Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 07: "A LESSON IN LYING"

PART ONE: A LESSON IN LYING
Immanuel Kants stringent theory of morality allows for no exceptions. Kant believed that telling a lie, even a white lie, is a violation of ones own dignity. Professor Sandel asks students to test Kants theory with this hypothetical case: if your friend were hiding inside your home, and a person intent on killing your friend came to your door and asked you where he was, would it be wrong to tell a lie? If so, would it be moral to try to mislead the murderer without actually lying? This leads to a discussion of the morality of misleading truths. Sandel wraps up the lecture with a video clip of one of the most famous, recent examples of dodging the truth: President Clinton talking about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

PART TWO: A DEAL IS A DEAL

Sandel introduces the modern philosopher John Rawls and his theory of a hypothetical social contract. Rawls argues that principles of justice are the outcome of a special kind of agreement. They are the principles we would all agree to if we had to choose rules for our society and no one had any unfair bargaining power. According to Rawls, the only way to ensure that no one has more power than anyone else is to imagine a scenario where no one knows his or her age, sex, race, intelligence, strength, social position, family wealth, religion, or even his or her goals in life. Rawls calls this hypothetical situation a veil of ignorance. What principles would we agree to behind this veil of ignorance? And would these principles be fair? Professor Sandel explains the idea of a fair agreement with some humorous examples of actual contracts that produce unfair results.

• Category

  Education

[SendEstringsForXmas]

You know what I like about Michael Sandel? I've never heard him say "Uhhhh" once when he speaks. He's so fluid and concise.

[Omer Samir]

No subtitle? :(

[Jorge Lamas]

Lying is not that bad, it depends on the lie.

[Mike Staihr]

It is not often that my thoughts garner any response from the rest of humanity so I thank you for some modicum of recognition...After 40 years of my declining ability in abstract thinking it has become difficult to relate discussions such as this to the "real" world that I inhabit. Concepts such as duty, honor, etc. have become empty or perverted to such an extent that I see little evidence of them around me. Ok, the end/means thing is understood although little of that seems to be practiced.

[John Gillespie]

Mike, it might be helpful to think of "duty" as it is used here as a SENSE of duty rather than an external obligation. Also, the Kantian concept of humanity as an "end" is not to be understood as the "end result" of the universe, or teleological end, but as an "end" as opposed to a "means." That is, one should treat people as befitting their human dignity, as opposed to using people like a tool to accomplish one's own goals.

[VitalSigns1]

This stuff is interesting, but you have to admit that when you take a step back from it, it really seems like a silly thing to spend so much of your time analyzing.

[woutkoopman]

No it is not an answer. Just because I hear a sound does not mean I am involved in any way. If I hear the doorbell and I don't open, nothing happens. If I do open, still nothing has happened. If he asks me and I don't reply there is still no debate about giving any answer to anyone. You can't say, because someone doesn't disagree he agrees and vice versa. What the killer thinks is not important, it is about what is implied. And when there is no response, nothing is implied.

[Mike Staihr]

I am out of Lecture 6 and into the very beginning of 7 and still I have not grasped the definition of Duty as implied. It is not purely a dictionary definition because that is defined as pressure of an external nature--not necessarily physical--and not purely derived from within oneself. I suppose I can attribute my difficulty with the fact that I have problems with the concept of humanity as an end in and of itself. Granted, rational and advanced but still far from perfection.

[Nova Choi]

The refusal of giving an answer is in fact an answer to some extent. Although words are not told, the fact that you refuse to answer means that this option is more favorable than lie or truth to you, which then can lead the killer to think the reason behind. I think the implication of this non-answer response is actually an answer, but not a clear one. Therefore, in my point of view, your participation in this event starts when you hear the bell rang.

[Bazooka Nylon]

you could try the beta subtitles from youtube. check the buttons on the lower right corner. the one on the far left of all these is the subtitles. they aren't always very accurate but it may help you. good luck!