Bad is never good, by definition. Bad means to a greater good is an oxymoron; bad ≠ good.
Extrapolate; would life be better if everyone was doing something bad for the greater good? I think not.
Yes, at times (very few) it seems
, the ends do outweigh the means; especially if one feels no other choice is available. (Where the lack of foresight is always a rouge factor.) If
the value one puts upon the end
, is so much more acceptable for most all of society, then the less than honorable of means may be used. The problem is assumed values, which are a bit volatile.
If a sailor, who has been at sea for many months, acts sexually aggressive in a bar - he may be given more sympathy for his actions, than a lounge lizard
having the same exact behavior. As SiulaGrande
pointed out, if one is seen as more bad than the other, you have conditional values. Conditional values can't be used to judge "bad" behavior because it's situational, not fixed. Without fixed values, you can justify anything in the end.
When there is a difference of acceptance of bad behavior, "bad" can beome the whim of opinion, and not a value at all. Acceptance of bad behavior is not the same as denying it is bad As "ends outweigh the means" argument goes - the bad and the good are weighed as one, and the result is judged either bad/good. The level of acceptance given to the bad, weighed opposite the desirable level of the good, is done on a scale, and not found as an absolute yes/no.
When is bad - good? Never, except maybe, when people wants it to be.