I think they're following the theories of Consequentialism here, where you're trying to maximise the different consequences instead of aiming for one single max

I think they're following the theories of Consequentialism here, where you're trying to maximise the different consequences instead of aiming for one single maximised consequence - even if that means violating an established ethical rule: " The consequentialist analysis can take the form of a utility function, where the expected utility of an action is determined by the sum of the utility of each of its possible consequences, individually weighted by their respective probability of occurrence. Therefore, the correct action is always the one which maximizes o total value of positive consequences, even if it violates some established moral rule. Consequentialism is based on a cost and benefits analysis and measure goodness by calculating the total expected good." [1] I don't presume to be able to say whether that's right or wrong, but it certainly feels like the underlying theory with which the government currently acts. [1] http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Consequentialism http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Consequentialism