> it is morally impermissible intentionally to punish the innocent or to inflict disproportionately large punishments on wrongdoers. > What if harming Hitler’s

> it is morally impermissible intentionally to punish the innocent or to inflict disproportionately large punishments on wrongdoers. > What if harming Hitler’s baby was the only way to save the world? As a moderate deontologist, I reluctantly endorse this implication So the author believes that it is not permissible to punish an innocent person, regardless of any positive benefits that arise from its deterrent value. But he also believes it is permissible to harm a baby if it confers tremendous benefits. Clearly there is no logically coherent moral philosophy here.