I’m taking my LSATS in about 2 weeks, so i’ve been mulling through some sample exams to study off of. As soon as I came across this questions, I wrote in big letters “HAHA”. I was so fed up with the section and questions similar that I just became out-of-the-box hysterical.
The end of an action is the inteded outcome of the action and not a mere by-product of the action, and the end’s value is thus the only reason for the action. So while it is true that every end’s value will justify any means, and even, perhaps, that there is no end whose value will justify every means, it is clear that nothing will justify a means except an end’s value.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?
a) The value of some ends may justify any means
b) One can always justify a given action by appeal to the value of its intended outcome.
c) One can justify an action only by appeal to the value of its intended outcome.
d) Only the value of the by-products of an action can justify that action.
e)Nothing can justify the intended outcome of an action except the value of that action’s actual outcomes.
What’s your pick?