John Dewey Quotes

The end justifies the means. But what if there never is an end? All we have is means.

The end never justifies the means because there is no end; there are only means.

But the nature of the universe is such that ends can never justify means. On the contrary, the means always determine the end.

I think in general the ends do not justify the means.

And don't tell me the end justifies the means because it doesn't. We never reach the end. All we ever get is means. That's what we live with.

Even for the world's only superpower, the ends don't always justify the means.

There are times when the end justifies the means. But when you build an argument based on a whole series of such times, you may find that you've constructed an entire philosophy of evil." --Luke Skywalker

the ends never justify the means because IT never ends.

The result justifies the deed.

Any humane and reasonable person must conclude that if the ends, however desireable, are uncertain and the means are horrible and certain, these means must not be employed.

Philosophy is fundamentally about how you come to terms with living your life and trying to do it in a wise manner, and, for me, that means decently and compassionately and courageously and so forth.

The third rule of ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means.

A means can be justified only by its end. But the end in its turn needs to be justified.

The ends do not justify the means. The means are the ends.

What would our world be like if we ceased to worry about 'right' and 'wrong,' or 'good' and 'evil,' and simply acted so as to maximize well-being, our own and that of others? Would we lose anything important?

Men think they may justly do that for which they have a precedent.

The doing evil to avoid an evil cannot be good.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

One’s concern with the ethics of means and ends varies inversely with one’s personal interest in the issue.

But when the good people do know, as they certainly do, that three million persons (at the least estimate) were starved to death in one year by the methods they approve, why do they still fraternize with the murderers and support the measures? Because they have been told that the lingering death of the three millions might ultimately benefit a greater number. The argument applies equally well to cannibalism.

Morality must be the heart of our existence, if it is to be what it wants to be for us. The highest form of philosophy is ethics. Thus all philosophy begins with "I am." The highest statement of cognition must be an expression of that fact which is the means and ground for all cognition, namely, the goal of the I.

Too great a preoccupation with motives (especially one's own motive) is liable to lead to too little concern for consequences.

If it's anything that's going to result in suffering to animals or people, then I don't think [the end] justifies the means... Yeah; but then again if you could hurt ten people to save 100 people and there was no option, what would you do? I can't really address that.

The end does not justify the means. No one's rights can be secured by the violation of the rights of others.

Moral truth, resting entirely upon the ascertained consequences of actions, supposes a process of observation and reasoning.