Is it ok to do the wrong thing for the right reasons?

Answer 1

Details are not necessary: this is a classic trade off that we should be thinking about all of the time. Machiavelli coined the phrase "the end justifies the means" which Lenin liked to use for his blood lettings to further Bolshevistic ideology.

We have values and norms of behavior that we should follow that tend to limit the harm we can do to individuals in particular. Yet, some of these values yield outcomes that contradict other values we have, for example, Euthenizing all of us people who are infirm given that we use society's resources rather than contribute; doing which would add to the collective good. These views are "deontological" aka duty ethics, verses "teleological" aka outcome ethics. Is it ok to experiment on a handful of individuals to save future generations of victims of a dreadful disease? Should we torture individuals to glean information that will save countless others? I think in our western point of view, these are easier situations to answer. This is more realistic though: should we engage in research which MAY kill the subjects for the POSSIBILITY of saving generation of potential victims? Should we employ torture for an individual who MAY be related to terrorists and have information related to the POSSIBILITY of saving countless people from terrorism? The calculation of risk does lend itself to real foundation for justifying doing the deontological "wrong" for the overwhelmingly teleological "right" outcome. But there is a disputable area where the line is ambiguous and unclear. People who embrace purely one philosophy or the other live in a fabulously simplistic world, of which does not really exist.

For all of us who rely on law to determine ethics: recall that the values precede law and the laws are created as a formal structure for reinforcing or prescribing behavior that conforms to one value or another; therefore it is for the most part an imperfect reflection of generally accepted values in a society.

Real ethical dilemmas are never simple.

Good luck with whatever you are struggling with.

Answer 2

i agree with heart of gold, your question lacks meat.
i'd say that, it depends on whose point of view the wrong and the right thing is.
As a Christian, I follow the Bible's guidelines, Jesus healed people on the Sabbath. The Jewish priests wanted him done for it. They were looking for reasons to persecute him and have him killed, he was causing too much controversy. Jesus read their thoughts and said, would it be better if I left the lame man there to his own devices, when he'd be better off cured and can help himself better? They couldnt answer him. See, Jesus then added that even though the Sabbath is Holy, he wasnt necessarily working in a way as to earn money, or benefit from the lame man being healed, he also said he didnt come to uproot God's law, but to enrich it, and to be a mediator between humans and God, and bring reconciliation. (Jesus was God incarnated...but of that, another time) so, in short, some things are right within a certain context, even if it appears wrong, or vice versa.
Another example if juxtaposed is when, some boys were picking on Jesus for not having a 'proper' father. They mocked him pestered him until out of sheer frustration and exasperation, he drove them off a cliff. He said that it is wrong to use the truth to hurt someone, even though its generally right to tell the truth. I hope that what you're doing or about to do wont hurt anyone, including yourself...take care, whizz...

Answer 3

If you don't do it all the time, yes.

To cut through red traffic lights and drive down one-ways to get a person to hospital is understandable, although dangerous.

Similarly, white lies and things like that, where one knows something is "wrong" but it is being done for a good reason.

Robbing a bank to put food on your family's table doesn't count. When you get caught, you only leave them more destitute. Playing an instrument on a street corner for money is "wrong" but it is being done for "the right reason" if your family are going to be fed/clothed/schooled/medicated.

Answer 4

Sometimes I would say yes,for example if a relative only had a few days to live and they asked "am I going to be ok?",you might reply of course because you know the truth might kill them sooner,however there are many times when doing the wrong thing is just wrong full stop.
You need to elaborate on the question !

Answer 5

It largely depends on what the wrong thing is and its effect on others.

Sociologically, doing the wrong thing, or what would seem like the wrong thing, or what society's collective conscience would deem the wrong thing, can actually be the right thing if it means challenging the boundaries of acceptable behaviour and bringing about a positive result.

Answer 6

depends - Even the Law will allow exceptions for a person who is in a situation where there are only two options and both are wrong.

For example, You are being held captive by a criminal, you can do one of two things.

1) hit him on the head and escape ( commit assult )
2) set the house on fire to get help from the fire dept. and police
( ARSON )

Either way you are wrong...

Answer 7

A contradiction of terms question as both 'wrong' and 'right' exist at polar opposites. There's no paradox in it, the two shan't never meet. You see, what is wrong, is wrong, and the same goes for right.
(dunno about left).

Answer 8

Sometimes yes, like admitting something that my disabled son had done to prevent further hardship or pain for him.

Plenty of times in life I am sure we have all been faced with this type of scenario

Answer 9

it all depends..what you think are the right reasons might be wrong for others..follow your heart....

like in one of the answers, your motive counts a lot...

Answer 10

Does the end justify the means? It really depends on the situation, but leagally no.