In the Groundwork Kant makes a claim that hypothetical imperatives because of their dependence on contingent and variable desires, wishes, and ends cannot provide universally valid rules of action for all rational beings, and therefore cannot be moral. Therefore, moral imperatives must be categorical rather than hypothetical. In other words, they must be unconditionally valid rules of action for all rational beings. Moral principles must therefore be formal and be able to serve as universal laws. In a nutshell, according to Kant (i) the moral principles must be categorical imperatives (ii) the concept of a categorical imperative is an idea of an unconditional command that ought to serve as a universal law of action for all rational beings without regard to their subjective wishes, desires or ends (Rosen, pp.52-53). Kant offers three categorical imperatives which serve as a tool to judge the morality of an action. This paper proposes to examine the action of Father Bobby in the movie Sleepers by means of the categorical imperatives offered by Kant.
The film raises the moral dilemma in context of the critical role played by the priest, Father Bobby. As the court trial proceeds, it becomes evident that the success of the story hinges on possible availability of a false witness, who would testify that the two murderers were elsewhere at the time the murder took place. Father Bobby is possibly the only person who can be trusted with the secret of the boys who wanted to avenge their abuse and he could also appear as a plausible witness.
In other words, Father Bobby is expected to give a false testimony or lie on oath, which is clearly against his faith. However, Shakes is also aware at the same time that this is a good thing to do that is in fact demanded by the very same faith. In other words, in opinion of some people speaking lies can be ethical if it serves a noble purpose. For instance, speaking lie is an ethical act, if it saves someone’s life.
On an earlier occasion, Shakes as he was entering the prison house, asks the priest to keep an eye on his parents, who he fears are on the point of killing each other. He says, “No matter what you hear, tell them that I am doing OK.” “You mean you want me to lie?” “It’s a good lie, Father. You can do it”. Years later, Shakes asks Father to lie a second time. In course of conversation, Shakes appears to argue that the lie would be a fulfillment of his faith rather than its betrayal.
The priest eventually decides to tell the lie so as to save the boys. The decision to tell the lie should not be seen as participating in the scheme to revenge. It is neither connivance with revenge nor its condemnation. Similarly, he should not be seen as committing the perjury or telling the truth. The father is guided by a set of theological impulses including justice, salvation, love and redemption (Levinson, “Sleepers”).
The question on the basis of the discussion above is, how the action of Father Bobby is to be judged in context of Kantian ethics. Kant offers three categorical imperatives as under:
The first formulation of CI, also known as Universal Law states, “Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” (Johnson, 2014). Kant’s second formulation of CI, also known as the humanity formula states, “we should never act in such a way that we treat Humanity, whether in ourselves or in others, as a means only but always as an end in itself” (Johnson, 2014). Kant’s third CI formulation, also known as the autonomy formula is represented as, “Act so that through your maxims you could be a legislator of universal laws.” (Johnson, 2014).
In examining the action of the priest Father Bobby, it may be asked whether he would be willing to recognize that his action became a universal law. It is obvious that Father Bobby felt he was doing his duty in saving the boys. The boys were reformed and had chosen to tread the path of morality. The father was acting from a very healthy and moral motive. Therefore, he would certainly want that this maxim became a universal law. The maxim may be reformulated as “It is not unethical to lie, if it gives a chance to someone to evolve as a better human being”. Kant argues that motive of a person is important in judging his action.
It is also evident that Father Bobby is not using himself or the boys as a means to some end but rather as an end. The end in this case is saving the boys and doing a moral act. Had Father Bobby put a condition on helping them, he could be charged of using the boys as a means. Even if the priest had asked the boys to work on his behalf for increasing the membership of his church, it could be construed as using them as a means. Also, the priest is not using his own individual self as a means. On the contrary his action is guided on the basis of self worth and dignity for himself as well as the boys.
Kant’s third imperative is nearly the same as the first imperative. According to the third imperative the action of Father Bobby is praise worthy and worth emulating. In other words, through his action, the priest has made a maxim that lies are not unethical if it brings about salvation or redemption for someone while the same lies can destroy a person. This maxim could well be construed as having been legislated by Father Bobby that can be universally applicable without any moral contradiction.
Works Cited
Johnson, Robert, "Kant's Moral Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2014/entries/kant-moral/>.
Rosen, Allen D. Kant's theory of justice. Publisher: Ithaca; London: Cornell University Press, 1996.
Dir. Barry Levinson. Perf. Brad Pitt, Jason Patric, Dustin Hoffman, Robert DeNiro, Kevin Bacon Sleepers. 1996. Film
