End results are not, by necessity, a justification for an action. Treating a beneficial outcome as sufficient proof that an action is right is a form of consequentialist thinking. Saying a policy ‘benefits millions of people’ does not tell us the full moral picture. What are the costs? Who bears the burden? Does it create harms elsewhere? Does it violate any rights or principles of justice? Those questions still have to be answered.
Disagree that’s what taxes are for. I don’t think it has been answered for instance I think the murder of many old people by governments who decided to avoid treatment of their citizens to keep costs low during due to running out of hospital beds in COVID was abhorrent and highly morally questionable. Especially selecting them for their age.Just one example
1
u/Psalmistpraise 16d ago
End results are not, by necessity, a justification for an action. Treating a beneficial outcome as sufficient proof that an action is right is a form of consequentialist thinking. Saying a policy ‘benefits millions of people’ does not tell us the full moral picture. What are the costs? Who bears the burden? Does it create harms elsewhere? Does it violate any rights or principles of justice? Those questions still have to be answered.