Well, you could have just listed my name in your post, because I think it's clear you already know!

The outcome.

I know hehe . So what do you look at Zarfy?

*pat for Zarf*.

*Waits for Eliot to give his essay espousing the evils of not considering the actions*

More the outcome than the action, though the action is important.... the ends do not always justify the means, but the end is what we need to aim for...

> lmperial wrote:

> This question is flawed.

To me, the outcome and the action must be justified in lue of the scenario.

But in the overall's the outcome.

But again it depends on the choice and what it pertains to, sometimes the action, but more then naught the outcome.

How is the question flawed when I put in the "both" portion for just such an occassion as your answer?

Naturally I mix the two, as does any sane person.

While the extermination of the human race cures all manner of ills (e.g. The Aids epidemic, World Hunger, World Peace etc.), that does not mean it's an advisable course of action.

As for which I favor...it depends on the outcome. If some politician wants a Klondike Bar, I don't condone them killing someone to get it. If someone needs to be killed to prevent a world war, I probably would condone it. So even within the mix of the two, there is variation as to which predominates...depending on the outcome.