Niiiice question. One of the big questions. And the first thing I remembered was a philosophy lecturer talking about utilitarianism (do that which brings about the greatest good for the greatest number of people) which had an immediate proviso: "First, do no harm."
Ultimately I think it's a false dichotomy, as good and harm seem to follow some kind of Newtonian law-- equal and opposite reactions or somesuch. But I think "First, do no harm" is not a bad first principle, and forces one to consider all effects of an action, not just the desired effects.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2/5/04 04:02 am (UTC)Ultimately I think it's a false dichotomy, as good and harm seem to follow some kind of Newtonian law-- equal and opposite reactions or somesuch. But I think "First, do no harm" is not a bad first principle, and forces one to consider all effects of an action, not just the desired effects.