Intentions vs Consequences

[PlasmaHam]

In ethics, there are two general ways to ascribe the morality of an action. The first, known as deontological ethics judges the action based upon the intentions of the person who did it. In this world view, the means can often justify the end. For example, murder is wrong when you are doing it out of self-interest or hate, but under the idea of deontological ethics, murder would be okay if you are doing it to protect your family. The first is wrong because the murderer had bad or immoral intentions, but the second is right because you had good intentions.


The second viewpoint is called Consequentialism. Rather than intentions, actions are judged by their results, or as the name implies, consequences. In a Consequentialist’s view, the ends justify the means. For instance, under consequentialism, theft is always wrong, because it always results in harm being done to the person you stole from. Or in the classic case of a speeding train, it would be moral to sacrifice one person to save five others, because the consequences of 5 people living is better than just one.


So, which viewpoint are you? Here (http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethics.html) is a great site if you want to learn more about this and other ethics topics.

[Just JT]

I know in the Christian religion, to kill someone (as an example you used) is a sin. To intentionally kill someone, yeah, I think that would be a sin. We are taught about forgiveness and love. But that’s an intentional, almost like a premeditated, I’m going to do this action.

But if you are in a situation, not even an accident, more like if your own life is threaten, or you act out naturally, not even thinking about the consequences, in defense, that’s a natural reaction. I think by the letter of the comandement, it’s still a sin. But there’s also so much that can be interpreted from the Bible as well.

But also in the Christian faith, if we do sin and repent, our sins will be forgiven.

I’m not so sure that’s what your looking for or not? I’m pretty sure you already knew that Sunday school lesson, but that’s kinda how I see it.

[ShineintheDark]

Well, as with every part of philosophy, there is no one concrete answer to a problem. I am personally more of a consequentialist but it must also be respected that the intentions of the person carrying out is also a huge factor of an actions morality.

[Microcosm]

Is it possible to believe both? I personally believe that karmic forces are created on the basis of one's intentions, yet consequences determine the objective rightness or wrongness of the action. In other words, if you did not intend to do something wrong, but it had bad consequences and was therefore an objectively wrong action, then you shouldn't be punished for that action.