Ask a New Question
Menu

Hook Exercise: Do the Ends Justify the Means?

There is an important question that we can ask both about history and our personal behavior:
Do the ends ever justify the means? In other words, is it sometimes OK for actions to cause pain and suffering along the way if the final result the end— is positive?
Your Task: Below are three situations. With a partner, discuss each one and ask the question, do the ends justify the means? Be sure to identify the means and the ends in each situation before making your decision.
Situation One: Three players on a professional football team secretly take steroid drugs to build more muscle mass. All three make the Pro Bowl all-star team and lead the team to a Super Bowl victory. The win is a great boost for the struggling hometown economy. The city is deliriously happy.
Means
Ends
Justified/Unjustified
Situation Two: There is a rumor that some students are bringing illegal and dangerous items on school grounds. To improve campus safety, the local school board orders random locker searches and full body X-ray scans of everyone coming on campus, despite complaints that this represents an invasion of privacy.
Means
Ends
Justified/Unjustified
Situation Three: An Army general is getting frustrated with hidden roadside bombs injuring and, in some cases, killing his soldiers. To send a message to the enemy and to protect his own men, the general orders captured enemy soldiers (POWs) to walk along the sides of the roads to clear the bombs.
Means
Ends
Justified/Unjustified

1 answer

Situation One: Football Players Taking Steroids

Means:

  • The three players taking steroids to enhance their performance.
  • Engaging in dishonest behavior that violates league rules.

Ends:

  • Achieving a Super Bowl victory.
  • Boosting the local economy and providing happiness and pride to the community.

Justified/Unjustified: This situation leans towards being unjustified. While the end (economic boost and community joy) is positive, the means (cheating, risking health, and undermining the integrity of sports) are ethically problematic. Cheating through performance-enhancing drugs also sets a harmful precedent for future athletes and may have long-term consequences on health and integrity in sports.

Situation Two: School Safety Measures

Means:

  • Random locker searches and full body X-ray scans of students.
  • Invasion of privacy for all students on campus.

Ends:

  • Improved safety on school grounds and prevention of dangerous items entering the school community.

Justified/Unjustified: This situation presents a complex judgment. While the end (ensuring safety) is commendable, the means involve significant privacy infringements, which can create a climate of mistrust and fear among students. Balancing safety with respect for civil liberties is crucial here, making the justification of these means more nuanced; it could be considered justified if no less invasive alternatives are available that can effectively ensure safety.

Situation Three: Use of POWs to Clear Roads

Means:

  • Forcing captured enemy soldiers to walk alongside the roads to clear bombs, endangering their lives.

Ends:

  • Protecting the lives of soldiers by removing bombs from the roads and sending a strong message to the enemy.

Justified/Unjustified: This situation is unjustified. Using POWs in this fashion violates ethical standards of warfare, particularly the treatment of prisoners. It disregards human rights and places captives in dangerous situations to serve military objectives. Such actions can undermine moral authority and lead to potential retaliation against one's own forces and increase hostility.

Conclusion:

In analyzing these scenarios, the question of whether the ends justify the means often depends on the ethical considerations involved in the means taken to achieve the ends. Each situation requires careful examination of the consequences of actions and adherence to ethical principles, showcasing that sometimes the pursuit of good does not justify unethical actions.