both the means and the end; hence both de
both the means and the end; hence both de kG8PM
be Kant’s, is that neither of these attitudes captures the significance of the end to the means for marketing. A field of knowledge or a professional endeavor is defined by both the means and the end; hence both deserve scrutiny. Students need to study both how to achieve X, and also what X is.
F
It is at this point that ‘Arson for Profit’ becomes supremely relevant. That course is presumably all about means: how to detect and prosecute criminal activity. It is therefore assumed that the end is good in an ethical sense. When I ask fire science students to articulate the end, or purpose, of their field, they eventually generalize to something like, ‘The safety and welfare of society, ’ which seems right. As we have seen, someone could use the very same knowledge of means to achieve a much less noble end such as personal profit via destructive, dangerous, reckless activity. But we would not call that firefighting. We have a separate word for it: arson. Similarly, if you employed the ‘principles of marketing’ is an unprincipled way, you would not be doing marketing. We have another term for it: fraud. Kant gives the example of a doctor and a poisoner, who use the identical knowledge to achieve their divergent ends. We would say that one is practicing medicine, the other, murder.
Questions 27-32
be
Kant’s, is that neither of these attitudes captures the significance of the
end
to the
means
for marketing. A field of knowledge or a professional endeavor
is defined
by both the
means
and the
end
;
hence
both deserve scrutiny. Students need to study both how to achieve X, and
also
what X is.
F
It is at this point that ‘Arson for Profit’ becomes
supremely
relevant. That course is presumably all about
means
: how to detect and prosecute criminal activity. It is
therefore
assumed that the
end
is
good
in an ethical sense. When I ask fire science students to articulate the
end
, or purpose, of their field, they
eventually
generalize to something like, ‘The safety and welfare of society,
’
which seems right. As we have
seen
, someone could
use
the
very
same knowledge of
means
to achieve a much less noble
end
such as personal profit via destructive,
dangerous
, reckless activity.
But
we would not call that firefighting. We have a separate word for it: arson.
Similarly
, if you employed the ‘principles of marketing’ is an unprincipled way, you would not be doing marketing. We have another term for it: fraud. Kant gives the example of a doctor and a poisoner, who
use
the identical knowledge to achieve their divergent
ends
. We would say that one is practicing medicine, the other, murder.
Questions 27-32
Do not write below this line