Using Immanuel Kant. Is there anyway to justify lying? Say if i was protecting/hiding people from genocide?

Question

I understand the categorical imperative, but i need to justify lying to save a group of people from genocide, and i need to use Immanuel Kant. Anyway?

Answer 1

There are two ways to use Kant in this regard:
1. (The simple way) The categorical imperative can be universalized on a case by case basis. This means that you can frame the imperative in the best possible way to make your case. If you can achieve this, then you have successfully universalized the specific parameters of the dilemma you are dealing with. As such, I could easily see a case to be made for lying based upon the criteria you've set forth.

2. (The fun way) Kant violated his own philosophy at least once. He had a servant...a butler of sorts...who worked for him for many years. The man wasn't really that good of an employee. He left Kant to seek employment with another source. Despite the fact that Kant thought he was lack-luster, he gave the guy a good recommendation to help him get another job.

So, basically, Kant violated his own philosophy for humanitarian reasons without even attempting to justify it. Seems real close to what you're after!

Answer 2

In accordance with the CI we have to ask could there be a general law 'everyone ought to lie'? We could not state this law without breaking it and are therefore duty bound not to lie.

Kant does not justify lying in any event.