GUIDE TO THE PHILOSOPHY 1938 - 1947.pdf - Rare Books at ...

2l6 * ETHICS
wrong in themselves, irrespective either of inclination or
consequences; that their lightness consists in their being
prescribed to us by the moral consciousness'; and that
the dictates of the moral consciousness are immediately
recognizable and of binding authority. For what need, it
may be asked, has a doctrine such as this to concern
itselfwith the question whether the actions which the moral
will prescribes can be universalized or not? The moral
law does not need a sign, and its authority does not depend
*
upon consequences.
And Unacceptable.
be doubted whether the
(b) In the second place, it may
" "
universalization formula is always applicable. Moral problems
are exceedingly various, and not the least difficult
is that which presents itself in the form of a choice between
two alternatives, to both of which Kant's universalization
formula applies. There is, for example, the familiar problem,
whether it is morally justifiable to tell a lie to save a life.
Most people would say that it is; but both the two principles
involved, "we ought to tell the truth" and "we
ought to save life whenever we can" are universalizable.
In fact, it was reflection upon the consideration that
universal lying is self-contradictory in its results that, in
the 1
foregoing discussion, suggested the conclusion that
truth-telling was what the moral law prescribed. Thus in
a case of this kind Kant's formula gives us no help in
determining where our duty lies.
And Partial in their Application.
(c) Apart from cases of doubt, there are others in which
the course of action to which the formula of universalization
points would appear to.be definitely wrong. There
is, for example, the class of case which is covered by the
notion erf vocation. Some people, it has been held, may
be called upon to Jive a certain kind of life, which is unsuitable
for others. The kind of life in question may be
1 See above p. 208.