Is it ever right to do what is wrong - Term Paper Example

Is it Ever Right to do what is Wrong? There are at times when an ethical dilemma arises regarding the justification of some actions or decisions, specifically an ethical justification for doing something wrong. In such a case, an ethical analysis of the action or decision is made by way reference to the various ethical theories. These theories are viewpoints from which people can obtain guidance towards various decisions or actions. For example, is it ethically justifiable to speak falsehood in the hopes of obtaining good consequences?

In this paper, I will discuss Kant’s moral theory/philosophy, a deontological theory, as a foundation of analyzing whether it is ethically justifiable to speak falsehood in the hopes of obtaining good consequences. In the first part of the paper I will reconstruct and explain the philosopher’s argument. In the second part of the paper I will offer my critical evaluation of the argument in relation to speaking falsehood in the hopes of obtaining good consequences. According to Immanuel Kant, there is a standard of rationality called Categorical Imperatives on which moral requirements are based.

Therefore ethical immorality involves the violation of these categorical imperatives and conformity to them is basically conformity to moral requirements. One of such categorical imperatives is that we cannot use or treat others exclusively as a means of obtaining that which is good for us. Kant argued this way because he believed that every person is born with inherent dignity and every person is entitled respect (Bruce 120). All deontological theories do not take the end as a justification of the means just as Kant states that we cannot use or treat others exclusively as a means of obtaining that which is good for us (Bruce 134).

I support this viewpoint because in many cases in which people being used or whose rights have been sacrifice to achieve good for individual people do not benefit in any way. In some instances, some are more likely to find themselves on a suffering end as a result of the good obtained by one person. For example an applicant uses a fake certificate to secure a job in a certain company. In such a case, there will be one truly qualified person who will miss out on the job. At no time will the falsely qualified person help the person they have forcefully taken their chance.

Conformity to moral ethics is a duty and therefore, we should make decisions bearing in mind that is our duty to fulfill moral obligations to others. An understanding of the moral duties should therefore form the basis of making correct moral decisions. For example it is our moral duty to tell other the truth. We should also value these duties for example holding truth telling as a dear duty. This means that despite the expected outcome, any lie will amount to a failure in fulfilling our moral obligations.

Conformity to moral ethics is based on respect for the moral laws. Therefore acting contrary is worth being rebuked just like any other criminal act that goes against state laws. This is because daily relationships between people in a society are much more guided by moral laws than state laws. Moral laws form the basis for state laws for example many instances of violation of state laws involve violation f the moral laws. Possessing and maintaining moral uprightness is a condition under which everything else is worth having for example securing an employment or making business dealings.

Therefore, actions like speaking the truth should never be compromised in an effort of obtaining good consequences (Bruce 145). It is true to say that success obtained through morally upright means is more likely to be sustained, enjoyable and long lasting as compared to those obtained through lying. For example, an applicant who uses a fake certificate could be caught at any time. This means that not only will they loose the job but they will also face criminal accusations. It is not right to do wrong because whenever a wrong action or decisions is justified as a means of obtaining good, the rights of other people have to be sacrificed.

This is mean especially considering that every human being is worth respect and is entitled to enjoyment of all human rights. The value of a good outcome is judged by the means by which it was obtained and a proof that it was being driven by a correct/upright motivation. This means that however good the consequence, it is worth being condemned if the means of obtaining it was not in line with moral uprightness. Works cited Bruce Aune. Kant's Theory of Morals. Princeton, New Jersey. Princeton University Press. 1979.