Well, my understanding on the OPs text is that the means necessarily shape the ends, but instead of a sociological interpretation, it is an equally valid neurological one.
And this is in turn the exact same argument as that the ends should never justify the means, because if you use the wrong means you will never reach the ends you want.
Basically a neurological take on the age old “the ends can never justify the means” take.
??? This is about targeting the correct audience instead of what’s easy.
??? It seems we do not understand each other at all.
But “make sure your motivation is to help the system” isn’t related to “the ends justify the means” at all.
The OP is claiming that if done correctly, the ends justify the means.
I’m not criticizing your idea that the ends don’t justify the means. It’s only that your reply is a non sequitur to the OP.
Well, my understanding on the OPs text is that the means necessarily shape the ends, but instead of a sociological interpretation, it is an equally valid neurological one.
And this is in turn the exact same argument as that the ends should never justify the means, because if you use the wrong means you will never reach the ends you want.
The OP states it is justified to use violence against the right people to achieve your ends.
“The ends never justify the means.” is a statement that violence is never the right answer.
Hmm, no? Where does the OP say that?