57

If he asks Immanuel Kant, he says, "Third door on the right."
There's no other way to go. Kant here, and many philosophers
in this moral regime, failed to worry about the case when
what you do is always wrong in some way or another. That's
the more natural real life situation. Sorting out right
and wrong are rather simple. Sorting out the lesser of two
evils i s a little more complex and we see this in the
utilitarian's position. utilitarians on the surface rather
like white lies, they think they're practical and often
trivial. Signing letters like "Cordially yours", doctors
distributing placebos rather than real pills. But the
utilitarians disagree on what's utilitarian in complex
situations when there's always something wrong and they
start to think that lies are neutral. Sissela opposes this
and in her second chapter awards any lie a negative buoyance
to start with. Much as Aristotle would, when he said, "Lies
start out and persist in being mean and culpable."

I hope I've introduced some discussion items that will
be interesting for tomorrow's seminars. I've not even talked
about not lying to enemies and you can imagine what my
position would be on that. Where do you stand on bureaucratic
lying, what do we do about that? Writing letters of
recommendation, writing fitness reports that are inflated
and in any real sense, lies. Or how about the chips, we
have so many to spend, we tell people we're not here, we
give them false excuses for not doing this or that. I don't
propose to turn this bureaucracy around, but I propose that

13