Philosophy 10200
Weekly Assignment 14
Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy
Kant writes in response to Benjamin Constant’s idea that telling the truth
is a duty. Kant believes that telling only the truth will make society impossible. He used the
example of how if a criminal were to ask for the location of your friend you ought to tell him the
truth according to Constant’s idea. Constant rebuked and said it is a duty but “no one has a right
to a truth that harms others” (Kant 611). Kant believes that “truthfulness in statements that one
cannot avoid is a human being’s duty to everyone” (Kant 612). Humanity is generally harmed
when a lie is told. Lies can be done on purpose or accidentally. If you tell a lie by accident and
something harmful arises then you shouldn’t be condemned for it. Going back to the murderer
example, if you lied and said the person wasn’t home and the murderer encountered them outside
and killed them trying to look for them, then you are responsible (612-13). “To be truthful in all
declarations is therefore a sacred command of reason prescribing unconditionally” (Kant 613).
Questions:
= Is it morally wrong to alter the truthfulness of a statement for the greater good?
= How do you tell who has a right to the truth?
= In what other circumstances would you expect the demand for unconditionality(of telling the
truth) besides the justice system?
Weekly Assignment 14
Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy
Kant writes in response to Benjamin Constant’s idea that telling the truth
is a duty. Kant believes that telling only the truth will make society impossible. He used the
example of how if a criminal were to ask for the location of your friend you ought to tell him the
truth according to Constant’s idea. Constant rebuked and said it is a duty but “no one has a right
to a truth that harms others” (Kant 611). Kant believes that “truthfulness in statements that one
cannot avoid is a human being’s duty to everyone” (Kant 612). Humanity is generally harmed
when a lie is told. Lies can be done on purpose or accidentally. If you tell a lie by accident and
something harmful arises then you shouldn’t be condemned for it. Going back to the murderer
example, if you lied and said the person wasn’t home and the murderer encountered them outside
and killed them trying to look for them, then you are responsible (612-13). “To be truthful in all
declarations is therefore a sacred command of reason prescribing unconditionally” (Kant 613).
Questions:
= Is it morally wrong to alter the truthfulness of a statement for the greater good?
= How do you tell who has a right to the truth?
= In what other circumstances would you expect the demand for unconditionality(of telling the
truth) besides the justice system?
