Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

Are you a consequentialist?

Do your decisions involve the accounting for the possible good coming out of an immoral act. For example there are those that justify the Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagaski
Do you believe that the ‘the right action’ is the action which produces the best possible consequences"?

Answer Question
 
adnilm

Asked by adnilm at 12:01 PM on Nov. 16, 2012 in Religious Debate

Level 40 (118,866 Credits)
Answers (27)
  • I would say yes. That when given options you pick the one that will do the greatest good even if it means some harm to others. We see this in victims of war. Where mothers have left behind a sick child because if she didn't then all her children and her would die. Or the way some women feel about abortion. That this procedure might be difficult but there is greater good there. I guess it could be applied to a lot of situations. I think only time can tell if the action was worth the final sum of consequences. But I see it as a choice we make in that moment. Kind of like being caught between a rock and a hard place.
    frogdawg

    Answer by frogdawg at 8:58 PM on Nov. 18, 2012

  • I don't believe that the ends justify the means if the means are unethical. For example, I would not take it upon myself to shred the ballots cast for the other candidate simply to get my candidate into office.
    Iamgr8teful

    Answer by Iamgr8teful at 9:10 PM on Nov. 17, 2012

  • I guess I am. I think doing something immoral is never something I would want to do but this is an evil, imperfect world. Is it immoral to steal for a hungry child? Is it immoral to kill if you are threatened? Is it immoral to launch a preemptive strike to keep an enemy in check before all out war breaks out? I think we have to do the best with what we have and accept that there are certain evils in this life.
    HHx5

    Answer by HHx5 at 9:30 AM on Nov. 17, 2012

  • i think a pp nailed it, in that not one person can decide what is/isn't right/moral,etc for the whole.
    >>>
    I think there are absolutes in that area, like murder, kidnapping. We have decided, as a whole that those things are an evil, making them immoral
    adnilm

    Comment by adnilm (original poster) at 8:47 AM on Nov. 17, 2012

  • Do your decisions involve the accounting for the possible good coming out of an immoral act?-

    i think a pp nailed it, in that not one person can decide what is/isn't right/moral,etc for the whole. for instance, i think stripping for $ to the public is immoral and would never go that avenue. however, some have said its the only way they can make money to feed their starving kid or keep a rent check paid. (that's as far as i'll go with that topic.) the ends does not justify the means, IMO..but to someone else, it may.

    Do you believe that the ‘the right action’ is the action which produces the best possible consequences?-

    a little trickier, at first. everyone wants the 'best consequences'..but what is best for you, may not be best for me. therefore, the right action you take, may be the wrong action for me. (yeah, kind of the same answer to both ?s.)
    dullscissors

    Answer by dullscissors at 6:53 AM on Nov. 17, 2012

  • Oy! I am amazed at the variety of answers here. Some even to a question i didn't ask lol
    adnilm

    Comment by adnilm (original poster) at 4:42 PM on Nov. 16, 2012

  • If you are asking should there be consequence to people's actions I have to say yes.... That is how we learn. If someone attacks us either on individual level or on a larger scale, in order to get them to stop there needs to be consequences or they will just continue.  Some of us learn very quickly from very little consequences not to do certain things.  Others have to suffer a great deal before they learn from their consequences.  Do we just allow people to continue to bomb us and not do a dang  thing about it.  Allow our families to die before our eyes because we feel it is wrong to retaliate?  How many of our people would have had to die for those of you to feel it would have been justified? 

    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 4:37 PM on Nov. 16, 2012

  • So if those are terrorist attacks what was Perl Harbor then? 

    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 4:21 PM on Nov. 16, 2012

  • I think the bombing was wrong. I do however try to understand it from the perspective of the people living through the events at the time.  It's easy for me to sit back and say it was wrong, I'm not living through WWII, my son isn't being drafted, my family members haven't died, I don't have the images of a destroyed Europe affecting my judgement.  It was wrong, but it's easy to say it now.  I can understand how fear could make it seem necessary at the time, I wouldn't have wanted to be dragged into a war with Japan either.  It really would have felt like the end of the world.

    RyansMom001

    Answer by RyansMom001 at 3:31 PM on Nov. 16, 2012

  • if you could kill someone you don't know in order to save your child from being killed, would you? That would bring a positive result from a negative one.....
    >>>
    No, the question is...would you? We aren't talking about someone breaking into your house and shooting someone. Self defense is a whole other can o' worms
    adnilm

    Comment by adnilm (original poster) at 2:25 PM on Nov. 16, 2012

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.