Nagel Concludes That "If Results Were the Only Basis for Public

Essay

Nagel concludes that "if results were the only basis for public morality then it would be possible to justify anything, including torture and massacre, in the service of sufficiently large interests," stating that limiting factors will continue to be constitutional protections and constraints of individual morality. Do you find these protective limits to be sufficient in restraining ruthlessness to such a degree? Why or why not? Explain your answer.