I was looking for another word and found the word "agathism." At first I thought it meant that the ends justify the means...from this Tiscali definition: "doctrine that ultimate end of all things is good, though means may be evil." Then, however, in looking further I found that it's more than that. Wikipedia's discussion says that it's:

quote:

the doctrine that the ultimate end of all things is good, although the intermediate means may be evil. In the conflict between optimism and pessimism, agathism is the reasonable intermediate. The agathist sees the world as essentially good but a place in which bad things can and do happen to good people.

It seems to be associated with pessimism and optimism. Am I correct that it isn't merely that the ends justify the means?

I thought it meant people fond of whodoneit novels by Ms. Christie.

Am I correct that it isn't merely that the ends justify the means?

I don't think so. The next paragraph states:

quote:

Agathism is offered as an apologetic in theodicy to address the problem of reconciling a benevolent God with the existence of evil in the world.

It's more of an explanation of how evil occurs in a world run by a benevolent god. The ends justify the means is known as consequentialism in ethics (link). I suppose free will, and whether or not it exists, comes into the discussion, too.

The Greek adjective αγαθος (agathos) 'good' is of unknown etymology, but it did give us the feminine name Agatha.

quote:

Originally posted by zmježd:

The Greek adjective αγαθος ([i]agathos) 'good' is of unknown etymology, but it did give us the feminine name Agatha.

Hence my first comment, silly as it was.

It seems that the term, "apology" is used in its previous meaning only in philosophical circles nowadays, whereas common usage has transformed it into a synonym for contrition. How'd that come about?

quote:

I don't think so.

Hmmm. I think we are in agreement, z. My original question was: Am I correct that it isn't merely that the ends justify the means?

Am I correct that it isn't merely that the ends justify the means?

What I meant was that I did not think that agathism is the same thing as consequentialism (i.e., the ends justify the means).

[Fixed misformatting.]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: zmježd,

Yes, and after reading about it, I agree.