Should we be judged by our actions or our intentions?

Answer 1

Hegel says that intention is not the true means for judgement, what determines who we are is our actions. However, judgement should not be formed by 1 and 0 digits. Judgement is not a mechanical decision unit. I believe in giving a chance for intentions. Because some factors like capacity, situation, chance might be a hindrance for the intended action.

Answer 2

Action b/c it's more concrete proof. Although there is a correlation between action and intention, they don't always go together (Hamlet is a good example). You don't always know what people are intending to do, and action provides tangible evidence of what people's intentions are.
However, I understand the downside to this view, which is that if somebody is acting w/ good intent, but winds up acting poorly, then they must suffer .For many of us, the "just" response is to let them go. But this is a harsh world, where loose actions can't be forgiven.
On the other hand, if there is a way to find out somebody's intentions (lie detector test, for example), then for me it is generally better to judge by intention, unless the action were too egregious to be forgiven.
It's a hard question that comes down to the severity of the consequences of the actions and the justness of the intention.
Because most of this is subjective, it's hard to pin down a correct answer. Hope that was a specific enough answer;)

Answer 3

Action with intent is judged seriously by the court of law, Action without the intent is relatively relaxed. But we are all bound by our action therefore intent only cannot be the deciding factor unless action is committed, also action committed cannot be free of the intent behind it. The age old argument is should one be punished for intent, even if the act was not committed or on the other hand should one be forgiven for the act committed if the intent was not its outcome. To me the safest position in NO for both.

Answer 4

Our intentions may be good but the world, whether we like it or not, always judges us on our actions.

This is judging on the observable results.

Many times we act before we think.

There is not a thought of how this particular action may affect others or affect many other things in the long run.

We may intend for things to be fixed in a way that a speedy recovery comes into being, though the quick fix may be temporary and not at all what is really needed.

For example: Some one dies and there is a great deal of pain. Someone that feels this deeply may choose to drink.

This is a temporary fix. The event and the pain still exist.

Often we just have to walk through the pain. ??

When we come out the other side we have may have learned a great deal from the path of the pain and fear.

Answer 5

It depends on the action, if someone is swinging a bat at you, you will judge the intention and try to get out of the way, if you dont you are unusual, hence we should consider intention in some cases.
Other actions that fall further down the 'impact on us' scale perhaps we will judge the actions more. Perhaps a correlation between the possibility of pain and certainty of intention could be devised to answer your question

Answer 6

Both, our intentions and our actions make us who we are. However no matter what our intentions are, it is our actions that really make a difference in the outcome of things.

What we do is what makes the difference, however our intentions are important as well.

If our intention contradicts our actions then maybe we really had another intention that we thought was more important to act upon. However if we meant well but it did not turn out that way we wanted it to, maybe we did not choose the correct action o fullfil our intentions. In this case intentions can count for something, but the bottom line is the outcome of the actions.

The prosicutor from Batman the Begining told Bruce Wyane that it is not what we are on the inside, but what we do that defines us.

Answer 7

If you crash your car 4 times your intentions may not be good to use exclusively. You may want to use the evidence that the light shines on. The evidence that the light does not shine on exists in your heart. It is difficult to present this evidence but it can be done sometimes.

The structure of the court is crucial. We hold a desire for divine judgment that penetrates everything and is also perfect. So perfect that we learn the truth about ourselves. Such a judge cannot be hired.

If you want to fly a plane but have no license you are a danger to the public no matter what your intentions. So a judge would need to look at your incompetent behavior because your intentions do not mitigate your danger to the public.

I think you want to judge someone good or bad and not right or wrong. Judging write or wrong does not require evidence about intentions. I think it is better to reserve this kind of judgment. Nothing good comes from it because it is redundant to other forms of judgment.

Answer 8

We should be judged by our actions. If you are judged by your intentions you can be perceived as a deceitful person if you, for any reason, do not follow through on your intentions.

Also, talk is cheap. If someone says they love you and then abuses you, it becomes obvious that do not have good intentions and you have to go by their actions.

In the long run it comes down to "Action Speaks Louder Than Words".

Answer 9

Actions only. Intentions are easy to mis-represent or subvert.

An example would be a politician who has made a faulty policy judgement. He may claim good intentions, but if the fruits of his actions are disaster, the claim is without real value, unless he is willing to modify the actions once they have proven ill advised. But to then just continue with the same actions, in the face of obvious harm but claiming good intentions becomes an insult to the harmed.

Answer 10

Actions. They're what actually matters to the people around you. Besides, "good intentions" is totally subjective. By his own standards, Hitler probably had good intentions.

Mind you, I think intentions should be a factor. A person who did something bad by mistake shouldn't be judged as harshly as somebody who did something bad with full consciousness of it. But ultimately, what you do > what you think.