic value. We are to consider whether our actions are moral and acceptable. Kant argues that morals are about following the rules. Kant moral theory can be summarised in two ways Kant argues that we all have a choice that we can all identify the moral law. The Categorical Imperative Kant designed the Categorical imperative as a framework used to make moral law, which states that one must do what one expects other to do in a similar situation. The Categorical Imperative is the central concept in Kant’s ethics and the groundwork to Metaphysics of Morals. It is based to the â€Å"supreme principle of morality† (4:392), from which all our moral duties come from. He believed that moral requirements were based on a standard of rationality and he named this the Categorical Imperative. By using the Universal Imperatives we use our reason (as long as it is not corrupted) to guide us in a path which is morally virtuous. He states that we should act according to the maxim by which you can at the same time will that it becomes a universal law. Kant uses the example of a person who lends money and is unable to repay the loan. He states that this cannot be a universal law people will no longer believe each other and no person will lend money to another. This can be explained in three ways The Universal Law means that one should act on an action which can be sustained. It is important that we should consider if an action is right or wrong. This action will eliminate selfish action towards other human beings. Imperfect Duties Imperfect duties to seek the happiness of other people this cannot completed always. The moral law will most certainly collapse if everyone told lies and were to steal. It is expected of one to perform ones duty in every way. The Kingdom of Ends is in accordance with the maxims of a member giving universal laws for a merely possible kingdom of ends is an ideal society every person must act in such a way that it benefits the greater number of people for the greater good. Every person should act in such a way as if the person through their maxim were universal lawmakers as members in the universal kingdom of ends. One cannot say I will kill myself out of love; this is acceptable and cannot be regarded as a universal law. He argues that humans have an intrinsic worth, and occupy a special place in creation, therefore people are to be treated with respect and dignity because we should understand that we are all rational agents. We possess the freedom to make our own decisions set targets and guide our conduct by reason. He believes that God is the Supreme Being speaking through our conscious. Therefore Gods existence although it remains unproven it is necessary in order for Kant’s ethical theory to be sound. He states that is freedom and immortality. â€Å"God is the law giver to be obeyed† Kant argues that there must be a God and an after-life since it would be intolerable if there were no reward. Kant states that if humans were to disappear from the planet the moral dimension would disappear too. Critique on Kant’s theories: Humans are motivated by pleasure and not only by reason. The question is it possible to act unselfishly, it is necessary to take consequences into consideration. Kant ethics places great emphasises on lying as a form of wrong. He fails to offer an understanding of conflict between different duties, Kant theories does not take into consideration social conditioning and free will. I disagree with Kant that feelings are subjective and selfish and find that he focuses too much on pure practical moral reason he excludes feeling and desires. Kant tries to combine ethics with reason but this seems unrealistic as the concept of reason does not exist in isolation from human beings and their feelings and actions. Ref: Jorge J. Gracia E, Gregory M, Reichberg and Bernard, Schumacher N. The Classics of Western Philosophy, (Blackwell Publishing Ltd). 2004. Ref: Mc Coy A. An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Christian Ethics, Continuum. London , New York Ref: http://www. slideshare. net/t0nywilliams/kant-9170093.

Understanding Shakespeares Seven Ages of Man

The poem The Seven Ages of Man is a part of the play As You Like It, where Jacques makes a dramatic speech in the presence of the Duke in Act II, Scene VII. Through the voice of Jacques, Shakespeare sends out a profound message about life and our role in it. Shakespeares Seven Ages of Man All the worlds a stage,And all the men and women merely players,They have their exits and entrances,And one man in his time plays many parts,His acts being seven ages. At first the infant,Mewling and puking in the nurses arms.Then, the whining schoolboy with his satchelAnd shining morning face, creeping like snailUnwillingly  to school. And then the lover,Sighing like furnace, with a woeful balladMade to his mistress eyebrow. Then a soldier,Full of strange oaths, and bearded like the pard,Jealous in honour, sudden, and quick in quarrel,Seeking the bubble reputationEven in the cannons mouth. And then the justiceIn fair round belly, with good capon lind,With eyes severe, and beard of formal cut,Full of wise saws, and modern instances,And so he plays his part. The sixth age shiftsInto the lean and slipperd pantaloon,With spectacles on nose, and pouch on side,His youthful hose well savd, a world too wide,For his shrunk shank, and his big manly voice,Turning again towards childish trebl e, pipesAnd whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,That ends this strange eventful history,Is second childishness and mere oblivion,Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything. In this drama of life, each one of us plays seven distinct roles. This, the author says, is the Seven Ages of Man. These seven roles begin at birth and end with death. Stage 1: Infancy Birthmarks the entry of man in the first stage of life. An infant in the caretakers arms is just a helpless child learning to survive. Babies communicate with us through their cries. Having been nourished in the womb of the mother, the baby learns to accept breast milk as its first food. Vomiting is common among all babies. Once a baby is breastfed, you need to burp the baby. In the process, babies throw up some milk. Since babies do nothing most of the day, other than crying and spitting up after feeding, Shakespeare says that the first stage of life is marked by these two activities. Babies have been perceived as cute since the beginning of time. They feed and spit up, and between these two activities, they also cry. A lot. Young parents know the drill even before they become parents. While babies continue to be puking and mewling little adorable beings, the difference between then and now is that raising babies is a concerted effort between the parents. Stage 2: Schoolboy At this stage of life, the child is introduced to the world of discipline, order, and routine. The carefree days of infancy are over, and schooling brings about a regimen in the life of a child. Naturally, the child takes to whining and complaining about the forced routine. The concept of schooling has seen a great change since the time of Shakespeare. In Shakespeares time, school was a forced practice usually overseen by the church. Depending on the status of the parents, a child went to either a grammar school or a monastic school. School  began at sunrise and lasted the whole day. Punishments were common, and often harsh.   Modern schools are quite unlike their ancient counterparts. While some kids still whine and complain about going to school, many actually love school because of the play while you learn approach to schooling. Modern day schools have taken a holistic approach to education. Children are taught through role plays, visual presentations, demonstrations, and games. Homeschooling is another option that most parents prefer to formal schooling. Also, with the abundance of online resources, modern education has extended the boundaries of learning. Stage 3:  Teenager Teenagers in the medieval times were accustomed to social etiquettes of wooing a lady. The teenager during Shakespeares time pined for his lover, wrote elaborate verses of love ballads, and mooned over his object of desire. Romeo and Juliet  is an icon of romance during the period of Shakespeares. Love was sensual, deep, romantic, and full of grace and beauty. Compare this love to the teen love of today. The modern age teen is technically savvy, well-informed, and romantically astute. They dont express their love in amorous love letters. Who does that in the age of texting and social media? Relationships are not as elaborate, or romantic as they were for the medieval teenager. The youth of today is far more individual-centric and independent than those in Shakespeares time. Back in those days, relationships were nurtured towards matrimony. Nowadays, marriage is not necessarily the goal of every romantic affiliation, there is more sexual expression and less adherence to social structures such as monogamy. However, despite all these differences, the teenager of today is as angsty as the teenager of the medieval time. They have to deal with unrequited love, heartbreak, and depression just as those in ancient times. Stage 4: Youth The next stage Shakespeare talks about in the poem is that of a young soldier. In old England, young men were trained for combat. The young soldier developed an attitude of brash courage, raw passion mixed with the impetuous temper that is characterized by unwarranted rebellion. The youth of today have the same zeal and energy for rebellion. They are far more expressive, vocal, and assertive about their rights. Though the youth of today would not necessarily be enlisted for service in the army, they have enough avenues to form social groups to fight for a political or social cause. With social media platforms and the global reach of mass media, the young can reach their voice to the far corners of the world. A widespread reaction is almost instantaneous because of the global reach and effectiveness of propaganda.   Stage 5: Middle Age The middle age has hardly changed over the centuries. Middle age is the time when men and women settle down, and kids, family, and career take precedence over personal indulgences. Age brings wisdom and a sense of peaceful acceptance of realities of life. Idealistic values get pushed behind, while practical considerations become important. While the middle-aged man (and woman) of today have more options to further personal or professional interests, perhaps the medieval middle-aged man had fewer such options, and, not surprisingly, even less so the medieval woman. Stage 6: Old Age In medieval times, life expectancy hovered around 40, and a man of 50 would consider himself lucky to be alive. Depending on the social or economic class of the person, old age could be harsh or at best, ambivalent. Though the old were respected for their wisdom and experience, most old people suffered due to neglect and degeneration of physical and mental faculties. Those who were oriented towards religious pursuits fared better than the household man. Today, life is alive and vibrant for a 40-year-old. Many senior aged people (starting in their 70s) in the modern era are still actively involved in social activities, secondary occupations, or hobbies. Also, there are good retirement plans and financial devices available to make old age comfortable. It is not so uncommon for a healthy and young-at-heart senior citizen to go on a trip around the world, enjoy gardening or golf, or even continue to work or pursue higher education if they so desire. Stage 7: Extreme Old Age What Shakespeare talks about in this stage of man is an extreme form of aging, where the person is no longer able to perform basic tasks such as bathing, eating, and going to the toilet. Physical frailty and incapacity no longer allow them the freedom to live unassisted. During Shakespeares time, it was quite okay to treat old people as senile. In fact, in the Elizabethan era, where slavery and discrimination against women were highly prevalent, ageism  was hardly considered a problem. Old people were treated as little children, and as Shakespeare describes this stage as a second childhood, it was socially acceptable to treat the old with disdain. Todays modern society is more humane and sensitive to seniors. Though ageism still exists and is prevalent in many spheres, with growing awareness, seniors sans teeth, sans eyes, and sans taste still live with the dignity that ought to be afforded to the elderly.