Ends, means, or intent?

I’m pretty sure that the intent behind an action is more important than how one goes about accomplishing it or how it ultimately turns out. If a person does something with evil intentions, even if the execution and result are good, the fact remains that they meant to do evil. The roots are rotten even if the blossom is beautiful, or something like that.

The ends is actually least important, from my point of view. It’s getting there that matters.

maybe ends, means and intent are all important.

ends, means and intent are irrevelant…

things happen. period.

what one does in return of certain things is all that counts… it is the doing…

explaining how one gets there and what happened afterward isn’t as important as the doing…

-Imp

what one does in return of certain things is all that counts… it is the doing…

explaining how one gets there and what happened afterward isn’t as important as the doing…

-Imp
[/quote]

So, it’s the means then…

FoulSmellingDebris,
Your Avtar is very big, can you please shorten it? This is not some catwalk where you show your body wares, this is an intellectual forum where you show your intellect! :wink:

You can never control the outcome of anything. From your side you can only ensure that your intent is good. And where someone’s intent was evil and the result turns out to be good, man! They get paid right there! :smiley:
And no, the end is actually the most important because that’s why the means is there or why would we have the journey if there was no destination? It’s true that in life ‘the journey becomes everything’ but that’s only because we feel that the end is death which no one wants to see or likes. But in case of getting a degree, the whole point of doing let’s say B.A. or going to Univ., is that you achieve that B.A. so how can getting this degree be the “least important” when “getting there” is what “matters?” If I am the dean and I don’t give you that piece of paper after your 4/5 yrs of labour, then you will feel that your “getting there [the means]” was all a big waste of time.

I just wanted to say that there is no constitution or natural law that says that you cannot enjoy your journey or prevent you from enjoying it, but reaching your destination will always be top priority unless it’s a destination that we cannot avoid and that we don’t like. Now some people lay too much emphasis on the destination and some on the journey, both ways it’s fine, it’s your outlook, your life!

I don’t think that statement is entirely correct. What good is a piece of paper that says you got a B.A. if there is no knowledge, no work, no learning or understanding behind it? It is the journey that alows you to reach the destination. If I forge a B.A. degree, is it the same as someone who earned it through hard work and determination? No, of course not. And even if for some obscure reason, you don’t receive your degree after years of work, you have still earned knowledge and understanding. Is that not worth anything?

not really… means is this context has intent directing it… the intent is irrelevant… it is all reaction…

-Imp

All that matters in anything is the good in it. Whether you pursue it or not is up to you but I honestly believe that everyone has an innate ability to recognize the difference between good and bad and also the ability to choose between them. So what matters is only that.

Every action has an intent and an end. However these won’t necessarily be the same thing. An action will have an intent for a certain end, but how that end actually turns out is another thing. As some of you have already said.

However:

I don’t think this is a valid statement. The means is an action which has been performed with some intended end in mind. So even if you believe that the action or means is the most important thing, there still needs to be a sufficient intended end to guide and motivate that action. So therefore one could say that the intended end is as equally important as the means. There would be no means without an intended end.

But as has been said already, the intended end may not match the actual end. So therefore, perhaps the intention and the means share an equal importance. The intention drives and causes the means, but if the means are not of a sufficient quality, the resultant end may not match the intended end.

I don’t think you even understand the perspective under which we are discussing this topic. I never said that the person is not working hard towards his degree. The ISSUE was of having FUN on the way doing that. And my point was, that some will have fun while getting the degree and some won’t, but both are working hard towards it. And my emphasis was on the point that if someone makes a quote like, “It’s the journey that matters” then I don’t have to believe in that quote for the simple fact that we are all unique. Some like to work seriously and some playfully, and it’s all fine because it’s our outlook, our life!

As for working hard for 4/5 yrs. and after that if I don’t get my degree, baby I’d bring the roof down. Sure I’ve learnt and gained knowledge, but I PAID for that piece of paper with my time, energy, money, emotions and well-being. You are not going to convince me that I should be happy with not having gotten that piece of paper when I fully deserved it and you’re telling me that my not getting it may be even JUSTIFIED? Ha!

I agree with BeenaJain that if my univ. didn’t give me a piece of paper stating that I’ve done something, I’d be a little upset. I suppose, though, that that feeling comes from the need of recognition for work, a tangible reward of sorts. I suppose I would have accepted a really good cookie too, if that’s what everyone else got.
At the same time, it seems that most of us agree that means and ends both matter, but not at the same degree. Our ideal goals, for the most part, will never be realized, but getting near the target would be quite satisfactory for most of us, as we know that tried our hardest to achieve it.
I, then, think that intentions ought to be weighed more than the ends. Accidental murder is still murder, but the guilty wouldn’t be properly punished if the fact that is was an accident was not factored in with the punishment.

I agree with BeenaJain that if my univ. didn’t give me a piece of paper stating that I’ve done something, I’d be a little upset. I suppose, though, that that feeling comes from the need of recognition for work, a tangible reward of sorts. I suppose I would have accepted a really good cookie too, if that’s what everyone else got.
At the same time, it seems that most of us agree that intent, means and ends all matter, but not at the same degree. Our ideal goals, for the most part, will never be realized, but getting near the target would be quite satisfactory for most of us, as we know that tried our hardest to achieve it.
I, then, think that intentions ought to be weighed more than the means and the ends. It’s where most of our procedures begin, and when one is trying to build a building, one would want a good foundation and blueprint first, as opposed to just winging it and hoping to get it right.

what is the intention of rain?

what is the intention of fire?

why do they not have intention directing them?

what makes how you deal with them any different than your reaction to anyhing else?

intention doesn’t matter.

-Imp

Maybe intention is sufficient for purpose. Is purpose sufficient for action? Is it necessary? I don’t know, but I do this: If you spend your life trying to not let the bomb from becoming, then your life will be empty. The purpose/intention of a bomb is to explode, and it doesn’t do that, then it’s just a cheap gold watch. Yeah, a piss-poor job of the philosophical rant in the movie Speed. Yeah.

So if an intended bomb did not explode, it isn’t a bomb but just a clump of shit squished together? If you intended to save a life from drowning, yet failed, your actions could be described as you just going for a swim? “Dude, that f*cker could have saved a life, instead he went out for a swim.”

This sounds like Aristotle and his perception of a severed hand. Purpose defines objects; a hand’s purpose is to grasp, and it were unable to grasp, then it is just a “hand-like” thing. I don’t know if I agree with this, but it makes sense. I suppose one could say, “that hand-like thing, used to be a hand and its owner intended for it to choke me, but since I prevented it from doing so via a sword, I just cut that guy’s hand off for nothing. Boy is my face red.” God I hope this made sense.

I think one can find purpose in rain or fire, but intention lies in thinking beings, though possibly not limited to humans, since animals too would have intentions to procreate, etc. So maybe rain and other things do not have intentions, but purpose and cause. Or just damn luck that it rains so that plants can grow, but that would still satisfy cause. I don’t know much of this part, but still something to think about.

My former (oversized) avatar was from the comic book series Watchmen. In the series, one of the characters devises a means of bringing about world peace, but in order for it to succeed a slew of people must die. So, is his act still a good one? His intent was to bring about world peace and end result was world peace, but the means was evil. So, was it an act of good or evil? Two out of three were good.

If only Kant were alive… :slight_smile:

Like criminal law, intent, means and ends are all important, but for different reasons.

If both the intent and means are good, i would classify the act as good. And by good I mean morally good for that particular individual.

The ends is important simply because if you intend to do something good, go about it the right way, but 300 people die in the process, the act can still be considered bad. But like I said, if you truly meant to do good, and you went about it in a good way, you should not be held responsible if an unforseen consequence is harmful.

It depends if the number of people benefitting from world peace matter or not. Is a million happy people better than 500 happy people? Some would say yes, very few would say no. I wrote a thesis arguing that numbers don’t matter. Needless to say, it didn’t go very well with my professor, but I was on to something, he said.

John Taurek wrote an essay called something like “Should the Numbers Really Count?”, and discusses this topic. I started a thread about it while ago, except no one replied to it. I read it after I wrote my paper, and it basically articulated what I was trying to say a lot better than I did. You should read it if possible.