Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T18:19:35.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Kant’s Duty to Speak the Truth

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2016

Thomas Mertens
Thomas Mertens*
Affiliation:
Radboud Universiteit
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In ‘On the Supposed Right to Lie from Philanthropy’, Kant defends a position that cannot be salvaged. The essay is nonetheless important because it helps us understand his philosophy of law and, more specifically, his interpretation of the social contract. Kant considers truthfulness a strict legal duty because it is the necessary condition for the juridical state. As attested by Kant’s rejection of Beccaria’s arguments against the death penalty, not even the right to life has such strict unconditional status. Within the juridical state, established by the social contract, the (single) innate right to freedom is transformed into a bundle of merely positive rights, including the right to life. Understanding the reason for the rejection of ‘the right to lie from philanthropy’ thus helps us understand the, in a sense, ‘positivist’ character of Kant’s legal philosophy. In conclusion, some suggestions are made to bring his position closer to our common moral understanding.

Keywords

lyingKant’s philosophy of lawright to lifesocial contractBeccarialegal positivism
Type
Articles
Information
Kantian Review , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 27 - 51
Copyright
© Kantian Review 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexy, R. (2002) The Argument from Injustice: A Reply to Legal Positivism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ataner, A. (2006) ‘Kant on Capital Punishment and Suicide’. Kant-Studien, 97, 452–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baynes, K. (1989) ‘Kant on Property Rights and the Social Contract’. The Monist, 72, 433–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beccaria, C. (2009) On Crimes and Punishments, trans. E. D. Ingraham. Philadelphia: Treasurers.Google Scholar
Benton, R. J. (1982) ‘Political Expediency and Lying: Kant vs. Benjamin Constant’. Journal of the History of Ideas, 43, 135–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bok, S. (1978) Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life. Chichester: Harvester Press.Google Scholar
Byrd, B. Sharon, and Hruschka, Joachim (2010) Kant’s Doctrine of Right: A Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassirer, E. (1970) Rousseau, Kant, Goethe, trans. J. Gutman, P. O. Kristeller and J. H. Randall Jr. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cicero (1991) On Duties, trans. and ed. M. Griffin and E. Atkins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Constant, B. (1964) Écrits et discours politiques, ed. O. Pozzo di Borgo. Paris: Pauvert.Google Scholar
Fredman, S. (2008) Human Rights Transformed: Positive Rights and Positive Duties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geismann, G., and Oberer, H. (1986) Kant und das Recht der Lüge. Würzberg: Königshausen & Neumann.Google Scholar
Goodman, R., and Soni, J. (2012) Rome’s Last Citizen: The Life and Legacy of Cato, Moral Enemy of Caesar. New York: Dunne.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. (2008) On Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, S. (2013) Lying. Four Elephants Press.Google Scholar
Höffe, O. (1994) Kategorische Rechtsprinzipien: Ein Kontrapunkt der Moderne. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Horn, C. (2014) Nichtideale Normativität: Ein neuer Blick auf Kants politische Philosophie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Ju, G.-J. (1990) Kants Lehre vom Menschenrecht und von den staatsbürgerlichen Grundrechten. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1902) Immanuel Kants Schriften. Ausgabe der Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1996) Practical Philosophy, trans. and ed. Mary Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (2004) Vorlesungen zur Moralphilosophie, ed. W. Stark. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, C. (1996) ‘The Right to Lie: Kant on Dealing with Evil’. In Creating the Kingdom of Ends (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 133–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, J. (2008) Second Treatise of Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, A. (2006) Ethics and Politics: Selected Essays, vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McMahan, J. (2011) Killing in War. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mertens, Th. (2013) ‘Review of B. Sharon Byrd and Joachim Hruschka, Kant’s Doctrine of Right’. Ethic@: Revista Internacional de Filosofia da Moral, 12, 355–358, <https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/ethic/article/view/1677-2954.2013v12n2p355>.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neiman, S. (2008) Moral Clarity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
O’Neill, O. (1989) Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pauer-Studer, H. (2016) ‘“A Community of Rational Beings”: Kant’s Realm of Ends and the Distinction between Internal and External Freedom’. Kant-Studien, 107 (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinzani, A. (2015) ‘Living Honestly and Killing Honourably: Ehre and Ehrbarkeit in the Metaphysics of Morals’ (unpublished).Google Scholar
Radbruch, G. (1946) ‘Gesetzliches Unrecht und übergesetzliches Recht’. Süddeutsche Juristenzeitung, 1, 105–108. (Trans. Bonnie Litschewski Paulson and Stanley L. Paulson as “Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-statutory Law at <http://ojls.oxfordjournals.org/content/26/1/1.extract>).Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1999) The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (2000) Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy, ed. B. Herman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reich, K. (1936) Rousseau und Kant. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
Rousseau (1997) The Social Contract and Other Later Political Writings, trans. and ed. V. Gourevitch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sartre, J.-P. (1966) Le mur. Paris: Gallimard. <http://faculty.risd.edu/dkeefer/pod/wall.pdf>.Google Scholar
Sartre, J.-P. (1996) L’existentialisme est une humanisme. Paris: Gallimard. <http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/sartre/works/exist/sartre.htm>.Google Scholar
Sensen, O. (2009) ‘Kant’s Conception of Human Dignity’. Kant-Studien, 100, 309–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. (2005) International Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stell, L. K. (1979) ‘Dueling and the Right to Life’. Ethics, 90, 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmermann, J. (2013) ‘Kantian Dilemmas? Moral Conflict in Kant’s Ethical Theory’. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 95, 36–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varden, H. (2010) ‘Kant and Lying to the Murderer at the Door … One More Time: Kant’s Legal Philosophy and Lies to Murderers and Nazis’. Journal of Social Philosophy, 41, 403–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, H. (1978) ‘Kant gegen ein Vermeintes Recht, aus Menschenliebe zu Lügen’. Kant-Studien, 69, 90–96.Google Scholar
Waldron, J. (1996) ‘Kant’s Legal Positivism’. Harvard Law Review, 109, 1535–1566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willaschek, M. (2009) ‘Right and Coercion: Can Kant’s Conception of Right be Derived from his Moral Theory?’. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 17, 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittwer, H. (2001) ‘Über Kants Verbot der Selbsttötung’. Kant-Studien, 92, 180–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, A. (2008) Kantian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar