Immanuel Kant is vastly known for his deontological ethics which discuss the morality of an action in regards to its intention. Kant discusses the actions of making a false promise.  According to him, the implementation of a false promise is only resulted due to the fear of the consequence in the present moment. He deliberates on the thought behind the incidence of making a promise without the intention of keeping it and concludes that it is unwise to do so. Apropos to his thinking, individuals engage in making false promises as its easy for them. When one makes a promise initially, they fail to consider its long-term outcome. While it may be sagacious in the short term, the long-term effects can be fatal. Hence, the negativity that is initially avoided will express itself in the later stages.

Essentially, he distinguished between the two intentions that may lie when one does intend to fulfill a promise. Kant suggests that ethically when one makes a promise that is intended to be fulfilled, it should be done with the intention of fulfilling one’s duty rather than being concerned about the outcome. The following outcomes can result from this action:

• Losing of one’s credibility: Concordance to the belief of Immanuel Kant, when individuals make false promises, they rely on avoiding the adverse outcome. However, the element that remains unobserved is the after-effects of one’s cunning deceit. In case the individual does make a false promise without having clear intentions to go through with it, will that individual be trusted again? Immanuel Kant suggests that the risk of this outcome, on a holistic level, would result in losing the sanctity of making a promise. Consequently, no individual would be able to trust one another when a promise is made.

• Chain of Immoral events: Furthermore, when a promise is made with the intention of not going through with it, the individual is engaging in a series of immoral events. Ergo, when a promise is made, the opposing party expects an outcome, however, when the outcome is not delivered, the promising individual will have to concoct a web of lies to explain themselves, thus resulting in more immoral actions.

• Sanctity of a promise: The deontological ethics preached by Immanuel Kant discuss the principle of universalizability. This principle states that to determine the morality of an action, one should consider the outcome of the situation in a way that every person in the world is engaged in the same action. Hence, in the discussion of making a false promise, Kant states that if every individual in the universe made a false promise, the very act of making a promise would have no meaning. Thus, no person would be able to trust the other person entirely. He further educates individuals on directing their intention to engage in actions that can be turned in universal law. As Immanuel Kant’s deontological ethics urge individuals to focus on duty rather than outcome, it is stated that if every individual act with good intentions, the consequences of those actions would be good naturally. Considering the example of false promises, if all individuals are truthful, the sanctity of the act will benefit society as a whole. Thus, before one performs any action, they should consider the consequences that may arise, if that action was performed As a result, he states that individuals should have well-intended motives, as the good in itself has value above everything else.

While Kant’s ethics have contributed greatly to the overall society, they fail to consider taking many factors. Some of the weaknesses of this model are stated below:

• The Hedonistic Nature Of Human Beings: While this discussion can be aiding towards maintaining an honest and ethical society, it fails to consider the hedonistic nature of human beings. As human beings are motivated merely by their intentions of achieving pleasure and avoiding pain, their intention can never be to act in the interest of the society. It is believed that even the noblest actions are based on one’s hedonistic impulses. Taking the example of a philanthropist, it can be stated that to some degree, they enjoy their work as it makes them feel good about themselves. Hence, their intention, to some extent, is to please themselves. Considering the false promise discussion, we fail to consider the outcomes of some truths. Immanuel Kant’s argument is reductionist, as it repudiates the presence of dissimilar events or occasions. For instance, one may make a false promise not to hurt an individual, such as promising a patient that everything will be okay, to give them the necessary hope that can augment their healing process. Moreover, the writing style in this extract is very one-sided. While he is discussing the significance of duty over consequence, he is entirely disregarding the importance of the outcome.

• The Wrong Outcome of Right Intentions: Furthermore, this point of view ostracises the fact that some individuals with good intentions may cause harm to the environment. As we are hedonistic species, our point of views can alter our concepts of right or wrong. What one may consider as good, others may consider wrong. Hence, often, good intentions can lead to negative or adverse consequences. Following from this, when we are honest in our promises, the possibility of hurting someone, including ourselves, is ever-present. For instance, many students entrust academic writing services to complete their day to day academic projects. On the contrary, several students and professors discourage the use of these services as they believe them to be extremely unethical. These differences in opinions of right and wrong are not covered by Kant’s deontological ethics. While the intention of both these opposing parties is aligned, the outcome of this is different for each.

From a holistic perspective, we can say that Kant’s contributions to ethics are vast.  As he urges honesty and integrity, he pushes individuals to be the best version of themselves, which in turn, can help make a better society as a whole. Despite the presence of weaknesses in his theory, Kant’s contribution to ethics has opened up a new era in the ethical arena of Philosophy.