Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
I don't know what the hell Kant makes the foundation of his deontology. I barely had time to make sense of Mill and Aristotle, I wasn't going to dedicate 10 hours a week into deciphering the 30 pages I was assigned of him. All I know is that I liked his (or my interpretation of his?) idea that all humans by apparent observation, obtain a degree of reason and thus hold a special responsibility/duty to act accordingly to his Categorical Imperative.....or something like that. Tbh, I just really liked his Categorical Imperative and didn't see why people freaked out when they learned you could not lie.
The classic example of why Kant's imperative is problematic is that of helping the murderer. You walk the streets at night. A man flees past you in panic, then crosses into an alley. Then you see his pursuer who obviously has bad intentions, and he asks you where the other guy went.
According to Kant, it would be morally wrong to direct the pursuer in the false direction. "Lying" is not an action you would want the rest of the world to induldge in and is therefore bad in and of itself. The fact that telling the truth will result in the death of the fleeing man is because the pursuer isn't acting according to the categorical imperative, not because of your action.