Ends and Means LO7923

Nickols@aol.com
Mon, 17 Jun 1996 15:14:27 -0400

Replying to LO7904

John Constantine responded to my assertions about ends-means
relationships as shown below:

<< >
> The means suggest the ends.
>
> The ends determine the means.

I'm sorry for Fred but that does not compute.

Having a weapon does not suggest what is to be done, other than
possession.

Desiring to become a millionaire does not determine how one goes about
it.
>>

Well, Fred will try again.

When I wrote, "the means suggest the ends," I meant simply that
the means being employed are good indicators as to the ends sought.
Thus, when someone is shooting at me, I assume they mean to kill
me or to inflict great bodily harm and I don't much care which is the
case. Less violently, if someone repeatedly puts obstacles in my
way, I assume they're trying to trip me up. The pattern in activity
reveals the outcome.

Similarly, when I wrote, "the ends determine the means," I meant that
the ends sought restrict choices from among available means, that is,
some means won't get the job done. For example, if a young person
25 years old wants to be a millionaire by age 65, investing 10% of his
or her income each year in mutual funds might do the trick; spending
every penny earned most definitely will not.

John's examples display a problem commonly found in ends-means
discussions, namely, that ends and means are treated as though they
exist apart from one another. They do not. Ends and means are
relative constructs, they have meaning only in relation to something
else. A gun is not a means. It can be a means to several ends, but
unless those ends are spelled out in relation to the gun, a gun is a gun
and not a means.

Fred Nickols
nickols@aol.com

-- 

Nickols@aol.com

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>