Which statement aligns with ethical formalism regarding undercover operations?

Which statement aligns with ethical formalism regarding undercover operations?

• A. condemn undercover operations where innocent people are deceived because the actions could not be justified under the categorical imperative
• B. support undercover operations even if innocent people are deceived, as long as the greater good was being served.
• C. support undercover operations under any circumstances
• D. allow undercover operations only if the general community approved the action ahead of time

Answer: (A)

Ethical formalism (Kantian deontology) holds that the morality of an action depends on whether the underlying maxim could be universalized and on respecting the inherent dignity of all persons. Deceiving innocent people in undercover work treats those individuals as mere means to an end, not as ends in themselves. If everyone acted by deceiving innocents for any purpose, trust in social institutions would erode and moral law would lose its force. So condemning undercover operations that deceive innocent people aligns with the duty to act only according to principles that could be universalized and that respect persons. The other options rely on consequences, majority approval, or utilitarian calculations, which Kantian ethics rejects as determinants of right action.

Ethical formalism (Kantian deontology) holds that the morality of an action depends on whether the underlying maxim could be universalized and on respecting the inherent dignity of all persons. Deceiving innocent people in undercover work treats those individuals as mere means to an end, not as ends in themselves. If everyone acted by deceiving innocents for any purpose, trust in social institutions would erode and moral law would lose its force. So condemning undercover operations that deceive innocent people aligns with the duty to act only according to principles that could be universalized and that respect persons. The other options rely on consequences, majority approval, or utilitarian calculations, which Kantian ethics rejects as determinants of right action.