In Immanuel Kant’s (On Political Reactions) he states that “It is a duty to tell the truth”. Kant also continues on to say that the concept of duty remains inseparable from the concept of right. One being corresponding to the rights of another qualifies as a duty. Where are there are no rights, there are no duties. To tell the truth is a duty: but it remains a duty only in respect to one who has a right to the truth. However, no one has a right to a truth which injures others ( Kant, Immanuel). The question of whether or not lying ever proves acceptable constitutes as a gray area. An idea proposed by Immanuel Kant, are you to lie to a murderer?
If one tells a lie, such as stating people are not present in their home at the time when they are really there, and murder has been prevented the lie was told with a justifiable cause. Was it still ethical to lie is an important question that opens up the potential for heavy debate. The lie that was told enabled a life is still able to continue on. On the
…show more content…
Lying is a form of deception, but not all forms of deception are lies.
Lying proves itself as one of the most common acts carried out within society, but lying and deceit are also acts that are commonly deemed “wrong”. One researcher has said 'lying is an unavoidable part of human nature’. Therefore, the majority of people find that lying and deceit, as well as the morality of the two, are worth thinking about. Most people would say lying and deceit are always wrong, unless there is a good reason behind it. One can conclude that this means that lying and deceit are not always blatantly wrong. Lying qualifies as a form of deception, but not all forms of deception qualify as lies.
Why is lying