AI Assignment on Kant

pdf

School

University of Notre Dame *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

BIOC20

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Oct 30, 2023

Type

pdf

Pages

Uploaded by BarristerProtonDragon33

The Moral Imperative of Truthfulness: Kant ’ s Argument for Never Lying By ChatGPT In the "Groundwork of The Metaphysics of Morals," Immanuel Kant presented the idea that one shall never lie. Kant presented the argument with the support of the categorical imperative, as we should not make an exception for ourselves and do something with poor intentions. In this essay, I will support Kant's argument against lying because it is immoral and goes against the categorical imperative by looking deeper into his argument and its practical implications. Kant's idea is based upon the categorical imperative which mandates that all rules should apply to an individual, regardless of their goals (p. 73). To determine whether a rule (or maxim) is moral according to Kant, one must ask themselves what would happen if everyone acted in the same way (p. 73). If you want to be able to do something but you can’t wish for everyone to do it then you are placing yourself above humanity (p. 73). For example, if a person, knowing that littering is immoral, still decides to throw garbage on the street while travelling. However, if everyone followed this maxim, it would result in a world where streets are filled with garbage. This illustrates the concept put forth by Kant, where an action cannot be considered moral if it cannot be applied universally without resulting in negative consequences. Kant's idea of the categorical imperative builds on idea 2 with the same theory that one must not lie. As if this maxim becomes a universal law, you would not be able to get away with it next time (p. 610). As no one would trust each other in society (p. 612). This would lead to anarchy and chaos. For instance, borrowing money from a friend knowing you cannot repay them is an example of a maxim that fails Kant's test. If this became a universal law, trust among individuals would disappear. As well it would not be considered advantageous anymore. When it comes to lying, Kant asserts that it violates our moral duty because it treats others merely as means to an end. Lying involves manipulating others ’ beliefs to achieve our goals, essentially disregarding their autonomy and right to make informed decisions. Kant contends that every individual possesses intrinsic worth and should be treated with respect, which inherently involves not deceiving them. It is worth noting that Benjamin Constant had a different perspective from Kant regarding the morality of lying. According to Constant, there may be scenarios where lying is morally acceptable. For example, if a murderer comes to your house asking for the whereabouts of your friend who is taking refuge in your home, would it be morally right to tell the truth and put your innocent friend's life at risk? (p. 612). .

In conclusion, Immanuel Kant ’ s argument that we should never lie, grounded in his categorical imperative and deontological ethics, underscores the moral imperative of truthfulness. Lying, according to Kant, violates the principles of universalizability and treats others as means to an end. While Kant ’ s stance may seem stringent, it ultimately calls for a commitment to honesty, trust, and respect as fundamental pillars of moral behavior. In navigating the intricate terrain of truth and deception, Kant ’ s philosophy reminds us of the enduring significance of these ethical principles in our interactions with others.

Explanation of improvements Instructions: Fill in each box to explain the ways in which you have improved ChatGPT’s essay. Write no more than 100 words in each box. 1. There is a clear thesis and argument The thesis was revised to be more concise and clearly state the writer's intention to support Kant's argument. It also provided a roadmap of what to expect from the essay itself. The arguments on the categorical imperative, maxim and why we shall never lie were explained to new readers in simpler terms for those who have no background information. 2. Philosophers’ ideas are presented correctly Kant’s ideas were not presented correctly. As Kant did not have any exceptions to his rule where lying would be morally accepted in certain situations. He instead wanted us to never lie under any situation by following the rule of universality. In the text it was outlined instead it was Benjamin's constant that had opposed to Kant's strict rules. 3. Important concepts are clearly explained, with examples The essay was corrected to demonstrate examples that were found in Kant's reading to support his argument. The examples were placed on topics like what it means to follow the categorical imperative and why we shall never lie. To give the reader the perspective that if we do lie and break the maxims how will this impact us if everyone started to do the same? For example, if a person, knowing that littering is immoral, still decides to throw garbage on the street while travelling. However, if everyone followed this maxim, it would result in a world filled with garbage. 4. Texts are referenced and cited The examples and arguments were referenced and cited using Kant's book called the "Groundwork of The Metaphysics of Morals". The individual pages were cited. Kant, Immanuel. Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals . Translated by James W. Ellington, Hackett Publishing, 1993. 5. An objection is discussed Benjamin Constant presented an objection to the thesis which was written in the essay on how lying should be morally accepted under certain situations. He used the example of a murder to support his philosophy. Constant asked the question, if a murderer comes to your house asking for the whereabouts of your friend, would you tell the truth and put your friend's life at risk? (p. 612).

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version