So you’re saying “don’t use that ‘logic’ stuff on me!”? I’ll take that as conceding the argument then.

:up: :victory:

]What if those that were "sacrificed" were against creating the Utopia as imagined by Stalin, Mao, Hitler, etc.?[/quote]
Well, it would have not been so bad if all these millions slaughtered had brought about a Utopia. Where is this Utopia?

Your point about my post is true, however, the point I was making was just that situations need future context, as I assumed but did not write that past context is readily available, nor did I think very much of it. Thank you for pointing that out. ( I also assumed I was not a murder or rapist, which I am in fact not either of those) — Lawrence of Arabia

Read the rest of my post. Its not just about future and past contexts. It is about subjective moral contexts that might disagree about what is good and what is bad. If what is good or bad is subjective, then what does it mean to say there are good or bad means and ends?

The 'ends' are all the consequences to all people over both the short term and the long term as a result of the action taken. — A Seagull

I think "ends" most properly does refer to "objectives", while "results" might better characterize the net consequences. The goal being that ends and results should be equal. Realistically, there usually are unintended consequences/results.

Realistically, there usually are unintended consequences/results. — Pantagruel

What function does blame achieve when it come to result or consequence?

The ends justify the means. — Lawrence of Arabia

is said only because, sometimes, we have to do what is clearly bad in other situations but necessary to achieve what is clearly good in another situation. I think the trolley problem gets to the heart of this issue but with no clear answer except a vague understanding on our intuitions.

Personally I endorse this view fully but reluctantly so. Fully because it isn't too hard for the trolley problem to become a reality. Reluctantly because I feel there's a fundamental problem with such scenarios which is brought into relief by the fact that situations where one says "the ends justify the means" are those where there is no alternative but to do something bad to achieve the good. What I mean is that such situations are crisis events where choices collapse to one single morally questionable and yet necessary action and that too for the good.

In "normal" conditions there are many choices and at least one among them will satisfy the condition that both the means and the ends are good.

Depends on how many different means can have same ends. These violent delights have violent ends.

What function does blame achieve when it come to result or consequence? — Spirit12

Not exactly sure what you mean by function?

Function to mean what purpose does it contribute to and what are the consequences of blame itself?

Blame is the "feedback" that ensues from those undesired/unintended consequences, and it does reflect responsibility for those consequences. We assume responsibility in a positive sense for the desired outcomes we produce, as "reward"; blame is the downside of that I think.

@Pantagruel I think punishment is the downside of reward and praise is the upside of blame

As for responsibility how much accounting is there for individual or contributive control of consequences?

As for responsibility how much accounting is there for individual or contributive control of consequences? — Spirit12

Do you mean are you responsible for things you cause that are beyond your control? Personally, I think if you do something, then you should make every effort to fully understand the scope of impact. If you act under the assumption of full responsibility, presumably you would minimize unintended effects.

Both means and the characteristics of the agent tend to condition the ends.

one: The availability of the means varies with circumstance. A person whose life might be saved outside a war zone might have to die under combat conditions. Availability of means may also reflect ideological restrictions in the agent's society. Witness the Catholic doctrine on artificial birth control. In a Catholic country, you might find no condoms in the drug store--just ovulation calendars.

Hence the old proverb: "If a hammer is the only tool you've got, pretty soon every problem starts looking like a nail."

two: The tendencies of the agent in this scenario condition the means, which in turn condition the ends. Everybody says they want law and order, but a militaristic dictatorship uses slightly different means to achieve that goal than a moderate representative government. The results tend to contrast, as anyone who has fled a fascist or communist dictatorship knows. Similarly, an aggressive parent will use different means to get compliance from his or her children than a more empathic parent--or a more negligent one.