I find it reasonable to question any ethical system that does not deliver success and happiness. What’s the point of being a good person if there are no tangible rewards? Why should one practise virtue if it does not bring practical advantages? Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592) asked those questions in the context of the sixteenth century, but today’s circumstances are not fundamentally different. We all face moral choices, and must figure out how those are going to impact our success and happiness. I can take those questions a step further and ask whether it’s legitimate to achieve good ends by employing unethical means such as theft, murder, or false imprisonment. Montaigne pondered precisely that question in his essay “Of bad means employed to a good end.” He scrutinised the worth of moral values in a world that is often unjust, chaotic, abusive or plain incomprehensible. All moralists in history have asked themselves if important goals justify wrongful behaviour. Montaigne wanted to give the right answer, but sometimes, he got sidetracked. Montaigne had grasped the crucial importance of practising ethical values each day, but could not always provide a solid justification. His reasoning in this area is not always accurate. He argues that, if we use bad means to achieve “good ends,” we would be automatically corrupting those “good ends” and destroying their “goodness.” Was Montaigne using the correct logic? Let’s see an example: If a man is pursuing the “good goal” of building a children’s hospital, would it be unethical for him to steal bricks from a construction site where a cinema is being built? If we adopted Montaigne’s logic, we would have to say that the bricks stolen from the cinema are corrupting the children’s hospital and destroying its goodness. However, there is room for improvement in Montaigne’s argument because, once the hospital becomes operational, will patients care where the bricks came from? Even if patients find out that the bricks had been stolen, will they view the hospital as evil? Montaigne’s logic proves inaccurate in this case because it fails to point to the key relevant principle. Unethical behaviour such as stealing is wrong because it violates a crucial ethical principle, not because it turns a “good end” into a “bad end.” Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/hard-decisions-and-montaignes-concept-of-virtue/