Does the end always justify the means?

[Celestia]

I’ve been reading a book regarding anatomical practices and cadavers and it’s left me wondering, where do we draw the line at immoral practices?

To sum it short, in 19th century anatomists would dig up and rob grave sites for skeletal remains to study and research.
(Link: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/in-need-cadavers-19th-century-medical-students-raided-baltimores-graves-180970629/)

Also, it was very common for the poor to offer themselves as practice for students and surgeons in exchange for a cheap procedure which often times ended in their death.

We are in an advanced stage of life now, and sounds immoral and unethical, however it is simply because of this that we are as advanced in anatomical studies as we are.

So it makes me wonder, where do we draw the line? Do you believe that the end always justifies the means?



If anyone is interested in the book
It’s called: “Stiff: The Curious lives of human Cadavers” by Mary Roach.

[Albertón]

No, actually, the end almost never justify the mean, save only some few exceptions( only when there is no option).
To think otherwise is a lack of ethic or morality.

[Tooting Carmen]

No, actually, the end almost never justify the mean, save only some few exceptions( only when there is no option).
To think otherwise is a lack of ethic or morality.

Exactly.

[Celestia]

So do you both believe it would’ve been better if they had not participated in such practices? Do you think we’d have the research and technology now if they hadn’t?

[Tooting Carmen]

So do you both believe it would’ve been better if they had not participated in such practices? Do you think we’d have the research and technology now if they hadn’t?

Well, everything in life (and to an extent death) involves compromises. Black-and-white morality usually gets us nowhere.

[Faklon]

I can't think that much right now, but I don't believe to a finite "end". corruption itself breeds more corruption.

The noble act is to change the morals themselves but it needs guts.

[NSXD60]

WW2 nukeing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is still being debated: Invade and lose thousands of Yankee boys or nuke civilians and save the former.

[barnumandbailey]

WW2 nukeing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is still being debated: Invade and lose thousands of Yankee boys or nuke civilians and save the former.

The Japanese sure aren't debating anything.

[Celestia]

WW2 nukeing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is still being debated: Invade and lose thousands of Yankee boys or nuke civilians and save the former.

I’ve noticed myself understanding the phrase “sacrifice a few for the good of many” lately although I’ve always considered myself a highly moral person.

Great example.

[JamesBond007]

We are in an advanced stage in life now, where this would sound immoral and unethical however it is simply because of this that we are as advanced in anatomical studies as we are.



.

My last name is slang in Britain because some people with my last name raided graves in Scotland for Cadavers. Anyway, we are not as advanced as we like to think. Modern medical practice or medicine is the third or fourth leading cause of death in America or something like that (not sure where it stands now with Covid).

Also, sorry, I'm going to upset deeply held mythical beliefs here :


„It's a great game to try to look at the past, at an unscientific era, look at something there, and say have we got the same thing now, and where is it? So I would like to amuse myself with this game. First, we take witch doctors. The witch doctor says he knows how to cure. There are spirits inside which are trying to get out. … Put a snakeskin on and take quinine from the bark of a tree. The quinine works. He doesn't know he's got the wrong theory of what happens. If I'm in the tribe and I'm sick, I go to the witch doctor. He knows more about it than anyone else. But I keep trying to tell him he doesn't know what he's doing and that someday when people investigate the thing freely and get free of all his complicated ideas they'll learn much better ways of doing it. Who are the witch doctors? Psychoanalysts and psychiatrists, of course.“ — Richard Feynman, book The Meaning of It All


Richard Feynman also observed :


“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you’re finished, you’ll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird. You’ll only know about humans in different places, and what they call the bird. So let’s look at the bird and see what it’s doing—that’s what counts. I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.”

Mistaking knowing the name of something for knowing something is endemic in journalism, politics, and psychiatry. We are so advanced the medical practice of psychiatry is like modern day slavery and the Catholic inquisition :


Yes, disguise it as we may , we do keep ... in a sort of slavery a multitude of unfortunates who sigh for liberty and to whom it would be sweet --Samuel Gridley Howe, M.D (medical doctor)

Yeah, schizophrenia sounds fancy cause it comes from Greek but that does not mean it points to anything real especially not on the cadaver autopsy table.

[sean]

The first cadavers used in medical school weren't donated, as that was taboo at the time, so doctors and schools had to pay grave robbers to go out and dig 'em up. But the passage of the 1832 Anatomy Act in England and similar bills in America allowed for cadavers to be obtained for medical research from a number of sources, particularly the poor and the unclaimed.


So it makes me wonder, where do we draw the line? Do you believe that the end always justifies the means?

If they're already dead anyway, I don't really care if the person dissecting them is having fun, crying in sadness, or completely emotionless.

Consequentialism on the other hand is a boorish moral system. It's so vague that isn't barely even worth using in a rational argument. You could apply it to almost anything and convince yourself that a certain action is justified. These ideas were at the forefront of the civil rights movements and thus, the modern day left.

Just because you perform a specific means, doesn't mean you're guaranteed to reach the ends. If your means cause a buttload of collateral damage and conflict, you could end up missing the target and just making things worse.

[JamesBond007]

I’ve noticed myself understanding the phrase “sacrifice a few for the good of many” lately although I’ve always considered myself a highly moral person.

Great example.

I'll sell you and Frank Grimes down the river for being ethnic Catholic monkeys. Frank Grimes want to put me in a modern Catholic monkey inquisition cage through psychiatry but he will fail of course because he is not a WASP :

Ah , yeah, Methodist of WASP DNA got the power bitch the only Catholic Irish monkey of the USA was assasinated by the Protestant CIA :

Target: Jamesbond_scaled
Distance: 1.9624% / 0.01962356
42.8 England_IA (England Iron Age)
32.0 ISL_Viking_Age_Pre_Christian (Scandinavian Germanic)
25.2 SVK_Poprad_MA (Vandal Germanic)





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNwPCrFKXBk

[Celestia]

I'll sell you and Frank Grimes down the river for being ethnic Catholic monkeys. Frank Grimes want to put me in a modern Catholic monkey inquisition cage through psychiatry but he will fail of course because he is not a WASP :

Ah , yeah, Methodist of WASP DNA got the power bitch the only Catholic Irish monkey of the USA was assasinated by the Protestant CIA :

Target: Jamesbond_scaled
Distance: 1.9624% / 0.01962356
42.8 England_IA (England Iron Age)
32.0 ISL_Viking_Age_Pre_Christian (Scandinavian Germanic)
25.2 SVK_Poprad_MA (Vandal Germanic)





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNwPCrFKXBk

Ok so where does Southern Baptist fit on your scale of religious monkeys

[Daco Celtic]

Imagine the amazing variety of immoral deeds carried out for a certain end.

[Anglo-Celtic]

It doesn't, and we should strive to make logic and morality define the lines that must not be crossed. Admittedly, there's a wide range of choices that could fit within those lines, but there must be limits on what's acceptable, in order to preserve our humanity. Japanese war criminals had no *ethical* lines that kept them from committing egregious sins, but they minimized their crimes with the claim that their ends justified their means. The main question is "at what point does the point of no return start?".

[Anglo-Celtic]

Ok so where does Southern Baptist fit on your scale of religious monkeys

They think that Evangelical Protestants are clowns or heretics. Their churches don't adhere to bloodless conformity that lacks soul. Just do the traditional routines by rote with no regard to the real presence of the Divine. Just look down on "backwards" Americans who need more than customary nods to traditional activities.

[coolfrenchguy]

It doesn't, and we should strive to make logic and morality define the lines that must not be crossed. Admittedly, there's a wide range of choices that could fit within those lines, but there must be limits on what's acceptable, in order to preserve our humanity. Japanese war criminals had no *ethical* lines that kept them from committing egregious sins, but they minimized their crimes with the claim that their ends justified their means. The main question is "at what point does the point of no return start?".

I will join you on the fact than for many so called economical/ethnical/religious/political reasons,millions have been exterminated , i will not name it a particular one ,but if you look back the human history,twisted ends have been always sustained by twisted means,unfortunatly we are not in the wisdom mood of star trek but we still leaving on the ashes of thousands exterminated individuals because the culture of death is a very good buisiness,puppeted by the less philanthropic rotten people on earth

[Anglo-Celtic]

I will join you on the fact than for many so called economical/ethnical/religious/political reasons,millions have been exterminated , i will not name it a particular one ,but if you look back the human history,twisted ends have been always sustained by twisted means,unfortunatly we are not in the wisdom mood of star trek but we still leaving on the ashes of thousands exterminated individuals because the culture of death is a very good buisiness,puppeted by the less philanthropic rotten people on earth

That's why we need clear limits, and that's why we need to learn from past mistakes. We're repeating them right now, and Australia and Canada are just two examples. They use COVID-19 as an excuse to destroy civil rights of healthy people. Their *claimed* ends "justify" their dictatorial means.

[Sarin]

Depends on what the means are & what the end is . For instance in quoted instance , the end imo far outweighs what they might say dishonouring the dead (which for me is nothing but inanimate,decaying matter) & criminal trespass* etc . Now they may put " what if it is your dear one ? " Well , I'll consider trading it for money only to point blank donate it in toto to a noble,humanitarian cause & fetch the departed a good deal . " What about maggots , the food chain haan ? " Well , I'll forward this wacky one to TA or some aghori .

(*though to contain any social disorder , criminal trend etc , I would have strongly favoured legislative regulations but that's not the point here)

[Celestia]

Depends on what the means are & what the end is . For instance in quoted instance , the end imo far outweighs what they might say dishonouring the dead (which for me is nothing but inanimate,decaying matter) & criminal trespass* etc . Now they may put " what if it is your dear one ? " Well , I'll consider trading it for money only to point blank donate it in toto to a noble,humanitarian cause & fetch the departed a good deal . " What about maggots , the food chain haan ? " Well , I'll forward this wacky one to TA or some aghori .

(*though to contain any social disorder , criminal trend etc , I would have strongly favoured legislative regulations but that's not the point here)

I really like your points.
It makes me question if situations are only considered immoral when it’s personal.
Would it truly affect me if someone robbed a gravesite of a stranger? No.
Would it truly affect me if someone robbed my loved ones gravesite? Yes.

Perhaps one could argue that it is immoral to prevent unethical studies from taking place and that some are necessary for the growth and development for future generations.

[coolfrenchguy]

I will join you on the fact than for many so called economical/ethnical/religious/political reasons,millions have been exterminated , i will not name it a particular one ,but if you look back the human history,twisted ends have been always sustained by twisted means,unfortunatly we are not in the wisdom mood of star trek but we still leaving on the ashes of thousands exterminated individuals because the culture of death is a very good buisiness,puppeted by the less philanthropic rotten people on earth

damn i will would say living and not leaving,my bad big mistake,fatigue is not your friend

[Mixdguy17]

Imo it almost never does

[Richmondbread]

We can't judge people by today's morality because times and circumstances and numerous other factors are in constant flux. For example, we look at historical figures as horrible people if they happened to own slaves. But in the olden days, owning a slave was the equivalent of having a laptop computer or a Lexus today . A rather necessity than a moral issue.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk