Are all means really good in war? Electronic textbooks on the Russian language
It seems to me, friends, that everything we have already seen performed by Real and Barcelona in the spring of 2011 was nothing more than a warm-up before their main battles of the year. The draw in the championship left no one feeling hot or cold.
Champions League. 1/2 finals. The first match
Judge: Wolfgang Stark (Ergolding, Germany).
Bookmaker quotes: 2.64 – 3.40 – 2.80.
Madrid's victory in the Cup, of course, stroked the capital's pride, but nothing more. The Cup is just that – a cup – not only in Spain the attitude towards it is condescending and cool.
Whether it’s the Champions League. This is where the genuine passions and significant fees lie. That's where the prestige is! It’s probably good that they first warmed up at home - now they’re guaranteed to rock it in Europe. There is simply no point in hiding something from each other and normalizing workloads. Everything faded into the background - even the finale. The third round of the Clasico is on the agenda. The climax is near...
The team coaches, long-time acquaintances from cooperation at Barça of the last century, tried so hard not to say anything stupid to each other before the previous games, but before today’s meeting they still couldn’t restrain themselves. And they exchanged barbs in absentia.
Mourinho, in particular, said that his young Catalan colleague is a one-of-a-kind specialist who scolds referees for making the right decisions and sarcastically reminded the guest how his team overcame Chelsea at one time, and this year Arsenal. The hint is clear. In both cases, according to the conviction of English fans, there were effective errors by the referees in favor of the Blaugrana. In Barcelona, of course, there is a different opinion on this matter. However, Jose is not interested in it.
Guardiola I also didn’t bother to speak. “In this room, he’s the damn boss, the damn master,” the visiting coach said irritably in the press center of the Santiago Bernabeu stadium. “And I’m not going to compete with him on this.” But as long as he allows himself to address me familiarly, well, I will do the same.”
Cristiano Ronaldo and Marcelo are preparing for the battle with Barcelona
It was obvious from the Catalan’s nervous state that Mourinho’s remarks had achieved their goal. Perhaps this is what the cunning Jose wanted - to sow nervousness in the enemy camp. We already know: in war all means are good...
Although, to be honest, I doubt that Barça’s leaders can be enraged by such things - tea, this is not the first time in the Clasico. Much more guests are concerned about personnel problems. The Blaugrana ones have them that are really big. Guardiola must have already forgotten those blessed times when he had no problems in defense. Now they are literally on his heels. Didn't have time to recover Carles Puyol how a tumor was discovered in the liver Eric Abidal. The long-suffering man has recovered Gabriel Milito- broke down Adriano. Remains out of the game Maxwell. This means that in Madrid the Barça coach will again have to fashion a defense “from what was.” He doesn't have much. Puyol will likely move to the left, with a nominal midfielder taking his place in the center Javier Mascherano.
Guardiola is even more worried about injury Iniesta. Damage to the calf muscle will apparently prevent Andres from entering the Bernabeu turf. Consequently, Pep will also have to rebuild the attack group. This is more serious.
Mourinho also has losses - moreover, approximately equivalent to the Catalan ones. Disqualification left the stopper out of work Ricardo Carvalho, injury – central midfielder Sami Khedira. But Jose, unlike the enemy, also has significant reinforcements. The championship game with Valencia was essentially “made” by two people - Kaka And Gonzalo Higuain. The Brazilian scored four points using the goal+pass system, the Argentinean five! And this extravaganza ended with a score of 6:3 in favor of Real. Meanwhile, neither one nor the other has played with Barcelona this year. With such a gold reserve, Mourinho can look to the future with optimism. And even make jokes about your opponent...
Statistics also speak in favor of the hosts. Twice the Spanish giants faced off in the European semi-finals, in 1960 and 2002, and both clashes ended in Madrid's favour. “Real” eventually got their hands on the main trophy: in the first case, the Champions Cup, in the second, the Champions League.
If modern Real Madrid do the same, Mourinho will become the first coach in the world to win the Champions League with three different teams. Guardiola, as you understand, will try to prevent this. Will try very hard...
End justifies the means
End justifies the means
From Latin: Finis sanctificat media (finis sanctificat media).
It is traditionally believed that these words belong to the famous Italian thinker, historian and statesman Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527), author of the famous treatises “The Prince” and “Discourses on the First Decade of Titus Livy.” But this is a mistake - in creative heritage this outstanding political scientist of the Middle Ages does not have such an expression.
In fact, this saying belongs to the Jesuit Eecobar and is the motto of the Jesuit order and, accordingly, the basis of their morality (see: Velikovich L.N. The Black Guard of the Vatican. M., 1985).
encyclopedic Dictionary winged words and expressions. - M.: “Locked-Press”. Vadim Serov. 2003.
End justifies the means
The idea of this expression, which is the basis of the morality of the Jesuits, was borrowed by them from the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), who wrote in the book “On the Citizen” (1642): “ Since someone who is denied the right to use the necessary means is also useless in the right to strive for the goal, it follows that since everyone has the right to self-preservation, then everyone has the right to use all means and perform any act without which he is not able to protect myself". Jesuit Father Herman Busenbaum in his essay "Fundamentals of Moral Theology" (1645) wrote: " To whom the goal is permitted, the means are also permitted.".
Dictionary of catch words. Plutex. 2004.
See what “The end justifies the means” is in other dictionaries:
- “The end justifies the means” catchphrase, originally by Niccolò Machiavelli Il fine giustifica i mezzi. This expression is found in a number of authors: The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588 1679) The German theologian Hermann ... Wikipedia
Adverb, number of synonyms: 3 the game is worth the candle (6) the game is worth the candle (6) ... Synonym dictionary
End justifies the means- wing. sl. The idea of this expression, which is the basis of the morality of the Jesuits, was borrowed by them from the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), who in the book “On the Citizen” (1642) wrote: “Since he who is denied the right to use the necessary ... ... Universal additional practical Dictionary I. Mostitsky
end justifies the means- about justifying immoral ways of achieving goals. Tracing paper from Italian. Authorship is attributed to the writer and politician of Italy N. Machiavelli. This idea was expressed by him in the essay “The Sovereign” (1532). Similar thoughts are found... ... Phraseology Guide
Razg. On the justification of immoral ways of achieving goals. BMS 1998, 612 ... Big dictionary Russian sayings
The problem expressed in famous maxim“The end justifies the means” and is associated with the value aspect of the relationship between C. and S. and, accordingly, with the choice and evaluation of means in expedient activities. Regarding the solution to this problem in the popular... Philosophical Encyclopedia
A goal is an image of the desired future, an ideal result that political actors strive for, which is an incentive for activity. The goal in politics, in addition to motivational, also fulfills organizational, mobilization... ... Political science. Dictionary.
Wed. There are many means to get rid of it... The goal sanctifies the means... Our brotherhood allows us to resort to a dagger or poison in cases like this. Gr. A. Tolstoy. Don Juan. 1. Wed. Some Jesuits claim that every remedy is good, as long as... ... Michelson's Large Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary
Adverb, number of synonyms: 3 the game is not worth the candle (11) inappropriate (14) ... Synonym dictionary
One of the elements of behavior and consciousness. human activity, which characterizes the anticipation in thinking of the result of an activity and the way of its implementation with the help of definitions. funds. C. acts as a way to integrate various actions... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia
Books
- The end justifies the means, Alexey Fomichev. He wanders from world to world - and longs to return home, to our reality, and when he returns, he dreams of new travels. But now he, having miraculously escaped death in the Perimeter trap and is having a hard time...
War is, without a doubt, one of the most terrible trials that can befall a person. Nothing brings so much misfortune, so much sorrow and suffering as wars do. From minor tribal skirmishes to the catastrophic conflicts of the 20th century, they have haunted humanity throughout our history. In addition to the enormous risk to life, war is also the most difficult test of the human psyche. To remain a person at the front, when comrades are dying around you every day, or in the rear, when you constantly live in fear for your loved ones, afraid of receiving a fatal letter from the front - this can only be truly endured. strong-willed Human. I believe that the consequentialist principle of “all is fair in war” is a fundamentally flawed way of looking at the world, especially in the context of actual warfare.
When discussing the war, it is difficult not to remember one of the greatest works Russian and world literature - “War and Peace” by L.
N. Tolstoy. Tolstoy's ideas of non-violence made a huge contribution to Russian philosophy, and were also reflected in the characters of many of the heroes of this work. The highest manifestation moral qualities and philanthropy is an episode in which Natasha Rostova, a man with extremely rich inner world, in tears, persuades his parents to give all the carts that the Rostov family had at their disposal to the wounded soldiers, who otherwise would have faced inevitable death in French captivity. In this scene, the goal is to evacuate Moscow with as little cost as possible, but to achieve this goal the Rostovs would have to refuse to help the soldiers. This did not happen only thanks to Natasha, who was able to convince the whole family and manage the carts fairly.
We encounter another incredibly difficult episode for both the reader and the characters in the epic novel “ Quiet Don» Mikhail Sholokhov.
Here the heroes face an even more difficult test - a civil, “fratricidal” war. Ilya Bunchuk is an example of a person who is ready to do anything for the sake of the party and “the fight against the bourgeois system.” He is engaged in agitation at the front, preparing militias in the rear, and making every effort to suppress the white movement. However, even he is unable to withstand the work of the commandant of the revolutionary tribunal. After a week of constant executions of White Guards, Bunchuk’s psyche was completely shaken. He suddenly realized how terrible sin accomplished, “bringing the revolution to the masses.” The death of his beloved finally breaks him: death for him becomes happy occasion, deliverance from suffering.
Thus, using the example of two different works we are convinced that, no matter what the circumstances, the most important thing is to maintain basic moral guidelines and not turn from a man into a beast. I would like to end with a quote from a philosophy textbook: “A person who violates the fundamental moral principles, undoubtedly, acts against himself, since he destroys his psyche due to the constant conflict of consciousness and subconscious. He cannot avoid this conflict, even if he convinces himself that he does not care about high morality.”
Effective preparation for the Unified State Exam (all subjects) - start preparing
Updated: 2017-09-25
Attention!
Thank you for your attention.
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and click Ctrl+Enter.
By doing so, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.
Is it possible to say that in war all means are good?
War is a difficult test for people when, at borderline moments, they are forced to choose between good and evil, loyalty and betrayal... What determines the means of achieving goals (especially in war time, when the line between life and death becomes barely perceptible), it is difficult to understand. Some are guided by personal interests, others by eternal, enduring values. It is important that the chosen means do not diverge from moral beliefs, but, unfortunately, sometimes a person’s actions go beyond generally accepted norms.
We find confirmation of this on the pages of Russian literature. Let us recall, for example, M.A. Sholokhov’s story “The Fate of a Man,” which shows the story of a man who managed to preserve human dignity, living soul capable of responding to the pain of others. Is it always Andrei Sokolov, main character story, chose a worthy means of achieving your goals? He is the defender of the country, it is important for him to stop the enemy, and therefore he serves honestly, without hiding behind the backs of his comrades. But Sokolov is forced to kill the man. Many will say: “War – someone kills someone. This is the law. There’s nothing wrong.” Maybe so, only he kills his own, the traitor. It would seem that the end justifies the means, but a drama plays out in the hero’s soul: “For the first time in my life, I killed, and then my own... But what kind of person is he? He’s worse than a stranger, a traitor.”
This internal monologue of Sokolov indicates that for him murder as a means of achieving even a noble goal (preserving the life of the captain) is immoral. Andrey agrees to this because he sees no other way to solve this difficult problem.
Classic literature, being a shining example moral values, also shows cases where insignificant means of achieving goals deserve condemnation. Let us turn to V. G. Rasputin’s story “Live and Remember.” The very title of the work, like an alarm bell, sounds a warning-spell in the reader’s heart: live and remember. What can't you forget? About a war that crippled the destinies of people?! About those who, through their actions, destroyed the lives of loved ones or tarnished military honor?!
It would seem that the usual desire of a soldier after being wounded and treated in a hospital to be in native village, feel the warmth and care of your wife and parents. There is nothing reprehensible in this, because this is not murder, not theft... But, having chosen the path of desertion, Andrei Guskov forces his wife Nastya to lie and hide from her fellow villagers. This road turned out to be unbearable and disastrous not only for her, but also for Guskov. Hiding from everyone, he turns into a hunted animal, living by the instinct of self-preservation, unable to understand Nastya’s pain, her anxiety about their unborn child. He does not give in to his wife’s admonitions to repent and give up, but only accuses her of wanting to free herself from him. The disapproving glances of fellow villagers, the reproaches of her husband's parents, the inability to rejoice at the end of the war, the constant feeling of guilt before those who receive funerals make Nastya's life unbearable. But she, like a devoted wife, steadfastly endures all the hardships. Maybe Andrey should remember this? Probably not only that.
The scene of the heroine’s death is terrible: she sacrifices herself and the life of her unborn child to save her husband; she rushes into the Angara. Who is to blame for these deaths? Life? War? Andrey Guskov?
A person, having decided to desert, could not retain the main thing in himself - a sense of human dignity. He condemned his beloved wife and long-awaited (never born) child to death, which, perhaps, became for Nastya a kind of deliverance from the difficult trials that befell her. This is exactly what you need to remember: you, Andrei Guskov, are guilty of the suffering and death of loved ones, you are doomed to loneliness and condemnation, because the means you have chosen cannot be justified by anything.
Returning to the question “Can we say that in war all means are fair,” I come to the conclusion that often in the “life and death” dilemma we do not think about how and what we do. This is wrong, although none of us is immune from mistakes. We must remember: whether this is a time of peace or war, we are people and we must try to preserve the soul within ourselves, and therefore, treat with special responsibility the means we choose to achieve the goal.
595 words
The essay was sent by Vanyusha
"In war, all means are good."
Based on the works of F.M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment" and Vasil Bykov "Sotnikov".
Direction "Goals and means".
Often, when discussing the permissibility of any methods, people utter the phrase: “In war, all means are good.” But is it possible to say that?
The question immediately arises, what kind of war is meant? War in its usual understanding is an armed confrontation between states? But war can also be bloodless.
It is known from history that there was " cold war" - a persistent struggle of ideologies. Consequently, war is a confrontation, a brutal struggle of opponents. That is, for victory, all means are good, in other words, the end justifies the means.
Let's imagine we ask this question famous writers, one of the smartest and most educated representatives of society. Of course, they are no longer alive, but they speak to us through their books. F.M. Dostoevsky in his novel “Crime and Punishment” speaks of the fallacy of such statements. He shows the image of a man who believed that the end justifies the means. Rodion Raskolnikov claims that he has the right to kill, since great people stop at nothing to achieve their goals, and he without any doubt considers himself one of such great people.
But having committed a crime, he retreats from his goal - he hides the stolen goods on the street without touching a penny. He almost hates his mother and sister, formerly dearly loved ones, for whose sake (as he believes) he even goes to the extent of murder. In fact, he barely wants to prove to himself that he is not “a trembling creature, but I have the right.” Why does he change so much after the murder? In my opinion, his psyche, his soul, was damaged. Rodion, crying in his sleep because his horse was killed in his presence, cold-bloodedly kills the old money-lender in order to achieve his goal; moreover, he kills her sister simply as a witness. By the end of the novel, Raskolnikov already understands the immorality of his goal and turns to God to atone for his sins.
The writer Vasil Bykov in the story "Sotnikov" says the same thing as Dostoevsky. The fisherman, the main character of the story, passionately wants to survive. He uses any means for this, and does not stop at betrayal, or even at knocking the bench out from under the hanged Sotnikov. And what? After everything he has done, he wants to go back and fix everything, but there is no going back. Realizing that everyone had turned their backs on him, the Fisherman, who committed all the crimes for the sake of own life, wants to interrupt her - to hang himself.
Thus, the general thought of the writers can be expressed in the words of Ivan Karamazov: “No human happiness is worth one child’s tear.” That is, many writers considered the phrase: “In war, all means are good” to be incorrect.”
From my small life experience I know that people who use unworthy means often do not achieve their goal, or, having achieved it, are tormented by their conscience. For example, young women who persuade their loved one to destroy their family or betray them are unhappy in love. I find confirmation of my thoughts in literature. Katherine, "Lady Macbeth" Mtsensk district"In order to ensure complete and undisturbed happiness with her beloved, she kills innocent people, but her lover leaves for another woman. Katerina from A. N. Ostrovsky’s drama “The Thunderstorm” cheated on her husband for the sake of forbidden love, but abandoned by the cowardly Boris, drowned herself. This series can be continued for a long time, but I will generalize: neither those who were betrayed nor those for whom they betrayed love traitors. The end does not justify the means.
Consequently, the expression “in war, all means are fair” is immoral, and it is used in an attempt to justify unseemly actions.
Effective preparation for the Unified State Exam (all subjects) -
