For clarification “a means to an end” is a Philosophical term which refers to any action (the means) carried out for the sole purpose of achieving something else (an end). “The end” is often noted as being prioritised above whatever “mean” it took to achieve.

In this scenario, you are an agent part of a counter terrorist unit, you find out that a bomb has been placed in a major city where you live which will cause catastrophic damage and an extreme death toll of over 10k people. Issue is, you do not know where in the city the bomb is placed.

You have found a person who is part of the terrorist group who you can interrogate into giving away the bombs location. However this person isn’t giving up any information, and happens to turn out to be your sibling.

You are forced to take extreme action, where your choice is to either:

1) Administer a poison directly into the veins of your sibling. It will cause immediate paralysing pain. The set up is designed that the doses get higher and higher until the sibling cooperates, however, you run the risk of killing your sibling it if they’re given to high a dose. Or;

2) You can choose to not take the extreme option. Hoping that your sibling will confine in you, you can take the action to plead with your sibling to give the location away. Though, this is at an increased chance of not finding the bomb in time.

You cannot back out of being solely responsible for this interrogation.

Main Question for Poll:

• Which option do you choose?

Bonus Questions:

• If you chose ‘Yes’, please explain why you feel that the ends justify the means.

• If you chose ‘No’, please explain why you do not feel the means are justified.

• Would your choice change if the loved one was actually your child? Partner? Or Parent?

(This is based off of a 24 episode. Where the main character was in this exact situation.)