One of the major politics thinkers known to us is Niccolo Machiavelli. He is popular for the key phrase "the finish justifies the means" which is regularly being the subject of discussions and discourses today (Adams and Dyson). With Machiavelli's concepts, we are actually faced with the issue if the desired ends is justified by the means used to attain them. The issue will be explored in the light of Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Characteristics of the Prince" and Martin Luther King Jr. 's "Letter from Birmingham Jail" to see this is of the phrase "the end justifies the means. " It cannot be denied that there are implications and problems when unworthy means are being used to achieve valuable ends. However, one thing is sure: if an end or goal is worthy, any mean for doing that end is justifiable provided that both ends and means are commendable and good.
The question whether the end justifies the means will depend on the kind of goal or end a person would like to accomplish and the means they use. If both the means and the ends are similarly noble and good, there is no question because the ends are justified by the means. This is actually the stand I have chosen to take. Although there are different views about this is of Machiavelli's expression, I agree with the belief that both ends and means should be good. Folks are known at times to utilize Machiavelli's term or expression as a justification when they make an effort to achieve their own goals no subject how immoral, illicit, and wrong their means are. For many individuals, it does not matter what means are being used long as they get what they need. To justify their ends by some form of means sometimes entails doing a wrong thing when attempting to achieve a good end. They justify the incorrect act by pointing to the outcome that was good. The wrong justification can be seen in a few horrors in history such as the Holocaust, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagaski, the earth Wars, and even the bombing of the World Trade Centre. There are a lot of justifications made by many people about the ends these happenings serve, but one thing holds true, the ends are commendable however the means aren't.
To compare the two in what's considered wrong and morally right, one of these is an specific lying down about their skills on their cv when trying to get a good job. This individual would later justify the laying by saying that it is a way to receive a bigger income to provide for his / her family better. Another example would be justifying an abortion to save lots of the mother's life. These two examples make a dilemma between what's done and what ought to be done. Machiavelli state governments,
Because how one lives is so far distant from one ought to live, that he who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his mess up than his preservation; for a guy who wishes to do something entirely up to his professions of virtue soon matches with what destroys him among so much that is wicked (Machiavelli, The Prince Ch. 15).
Considering both of these examples, the lying and taking of an innocent life can be viewed as both equally wrong. On the other hand, the end which is providing for one's own family and the saving of an woman's life are both morally right. However, one must learn to distinguish what should be done in order to avoid the results of what is done. What if the individual resting about his / her resume had not been given the work because he lied? Imagine if the baby aborted gets the cure for tumors in his or her mind? The wrong means used can result in ruin alternatively than good.
It cannot be denied that people all took area of the end justifies the means controversy at some point in our lives. Means used must also be ethical, communal, and morally upright. Therefore, if one mean alone is morally bad, it may not serve an end that is good, though it seems good on the surface. An objective or purpose achieved through an upright methodology is finished. justified, not those immoral, illicit, and wrong. One significant proof of a justified means to an end is exemplified in the nonviolent demo against segregation fought for by Martin Luther King Jr. There are a lot of ways for the African People in america back then to accomplish equality and liberty in American society. They are able to bomb the White House. They are able to coerce the federal government through unlawful means and other immoral and wrong acts imaginable. However, Martin Luther King Jr. and his enthusiasts thought we would gain freedom by having a peaceful means. Here, we can easily see that both the means and the ends are commendable and good. His famous writing "Letter from Birmingham Jail" laid down the plan of these non-violent advertising campaign. In his notice, Martin Luther Ruler Jr. demonstrated that the unjust treatment of Negroes and their segregation can be solved through peaceful means. A non-violent plan however can produce anxiety but it is up to the protestors to handle the tension. In his "Letter from Birmingham Jail, " King says,
Indeed, this is the very reason for immediate action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to set-up such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which includes constantly refused to make a deal is required to confront the problem. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it no more be overlooked. My citing the creation of stress as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shock-ing. But I must confess i am not reluctant of the word "tension. " I have earnestly opposed violent pressure, but there's a kind of constructive, nonviolent pressure which is essential for expansion (Jr. 216).
Martin Luther King Jr. died because of this of the demonstrations he started however the ends are fulfilled. His belief was opposed by the Whites throughout that time. The Whites also uphold the theory that the end justifies the means. They say that what they do to the Negroes is done because of self-preservation. The federal government throughout that time works to maintain their state so they acted on what things to be done: supply the African People in the usa what they want. The death of Martin Luther King Jr. proved that both the ends and means may be commendable, that it can be justified. Martin Luther King Jr. can be an example to be used when making use of the term "the end justifies the means. " As stated by Thayer, "Be strong is therefore the first and last commandment for countries and princes to observe; and Machiavelli instructs them how to use their durability" (Thayer 476). In cases like this, Martin Luther King Jr. understood what methods to use for his desired end.
No you can use bad means for any good end. In declaring this, it can be compared to a person trying to build a good house from bad materials - it does not work. The term "the finish justifies the means" can fool people if we do not look closely to what it says. What we fail to see in this declaration is the finish itself. Could it be really good? We all fail to see and carefully look at the means and exactly how they affect the ends. There are a lot of difficulties and complications when unworthy means are being used to achieve worthy ends. A good example will be the Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazi program (Gilbert 32). Is this end valuable after all of the events that happened? Another example would be the two World Wars. Will be the ends of such brutal means necessary? These difficulties are frequently seen in wartime situations and the politics field. Government authorities do not service whatever means they make use of just to earn. They consider about victory though it means sacrificing many lives, property, and even more morale. In both of these situations, really the only view is success and any means that could donate to success is thought to be justified, but not by everyone. Any success can be used as the standard by which we all measure the good thing about the means. However, some benefits are superficial and do not previous long. The misuse of the phrase "the end justifies the means" contradicts Machiavelli's main point - that a prince must think about future situations and plan potential problems. When a person really believes in a Machiavellian perspective, she or he would use necessary methods to achieve a finish to avoid future complications (Machiavelli, The Prince Ch. 14).
People who go after their dreams and their goals will take a course that is filled up with obstacles. It really is known that goals are achieved through very hard work. The means to attain such goals are different from the goals itself. A very important factor should be appreciated though; both means and ends must be noble and good. What I've shown is usually that the ends or goals of anybody can continually be justified by the means used to achieve it if only they are worthy enough. As Machiavelli highlights,
But to exercise the intellect the prince should read histories, and review there the activities of illustrious men, to see how they may have borne themselves in war, to examine the causes of their victories and defeat, in order to avoid the last mentioned and imitate the former (The Prince Ch. 14).
There are a lot of horrific examples in justifying immoral, illicit, and incorrect means but Machiavelli teaches us to study from past experiences to achieve ends through commendable and good means.
In conclusion, we all have been but humans who err almost all of the time. The values that we have as humans are what make us humans. Any means we use which violates our conception of morals and righteousness can never justify the finish or the goals no subject how worthy they may appear to be. As seen in the Martin Luther Ruler Jr. example, there are actually one thousand ways to attain a unitary end which is up to you whether to utilize the commendable means or the wrong means.