|
|
Post by hansoo on Feb 8, 2015 6:56:37 GMT
This is the question that I've been thinking about and struggled with these days. I cannot find a firm stance to argue with.
Please share your thoughts and reasons!
|
|
|
|
Post by dannyoh on Feb 8, 2015 11:17:29 GMT
I don't think the ending of this story justifies all the meanings throughout this play. It's one of those stories that doesn't have a specific answer. Therefore, it leaves you questioning all kinds of things even after you finish reading it. Which in my opinion, I find it frustrating.
|
|
jason
Junior Member
Posts: 98 
|
Post by jason on Feb 8, 2015 12:04:25 GMT
I don't think end justifies the means. I think that the process that meets in the end is more important and holds true meaning behind the meaning.
|
|
bachle
Junior Member
Posts: 83
|
Post by bachle on Feb 8, 2015 13:32:22 GMT
I think that the end of the story doesn't justify all of its meaning. The death of all character can be justified as the result of the themes of revenge and mortality but it's not enough. The process and progress of the story are more important.
|
|
|
|
Post by estherchoi on Feb 8, 2015 14:04:03 GMT
I don't think the end justify the means. There are literature that authors clearly ended the story, but not all stories have a clear and straightforward ending. Sometimes authors leave it up to the readers to predict the ending. Sometimes the ending is comprehended differently by people's different perspective.
|
|
jimim
Junior Member
Posts: 98
|
Post by jimim on Feb 8, 2015 14:24:58 GMT
End does not justify the means because people will have different perspectives of ending of the books. Also there are books that have ambiguous endings so end cannot justify the means.
|
|
|
|
Post by sergeyfen on Feb 8, 2015 14:36:14 GMT
The end of doesn't justify means. The death of all characters can relate to eye for an eye, meaning that revenge will never stop it will continue until everybody dies. It's the matter of how characters died at the end, but it everything goes back to the theme "Revenge."
|
|
|
|
Post by jmoon234 on Feb 8, 2015 15:27:58 GMT
I can't say that the end justify the means because people in this matter are being foolish and just killing others by their selfishness or personal hate. The results isn't the thing that was important, but the process to reaching the end was.
|
|
woojong
Junior Member
Come to the darkside...we have cookies 8D
Posts: 85
|
Post by woojong on Feb 9, 2015 14:39:20 GMT
If we think superficially, it doesn't seem that if end is okay, then everything else can be justified. For example, when we are assigned a group project and someone just takes over and do everything, he might get a good grade on it but everything else is just not okay. However, I think there is some point that if the end is good, everything else can be justified. What is the point of making effort if the result is not what you wanted and just getting over?
|
|
woori
Junior Member
Posts: 79 
|
Post by woori on Feb 11, 2015 3:00:45 GMT
I think the end can justify the means. Even though the process was messed up, if the end was clean and organized, any kinds of story can be justified.
|
|
|
|
Post by ameliachen80385 on Feb 15, 2015 1:19:43 GMT
Same as Woori,I think the end can justify the means.Even if lots of people die in the end and whole story is messed up,the end is organized and obvious.
|
|
|
|
Post by lins on Feb 15, 2015 9:27:07 GMT
End can never justify the mean, I personally think. There are several examples that support my idea. For example, if you cheat in the test, then you get 100. However, that doesn't justify your mean. Even if you get 100 in the test, how you got your score cannot be justified. You will be never able to get the score you wanted with your own ability. Your wrong method to get the score is not justified in this case. On the other hand, even though you tried as hard as you could in the test, you can fail it, although it is very not likely. In this case, your end is justified by our method.
Even though I didn't mention in the quick reply, there are lots of other cases that disproves the idea that the mean can be justified by the end. This is often immoral to say, when you achieved something in unfair manner.
|
|
|
|
Post by brandonina on Feb 15, 2015 9:57:02 GMT
I think the end can justify the means in real life situations. If someone is trying to kill my parents, I will kill him or her to save my parents. In this case, the end justifies the means in that the morally rightful outcome (saving my parents) justifies the immoral means (killing someone). In the Hamlet's case, I believe the end justifies the means as Hamlet kills Claudius, who killed King Hamlet that he personally loved and was loyal to. But Hamlet also dies too anyways.  |
|
|
|
Post by lukejoo on Feb 15, 2015 12:41:11 GMT
If I have to take a side, then I'd go with that the end cannot justify the means. It's more of a logical sense though. Even though if the original problem was ultimately solved though through unfair ways, those unfair ways would cause more problems that would need to be solved. It would only solve one problem and stem out to more and this will lead to an endless loop of them. Though we may choose priorities of which problems need to be solved, the end cannot always justify the means.
|
|
|
|
Post by elisalee on Feb 15, 2015 13:22:45 GMT
I don't think the end can justify the means. I believe that Shakespeare made the story as a tragedy to leave the readers to question about many things in the story. I think mysterious endings make the best stories because it makes the readers think more.
|
|
