Case Reference: Case 9-D “Feminist Fault Lines: Political Memoirs and Hillary Clinton”
Summary of the Case: Hillary Clinton released her memoir following her presidential campaign
in 2016. The book mentioned her struggles with sexism issues. Media sources were divided in
support or opposition to the book. Some say Hillary’s writing sets a poor tone on the Democratic
party or other female candidates in the future, while others applauded her for writing her
experience and exercising her voice as a female presidential candidate. Is it ethical for the Hillary
Clinton to release a memoir about her candidate experience following her loss in the election?
Analysis:
Kant’s Categorical Imperative
1. Create a maxim that applies to the action you propose to take. A maxim is a personal “ought”
statement, as in “I ought to ….” You should not calculate the consequences when you create a
maxim.- I ought to share my experiences to raise awareness of issues despite the pushback and
opposition that may come.
2. State that maxim as a universal law that all people must also adhere to. A universal law is
generalized from that “ought” statement, as in “Everyone ought to….”- Everyone ought to be
share their experiences to raise awareness of issues despite the pushback and opposition that
may come.
You can ask these questions about the universal law or rule:
A. How does this rule apply to my actions toward others?- Writing a book about my
experience helps others know the injustice or trials I faced.
B. How does this rule apply to others’ actions toward me?- Others will be able to read
and interpret the words I have written and respond to the details disclosed.
C. How does this rule apply to others’ actions toward others?- Others will be more
aware of issues and experiences people go through when sharing their stories. They
may be more willing to act for or against the injustice.
3. Consider if this maxim works in a rational world (governed by laws of nature); if it doesn’t
work, then you have a “perfect” duty to not act on that maxim. If the maxim could work in a
rational world, then ask if you would rationally will to act on this maxim, if not then you have an
“imperfect” duty to not act. – In a rational world, if all people shared honestly the details of
their experiences to raise awareness of issues despite pushback and opposition, the opposite
side would not be happy. With the actions and secrets of the other side made public, there
would be no secrets but possibly debates and violence in retaliation.
4. Next, ask yourself if the proposed action treats others as means to our own ends, or as ends
in themselves. Does the proposed action respect others as autonomous moral agents and
rational beings who should determine their own purposes? Or, in other words, what decision
will most respect the rights of individuals and their agency?- The action does not treat others as
a means to your own ends or as an ends to themselves. The decision to share one’s experiences
will yes provide more information to the public but will respect the rights of individuals and
their agency because they can still decide for themselves how they want to react or respond to
the information released.
5. Finally ask yourself, would the proposed action be a step toward bringing about an ideal
community in which everyone is always moral?- The action would help bring about an
awareness of social injustice, but may not result in the most peaceful outcomes as the opposing
side could release their own statements of defense and create a negative battle between sides.
Conclusion:
The release of a memoir by Hillary Clinton after the election of 2016 is ethical but may not be
the best idea to promote peace in society. By disclosing the actions and words of others against
her, the people or side accused of making her experience difficult as a woman might retaliate,
and more harm than good could present itself in the media.