Claim: An action is morally correct if the amount of good that results from the action is greater than the amount of bad that results from the action.
Reason: When assessing the morality of an action, the results of the action are more important than the intent of the person or people performing the action.
The writer claims that an action is morally correct if the amount of good results from the action is greater than the amount of the bad result. And to justify his point, he provides a reason stating that while assessing the morality of an action, the results are more important than the intentions of the person performing them. In my opinion, claim can be presented in a positive and in a negative way in different situations, but the reason is something cannot be acceptable. I would disagree with the reason for a following reasons.
Beginning with the claimed point, in some scenarios the statement can be agreed with. For example, if a company is facing great risks because of sudden market drop down, and the manager of the company takes some serious actions in favor of the company but without the knowledge of higher authorities. Also, the manager himself isn't sure if the results will be positive or company might face more loss. In such case, if the manager's actions take positive turn for the company, then the claimed statement by the writer can be agreed with. But the same statement will be false if the situation was different. For instance, a thief, who entered an empty villa with the intensions of robbery, and ended up calling the fire brigades after seeing the fire in the neighborhood. Here, the amount of good results are greater than the bad results (which was robbery), the moral actions can be questioned as after all the caller was a thief and had malicious intentions.
Now, focusing on the reason provided for this claim. As discussed in the above example, it does not matter how good someone's action's results are, if their intentions are not morally positive, they will harm the society in one or the other way. As the reasoning statement concentrates that the result of the actions is more important than the intentions of the person can be proved false if we alter the situation in the first example from the previous paragraph. Suppose, the manager who took instant action for the well-fare of the company, but ended up with a major loss rather than saving it. In this situation, the morality of the manager's actions cannot be judged on the basis of the results but his intentions should also be considered.
If the reason provided is considered true, then the thief, who had toxic intentions is morally correct and the manager, who wished to save the company is morally wrong. Yes, the results of the action do matter, but they do not define the morality for the performer.
There is no way one can identify the intentions of a person just because there was a positive result for his actions. Again, this is not always true that someone with the good intentions cannot bring out the positive results. In that case, his morality can be assessed positively. But judging someone only on the basis of the results for their actions does not define their morality. Rather it questions the society, and somehow the result statement diminishes the difference between two people with good and bad intentions, as one can be moralized in any sense just because they couldn't produce the desired results.
Hence, I disagree with the statements of the writer.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 386, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a negative way" with adverb for "negative"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...laim can be presented in a positive and in a negative way in different situations, but the reason...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 328, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
... authorities. Also, the manager himself isnt sure if the results will be positive or...
^^^^
Line 13, column 267, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... define the morality for the performer. There is no way one can identify the int...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 385, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Rather,
...actions does not define their morality. Rather it questions the society, and somehow t...
^^^^^^
Line 17, column 581, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...oralized in any sense just because they couldnt produce the desired results. Hen...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 618, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ey couldnt produce the desired results. Hence, I disagree with the statements of...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, so, then, well, while, after all, for example, for instance, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2653.0 2235.4752809 119% => OK
No of words: 549.0 442.535393258 124% => OK
Chars per words: 4.83242258652 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84053189512 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50423644289 2.79657885939 90% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 215.323595506 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.424408014572 0.4932671777 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 829.8 704.065955056 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 9.0 1.77640449438 507% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.3159481388 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.541666667 118.986275619 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.875 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.29166666667 5.21951772744 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.439797504518 0.243740707755 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142081773971 0.0831039109588 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.175407881986 0.0758088955206 231% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258683392293 0.150359130593 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.18682268513 0.0667264976115 280% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.03 12.1639044944 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.52 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 100.480337079 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.