“The end may justify the means as long as there is something that justifies the end” (BrainyQuote.com). The famous saying of Niccolo’ Machiavelli that “the end justifies the means” has spread all over the world and became an excuse for many people. When most people do something unethical in order to get what they want they explain that “end justifies the means”. So, that whenever they do that helps them to achieve or get closer to their goal must be done immediately; since the result matters most. However, not everybody will agree with this statement. Since, people around should not be hurt because of the methods one uses to achieve one’s goal; therefore, ends do not justify the means. Such philosophers as Immanuel Kant and William Ross believed that “ends do not justify means”, while Jeremy Bentham believed that the consequences must be also considered.
Great philosopher Immanuel Kant proposed a theory about “good will”, according to that, before doing something people should think if it correlates with the “moral law.” Thus, actions …show more content…
Therefore, “ends never justify means” almost everywhere, especially during the wars. For instance, a war between two countries starts because of some “significant” reasons. For the country victory is a desirable “end”. Government officials claim that victory will save independence and territory. Therefore, some “means” are justified because victory is very important. Unfortunately, most of the time country uses some prohibited poisonous gases and their military forces might kill women and elderly people; young boys leave their home to fight, and all this is justified by a positive “end”. In addition, people lose hope for a good future. In that gas attack might have died a lot of innocent people including children. Can it be explained? I think deaths of people are never
Great philosopher Immanuel Kant proposed a theory about “good will”, according to that, before doing something people should think if it correlates with the “moral law.” Thus, actions …show more content…
Therefore, “ends never justify means” almost everywhere, especially during the wars. For instance, a war between two countries starts because of some “significant” reasons. For the country victory is a desirable “end”. Government officials claim that victory will save independence and territory. Therefore, some “means” are justified because victory is very important. Unfortunately, most of the time country uses some prohibited poisonous gases and their military forces might kill women and elderly people; young boys leave their home to fight, and all this is justified by a positive “end”. In addition, people lose hope for a good future. In that gas attack might have died a lot of innocent people including children. Can it be explained? I think deaths of people are never