Is It Ever Moral to Lie in Political Life? BY CAROLINA VLACHAKOU
One of the foundational moral teachings, engrained in us from childhood, is that it is morally wrong to lie. But is that still the case when in the pursuit of noble aims? This question lies at the intersection of moral and political philosophy. Political ethicists study the values that underpin political decision-making, and analyze their moral implications (Thompson, 2013). A central debate in political ethics is whether there is a fundamental difference between the morals that govern politics and those dictating everyday life. Whilst thinkers like Machiavelli and Walzer advocate for a separation of political and everyday values, others such as Kant argue that the moral principles expected in daily life should equally apply to the political sphere.
and to make use of it or not according to necessity” (Machiavelli, 2004, XV). For Machiavelli, in conflict, a prince faces a choice: to follow the laws, the way of men; or to enact force, the way of beasts. Recognizing the impracticality of strictly following the laws, the Machiavellian Prince must learn to fight both as a man and as a beast.
Machiavelli’s seminal work, The Prince (1532), offered a practical guide for successful leaders. In this work, the term ‘virtú’ transformed, shifting from Aristotle’s notion of ‘moral worth’ to one of effectiveness (O’Rourke, 2019). For Machiavelli, an effective leader must be prepared to commit whatever immoral action necessary to maintain his power. He writes: “It is necessary for a prince wishing to hold his own, to know how to do wrong,
Machiavelli’s philosophy is illuminated in the Discourses (1531), which complements The Prince as a guide for the successful organization of republics. For Machiavelli, the primary objective of a leader is to secure the glory of his state. This perspective leads him to morally justify actions such as Romulus’ murder of his own brother to secure his kingship, as
39
