can you explain "does the end justify the means"?

Answer 1

Does the end justify the means? = Is the result worth the methods used to get that result?

Answer 2

It means doing something bad for the end being good. So does doing the bad thing justify the good that will come of it? Example: would you kill 1 person to save a million, how about 10, 100, 1000, etc.

Answer 3

suggested quickly this signifies that after we are engaged on accomplishing a particular purpose ( referred to as the right) , the technique ( or ability) of accomplishing the purpose is likewise both substantial..it would purely take position that once accomplishing the purpose we would purely ask the question " became that properly worth it in any respect , taking this course to achieve it?" a wide-spread get mutually that includes ideas , now rocking the international is Iraq. the united kingdom and the united states attempt to achieve a particular purpose ( end) in Iraq for what they call , the international peace. Many experience that that's being tried ( ability to do it) at an emormous fee and therefore , isn't justified. Others say that that's the purely ability to achieve the right. purely time will tell.

Answer 4

in different words, does method (means) justify the results (end).

it has nothing to do with good or bad...for example,

1.is torture (method/means) justified way to prevent terrorism (end)
2. is torture (means) justified way to achieve pleasure (end)
3. is increasing taxes (means) justified way of funding Health Service (end).
4. is cutting defence budget (means) justified way of funding helath service.

etc etc..

Answer 5

No,
IE. I want to help my friend. I want to make her happy.
I'm going to pay for her abortion. An abortion takes place.
The means, helping, paying, does not justify a intrinsically evil
end.

Answer 6

It's saying that if you achieved a good/positive result by doing something bad, then the result makes it all ok.