Is it fair to say that the ends justify the means for consequentialists and utilitarians?
For consequentialism, is it the intent that matters, or the end result that matters? So if a person acts to achieve a good end and succeeds, the means would be considered moral. But if a person fails to achieve a good end, and the consequences were bad, are the means still justified, or would the actions be considered immoral because the end result was bad?
If I remember right, a deontological view would be that actions are judged in of themselves, regardless of intent or end result?