2007-01-12 06:44:18 · 12 answers · asked by wondering 1 in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
the final outcome is worth whatever actions it took to get that outcome.
2007-01-12 06:52:08 · answer #1 · answered by GEEGEE 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It means that the end result is what is important. That the way you go about something doesn't matter as much as what you end up with.
Sometimes it's true. There are things worth sacrificing to save something else. I'd do a lot to save one of my kids' lives. I'd steal to feed them if I didn't have any other choice. They are my kids. To ensure their survival, I'd break some laws. I would maime or kill in their defense. I hope I never have to, but I'd do it if it was necessary, and it would be worth it to me to do so.
It's not always true, tho. Look our society. Corporate greed. Money, profit, the only thing that matters. Almost anything is okay as long as the bottom line is money. I don't believe that is true.
There are quite a few things that are more important than money.
Debating this is a good thing to do in an ethics class, or just a group of people. It makes for really good discussion.
2007-01-12 06:58:12 · answer #2 · answered by ntm 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It means, that the final results justify what it takes to get there. Usually it's an excuse to do something wrong and justify it by the results. Some say you must squeeze lemons to get lemonade. Whatever,An example is to steal money to pay for a medical surgery. Doing wrong, is wrong.
2007-01-12 06:51:20 · answer #3 · answered by Ab 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The phrase is from "The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli, and there is a lot more instead of that plain and ambigous sentence. An example is: "This law will make everyone's life miserable for a few years (the means), but in the long run it will save a lot of lives (the end)".
2007-01-12 07:14:52 · answer #4 · answered by mmarrero 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess you have read or seen the story Robinhood. He wanted to help poor people but he was not affluent to do so. So what he did was robbing rich and unscrupulous people and give the money to the poor and unfortunate ones. His intention of helping the poor excuses his act of robbing the rich ones. The result or the goal of your action justifies or excuses your ways of achieving it. I hope this is concrete enough for an example.
2007-01-12 07:23:57 · answer #5 · answered by brainyluscious 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The end is world peace, everyone wants world peace, right. Now if some magical being said. "I can grant you world peace, no more wars, no more third world suffering, everyone will be happy. all you have to do, is kill your spouse/partner and give me your children, never to see them again."
If you agree, then the goal of world peace(ends) would be attained if you commit murder and give away your children(means). could you justify Murder, and abandoning them to gain world peace.
the trouble with the phrase is that 'ends' and 'means' in thsi context are not common uses of the words any more.
2007-01-12 07:14:48 · answer #6 · answered by janssen411 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is the same thing as synergy. All efforts put into a task directly determines how successful or unsuccessful the outcome will be.
2007-01-12 07:12:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its a really negative thing that some people say. Ummm the best way to explain it is like this.
If you feel abortion is wrong, then (by this saying) it would be okay to kill all the abortion docters to make them stop doing it.
Thats only on example hope it helps. =)
2007-01-12 06:48:53 · answer #8 · answered by Jeremy B 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i have not any recollection of holding that... yet convinced, it does make sense. the folk who persecute their pals for the incorrect causes, and through incorrect methods, their ends will be justified.
2016-10-30 22:36:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In short ...
It means the best known option available...right or wrong has nothing to do with it.
20 has to people die to save 100,000
what's the option???
2007-01-12 06:58:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋