Immanuel Kant's Absolute Moral Rule

512 Words3 Pages
There are people that believe, there are absolute moral rule that everyone should follow, no matter what the situation is. Immanuel Kant a philosopher pushed this concept and believed that no one should break moral rules, even if it is to save people. He believed that we will never know the true outcome of anything, so we should always follow moral rules and late fate play its role. But most people don’t believe in this because it seems obvious that breaking some moral rules can have some real benefits from it. Furthermore, it would be impossible to follow every single rule because some rules can contradict to themselves. Around the 19th century there was a philosopher that believed the all moral rules are absolute with each other. His name was Immanuel Kant, he argued that lying in every circumstance is immoral. He believed that moral obligations do not depend on whether you want to do something or not. He thought that we should follow all moral obligations, no matter what we feel about it. Kant’s argument on lying was that if we keep on lying, even if it is for a reason then no one would believe anyone. Furthermore, he believed that if people lie no matter what, then they would follow the rule that it is okay to lie. Then the rule would be self-defeating because no one would believe each other, and then there would be no reason to lie. Therefore, he believed that no one should lie. Later on, people confronted him and gave him a scene for why it would be a good reason to lie. After he listened to the people, he said that no one can never know the full outcome of…show more content…
They believed that if one moral rule sometimes can go against other moral rule. For an example, if someone can either lie to a murder and help someone live or not lie and let the murderers kill the person. So as you can see, you cannot follow both moral rules. You would either have to lie or allow someone to
Open Document