This is true whether the sacrificing of virgins yields a better crop or not. Either the Aztecs were justified in their savage slaughter by virtue of their thinking that it would save millions from hunger, or the Western dictum that the "ends do not justify the means" is true, and any measures that necessarily harm people are illicit, regardless of the noble ends cited to justify them.
At least for the Aztecs, they only sacrificed a few hundred people to ensure the well-being of millions. We're sacrificing the well-being of millions for the sake of hundreds (or thousands, perhaps).
The point is it doesn't matter what the ratio is. Utilitarianism is bunk, the ends don't justify the means, and necessarily evil means cannot be employed morally, regardless of the end.
This is true whether the sacrificing of virgins yields a better crop or not. Either the Aztecs were justified in their savage slaughter by virtue of their thinking that it would save millions from hunger, or the Western dictum that the "ends do not justify the means" is true, and any measures that *necessarily* harm people are illicit, regardless of the noble ends cited to justify them.
At least for the Aztecs, they only sacrificed a few hundred people to ensure the well-being of millions. We're sacrificing the well-being of millions for the sake of hundreds (or thousands, perhaps).
The point is it doesn't matter what the ratio is. Utilitarianism is bunk, the ends don't justify the means, and *necessarily evil means* cannot be employed morally, regardless of the end.
(post is archived)