We often hear people say
the ends justify the means. I have always the thought the means are the
end. I thought this was original with me
but I should have known better. I
Googled both and learned a lot. Wikipedia
says, “Consequentialism is a theory holding
that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment
about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct. Thus, from a consequentialist
standpoint, a morally right act (or omission from acting) is one that will
produce a good outcome, or consequence. In an extreme form, the idea of
consequentialism is commonly encapsulated in the English saying, "the end
justifies the means", meaning that if a goal is morally important enough,
any method of achieving it is acceptable.
Wikipedia goes on to say, “Consequentialism is usually contrasted with deontology Deontology is the normative
ethical position that judges the morality of an action based on the action's
adherence to a rule or rules.
The ends justify the means
is advocated by Niccolo Machiavelli. Also the Greek playwright Sophocles “The
end excuses any evil” and the Roman poet Ovid wrote “The result justifies the
deed.”
But what about my “the
means are the end?” John Dewey said, “the
ends only justify the means only when the means used are such as actually bring
about the desired and desirable end.”
Scott Stroud in “John Dewey and the Artful Life: Pragmatism, Aesthetics,
and Morality,” says “means are the end to be effected.”
This takes us back to
mediation and adversary divorce. I
believe more often than not in mediations the means are the end while in
adversary divorce the means justify the end.
As
always, you can post any comment about this blog or Divorce Mediation, or just
Mediation by following the directions at the right in the green column or at
the bottom of this website. Learn more about mediation at http://www.center-divorce-mediation.com/
CDM (304) 3/15/16
