The Ends Justify the Means?

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.

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.

What if you had to kill one person to save the lives of millions?

IMO, thats a small sacrifice..........as long as its not me. 😱

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.

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.

Depends, but most of the times it doesn't.

I'd kill all of you for ten sexy minutes with Silver Tears.

Wait, did I say that out loud?

Dream on Rambler!

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 no2

^^✅^^

it depends on the situation like Soth said

ditto, I don't think I can add anything here because all my thoughts have been worded by others, but I agree with what Soth said.

And LR, you are ridiculously out of context sometimes, but funny 😉

Originally posted by big gay kirk
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

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.

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.

I killing one person will save millions my answer is yes

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.

Originally posted by mechmoggy
I'd kill all of you for ten sexy minutes with Silver Tears.

Wait, did I say that out loud?

I must say I wouldn't object naughty

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 😕

dang that eye Lord Sloth has is creepy 😑

I think that this is a question that for me is best answered on a case by case basis......