Means vs. ends in U.S. foreign policy
arthur comes close to making a point i have long held...
my belief is that means and ends are inseparable... in the western world, we have been thoroughly indoctrinated in a dualistic world view going back to the time of aristotle... our speech is a constant reflection of aristotelian dualism... we cannot go for a minute without referring to some aspect of duality - mind/body, black/white, good/bad, heaven/hell, thoughts/feelings, body/soul - on and on, ad infinitum... this mindset leads naturally and wrongly, in my opinion, to the equally false concept of either/or... we either win or we lose... we either stand or we fall... and it is the either/or that leads directly to false presumptions and equally false choices... somebody "HAS" to win and somebody "HAS" to lose...
it's impossible to overstate the difference in worldview that adopting a "both/and" perspective creates... in the simplest form, both/and means that win/lose (no such thing in my opinion because win/lose ALWAYS translates to lose/lose in the long run) ceases to exist because win/win is now the imperative... the MEANS are equally as important as the ENDS... the journey becomes as important as the destination... Submit To Propeller
Tweet
The lesson is one I had thought people understood by now, but many obviously do not: the ends determine the means. Invalid, and sometimes loathsome ends, require and necessitate cruel, barbaric and sometimes loathsome means. You cannot have these particular ends [the goals and aims of current U.S. foreign policy] without certain means..."
my belief is that means and ends are inseparable... in the western world, we have been thoroughly indoctrinated in a dualistic world view going back to the time of aristotle... our speech is a constant reflection of aristotelian dualism... we cannot go for a minute without referring to some aspect of duality - mind/body, black/white, good/bad, heaven/hell, thoughts/feelings, body/soul - on and on, ad infinitum... this mindset leads naturally and wrongly, in my opinion, to the equally false concept of either/or... we either win or we lose... we either stand or we fall... and it is the either/or that leads directly to false presumptions and equally false choices... somebody "HAS" to win and somebody "HAS" to lose...
Tens of thousands of people are now dead or have suffered untold agonies because of policies they continue to support to this day -- but they still refuse to take responsibility for any of it. They cling to their so-called "noble ideals" -- while every day provides further evidence that those "ideals" are drenched in blood. There is nothing in the least "idealistic" about their program: it stinks of death and of untold human suffering.
it's impossible to overstate the difference in worldview that adopting a "both/and" perspective creates... in the simplest form, both/and means that win/lose (no such thing in my opinion because win/lose ALWAYS translates to lose/lose in the long run) ceases to exist because win/win is now the imperative... the MEANS are equally as important as the ENDS... the journey becomes as important as the destination... Submit To Propeller
Tweet
posted by profmarcus at
12/11/2005
