In five pages a case study analysis regarding the 'lying promise' as a poor concept is presented with utilitarian and Kantian ethical philosophies incorporated into the discussion. Eight sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: RT13_SA215lie.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
lying had become a part of daily life in the Clinton White House. Yet, the people were angry with him not for his poor leadership, or philandering, but for his
lying. Whether it is a religious or intrinsic principle, or even a psychological detriment, lying does not work in society. It is always seen as bad. John Stuart Mill for
example abhorred the lie, but saw that it was necessary in some circumstances. It may be argued that lying is not only necessary in some circumstances, but one may go
beyond the few exceptions and see good in the lie. It is certainly a premise consistent with utilitarianism. Near the end of chapter two of Mills Utilitarianism, he argues that
people ought not to lie. But he also goes on to say that there must be exceptions to the general rule against lying. How does one reconcile this apparent
contradiction? Mill indeed sees exceptions because life is so complicated and one cannot make hard and fast rules. There are special situations that call for lying. Not lying for the
sake of telling the truth, even if the consequences are deadly, is simply ridiculous, so Mill allows for exceptions. Similarly, the lying promise is something that is said in
order to achieve a favorable outcome. What if someone has a gun to the victims childs head and the victim fears for that childs life? Should the victim tell the
gunman what he or she wants to hear, even if it is a lie? Should they promise him anything? The answer seems to be a resounding yes, but there are
practical problems with such a solution. No one really knows what the gunman wants to hear and the tactic may not work. Such is the case in law enforcement. It