Means and Ends-Consequentialism and Phobia

Consequentialism is a form of utilitarianism by which one determines the moral value of acts by what follows, or what consequences result. So if the means is to commit some evil act that results in loss of life, and the consequence is that 1000x more people are saved from dying, then that utilitarian paradigm would determine that the means were justified. However the end justifies the means is not exclusively limited to utilitarianism, and in fact consquentialists could equally determine that the means were not justified by the ends, yet the entire point is juxtaposed  ethical traffic over an onerous point. For me at least utilitarianism seems the best effort for political pragmatism in making decisions for the many that need be made. There are other than utilitarian ethical criteria involved in governance though. Utilitarianism choices arise when people are faced with forced options (as William James pointed out in writing about pragmatism) and they must make Hobson’s choices.

Another point( my response to a post elsewhere)- Dialectical D.N.A. strands are held together with hydrophobic bonds. Phobia simply means will for fervent separation from something else. It is cellular walls that allow cells to exist. There are a zillion oil and water kinds of things. Pluralism and heterodox bonds are implicit in universal compositions. It is politically convenient for some to proscribe any non-partisan attitudes- even Orwellian. Homo or same anything can be quite evil to human interests or destroy structures in nature. Some things are harmful and some things aren’t. Math formulas aren’t better’d if the variables are all the same, constantly.…/hydrophobic-forces-and…/

Evolutionary paths tend towards certain ways that are functional and perhaps necessary. It is the Tao of things, and that perhaps because it is determined by the will of the Lord to be what it is, and what it will become.

My comment pertains to the nature of reality and for human freedom that does not require agreement with ideas such as agreement with a negative universal proposition such as ‘there is no logical justification for homophobia’. Like hydrophobic molecules homophobic responses exist phenomenally for whatever cause (maybe for religious reasons or because one has commercial reasons such as possibly High Hefner may have had at the ranch).

People are free to have sentiments for-themselves and those may include a phobia to homosexuality, homosexual political hegemony in politics or society, a dislike for select decadent aspects of a homosexual culture etc. One may find historical lessons showing that homosexuality has corrupted societies, or that particular religious scriptures from God provide a deontological cause to hate sin including homosexuality, that medical science has shown that homosexuality and that lifestyle may convey lethal disease vectors, etc. A better and common idea that is not illogical is that homosexuality leads toward extinction and bad parenting when hetero liasons occur with homosexuals.

People often misunderstand wickedness and evil or use one when the other term was more appropriate. Biblically evil is caused by natural disaster. One could say a volcano erupting and burying a city, a tidal wave or the A.I.D.S. epidemic were evils. Wickedness is something caused by human will and action. A social philosopher studying human society in depth can find if he prefers some aspects of many phenomena that cause evil. I would say that concatenations in mass social effects of individual wickedness may be regarded as evil better than wickedness. Vaping deaths that have occurred recently might be considered evil, for example, though it is the result of several wicked actions by individuals (if one regards tobacco use as wicked).