lampliter87 8 Report post Posted August 25, 2008 What, if any, are the differences between the two phrases (or dare I say) schools of thought "The end justifies the means" and "All's well that ends well"? The former is considered "evil" in the context of Niccolò Machiavelli and The Prince, while the latter is (to me at least) an optimistic and overall hopeful phrase. Yet when I think about them, they seem relatively the same. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sitzlejd 0 Report post Posted August 25, 2008 "All's well that ends well"- To me this means, "Even though something may have sucked, if it ends up being fine in the end, no harm done during the shitty times." I look at this as a more passive expression, as if the matter was out of your hands. Perhaps losing one's job and then finding another good job could be an example. It sucked when you weren't working but now that you're employed again, in hindsight it really wasn't that bad after all."The ends justify the means"- I see this as a more active expression. You may have to do something shitty/immoral/wrong to satisfy a greater good. Military action could be an example of this. In order to end WWII we had to drop A-bombs. It was a terrible thing, but the result was positive enough to offset the unpleasant action. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Aussie Joe 0 Report post Posted August 25, 2008 It depends on your own point of view. In a sense they do mean the same thing.But in another view, should we look at the destination? Or the journey in those phrases? Both are obviously trying to point out the end result, but maybe thats not what we should necassarily place all our concentration on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
