The question of ends and means
Context: Whether ends justify the means may depend on contexts but the paths taken should be constitutional.
Different perspective on debate between ends and means
- Hindu Mythology: Ramayana glorified means, that the Mahabharata elevated ends.
- Constitutional View: Indian Constitution is not a philosophical treatise. It shows the path the nation must take, and the rules it must abide by, to honour the inalienable rights of every Indian, regardless of language, sex, caste or faith.
- Gandhian Views: Gandhi had figured out a way to reach moral clarity. Means are after all everything, whereas, a man is always obsessed with anxiety about the result of his action (ends).
- Gandhi wanted freedom: Yet, freedom obtained by spilling blood was not freedom he wanted.
- Violence would only breed more violence: Violence used to justify a goal, however desirable, would convince others in future that their goals too should be obtained through violence. That’s why the ends didn’t justify the means.
- Ambedkar stance: Before embracing Buddhism, Babasaheb Ambedkar explored all faiths. For him, Nationalism to Labour is only a means to an end.
- Subhas Chandra Bose Views: Bose had a different approach, or different means to attain independence.
- He was not averse to the idea of violence for independence, as he was a deep believer in aggressive nationalism.
==========================================================================================
