Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Cedars and Sandhills

Home
Family, Parenting and Religion
Lance Armstrong’s Ends…Do They Justify His Means?

Lance Armstrong’s Ends…Do They Justify His Means?

Last updated on: January 8, 2015 at 8:23 pm by Zeke Pipher

Lance Armstrong’s Ends…Do They Justify His Means? 2015-01-08T20:23:20-07:00 Zeke Pipher

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

A friend recently asked a question that many of us are asking these days. He wrote:

“I’m torn between two ideas: ‘Lance Armstrong is the greatest fraud in the history of sport’ AND ‘Look at all the lives he’s saved with his Livestrong foundation.’

Does the end justify the means?”

To ask the question, “does the end justify the means?” admits that something ethically, morally, or legally wrong took place. The question is moot if the means were morally acceptable.

From a philosophical, biblical, and societal standpoint, seemingly positive ends NEVER justify obviously morally negative means.

Some will object, presenting a scenario such as Bonheoffer trying to assassinate Hitler in order to save millions of lives. Others might cite Lance Armstrong using his dishonestly earned platform to support cancer patients & research as an example.

Let’s consider three aspects of this situation: The morality of the action (means), the morality of the person carrying out the action, and the morality of the outcome (end).

Lance’s action of doping in order to win is clearly immoral, and so is Lance for doing it. (This isn’t suggesting that Armstrong is as immoral as he could be, or that he doesn’t have morally positive qualities. But a person who does something immorally, is immoral – as much as we’d like to be disassociated from our actions, our actions point to who we truly are. If I cheat on my taxes, I am a man who cheats on my taxes.)

The hard question, however, is: Is the outcome of advancing cancer research through winning the Tour de France by cheating morally acceptable, if it was accomplished by an immoral set of behaviors by an immoral person?

No, I don’t believe it is. And to see how the answer must be no, we need to pull back and look at the philosophical & societal impact of saying yes. What kind of society would we be advancing if we encouraged people to cheat, lie, and do whatever drugs are necessary in order to accomplish good things?

Kant’s Law of Universality helps us here: “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”[1]

If, as a society, we DO decide that we want immoral means to justify what we perceive to be good outcomes, then to be consistent, we must not punish, penalize, or remove medals from people who do bad things to accomplish what we deem to be good outcomes. But as a society we do punish drug abuse, lying, and cheating in professional sports. Appropriately so. And what this says about us is that we have already ruled on this issue: Lance Armstrong’s ends DO NOT justify his means.

An Important Nuance: We can disapprove of the means, but still appreciate aspects of the person & and the end.

We don’t need to throw the proverbial “baby out with the bathwater.” All people are flawed. All people make mistakes and have various moral failings (not all sin is equal in quality or kind). All people are complex, and their contribution needs to be considered holistically. This is certainly true for Lance Armstrong.

Many of the people who have made significant positive contributions to our society were complex, flawed, paradoxical people. Their ends do not justify their means, but that doesn’t mean we can’t feel appreciation them for other aspects to their contribution.

A very personal example for me is Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. King probably cheated on his wife, and perhaps even on his doctoral dissertation. These are immoral acts—that are in no way made “acceptable” because of the sum of what Dr. King accomplished—yet Dr. King rightly belongs in the history books as one of our nation’s greatest heroes for his desires, commitment, and work toward civil rights. There are few people I admire more than Martin Luther King Jr., but his contribution is complex, and I have to hold various opinions and feelings in tension as I view him as a person.

Personally, I’m done admiring Lance for his accomplishments in sports. Yet, I’m deeply thankful for his desire to support those who have cancer. And I feel thankful and supportive of Livestrong. Armstrong is a complex figure for me, which makes it hard for me to place him neatly and cleanly into any one category. But I’m ok with that. I’m sure others feel that way about me.

Btw, here’s another family who is fighting cancer through all sorts of morally excellent and appropriate means. Check out & join Team Jack!

Zeke is a pastor, author, and freelance outdoor writer. His first book, “Man on the Run” can be purchased here.

[1] (Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated by Lewis White Beck. Library of Liberal Arts, 1959. 421/39)

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Livestrong Foundation

pediatric brain cancer

performance enhancing drugs

Previous Post

October 17, 2012

"Your Pension Is Bigger Than Mine"

Next Post

October 26, 2012 Why Nipping At Others Doesn't Work In Kennels Or Marriages

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I was rejected by God as king for offering an unauthorized sacrifice instead of waiting. Who am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

David Saul Solomon Rehoboam