87 – Does the End Justify the Means?

In this episode, Peter and Sonny deconstruct the classic Machiavellian quote. They explore the limits on free speech, why and how they should apply, and what is justified to obtain targeted outcomes. They also explain why Peter is wearing the hat he is wearing.

“The Obvious Podcast” is a production of ABC Florida East Coast Chapter. Unless otherwise stated, all content reflects the opinions of the guests and hosts.

If you like “The Obvious Podcast,” you can click here to listen to the audio version and subscribe on all the major podcast platforms, such as Apple Podcast, Amazon Music, or Spotify. We encourage you to leave us a review so other listeners can find us. 

You may also follow “The Obvious Podcast” on Instagram, Truth Social, X/Twitter, and now on TikTok.

► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theobvious_podcast/

►X: https://x.com/TheObv_podcast/

►Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/TheObvious_Podcast/

► TikTok: http://www.tiktok.com/@the.obvious.podca 

►Email: theobvious@abceastflorida.com

Transcript

Sonny Maken 0:09

Welcome to the Obvious Podcast. This is episode number 87. Wow, 87, Peter. That's incredible. I'm Sonny Macon. I'm the CEO at ABC Florida East Coast.

Peter Dyga 0:21

And I'm Peter Diga, president and CEO at ABC Florida East Coast.

Sonny Maken 0:25

You are watching us or listening to the show? Uh, well, somewhere, where all opinions expressed are our own unless we say otherwise. Get it together, Sonny.

Peter Dyga 0:36

Love the show. We ask you to subscribe on any major podcast platform or watch us in action on YouTube, follow the Obvious Podcast on Instagram, X, and True Social, and now on TikTok. All of the links you need are in the show notes. Reach out to us anytime at the Obvious at abc eastflorida.com. And if you're enjoying the ride, help others find us by leaving a review wherever you listen. So happy Friday, Sonny. You know, happy Friday. Despite the appearance.

Sonny Maken 1:06

This is me. This is this is our this will go down in history as our first episode in which you were wearing a hat. Yeah, I looked at it. Either one of us was wearing a hat. Yeah. By the way, TikTok is on fire. I'm a middle-aged man, so I don't go on TikTok, TikTok. But I am being told that a lot of people have a lot of opinions on on what we're putting out there. So which is great. I mean, you know, sure. Agree, disagree. They haven't doxxed us yet. So probably we'll soon, I'm sure. Probably. Nice hat. Thank you. Do you want to talk about that or should we just get into what we're going to talk about? Let's get into what we're going to talk about.

Peter Dyga 1:41

I think you know, I might make a connection.

Sonny Maken 1:43

All right. So I have always um I'm going to talk about one of my favorite.

Peter Dyga 1:48

I wouldn't say subject matter, but but subject areas. Topics of conversation. Subject areas. Topics of conversation.

Sonny Maken 1:54

So this episode is called uh Mr. Producer, we're going to call this episode Do the Ends Justify the Means?

Peter Dyga 2:02

I think our three-part series on communication, kind of talking about that. Um, because it's a I don't know, it's an age-old question, right? It's a in many ways a secular question that really stems from Drumroll, please, one of my favorite things to talk about, the the morality of human action, really, or human acts, right? Yeah. Do the do the ends justify the or the the means justify the ends. So I'm excited. Let's get into it. Some people, by the way, would say yes, right? Doesn't matter. Yeah. If you got good ends, who cares how you get there? That's a problem for culture and society.

Sonny Maken 2:35

Absolutely. So what do you mean? You and I say this all the time, right? I I'll get into that. But you and I say this all the time about how and and sort of the most prevalent example of this right now is um is our our current president. But words words versus um outcomes or words versus actions or words versus whatever. Right? Do you draw a distinction between that sort of thinking and the the the famous line of do do the the famous question of do the ends justify the mean? I guess what I'm referring to asking you questions the question that I'm asking is the word the ends. Uh huh. In your mind, is that purely um words or is that or words in action or is that just action? The definition of the word ends. Well, I think the means can be you know the words you use. My gosh, I completely screw that up. Yes. Yeah. I meant the means. How do you define the words of the the means?

Peter Dyga 3:32

So Well, yeah, I mean, you know, the means could be, I suppose, in the the way you say things. Right. The real question is it would be, you know, whether the saying things a certain way in and of themselves are evil. Right. You know, because that's really the you know the the crux of the matter. Trevor Burrus, Jr.

Sonny Maken 3:50

See, and as a First Amendment guy, I really struggle with that because I feel like ugly speech.

Peter Dyga 3:54

Right it's aligned. I mean, I think ugly speech can be ugly, but I don't know that it necessarily is evil.

Sonny Maken 3:59

And in in particular, you know, you know the Supreme Court justice who said you can't yell uh fire in a crowded theater? Right. I don't even necessarily know if I agree with that decision. I'm so such an extremist when it comes to freedom of speech. Okay. Right? I feel like in this country, whatever you want to say, say.

Peter Dyga 4:18

Yeah.

Sonny Maken 4:18

Actions, right? Mm-hmm. And I really kind of struggle with where I don't have really sort of consistent reasoning, is kind of when words inspire other people to do bad things.

Peter Dyga 4:29

Yeah. Um I don't think this is where we intended to go with this conversation, but I think but I but I'm fascinated by the conversation because I think um the idea, which by the way, probably has pretty widespread bipartisan acceptance or acknowledgement about the whole limits on free speech. The whole, you know, there's there's very little people in the lame stream media or the left that would even argue that you don't have that you have that right to yell fire in a crowded state. I know, I know. And what's the thinking behind that? Well, the thinking behind that, when again, I want to try to make a connection, and as usual, I'll lean on you to kind of drive it home for people because the way I could communicate sometimes. I mean, is that um you don't have that right if it's gonna if it's so you're acknowledging in that circumstance that harming others or what is an imminent harm to others makes that form of speech problematic. That's the thinking I think. That's the that's continue to agree with it. Yeah, yeah. Agreed. Yep. You know, so anyway, I'm for some reason my mind is going to probably because I watched a recent episode, a show, a true crime show, you know, where the real purpose of it was to degree to denigrate Florida's Stand Your Ground Law. That was the real that was the real purpose of the show.

Sonny Maken 5:45

Oh, is this about the old lady with the kids playing in her yard? Yes. I saw that. Fascinating.

Peter Dyga 5:51

You know, interesting show, right? But it's like the real purpose of this was just kind of denigrate Florida's stand your ground law. So anyway, help me make this connection. So there's there's widespread acceptance on all political sides, you know, about okay, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater because of the the idea of imminent threat. But somehow the idea of imminent threat when it comes to staying your ground is problematic for the left.

Sonny Maken 6:15

You're right. That's a great point.

Peter Dyga 6:17

I don't know why my main my show.

Sonny Maken 6:20

Yeah.

Peter Dyga 6:20

Because that's the essence of the stand your ground. And this, by the way, has a tie to the ends justifying the means. Um obviously the ends in in the case of anyway, separate separate conversation because we're going to a v an an evil end, you know. So in any event, death, you know. So but um morality, long, long, long standing acceptance of the right to self-defense, even the right to justifiable war, you know, and things like that. So in any event, these kind of conversations fascinate me. So in the whole ends justify the mean, there's usually a component that is left out of that. And again, that's kind of the secular phrasing of that, which I think is awesome when you can get away from you know, more theological or or or or or have moral conversations in the secular sphere, which is awesome, which is why I love the fact that that phrase is still alive today and still talked about, right? I mean, you can Google and your top searches are all gonna be, you know, Wikipedia and all sorts of stuff, it's not gonna be coming from St. Thomas Aquinas or Kierkegaard or you know, Nietzsche or any of those guys.

Sonny Maken 7:27

So although I don't know. So anyway, sorry for the detail. Okay. So let me let me paint for you a philosophical question. I if I tell a guy, hey man, go shoot this other guy because he's gonna kill you, and he does, I feel like my free speech right is not greater than the other guy's right to be alive, right? So I I said a lie and I got somebody killed, but I didn't do the actual, you know, I'm not the criminal, like I didn't actually pull the trigger, somebody else did, but because he did it based on what I said, my free speech right becomes secondary to the other guy's right to life. Does that make sense? You might have to help me out a little bit.

Peter Dyga 8:07

So, okay. So And by the way, I also want to, as we always usually do, I'm I want to try to tie, you know, why why are we having this conversation? Why are we having this conversation?

Sonny Maken 8:14

Because like literally we're making decisions every day in terms of how this organization is run, where we have we have to weigh that, right? Because there's because we obviously are an outcomes-based organization. The ends. Right, the ends, right? And so do the ends mean we can go scorch earth and do whatever we can or whatever we have to, or lie or cheat, or manipulate to get our outcomes. Yep. All right, like obviously so much of it comes down to phrasing. If you just kind of say it like that, obviously, no, you can't do all of that just to get your outcomes. But then you're like, why not? I'm getting my outcomes. So I so I manipulated somebody or I um told a half-truth or somebody to get what's best for the organization, what difference does it make? And now this is not what I'm saying, my opinion is. I'm just saying this is sort of the the devil's uh what's that called? Devil's argument? Uh-huh. Thank you. This is the devil's advocate speaking, right? So I do want to clarify that this is not our opinion. But the idea that outcomes is really all that matters. And I and I struggle with this because I'm like, man, if it's just words, right, but the policies are great, I can live with that. But if the words are great and the policies are terrible, like I remember the first time I had to pay, because under Barack Obama, I didn't have health insurance and all my taxes, I paid a fine. And I was so angry about that. I'm like, you know what, this guy's so articulate and he's so charming, and he's such a great communicator.

Peter Dyga 9:51

Yeah. That's supposed to do away with our healthcare problems, by the way.

Sonny Maken 9:55

But I remember paying that stupid fine and being so livid about it, like, leave me alone. I'll figure out because I can negotiate my own deals with hospitals and doctors and labs. I don't need you to like tell me that because I don't have insurance, you're gonna I have to pay a fine. And I did, and I had to pay a fine. And it really upset me. But anyway, it has since been done away with. That's been done away with thanks to to Trump. Yep. But I feel like he wasn't forcing everybody to get insurance anyway, which was the whole point. Which is a whole yeah, that's a whole other thing. But again, a guy great with words, but his outcomes were terrible. And now we got a president who's terrible with words, but most of his not all his outcomes, but some of his outcomes are great. And so you could argue the point that words as the um the means is are irrelevant. But then, you know, obviously philosophically you can take it to extreme measures like the Supreme Court case and say, no, if it causes death, speech is s secondary to death, you know, to somebody's right to life. And you could also argue this about abortion, by the way. Right? Like what what is justified, what isn't.

Peter Dyga 10:58

So a million things. Oh, yeah. Every every uh human act. Right. You know, so in any event for me I mean, I think for me, to let's try to drive this home, and there's you know, even uh, I don't know, we can have fun.

Sonny Maken 11:09

Sorry, I got I went off on a lot of tangents on that.

Peter Dyga 11:11

Yeah, well we can have fun talking about different actual uh acts, right? So but the the part that's oftentimes left out is is first off, the the end itself has to be something good. All right. So that's important. That's a very good point. That's a big thing. That's a very good point. Yeah. You know, oftentimes forgotten, you know. Yep, 100%. So the end uh, you know, uh itself has to be good. But then the real the real key in evaluating the moral decisions, the means, if you will, to get there is is the is is the same. You can never do right, you've heard it said you can never do evil. So the the the truth for us as Christians, for example, and who want to form a society around those type of values is no, evil means can never justify the ends. Right, right. So and that's man, that's those you've seen those hundreds of uh situational ethics that they'll put you in, you know, the the the the boat that's sinking, and I don't know, yeah, the different things about trying to pitch. So I'm gonna say I'm gonna say what you just said two bad choices in order to save more people. Right. You know, I'm gonna say what you just never you can never do evil to justify a good end. If you can, everything can be justified.

Sonny Maken 12:21

This is related to how you and I manage this organization, right? Because this happens this happens uh and if you're in any sort of a management role, you'll recognize this. This happens with staff all the time. Right? Like uh my dad used to always tell me you can't justify a bad decision by pointing to another bad decision. Right? And I see and I see this, especially when I'm trying to kind of guide staff a certain way, right? I'll see this come up, right? Well, what about that? Right? Like it's like but that was also a bad choice or a bad decision. Like that's not justification for this bad choice or bad decision, right?

Peter Dyga 12:58

Right, right.

Sonny Maken 12:59

And so to your point about sort of the the means, right? Like if you completely get rid of the means test or a means standard, the quality of life in society will completely fall apart. All right. I think the means really act as a as a way to man, this is getting really philosophical. So Yeah, which I love, but most of my modern audience is gonna be like, the hell are these two talking about, right? Um but if the means are completely unguarded and there's no there's no guardrails on the means, the quality of life and society is gone. Absolutely. Absolutely.

Peter Dyga 13:37

That's what I was saying when you know you can justify pretty much. You can justify anything. Yeah, so absolutely. And it's a hard, absolute moral truth to try to adhere to. But I think the nuance comes, and this is where the connection, obviously, to uh the association world or our lives in business, your lives running your business or whatnot is you know, you there that um it's usually because the circumstances are hazy. Yeah. That's that's where the real challenge comes up. You know, so for example, someone might have an objection to something, but the question is, is that objection is it really an immoral means or is it just a preference? You know, or a conflict of interest.

Sonny Maken 14:17

Yeah.

Peter Dyga 14:18

Well, totally separate, you know, issue and pertaining to like a association or managing your business. But yeah, you know, so that's the key there. You know, you can't confuse um a means that really is just it's not evil in and of itself, it's just a preference or a a choice. Am I making sense? Yeah, you know, so so uh part of the reason I think this came up uh the last meeting is because we recently had, you know, a conversation come up about um our communication methods, management styles, your legacy legacy, yeah, you know, and different things, and uh how just trying to get to an end uh doesn't justify for us. And so somebody might have asked, you know, but what about these methods you know that we use to get there? Um let's be honest. Some people, this podcast, you know, people think that method.

Sonny Maken 15:15

Yeah.

Peter Dyga 15:15

My point is um evil methods and means do not justify the end. But personal preferences are management conversations. They can be governance conversations. Sure, we can have an honest conversation, but you you know, you can't just say you're just just saying the mean the the the the ends justify the means, and so you're doing whatever it takes.

Sonny Maken 15:36

Whatever.

Peter Dyga 15:36

Yeah. No. I mean some very deliberate decisions have been made, you know, in terms of um some of the means. And hopefully we would never do one that is evil. So means can can never be evil, right?

Sonny Maken 15:48

Right.

Peter Dyga 15:50

That's the real that's the real question. Means can never be evil, and means have to be easy the mean in question that people have, whether it's in your business or practice or personal life or the association management, is is the mean itself evil?

Sonny Maken 16:02

If there's ethical and moral clarity, one, you can you can have a good handle on the means, and of course the ends have to be um also clear.

Peter Dyga 16:11

Yeah, right?

Sonny Maken 16:12

Absolutely.

Peter Dyga 16:13

So So let's take my hat. Let's take your hat. And and try to do this exercise. Because I'm guessing people will come to different conclusions. But is the ends that President Trump had in mind, okay, which was to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, an evil end? I don't see what's evil about it. There's nothing evil about it. You could disagree. So we're I don't know what you would classify as the means to get there. You know, he took whatever uh executive actions, I think executive orders requiring which which trickle down to I think how it's treated on U.S. maps and references and things like that, which, you know, let's say even if let's say you would argue, although that would be litigated, that those executive orders were illegal. Is that evil? Arguing that they're uh illegal.

Sonny Maken 17:07

I don't think that's evil. I think it's a it's an issue of litigation.

Peter Dyga 17:10

I don't think law in and of itself makes something evil or right, because we've had a good number of examples of laws that were enacted that were actually evil in themselves. So just the mere fact that something is legal or illegal, I don't think I'm dabbling in uh philosophy a little more than my qualifications. Trevor Burrus, Jr.

Sonny Maken 17:30

You could argue laws of segregation and slavery, those are evil laws.

Peter Dyga 17:34

Trevor Burrus, Jr.: So the legality of a law itself, you know, or or s somebody ruling at some point that your actions were illegal, that in and of itself makes it immoral or evil? No, I would I would argue not. So I I mean I don't see any means by which he did it either. In fact, you know, there are a lot of people that that argue I don't know if this is an ends argument or uh uh a means argument, but you know, we struggled through four years where they were naming everything from military bases to remove statues to schools to all sorts of things. You know, so um this to me makes imminently more sense. You know, I think the majority of the coastline in that Gulf. Yeah. Not only that, but I I think we've talked about this my whole life. I've had uh you know very erudite uh left-of-center people tell us that America is not America. Right. The Americas is all of Central, South, and North America. That's right. They have an equally good or legitimate claim to being called Americans as you do. You know, we we're so arrogant, us Americans calling ourselves Americans, because Mexicos are Mexicans are Americans and Costa Ricans are Americans. And they're right. They're right in a sense, probably not in the colloquial kind of use of the term. You know, I don't know any word I mean a name for an Italian. But but if that's the case, then doesn't it make sense for it to be the Gulf of America? I mean it's the Gulf in this hemisphere. Right. I would the biggest Gulf in this hemisphere. Trevor Burrus, Jr. You know, it doesn't really belong to a country. Right. It's just a name. I mean anyway. So to make the point about the ends and the means. And you know, again, I think it's important because now that you have sufficiently triggered our some people in our audience, I think we should have talks on fire.

Sonny Maken 19:18

We should wrap this up. We apologize for the philosophical nature of this uh episode. Um not everyone will be like this. Obviously, they're all different episodes.

Peter Dyga 19:29

And the end of our communications and our right and our being unified around a mission is important in order to deliver to communicate, uh minimizing conflicts of interest. And so I think it's important, you know, that we understand. I hope we're all still in agreement that um Well, we need clarity. Probably not all in agreement. Again, we had a c episode about Americans can't even agree on. We there are probably people out there that would disagree that the uh ends do not justify the means. I'm sure so But we would just ask that I think the real uh conversation has to be about the means themselves and what in in and of them is evil.

Sonny Maken 20:06

Yep.

Peter Dyga 20:07

If anything. You know, because you can't if they're evil, you certainly can't do it. Right. If it's just a matter of preference or style, there goes that style. There you go. You know, that doesn't make something evil, or it doesn't mean we're saying that the means justify the ends.

Sonny Maken 20:21

And clarity. I mean, you gotta have clarity in your communications, you gotta have clarity in your in your morality.

Peter Dyga 20:26

Yeah.

Sonny Maken 20:26

What do you think in your ethics? Yeah. What do you think?

Peter Dyga 20:28

Yeah, we'd like to know your thoughts.

Sonny Maken 20:30

So let us know if you think we are just way off base and completely wrong. But we're here. Um we gotta go. We're out of time. Thank you for um listening and honoring us with this philosophical conversation. Uh, we look forward to bringing you a new episode next Friday. Um And we welcome your comments.

Peter Dyga 20:49

So send us an email at the obvious at abc eastflorida.com. Until next time, you'll be seeing us swimming in the Gulf. Ciao.