Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative — "act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law" — is the most rigorous and internally consistent deontological moral framework in the Western philosophical tradition. It demands, among other things, absolute truthfulness: lying is never permitted, regardless of consequence. This paper argues that following Kantian deontology to its literal conclusion produces a reductio ad absurdum that reveals a structural flaw in any moral framework that abandons context-sensitivity entirely. The specific case: anyone who sincerely commits to never lying, and who recognizes that contracts and Terms of Service documents contain propositions they are assenting to when they click "I agree," is morally obligated to read every such document in full — every time, without exception — or face the charge of making a false assertion. This is not a minor inconvenience. The average human spends an estimated 76 working days over a lifetime reading Terms of Service agreements if they actually read them. Kant's framework, pursued seriously, condemns its adherent to this and every other literal interpretation of its rules. This does not mean Kant is wrong. It means no moral theory can function as a context-free algorithm. The Tralse resolution: deontological principles are True as orienting ideals and False as literal decision procedures. The Myrion Resolution integrates both: principles guide without governing, orient without overriding. The GILE framework's Goodness dimension is not a rulebook — it is a direction.
Brandon Charles Emerick (Tue,) studied this question.