End, Means, and Justification

'The end justifies the means' is a controversial slogan that attracts a lot of criticism for the objectionable actions that it itself is sometimes used to justify. However, the controversy is misguided, because the expression actually is an empty tautology that only serves as a distraction. It is an empty tautology because, any 'End' is, by definition, the reason for the 'Means' to it, and, hence, is its justification. Instead, every action has multiple consequences, and to assert that slogan is to actually maintain that 'One consequence of an action justifies all the others', i. e. that the benefits of one selected consequence outweighs the harm of the others. Hence, the slogan, taken literally, distracts from a consideration of other consequences. For example, the current relative stability in Iraq is now being used to justify the 2003 invasion, implying that what is at issue is a comparison between pre-invasion conditions and the current ones. However, a full and honest assessment of the invasion would take into consideration not merely the deposition of Hussein, but the tens of thousands of casualties, the erosion of American credibility, the economic burden, the escape of Bin Laden, etc. Debate over whether or not the invasion was justified should not be distracted from these consequences.