www.Tobold.com
Tobold@GMail.com
A blog with my thoughts regarding games I am playing and other stuff in life. Please read my Terms of Service
RSS Feed
Tuesday, October 14, 2025
The morality of intentions vs outcomes
There is a strong argument to be made that a person who has his press secretary put out an official statement complaining about not getting the Nobel peace prize didn't deserve such a prize in the first place. There is no doubt that Donald Trump's various efforts for peace in the world are mostly driven by vanity and a desire to be praised. But today he is praised by both Arabs and Israelis. While his intentions were selfish, the outcome of his actions was a positive one. That was probably because the problem required a big bully to solve it, and if there is one thing Donald Trump is good at, it is bullying. However, that leads to an interesting question of morality: Should we concentrate on intentions, which could be hidden, or should we concentrate on outcomes, which are a lot more visible and objective?
Go to Gaza today and ask any Palestinian whether they credit Donald Trump or the student protesters at American universities earlier this year for peace, and their response will be pretty clear. The outcomes of those student protests were at best inefficient, and at worst veered into anti-semitism and the harassment of innocent Jewish students. The intentions might have been good, although you never know how much such a protest is driven by genuine concern, and how much of it is virtue signaling. The illusion of moral superiority is a well-known psychological phenomenon: Most people believe their morality is above average, while simultaneously believing that most other people are below average in morality. But is having high moral standards and intentions moral, if there are no moral outcomes from them?
The internet these days is full of social justice warriors, who spend all day saying bad things about the morality of other people, but have never even spent a day helping out in a soup kitchen. There are blue states in the US in which progressives have a permanent majority, but if you look at outcomes like homelessness, they are actually doing worse than many red states. And progressives would never credit conservatives for positive moral outcomes, although there is a sizable number of conservatives who are deeply religious and do a lot of good out of their Christian values. That soup kitchen for the homeless might well be run by the local church, which is probably why those social justice warriors would never consider helping out there.
Personally I am deeply suspicious of people posturing on the internet to demonstrate their moral superiority. As somebody with an interest in history, these people very much remind me of the Puritans, just that the religion has changed to something new. You could easily write a 2025 version of The Scarlet Letter about the modern forms of public shaming and social exclusion. People haven't actually changed that much in 400 years.
- posted by Tobold @ 10:07 AM Permanent Link
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
It is far too soon if Trump plan for Gazah was a good or a bad thing. At least it saves 20 innocent people and put a temporary pause in the devastation - and this is very good news. But the next step would be to definitely stop the Crime Against Humanity happening in Gazah and this is far from confirmed.
About outcomes : it is disingenuous to compare outcome from decision by the President of the USA VS the outcome from a student. The question of morality is not only about outcome, but also about outcome VS capability. It can be argued that overall, Trump could have done far better on this war, far quicker, while protest was the only move that a student could have done.
And the last question is about personal charity VS politics. Going to help at popular soup is good, but electing someone that cuts billions of international charity is bad. In a consequentialism definition of morality, i am pretty sure the overall balance is bad.
About outcomes : it is disingenuous to compare outcome from decision by the President of the USA VS the outcome from a student. The question of morality is not only about outcome, but also about outcome VS capability. It can be argued that overall, Trump could have done far better on this war, far quicker, while protest was the only move that a student could have done.
And the last question is about personal charity VS politics. Going to help at popular soup is good, but electing someone that cuts billions of international charity is bad. In a consequentialism definition of morality, i am pretty sure the overall balance is bad.
For me intention is most important when there is a bad result to an action. If you intended to cause a bad outcome that is much worse than intending to do something good and inadvertently causing something bad. I say this because we all make mistakes, so intention is important when the outcome is bad. People wanting a bad outcome shouldn't receive the same leeway as someone intending a positive outcome.
However, when the result is positive, as long as the person didn't intend something bad, then I don't really care about intention. The fact that Donald's actions led to something good is enough for me to praise the action. I don't have to praise the intent.
We reward the behavior that we want to see in others in hopes of that behavior being repeated. So if someone intends to do good, we commend them, and if the results are less than desirable then we implore them to do better. If someone's intent is to do bad then they deserve no praise or recognition. When the intention is not clear and the outcome is good then we praise the effort and the outcome since that is the outcome that we want to see repeated.
However, when the result is positive, as long as the person didn't intend something bad, then I don't really care about intention. The fact that Donald's actions led to something good is enough for me to praise the action. I don't have to praise the intent.
We reward the behavior that we want to see in others in hopes of that behavior being repeated. So if someone intends to do good, we commend them, and if the results are less than desirable then we implore them to do better. If someone's intent is to do bad then they deserve no praise or recognition. When the intention is not clear and the outcome is good then we praise the effort and the outcome since that is the outcome that we want to see repeated.
A important thing to remember is that homeless don't stay in one place.
A state city where homeless are treated well tends to accumulate more homeless.
Locking up the homeless or driving them out of the state does not reduce the homeless it tends to move them on.
A state city where homeless are treated well tends to accumulate more homeless.
Locking up the homeless or driving them out of the state does not reduce the homeless it tends to move them on.
# posted by 
: 15/10/25 04:18
: 15/10/25 04:18
If Trump, out of pure narcissist tendencies to try and earn a Nobel Peace prize accomplishes a lasting ceasefire and improvement of the lives of Palestinians and Israelis does it matter if his intentions are selfish? Does it matter if he and his friends and family profit off the Gaza reconstruction?
Will people apologize to the leftists they attacked who voted against Kamala Harris because of her reluctance to distance herself from Biden's Israel/Gaza policies now that Trump has gotten a ceasefire agreement?
Like you said its easy to posture and make statements on the internet.
Issues with the homeless is actual a great example of this. If you ask most people online, I bet most would say we need more facilities and programs to help homeless people. Now ask them whether they support being taxed locally for this or a new shelter opening in their neighborhood and very quickly they become NIMBYs.
Most people say they care about things until caring about those things directly inconveniences them.
Post a Comment
Will people apologize to the leftists they attacked who voted against Kamala Harris because of her reluctance to distance herself from Biden's Israel/Gaza policies now that Trump has gotten a ceasefire agreement?
Like you said its easy to posture and make statements on the internet.
Issues with the homeless is actual a great example of this. If you ask most people online, I bet most would say we need more facilities and programs to help homeless people. Now ask them whether they support being taxed locally for this or a new shelter opening in their neighborhood and very quickly they become NIMBYs.
Most people say they care about things until caring about those things directly inconveniences them.
<< Home
