I disagree to an extent with the statement that, any means taken to reach a goal is justifiable.
This is because there are good and bad within this statement. Firstly, it depends on what goal you are trying to achieve. Secondly, it depends on what kind of actions you are going to take to attain it. These two things will determine which is the bad and which is the good within the statement.
However, according to my research, there seems to be fewer good within the statement compared to bad within the statement. Henceforth, why I disagreed to an extent instead of agreeing to disagreeing.
Let us break it up into sections and start with the following and onwards.
A goal is defined as a desired outcome that someone envisions. However, a worthy goal is defined the same, but it is more valuable when reached or valuable in the eyes of the person. Everyone perceives things differently.
Hence why a worthy goal is very subjective. “Any means taken to reach it are justifiable” indicates that, any actions taken to reach their goals, whether it be good or bad, will be excusable. Hence, in conclusion it means that they do not take any responsibility for their actions.
The bad within the statement is specifically from, “Any means taken to attain it are justifiable.” This means that killing, raping, and stealing is excusable., if it was what it takes to reach one’s goals.
This is link to my point where the actions you take determines the bad and good within the statement. If one were to take unlawful and inhumane actions to achieve their goals, it shows the bad within the statement. Also as said before, the goals of people play a factor in determining the good or bad within the statement. If one’s goal is to harm or place others in danger, it shows the bad within the statement.
In fact, according to the penal code, chapter 224, chapter XVI, section 321 and 322 by Singapore law, it states that one who commits voluntarily hurt or grievous hurt respectively will be charged and punished. This means that if one were to act with the intentions of causing hurt, will be charged.
An example of this situation would be an article that I came across recently. It was about an Indonesian domestic worker who killed her employer at her house in 2016, leaving the victim with 98 stab wounds and cuts on her face, head, and neck. The domestic worker also stabbed the victim’s husband when he discovered her and the corpse of his wife. The reasons behind her savagery was because she was homesick and wanted to return home to her lover whom she has been missing. This is link to my point, as her goal was to steal money to return home. However, to achieve that goal she stripped someone of their life. She is currently on trial for the murder which will resume in August 13, the last I checked.
Therefore, the actions one takes to attain a goal determines the bad within the statement. One should not throw their morals away just for a goal.
The good within the statement is specifically from the same expression as the bad within the statement. However, the difference would be the actions taken and the type of goal. If one’s goal is to help others or oneself with actions that does not cause harm to others, it shows the good within the statement. Did you know that you can kill someone and not be charged?
According to the penal code chapter 224, chapter IVA, section 102 of the Singapore law. It states that one has the rights to private defence of body, extending to causing death. This means that if one were to feel that their life or the lives of others are in danger, you are given the rights to cause death to the assailant and you will not be charged with murder. This is also called justifiable homicide in other countries.
An example of this situation would be a personal example. My goal when I was 16 years old was to get into PFP (Polytechnic Foundation Program). To achieve that goal, I worked hard and started studying early. I gave up a lot of things to make time for myself to study such as my meals, my sleep, and overall, I gave up my mental health. It did not cause any harm to others and I have achieved my goal. This is the good within the statement.
Through research I found out a possible reason why some people do the above. Reaching a goal may seem easy but from what the statistic says, it is not. According to the studies from the University of Scranton, 92% of people who set New Year’s resolutions never actually attain them. Hence, why people go to such monstrous lengths to achieve their goals as if a goal is achievable the easy way why not. It is like eliminating one’s competition so that one will not have to face the obstacles given. The following is a graph showing how long one keeps their New Year’s resolution.
In conclusion, there seems to be worse within the statement than there is good within it. This is because although there is the same number of examples given for each, there is only one action that can justify you for killing another. Which I have stated above. I can also conclude that the actions one takes, is a factor in concluding if one is good or bad. As the saying goes, “Every action has a consequence.” Hence let us not turn into animals for a goal.