|
|
| QUOTE (ex nihilo @ 15/1/2012, 10:33) Discuss:
Edit: What I meant to say was, does a immoral action justify the concluding good action. What a difficult question! I think what makes it difficult to answer for me is the definition of an end. I think the means are included in the end most of the time. Let's say you want to end poverty. Okay, that's invariably good. But the suggestion is you do it by killing all the poor people... The goal of ending poverty is "good". The means are solid: it will produce the result, in some sense. But it is not a "good" action for the poor. So in deciding the means, we chose "good" to mean: "good for the non-poor": after the massacre, the non-poor can live in the comfort of knowing there are no more poor people. If the conclusion doesn't include the existence and well-being of those who are currently poor, in the example I just gave, then it's perhaps not a real "good" conclusion. The end follows from the means, which means the end can't be moral if the means produce immoral consequences. |
| | |
