It is important to note that the moral law is a mandate which dictates how a person must act. The latter is Kant’s perspective on ethics and morality, where the supreme principle of morality or Categorical Imperative lies at its core. The act of lying contradicts the morality of truth, which implies that one must always tell the truth regardless of the consequences. The central argument of the given reflection is that Kant’s position is absurd since lying itself is not immoral, and it is a mere instrument to misinform someone.
One should be aware that truth and lie are rather challenging to define since it assumes full knowledge. Even the most accurate and well-established method of acquisition of truth and facts, the scientific method, is prone to errors, corrections, and paradigm shifts (Lower, 2020). Therefore, telling a person to always tell the truth assumes that such an individual knows the truth. For example, a conspiracy theorist, who believes that the earth is flat, might inherently believe that he or she knows the truth about the shape of the planet. A similar illustration can become significantly more immoral when it comes to dangerous beliefs, such as white supremacy.
In conclusion, the truth cannot have an intrinsic value because it itself cannot be fully known or defined. Even if the truth is recognized as such by most, there are situations where it can undermine the well-being of the entire nation. A CIA agent is acting morally by engaging in lying and disinformation in a foreign nation without which his or her own nation would be at risk. Since a similar tactic is being used against the US, security becomes a priority over truth-telling.
Lower, S. (2020). Limitations of the scientific method. Libre Texts.