Should we Accept This Doctrine?

Should we accept this doctrine?
Student:
Professor:
Course title:
Date
The political axiom that the end justifies the means has widely been adopted. It can be said that at some incidences, such an axiom should be accepted. This is so especially where there is no much impact of the process undertaken; rather consequences are felt in the end product. However, in incidences where there is an impact of the process and not just the end product, there is need not to adopt such an axiom. According to Kunsch, Schnarr & Rowe (2014) it can rightfully be said that; political axiom, that the end justifies the means, should be accepted in situational perspective and not unconditionally.
As Kunsch, Schnarr & Rowe (2014) point out; the political axiom that the end justifies the means should not be accepted unconditionally. This view emanates from the realization that; some situations may involve incidences that have a fateful means whereas the end may be acceptable. For instance, in such situations as war versus peace, adoption of this political axiom entails that what should be considered is the achievement of peace where there was none regardless of how peace will be arrived at. If this political axiom was to be accepted unconditionally in such a situation, it would mean that, even if everyone is killed so that at last there is peace that would be acceptable. It is clear that, adoption of this axiom in such situation would lead to loss of many innocent lives and at the end the killers would be praised for having achieved the intended purpose of bringing peace.
In such situations of war versus peace, it is crucial that; the means of achieving or arriving at the end is evaluated. Laer (2014) asserts that: the end alone cannot be use...