MetaChat - Is it moral to use evil means to achieve a good end?

MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.

05 June 2009

Is it moral to use evil means to achieve a good end? I was thinking about this:

Let's say that I'm a drug kingpin. I supply drugs that get people addicted and ruin the lives of the addict's loved ones. I traffic in underage prostitutes. To complete it, I also pay my drug mules next to nothing.

But, I then use the money I make from the above activities to build churches, fund religious education, and do good works in my community.

Would I go to hell because I'm engaged in glorifying God, or do I go to hell because of the misdeeds I am committing?

post by: reenum at: 20:58 | 26 comments

[moral inside]

j/k

Are you watching Breaking Bad?

posted by Eideteker 05 June | 21:07

Where is this hell of which you speak?

posted by Ardiril 05 June | 21:11

Neither.

Maybe you are paralleling something in your life but I'm not interested enough to figure it out.

I keep forgetting to watch Breaking Bad. My parents keep urging me to watch.

Good luck, reenum.

posted by LoriFLA 05 June | 21:12

I think what you're asking is, "would that make me a bad person?"

That's a deeply flawed question. We're not polarized beings. None of us is either wholly good or wholly evil. Also, churches and religious education can be pretty damn evil, in my opinion and personal experience.

I think it might be helpful to put the question in more "existential" terms. E.g., how can we consider the world to be good, overall, when there's so much evil in it? I don't know, but if this question really plagues you, I'd highly recommend reading Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamosov. Seriously. Not saying he has the answer, but at the very least, he articulates the pain of that question quite acutely.

posted by treepour 05 June | 21:44

In that scenario you would go to hell because you were unregenerated. Jesus referred to that as being "born again." (That can be found in the gospel of John.)

No amount of good works gets anyone into heaven. That ain't how it works. Repentance and faith in the redemptive work of Christ (His sinless life, his death and his resurrection) is what enables one to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

posted by bunnyfire 05 June | 21:56

No amount of good works gets anyone into heaven.

Note that Catholics do place emphasis on works.

posted by gaspode 05 June | 22:02

Ah, but which religion's education are you going to fund? No matter which one you pick, you're going to hell, at least to someone out there.

But everyone loves ice cream! Give away ice cream to everyone every day! Or donuts. I could stand a donut right now.

posted by WolfDaddy 05 June | 22:09

Would I go to hell because I'm engaged in glorifying God, or do I go to hell because of the misdeeds I am committing?

Glorifying God makes one go to hell?

Anyways, even the Catholic emphasis on works wouldn't help you out here (that's what purgatory is for). The trick is that the drug lord in this scenario would not be doing "good works" in his community to imitate Christ or reflect God's love, etc etc. He would be trying to do good works to buy himself out of Hell which means his eyes would only be focused on himself. The drug lord isn't listening to God and isn't doing God's Will but rather is like the Rich Man who sees Lazurus up in heaven. The Rich Man doesn't even ASK to get out from his eternal prison because he was focused on himself rather than on God and what God wants and there would be no repentance in the drug lord's heart.

posted by stynxno 05 June | 22:22

Respectfully, bunnyfire, you are saying things that are true about your own particular sect of Protestantism in a way that might make it sound like they're true for all Christians (or even true in a factual sense). Like gaspode says, Catholicism teaches that both faith and good works are required to enter the kingdom of heaven.

Also, I think Breaking Bad is really good.

posted by box 05 June | 22:23

Behavior doesn't cancel out other behavior. The first acts you mention would still be immoral, regardless of whether you go on to commit moral acts. In terms of Protestant Christian hell, repentence and change, if genuine, would still ensure a heaven for you, but for most (not all) denominations you'd have to achieve it before you died. That was one of my main issues with the idea of hell when I was a child- the thought of life on earth as a one-shot chance, where failure means eternal screwage; if souls were conscious enough to discern the difference between heavenly bliss and hellish torment, surely they should still be possessed of enough power to make the necessary choices to gain one over the other. Of course, if you're UU, God loves you so much that he'll redeem you no matter how much of an unrepentent bastard you were.

I am not UU (am agnostic) but I will also redeem you no matter how much of an unrepentent bastard you are.

posted by notquitemaryann 05 June | 22:32

I'm an athiest (though not an antitheist; yes, there's a difference), and I subscribe to the "do no harm" theory. At least, no intentional harm.

And if you profit from the suffering of others, you have still exploited people. It doesn't matter what you do with those profits.

posted by Eideteker 05 June | 22:59

I'm not a christian and I mean no offense by this answer, just an intellectual response from an agnostic gnostic.
By building churches you are enslaving minds, by funding religious education you are promoting dogmatic teachings, and by doing good work in the community you are unwittingly contributing to the misunderstanding that some children and some adults will when a violent drug pusher/pedophile pimp starts promoting 'God' while still exhibiting hypocritical deceitful behavior. It's a lose/lose situation. Mentally, psychically this hypothetical person would be in their own hell. Their perspective on life would be heavily warped by the violence, drug abuse and harm they caused. Even if it hasn't bubbled to the consciousness, living in the shadow chthonic side can mean unconscious destructive out comes.
Again, no offense, just my 2 cents. ta

posted by alteredcarbon 05 June | 23:13

If you live by a vow of poverty and drop the underage prostitutes, you've got yourself a deal. Difficulty: running a drug business while living as an ascetic.

posted by danostuporstar 05 June | 23:18

Not all churches or churchgoers are like that, alteredcarbon, as I hope you know.

posted by notquitemaryann 05 June | 23:27

I'm a UU. Just sayin'...

danostuporstar, if religion is the opiate of the people you've got yourself quite a career path.

posted by Luminous Phenomena 05 June | 23:40

You don't go to Hell at all - you live it out right here on Earth where, every time you pass a church you built, you instinctually visualize some poor fucker's family who couldn't get out from your punishing drugs and your own addiction to power and deceit.

Not only that, but you are also creating Hell on Earth for hundreds of other people who, if left to themselves, have a chance to do far more good works in their communities.

Or, flip this silly script and create a long-lasting event yourself that is overwhelmingly positive no matter who's involved and don't bother yourself with pointless "what-ifs" about the semi-finals for torture in the afterlife.

Go volunteer somewhere - clean up a beach, teach a kid to read, hose down a sick dog's cage at the shelter.

these kind of questions make me wanna throw shit, no offense, reenum, but damn....

posted by Lipstick Thespian 05 June | 23:41

Yeah, pretty much exactly in agreement with LT. I'm not really sure how to read the question, but any consideration of what may happen to you in an afterlife, if you choose to believe in one, is a premature and a distant second to the effect of your actions in life.

posted by notquitemaryann 06 June | 00:06

notquitemaryann, this is true, but the original question was framed in terms of "going to hell", after all.

I think it's possible to redeem oneself -- this is the essential Protestant impulse, after all. But you can't do it while continuing to do evil.

A murkier, but more realistic, scenario would be one of the Gilded Age robber barons who used his riches, obtained legally but often amorally, to become a great philanthropist. Rockefeller drove his own brother out of business.

I don't think this is an inappropriate question, but it has been heavily studied by philosophers both religious and secular.

posted by dhartung 06 June | 00:17

Also agreed, but specifying which hell...

posted by notquitemaryann 06 June | 00:56

You're going to hell because you are a hypocrite.

posted by brujita 06 June | 01:44

Not in Christianity.

You're taking a consequentialist view of ethics. That's where you add up the good and bad consequences of an act, and if it adds up to good overall, then the act was good.

Christian theology generally has a deontological view of ethics. An act is good or bad depending on whether it adheres to principles or duties. In Christianity, this means an act is good or bad depending on whether it's in accordance with the will of God, or natural law.

So, even if your evil acts have good consequences, they're still just as evil.

However, if you stop doing them, repent, and accept Jesus, you can be forgiven your sins: Jesus himself will take responsibility for them and suffer the punishment for them. So you can get into heaven that way. But you have to be sincere: if you try to keep sinning till the last minute, that may be a sign that you're not sincere about repentance.

posted by TheophileEscargot 06 June | 01:51

(Just to clear things up-good deeds are a consequence of being born again, not a cause...."a tree is known by its fruit")

posted by bunnyfire 06 June | 05:21

Hell is other people.

posted by Pips 06 June | 15:02

I am not too sure how to read the question also and was just being broad with my contrarian answer as much as could be allowed with a question that leaves much out. The question appeared generalized in good/evil to me so I gave an answer that was generalized, which I understand would upset.

posted by alteredcarbon 06 June | 20:16

Just what kind of excercise is this again?

Anyway, drug lords buy way into church's heart

Another kind of drug lord

<nitpick>
(Just to clear things up-[I believe]good deeds are a consequence of being born again, not a cause...."a tree is known by its fruit")
</nitpick>

Because I don't believe that, and I'm a Christian.

posted by lysdexic 07 June | 11:15

We're All Going to Hell

posted by alteredcarbon 07 June | 17:26

← Show us you're boobs || Grizzly Bear "Veckatimest" →

HOME || REGISTER || LOGIN