The end justifies the means

The end justifies the means is a paraphrase of Niccolò Machiavelli. It means that if a goal is morally important enough, any method of getting it is acceptable. The idea is very old, but it was not meant to allow people to be cruel or mean if they do not need to be. It was part of a political philosophy (way of thinking) called consequentialism. The basic idea is that doing something can be judged by what happens because of it. All modern forms of consequentialism have to prevent tyrants (absolute rulers) from using this idea for evil. 

 Origins 
The saying, "The end justifies the means", is usually linked to Niccolò Machiavelli, namely in his political treatise, The Prince (1513). Even though Machiavelli never stated this directly, it is a prominent idea in his works. For example, in Chapter XVIII of The Prince, he writes, "In the actions of all men... when there is no court to appeal to, one looks to the end". This has vastly been interpreted as an implication that a ruler might have to do things that go against their faith and what is right for people in order to keep the state safe.

The exact phrasing of it is occasionally associated with Hermann Busenbaum, a theologian for the Jesuits. He once stated: "Cum finis set licit, etiam media sunt licita", which translates to "when the end is lawful, the means are also lawful".  

 The Ethical Debate 
This phrase is linked with tensions between teleology (focusing on outcomes) and deontology (focusing on duty and rules). 

On the proponent side, the main argument comes from consequentialism. Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, often considered to have begun Utilitarianism, argued that the best action is the one that results in "the greatest good for the greatest number". Niccolò Machiavelli, in The Prince, argues from the point of view of Necessità (necessity), suggesting that a prince who tries to be good, in a world where many people are bad, will probably end up hurting himself and his country. 

Counterpoints argue that some actions are inherently wrong regardless of their outcome. The primary player here is Immanuel Kant. In his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), he posited that one must "act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end". This has been interpreted to mean that using a person as a "tool" (a means) to achieve a "goal" (an end) is a violation of human dignity.

 References 

Category:Phrases
Category:Political philosophy
Category:Ethics