Concerning a Pretended Right to Lie from Motives of Humanity by Immanuel Kant - Assignment Example

Truthfulness as a Duty What argument does Constant give to refute Kant’s position that it is always wrong to lie?Similar to Kant, Constant admits that truthfulness can be regarded as a duty. On the other hand, this duty must always be considered as an obligation that does not cause harm to another person. For this reason, Constant is convinced that truthfulness must be followed in the case if it does not harm another person. Kants strict requirement to comply with the truthfulness everywhere and in everything makes the existence of society impossible.2. Why is it always our duty to answer truthfully a question that we cannot avoid answering?

Truthfulness is a duty. Moreover, truthfulness must be respected even in those cases where we cannot avoid answering. This is due to the fact that a man who speaks the truth should not be seen as responsible for the consequences resulting from his/her honest answer. The harm caused to a person as a result of the truthfulness does not impose any moral or legal responsibility to the one who has told the truth, because in this case we are talking about an accident.3. Why is it redundant to define a lie as falsehood that harms another?

This is due to the fact that a lie “always hurts another; and if not another man, at least man kind in general by making the source of all right useless” (Kant and Kroeger 12). It makes no sense to define a lie as the falsehood that harms another because causing harm is the very essence of the lie. 4. In what kind of situation could a lie told to save an innocent friend be punishable under civil law? Despite the fact that in some cases, a lie is seen as an opportunity to save a loved one, however the consequences can be quite severe, including the tragic ones.

In particular, if someone in an attempt to save the life of his friend lied to a murderer about the location of his friend and yet the murder has happened, this person may be punishable under civil law. In this case, the person who told the lie is responsible for the consequences. 5. How does Constants argument rest on a confusion between an act that harms another and act wrongs another? Constants believes that in some cases, truthfulness may harm another person, but in fact truthfulness cannot cause harm because it is a formal duty.

Harm can be caused only by an accident (casus) to which the veracity is irrelevant. For this reason, truthfulness should be considered as an unconditional duty in any situation.Work CitedKant, Immanuel, and A. E. Kroeger. “Concerning a Pretended Right to Lie from Motives of Humanity.” The Journal of Speculative Philosophy 7.2 (1873): 14-19. Print.