On Moral Theory and the Moral Act

In the framing of moral theory one should weight the consequences first. That is, one should focus on engineering the particular consequences that emerge by virtue of many people acting as you think they ought to act. The implementation of virtue however should not be judged by its consequences. To err is human! Therefore, any action should then be judged purely by the degree to which that act sprung from a character embracing the "consequentialist" ideal.

Some see morality in the consequence. Some see morality in the intent. Pragmatists, the former; prigs, the latter. But they need not be at odds. We can spiral this around. What if the consequence of a moral act serves to edify the virtue of the person (or system) that generated the intent in the first place, so that the actor is also the acted upon – so that the consequences of the intent, act back upon itself, the intent? It is through such circumstances that we often witness whirling virtuous cycles – self-reinforcing, stable, and good. The whole is the ideal! That is Good.