Comparing Kant And John Stuart Mill's Theories Of Lying

1259 Words 6 Pages
Since a very young age we have been told by our parents to always tell the truth. But, do we always follow that order? No. Sometimes people lie. Lying can be defined as when a person knows the truth, but instead he says otherwise. It can be say that it is an intentional false statement. However, that is not the problem here. The dilemma is whether or not we are supposed to. This has been a controversy between philosophers for years and years. There are two philosophers that worked theories trying to states whether or not lying is morally right. They are Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. They both have addresses the issue of morality differently. However, after seeing both theories, it is clear that, the John Stuart Mill have a more realistic way to see to determine the morality of false promise/lies.
The first philosopher is Immanuel Kant from the 18th century. Kant’s idea of ethics is a little bit complicated, but the most controversial of all. He believed that lying is morally wrong regardless the situation. Kant‘s theory of ethics is well known as Kantian ethics. Also, it is considered deontological because deontology, normative ethical position, states that people should act to a set of rules. In order for one’s action to be
…show more content…
Thus, actions are deemed right or wrong based on the balance of pleasing and painful consequences that result. In Mill’s words, “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” Mill makes an important distinction between higher intellectual pleasures of the mind, and lower sensual pleasures of the body. Mental pleasures are qualitatively superior to bodily ones, and thus have more importance when assessing the consequences of our

Related Documents