7 ms·
The deontologist believes lying is against the universal maxim. If everybody lied all the time, we wouldn't have a functioning society. The virtue ethicist bel
by jacobmartin 4y ago
The deontologist believes lying is against the universal maxim. If everybody lied all the time, we wouldn't have a functioning society.
The virtue ethicist believes it is bad to be in a habit to lie because being predisposed to lying is opposed to the virtue of the truth. We've all known people who lie by habit and they are unpleasant and vicious to be around. I don't know if most virtue ethicists (who don't also fall into the natural lawyer camp, below) would say it is per se bad to lie, but most would say it is vicious.
The natural lawyer believes that speech has as its natural end telling the truth and therefore it is contra naturam to lie. See the almost-impossibly-extended discussion here, for that: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09469a.htm https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09469a.htm
For all of these groups, there has variously been admitted something like an "equivocal statement"---a statement which has some interpretation that is technically true, but not the interpretation that the speaker knows will be taken by the listener as a falsehood. For example, my friend invites me out on Friday and rather than saying I'd rather be at home, I say, "I have something going on that night." He takes it to mean that I have other plans, but I don't. But technically, breathing is "something going on" so I haven't lied. (Whether your social relationships will stand your doing this is another matter ;))
I'm personally fall in something like the virtue ethicist camp, but I do believe sometimes, in justice, a lie must be said, and not all of those situations can be covered by an equivocation.
- prepend 4y ago> If everybody lied all the time, we wouldn't have a functioning society. This is true. But I don’t think anyone makes the point that someone should lie all the time. Especially not that everyone should lie all the time. I think that there’s an ethical argument for lieing for some greater purpose (eg, a spy working for the Underground Railroad).
- fiddlerwoaroof 4y agoThat phrasing has to do with how Kant thinks you come to discover moral truths: it’s an appeal to Kant’s idea of the categorical imperative which, for him, is the basis of all morals. So, essentially, the claim here is “since you cannot lie all the time and have a functioning society then, by my prior arguments about what morality is, you can never lie”
- jacobmartin 4y agoYes, precisely. Sorry I wasn't clear about that.
- im3w1l 4y agoThat interpretation falls on its own absurdity. "Since you cannot eat all the time without dying of obesity, you must never eat at all". The categorical imperative only generalizes across people. "Can you have a functioning society where people tell a white lie now and then?" And the answer is clearly yes. Is it superior to one where everyone is perfectly honest? Less obvious.
- trinsic2 4y agoI agree. I side more with Deontology. But I understand that lieing should be used in small doses and only to protect the just from the unjust.
- Thiez 4y agoIf everybody used deceptive but ultimately truthful statements all the time society wouldn't function either. Allowing for deliberately deceptive truths is just a ridiculous contortion to solve the "murderer at the door" or "nazi at the door while hiding jews" problem. To me it just shows that they don't truly believe in their ethical framework since they will twist it into something ridiculous as soon as it gets difficult.