wow, the end justifies the means and "The ultimate end is to maximise net flourishing, where each agent’s interests counts equally - even those who do not excite our emotions."

so we must all act selflessly for the common good then? where the common good is 'net' flourishing. hmm..

consider this; population A is starving. Population A notices the country of population B has lots of unused resources. population A walks into country B non-violently and takes all their unused resources and starts setting up farms everywhere.
now this would satisfy the 'common good' and 'net flourishing' requirements. Population B would not be able to legitimately force out population A in order to reclaim their resources.
This ideology doesn't work in a world of individial countries with borders. it falls over in many other scenarios also.

You are right about satire. I love the American satirical website The Onion. Sometimes when I'm typing onlineopinion, I accidentally get the Onion. But sometimes it's hard to tell the difference. The fog is in your head, Mirko (an aptonym if ever there was one!).

Since you are a vegetarian, Pedant, I can see that you are unable to understand the concept that the ends sometimes do justify the means.

Psychologists and psychiatrists are aware that some people posses what they refer to as “Authoritarian personalities”. People with this particular personality defect are unable to comprehend moral perspectives. To an Authoritarian, morality can only be right or wrong, black or white, sacred or heretical. People with this condition behave as if nothing else matters other than principle, and people with this condition make the most fanatical members of any religious, political or social order. The most famous Authoritarian was the Greek philosopher Draco, who proposed that all crimes, no matter how trivial, were equally bad. Draco proposed a “Draconian” criminal code where the only suitable punishment for any crime was death.

Now I am not saying that vegetarians are Authoritarians, but personality wise, they are getting a bit close to the abyss. Vegetarians consider that the principle of being kind to animals is so sacred that they even go against the natural order by refusing to eat meat. However, I would point out that among the vegetarian movement, one sub group who call themselves “Vegans” who are very extreme. Vegans are all bloody Authoritarians. They are so obsessed with moral absolutes that they even refuse to eat honey, because to them it is “stealing from bees.” Draco would have been impressed by their logic.

But normal people who do not possess Authoritarian (or near Authoritarian) mindsets can understand moral perspectives. Normal people will concede that moral values are extremely important. But they can also moderate their scruples depending upon what is at stake. Normal people can understand that sometimes, the ends can justify the means

Whilst the ends may justify the means in some issues, there is never ever a hard rule which ordains such to always be true.

The “ends” are invariably emotional / subjective issues or aspirations. They are rarely commonly accepted absolutes or irrefutable facts.

The “means” are invariably physical actions or prohibitions.

Thus justification of “objective means” being deployed to resolve “subjective ends” can never be resolved absolutely.

Even “hindsight” will fall foul of the emotional malleability of the “ends”.
Example, should the allies in WWII have bombed the gas chambers of Auschwitz as a priority or not (I bring that up because I listened to a program the other evening and it illustrates the highly emotive nature of the “ends” versus “means” with regard to collateral consequences)?

“Ends and means” can only be considered in the isolation of every application.

Some took exception to my observation if anyone wanted to get serious about all the environmental challenges we face they needed to take on board first the cause, population explosion. To resolve that in simple terms

the “End” is Zero (or possibly negative) population growth
the “Means” – curtailment of results of activites for those who are creating that population growth (steralisation).

Does Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd want to deal with that massive, profound and underlying challenge or does Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd just want to play around at the edges and promote their “glamour” issues like saving whales and frigging around in matters economic which they just do not understand?

Some Ends will justify Some Means.
Some Ends are of significant human consequence. Some Ends are merely the playthings of people with too few challenges to fill their daily struggle. They are to promote their obsessive interest in their play pursuits. The latter would find it a hard challenge to justify, rationally, their indulgences in the face of a real crisis. Yet they recruit greater global interest to their hobby, partly because of the intensity of fervour which obsessives are capable of generating and inspiring.

I love the first comment. The poster should understand the duplicity. For example, the U.S.A. uses "end justifies means" for renditions and civilian casualties, you know. And their ends don't always end so nice, in that Osama Bin Laden is alive and that there is a new generation of people who lost their parents to American missiles.

Thanks Redneck for this interesting information.

From your definition, I don’t think I have an Authoritarian personality. I don’t mind if you or anyone else eats meat. I feed my cat and my husband meat. However, if I don’t want to eat meat then I don’t have to. In the same way I can understand the concept that “the ends sometimes do justify the means” but I don’t have to agree that this concept is valid. I don’t think I have a Draconian personality either, as I don’t approve of capital punishment.

Also I think you’re being a bit bold to state, “Vegetarians consider that the principle of being kind to animals is so sacred that they even go against the natural order by refusing to eat meat”. People are vegetarians for a variety of reasons. Some of the reasons I am a vegetarian have got nothing to do with animals. If vegans don’t want to eat honey (yummy) then they don’t have to, that leaves more honey for you and me to eat.