In this essay, I will argue that Kant does not successfully establish that one must never under any circumstances or for any purpose tell a lie. Kant does show that one must never lie under some circumstance but fails to from varies ways to prove that must not tell a lie for any purpose, firstly the defect of the universal law formula under some situation, secondly the controversial of the humanity formula and the link between rationality and the categorical imperative.
The categorical imperative suggest that tell a lie is unacceptable due to it could not become a universal law of nature. Though Kant view of the universal law that act is only morally permissible if the would run under the act is attainable. Consider if everyone is lying the world will be undermined as everything become untrustworthy. So
…show more content…
For example suppose your friend runs into your house tells you he is in danger and hides in your house and a couple minutes later a murderer comes knocks on your door with a gun in his hand asking if you have seen your friend, what should you do? From Kant’s view, you should not lie to the murderer because we have a duty to not to do so.
This seems irrational as you indirectly let your friend die which a rational agent would not do this. We are morally permissible to lie to the murder as it is in our power to prevent friend dying because there is nothing comparable moral importance(Singer, 1972, P.229-243). Kant respond to this said the key point is that not to lie does not necessarily equal to telling the truth. So it would, therefore, be possible that to achieve both not to lie and avoid letting the friend