The ends justify the means is a slogan for the belief that morally wrong actions are sometimes necessary to achieve morally right outcomes. When do the ends justify the means or to what extent do the ends justify the means? At what point do we forego efficiency for the sake of humanity? There are usually no easy answers to these questions and completely stick to a 'yes' or 'no' doesn' t seem very realistic in today' s society.
__________________
I am not driven by people’ s praise and I am not slowed down by people’ s criticism.
You only live once. But if you live it right, once is enough.
Make poverty history.
Stop aids, keep the promise.
awh..but it does.....it is 'no'. the end doesn't justify the means.
By that simple 'no' you can build actions and goals accordingly.
__________________
~ "Beyond the senses is the mind, and beyond the mind is reason. it's essence.
beyond reason is the Spirit in man, and beyond this is the Spirit of the universe. the evolver of all.
When the five senses and the mind are still, and reason itself rests in silence, then begins the Path supreme"
I believe that the ends do justify the means. Or rather, they can justify the means, if what is gained is more valuable than what is lost. lethargic rambler asks if you would kill one person to save a million; to save a million people, I see no problem in killing 999,999 others.
__________________ "Men curse the Communist Party, but eventually it may release them. If hell were endless, then God would be worse than our Secret Police."--Pastor Valentin
Depends on the circumstance. Killing one person to save a million others is justified. Killing a thousand innocent people to kill one killer is not, if that makes any sense the way I put it.
This is one of the most misquoted sayings in the world, along with the old chestnut about money and evil... Macchiavelli said, "the good end justifies the means..." he was also of the opinion that "the needs of the many far outweigh the needs of the few..." Society today prides itself on providing the most good for the greatest number... which means that the needs of the few are often trampled upon... I urge everyone to read Watchmen (the comic)... a classic example of doing evil to do good... see whether you agree with Ozy or Rorschach... me, I'm a Rorschach man... we must do whatever is right, even if it leads to our destruction
If the means involved, say killing someone to save the entire world....then definitely. If the means involves stealing from a jewelry store to make your girlfriend happy, then no
I'm glad you mention Macchiavelli (sp?) Some where in book "The Prince" he justifies the reasons for the "goods". I think to rephrase it would be something like this "The state comes first and put the rest aside". Meaning that commonwealth of the a state is more important than one person problem. When is a problem involving the "many" then it is important.
__________________
"I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when my fear is gone I will turn and face fears path, and only I will remain."
-Paul Atreides
The "kill x people to save y others" thinking is almost never encountered in reality, where circumstance dictates, 99% of the time, the course of action.
It is really hard to say for me... if it were my choice and I knew that what I was doing was WRONG but the end result was ABSOLUTELY NESSISARY, I would still find it hard to do.Is the end certain? What happens if it doesn't work out the way that was planned? Then you are left with alot of bad means when the end as well was bad....
On the other hand if I were put in a position where I had to judge another on the same circumstances I would probally be more leniant, seeing as I have already seen the end and would be able to weigh the good against the bad.
If you say a good end justifies the means, then it could mean that there are two wrongs. the wrong done and the wrong action that has to be taken. So there two wrongs make a right. But that is not always the issue.
When you say a good end justifies the means then you are talking about the greater good. The problem of the greater good is that it is (ultimately) descided by the person who has the power to "the means" and therefor is just a form of control.
Morality doesn't come into play here IMO because it is a concept based on culture and belief. The good end justifies the means is in the end a slogan aimed at self preservation.
And I believe that a positive outcome for a good cause is justified. Example being the killing 1 person to save 99 people, but then it just makes you wonder is it the same to kill one extrememly good person (example someone who finds the cure for cancer) to save 99,99,99 people who may have cancer.
And now I have confused myself, so I'm sorry
__________________
.i ♥ the way you roll,
excuses off the tip of your tongue.
KMC Community Forums
Apr 14th, 2004 06:39 PM
^^
