The debate "The means justify the ends more than the ends justify the means" was started by
May 27, 2015, 1:40 pm.
10 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 4 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
I_Voyager posted 2 arguments, soullesschicken posted 2 arguments to the agreers part.
I_Voyager, soullesschicken, DarkAngelAnarchist, KimUri, sdiop and 5 visitors agree.
amanofprogress, Ashik, sabrina and 1 visitor disagree.
I run at a police officer with a weapon and he shoots me. Means justify the end.
Examples like that work. I'm in a rush so I can't make a longer comment.
Your thought experiments are fine.
I guess in the Fallout 3 method if you tried to do the right thing and not let innocents died, but then failed to get water out to everyone and millions died of dehydration, the means didn't make those deaths just.
So sometimes the ends justify the means more than the means justify the end.
So now the question is... Which is true more often? Is it more often true that the means justify the ends? Is it only when the ends are drastic in their destruction that either the means can fail to justify the ends, or the ends justify the means?
This is very interesting, I wouldn't mind adding a comment.
I have to agree and disagree with this.
there would probably be a plethora of exceptions, but if I'm going to activate a purifier to provide clean water to the last million I think are alive I'd kill a few innocents if I had to (fallout 3 style)
Kill my family to save everyone in the city I live in? Sure. It would be extremely hard to do but it's the right thing.
But in an otherwise more realistic situation I would probably agree with the former.
I do feel a bit confused myself, so point out anything I made a mistake on.
I'm not sure if this is true or not. But it occurred to me and it sounds like something worth having a conversation over.