2. Do the ends justify the means (ends ethics vs. means ethics)?

If we are going for an answer that would attempt to include any possible situation, then I would have to say no, the ends do not justify the means. Dealing with means and ends ethics can be tricky, due to the myriad of situations that one can find themselves in. However if we take a look at a successful individual, one who has achieved a high ranking position in a company or in the government, doesn’t the way by which he got there and achieved such things matter? If he lied and stole on his way up the ladder of success, doesn’t that somehow “undo” the end result? Someone once told me that “two wrongs do not make a right”, so if we do whatever we have to, whether that be right or wrong, in order to achieve a particular goal, I would say that we have lost our sense of direction in the ethical sense. If individuals only focus on the end goals, they may not be good role models to others in the community either if they conduct shady business on the way up to the top. Another quote which comes to mind is “It’s the journey, not the destination that matters”, meaning that it is the choices we made and the actions we took along the way. Whether the end result turned out exactly how we expected it to or not, we would know that we tried to make the best decisions we could at the time along the way.

3. Does the process by which decisions are made matter more than the outcomes of these decisions (procedural justice vs. distributive justice)?

I tend to think that as long as the decisions made are good and appropriate ones, it may not matter how they were arrived at. The reason that process might need to be focused on more than the actual decision is so that we can sort of come up with a set of guidelines for how to make good decisions, kind of a “how-to” book, if you will. By creating these rules, laws and orders in government (and other areas), we are attempting to accommodate nearly all individuals and situations that one might face in a particular field/area of government or business. Thus just because a set procedure is established for certain types of decision making, does not mean that certain individuals would not corrupt that system or use it in a way unintended for a particular end. My thought is that if the decision is ultimately a good and honorable one, then it doesn’t necessarily matter what the thought process was or what obstacles the individual had to overcome in order to arrive at the decision.

6. Is my own life worth more than the lives of others, the same, or less (selfishness vs. altruism)?

This is definitely a challenging question, because it is incredibly difficult to say whose life is worth more. In my life in general, I would tend to side with the argument for more altruism and less selfishness, simply because I do tend to see far too much selfishness out in the world. I would say that my life is worth about the same as someone else’s however I would more likely give things up for someone else (especially for those whom I care a lot about), rather than keep them for myself and be miserly. However, this is not to say that everyone should consider themselves as a “doormat”, that is to say they must still require things such as respect, etc. This is the main problem though with too many people acting selfishly. If everyone was to act even the slightest bit more altruistically, then we would be able to better look out for others since we wouldn’t have to worry quite as much about ourselves because others would also be looking out for us. It’s an interesting positive or negative feedback loop, depending upon how you look at the situation. One could also look at it as a question of “for the good of the one? Or for the good of the many?”, as we hear in Star Trek. Sometimes to do the right or appropriate thing is to put the needs of others before the needs of oneself.

(These of course are my own opinions from my own experience and teaching, so I invite any and all commentary on the subjects presented above.)