The end(s) does not justify the means, but it must provide the justification. All means are measure against the end they serve. Torture is permissible when justifiable by the end it serves. Given that there often are numerous means to accomplishing a given end, the calculus can be quite complicated. There will be aspects of a given "mean" that weigh against its application (in the case of torture, there are plenty); there also will be aspects that will weigh in favor of application (in the case of torture, time might be of the essence and losses catastrophic if information is not forthcoming). Every decision requires a moral calculus before action is taken not after. Thus, the ends do and must justify the means.
Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
Chip Berlet wrote:
>
>
>
> The ends do not justify the means.
>
> -Chip
>
A point Hannah Arendt makes impressed me. If a question is posed in terms of ends & means, ends tautologically justify the means. One has to escape the ends/means 'problematic' rather than make the hopeless claim that ends don't justify means. If I need groceries, the end rather tautologically justifies using energy, muscle power and gasoline, to obtain those groceries.
Carrol
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20030407/3ade7f56/attachment.htm>