l law, there would never be any more borrowing or lending at all, because nobody would believe that a promise to repay was made sincerely. In fact, says Kant, because the act is a lie, all exchanges between human beings would be called into question, and all statements seen as potential lies. Trust between human beings would perish. such a lie then would be a breaking of the universal law of ethical behavior.
Ross holds that it is helpful to consider that every person would act the same as one person does, and that such a universal picture could guide a person to see beyond his or her own desires or fears in any situation. However, Ross take a modified view, holding that the definition of a "duty" is more dynamic and broad than Kant envisions. The real world presents us with decisions more complex than Kant proposes, says Ross: ""Our judgments about our actual duty in concrete situations have none of the certainty that attaches to our recognition of the general principles of duty" (Timmons 222). For example, it would be more "right" for a Kosovo Serb to hide an Albanian Serb from Serb police in Kosovo than it would be to tell the truth (not lie) about he Albanian's location to the Serb police who are going to kill the Albanian when they find him.
Mill's maxims are that "the individual is not accountable to society for his actions, in so far as these concern the interests of no person but himself" and "that for such actions as are prejudicial to the interests of others, the individual is accountable, and may be subjected either to social or to legal punishment" (Mill 234).
Based on these maxims, Mill would probably argue for active voluntary euthanasia, although there would likely be cases in which Mill would be against it. He would favor it as long as, referring to his maxims, it affected only the person making the choice.
...