End and the Means

[bozo]

The ends only justify the means if the means had multiple paths, and the chosen path ended with the greater of the ends. For example, a train is hurtling towards certain doom, and the only way of preventing disaster is to send it onto another set of tracks. However, there is someone caught on the tracks and nobody can get to them in time (nor can they free themselves).

So you have the choice of sacrificing the one to save the many, or sacrificing the many to save the one. In this circumstance I could positively say that I would choose to divert the train, killing the person on the tracks. I probably wouldn't like doing it, but the ends justify the means.

Adrian, what if the one strapped to the track was the most prominent atheist there has ever been?

I don't value any particular life as greater than another, so for me the problem wouldn't be apparent. Of course, when you get into things like "what if the person on the track knew the cure for cancer" then it gets harder, because suddenly the ends are shifted. You have to factor in whether you should sacrifice this man and hope that another cure is discovered, or whether the greater amount of life on the train is better than all the lives that could be saved with the cure.

I see no reason why I would save a prominent atheist over a train full of people though, as in the long run they have nothing to offer that can even remotely compare to the saving of life.

Adrian, apologies I didn't phrase my question properly ( I'd had a few drinks and it was late ).
What if the one strapped to the track was the " goody " and all the people on the train were real " baddies "? Put your own interpretation on good and bad.
My view is that the answer to the question is how you view the end result. Some results will justify the means, others won't, depending on your own view.