Prohibition of Lying in the Ethics of the Act. Perusing I. Kant’s essay “On a Supposed Right to Lie” in the Light of H. Arendt’s Philosophy

Abstract

Kant’s prohibition on lying is analyzed in the light of theoretical discussion on the sense of morality between Ruben Apressyan and Abdusalam Guseynov. The distinction between the spheres of individual and public morality makes it possible for different approaches to consider the prohibition on lying as the factor of the moral action. In the article Kant’s ethical and philosophical ideas are considered through the prism of social and political stance Hannah Arendt’s. Arendt proposed to consider three perspectives of human affairs in Kant’s philosophy: human species and its progress, a human person as a moral being and end in oneself, men in plural, whose true end is sociability. The Enlightenment provides a person with the opportunity to free oneself from superstitions and to follow Reason, and the moral law defines its demands. The moral law also obliges a person to act according to the duty; the prohibition on lying being one of its particular forms. At the level of Kant’s moral subject, the prohibition on lying is specified in deliberated efforts of an actor to follow the absolute duty. In the case of the householder, to follow the duty means to not lie to the malefactor about the location of a friend. The alternative to such action is the recognition of personal moral failure as any other choice is inevitably defined by partiality, not by the moral law. However, absolute prohibition against lying in its ultimate implementation eliminates actor’s ability to recognize the good and the evil, while eliminating one’s responsibility and allowing to hide behind the moral law. In the sphere of human interaction, persons verify correctness of their actions by means of judgments. Under the circumstances of conflicting obligations, an actor is able to comprehend all contradictions, to make a judgment and to take responsibility in position of “non-alibi in being”.