Kant's Categorical Imperative Essay

Kant, unlike Mill, believed that certain types of actions including murder, theft, and lying were absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about more happiness than the alternative. Kant also has something to say about what makes someone a good person. Although, Kant intends this to go along with the rest of his theory, and what one's duty is would be determined by the categorical imperative. However, one can treat this as a separate theory to some extent, and consider that one's duty is determined by some other standard.

Kant believed there cannot be any exceptions to the duty not to lie, regardless of the consequences because he stated “ whoever tells a lie ,however well-intentioned he might be, must answer for the consequences, however unforeseeable they were, and pay the penalty for them. “Even though we may repeatedly consider lying or bring the good consequences, we can never know exactly what our results would be from our actions. So as long we done our duty we cannot control the consequences nor should be we held accountable for them.
He well-defined an imperative as any proposition declaring a certain action or inaction to be necessary. A categorical imperative, on the other hand, denotes an absolute, unconditional requirement that must be obeyed in all circumstances and is justified as an end in it. It is best known in its first formulation” Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.” Kant suggested that lying could not be a universal law and would not pass the test of the Categorical Imperative. Lying would be self-defeating meaning if we fail to tell the truth we must be willing to wish that all other people do so well on the