enquiriesalevelphilosophycouk Michael Lacewing Utilitarianism A ct utilitarianism an action is right if it maximises happiness and wrong if it does not I f telling a lie creates more happiness than telling the truth or keeping silent then telling a lie is morally rig ID: 643491
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Telling lies Michael Lacewing" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Telling lies
Michael Lacewingenquiries@alevelphilosophy.co.uk
© Michael LacewingSlide2
Utilitarianism
Act utilitarianism:
an action is right if it
maximises
happiness, and wrong if it does not If telling a lie creates more happiness than telling the truth (or keeping silent), then telling a lie is morally rightMill: wider consequencesBeing truthful is of great benefit, and society, civilization and virtue only works on the assumption of truthfulnessHence weakening our own truthfulness or another’s trust is very seriousTherefore, lying for convenience is wrong
© Michael LacewingSlide3
Utilitarianism
Mill: Lying can be permissible, e.g. when it is the only way to withhold information from someone who intends harm
E.g. Kant’s example of the would-be murderer
Rule utilitarianism:
an action is right if, and only if, it complies with those rules which, if everybody followed them, would lead to the greatest happiness (compared to any other set of rules) ‘Never lie’ will not maximize happinessBut it is hard to formalise the best rule
© Michael LacewingSlide4
Kantian deontology
‘Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law’
Lying
violates the Categorical Imperative:
Deceiving another requires that they believe us, which requires that deceiving is not universalKant argues that lying is always wrongThe axe murdererBut one’s maxim might be more specific, and so pass the Categorical Imperative, e.g. ‘lie to save a life’But could we still deceive the axe murderer if this was universal?© Michael LacewingSlide5
Kantian deontology
Kant: If we lie, we are responsible for the consequences of our lie
But aren’t we equally responsible for the consequences of doing our duty?
‘Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end’
Lying violates the formula of humanityThe deceived person can’t freely choose whether to adopt our endKant seems to allow that lying is a ‘weapon of defence’ against someone who intends harm
© Michael LacewingSlide6
Aristotelian virtue ethics
‘falsehood is
in itself
mean and culpable, and truth noble and worthy of praise
’Does this imply that lying has no mean, it is already a vice?Alternatively, truth is a final end – but that doesn’t mean that we should always pursue it (cp. pleasure), since we should only do so at the right time, with the right objects, etc.© Michael LacewingSlide7
Aristotelian virtue ethics
Aristotle mainly discusses boastfulness – lying about oneselfThis is ‘futile rather than bad’
It can be done for better or worse motives (e.g. to gain reputation
v
. gain money)This indicates that lying is never virtuousBut if there are few rules in ethics, it is unlikely that lying is always wrongIf we lie, we must do so at the right time, with the right motive, about the right truths, and in the right way© Michael Lacewing