Does the End Justify the Means?

Does the End Justify the Means?

Title: yes/no philosophical question

My question                 Does the end justify the means?

Section one: one word yes or no suffices how you answer the question (for example NO)

Section two:  What have others said who disagree? Quote exactly 3 sources

Section three:  What have others said on behalf of your position? Quote exactly 3 sources

Example (on the contrary, it seems that gambling is immoral. For D. No says)

Section four: this where you explain why you take why take the position you do be sure to back up your claims with evidences

Section 5 : rebut each of the reasons given by opponents in section two.

Do not add introductions and conclusions.

Sources and its links, and I underline some good sources

Joyce, Richard, “Moral Anti-Realism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/moral-anti-realism/>.

Website:

Driver, Julia, “The History of Utilitarianism“, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =

All the sources from the link above

• Bentham, Jeremy (1907). [PML] An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation., Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• ––– (1978). [OAO] “Offences Against Oneself.” Louis Compton (ed.), The Journal of Homosexuality, 3(4): 389-406, 4(1): 91-107..
• Cooper, Anthony Ashley (3^rd Earl of Shaftesbury) (1711). [IVM] Inquiry Concerning Virtue or Merit, in Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions and Times, excerpts reprinted in Raphael 1969.
• Crisp, Roger (1997). Mill on Utilitarianism., London: Routledge.
• Cumberland, Richard (1672). De Legibus Naturae Disquisitio Philosophica, London. English translation by John Maxwell, A Treatise of the Laws of Nature, 1727, reprinted New York, Garland, 1978.
• Darwall, Stephen (1995). Hume and the Invention of Utilitarianism, University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.
• Donner, Wendy (1991). The Liberal Self: John Stuart Mill’s Moral and Political Philosophy, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
• Driver, Julia (2004). “Pleasure as the Standard of Virtue in Hume’s Moral Philosophy.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly., 85: 173-194.
• ––– (forthcoming). Consequentialism, London: Routledge.
• Gay, John (1731). A Dissertation Concerning the Fundamental Principle and Immediate Criterion of Virtue in Frances King’s An Essay on the Origin of Evil, London.
• Gill, Michael (2006). The British Moralists on Human Nature and the Birth of Secular Ethics (New York: Cambridge University Press).
• Hruschka, Joachim (1991). “The Greatest Happiness Principle and Other Early German Anticipations of Utilitarian Theory,” Utilitas, 3: 165-77.
• Hume, David (1978). A Treatise of Human Nature. Edited by L. A. Selby-Bigge, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hutcheson, Francis (1725). An Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue, London; excerpts reprinted in Raphael 1969.
• Long, Douglas (1990). “‘Utility’ and the ‘Utility Principle’: Hume, Smith, Bentham, Mill,” Utilitas, 2: 12-39.
• Mill, John Stuart (1859). On Liberty, London: Longman, Roberts & Green.
• ––– (1861). [U] Utilitarianism, Roger Crisp (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
• Moore, G. E. (1903). [PE] Principia Ethica, Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 1988.
• Raphael, D. D. (1969). [R] British Moralists, in two volumes, London: Oxford, Clarendon Press.
• Rosen, Frederick (2003). “Reading Hume Backwards: Utility as the Foundation of Morals,” in Frederick Rosen (ed.), Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill, London: Routledge, 29-57.
• Rosenblum, Nancy (1978). Bentham’s Theory of the Modern State, New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Ryan, Alan (1990). The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill, Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
• Scarre, Geoffrey (1996). Utilitarianism, London: Routledge.
• Schneewind, J. B. (1977). Sidgwick’s Ethics and Victorian Moral Philosophy, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• ––– (1990). “The Misfortunes of Virtue,” Ethics, 101: 42-63.
• Schofield, Philip (2006). Utility and Democracy: the Political Thought of Jeremy Bentham, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Skorupski, John (1989). John Stuart Mill, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

 

Hooker, Brad, “Rule Consequentialism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =

All the sources  from the link above

• Adams, R. M, 1976, “Motive Utilitarianism”, Journal of Philosophy 73: 467–81.
• Arneson, R., 1999a, “Human Flourishing versus Desire Satisfaction”, Social Philosophy & Policy 16: 113–42.
• Arneson, R., 1999b, “Egalitarianism and Responsibility”, Journal of Ethics 3: 225–47.
• Arneson, R., “Sophisticated Rule Consequentialism: Some Simple Objections”, Philosophical Issues 15: 235–251.
• Attfield, R., 1995, Value, Obligation and Meta-ethics (Amsterdam: Rodopi BV Editions).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

…………………Answer Preview…………….

Stand on the question at hand

The question on whether the end justifies the means is one that has been constantly asked by many individuals. There are always reasons that people give to justify their opinions on whether something they did to achieve a set result was good or bad. To some individuals, the process undertaken to arrive at a certain result does not matter while to others, the route taken to a certain end result is as important………………………

APA

1,221 Words

$16.00 – Purchase



Added to cart