|
|
|
|
|
by AndrewBissell
2017 days ago
|
|
> usually with the belief that the ends justify the means This is exactly how the vast majority of the purportedly CIA-ambivalent media franchises ultimately come out in The Agency's favor. If they depict agents doing bad things, it's always made pretty clear that the world would be even worse if they hadn't. |
|
What you’re describing is a very utilitarian perspective towards ethics/morality and I’m not sure everyone would walk away with that conclusion. There are plenty of people who do not believe the ends justify the means, or at least, don’t always. Others may think it is immoral, but necessary in some circumstances. This includes people that do or have worked in this line of work, to include me. It is also complicated, because there is no way of knowing if the outcome would be worse had they not done the “bad” thing. It also assumes we all agree as to what is “bad” versus what is “good”, or even somewhere in between.
Maybe a better way of looking at it is as though they are portrayed as flawed heroes? Or even good people that sometimes have to/choose to do bad things?
I don’t know the answers to those questions and it is very likely I am way off, but I appreciate you bringing up your thoughts on the matter!