NO FILE ATTACHMENTS ACCEPTED – Write your answers directly into the journal text editor
Minimum Total Word Count: 500 words (does not include headings, your name, titles, or citations)
Compose your responses using the question format found below
Write in your own words – do not quote from any source unless absolutely necessary – and even then, quotes should be no longer than seven words in length
Use only assigned course materials
No lists or bullet points accepted
Spelling and Grammar count
Respond to at least one classmate’s blog
prioritize responding to a blog that did not yet receive a comment
keep the discussion going
Feedback ideas that further the discussion:
“This reminds me of…” something slightly different but connected in some way.
Offer an observation that hasn’t been discussed yet.
Ask a question.
If all you can think of is, “great job!” say why. Be descriptive.
Blog Prompt/Topic Set-Up: Kant and the Ethics of Lying:
Kant’s deontological ethics argues for absolute ethical rules that apply in all situations. Only conduct that strictly adheres to those rules is “ethical.” According to deontology, the consequences of an act/conduct are not relevant to determining ethical permissibility.
Kant argued that ethical rules are determined ahead of time and a priori through the application of “pure reason.” In other words, the rules or “maxims” of deontology are the product of self-evident propositions arrived at through use of deduction.
For example, deontology holds that lying is never permissible (in other words, it is always unethical). This rule is reasonable, a Kantian would argue, because the alternative is to imagine a world in which the opposite were true – that lying is always ethical/permissible. Surely, a world in which everyone lies, all the time and to everyone – even amongst family and friends – is not a world any reasonable person would wish into existence. Therefore, Kant argued that a world in which no one lied, ever, is clearly preferable and is a world in which people would want to live.
Do you agree with the concept of small, “white lies” versus more serious, big lies? If so, what, exactly, are the differences between the two categories of lying? How do you determine when, and to whom, lying is permissible?
In your own life, do you lie (this includes the telling of “small” lies)? If so, to whom do you lie and why do it?
(Please answer honestly here – I admit, I tell small lies, probably every day, to my young children – not sure if I am exactly “proud” of that, but it is the truth and I know I am not alone in doing/have done this.)
Define and explain the core concepts and views of deontological ethics. Please provide examples to help describe/illustrate your explanations.
Define and explain deontological views on the ethical permissibility/impermissibility of lying.
Do you agree with the deontological rule about lying? Why or why not? – explain in detail.
The questions in part C reference the following required reading: the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s “Law Enforcement Code of Ethics.” (We will be using the IACP Code of Ethics in this class as a “model” ethical code for Policing.)
Explain the code’s stance regarding lying. What, specifically, does the code say when it comes to “honesty?” (NOTE that in this specific instance, you MAY QUOTE the exact sentence from the code that mentions honesty).
To what degree and in what specific ways does the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics resemble deontological ethics?
Recall your responses to the questions in Part A, above. How well (or not) do your responses conform to the importance the Code places on honesty in both while on duty and in private life? [No judgements here – answer honestly, please].
How would you/do you explain and reconcile/justify any apparent contradictions between the ethical duties imposed by the IACP Code of Ethics and your responses to the questions in Part A above? https://www.theiacp.org/resources/law-enforcement-code-of-ethics