This conclusion presents some closing thoughts on the key concepts discussed in the preceding chapters of this book. The book seeks to articulate a version of liberalism that takes toleration as seriously as possible. A theory of normative toleration like the author's will tell us when interference may be permissible in distributive issues, issues of criminal justice domestically, and in many cases of possible international intervention. The book suggests that the primary missing theoretical elements must come from normative moral theory itself. Philosophers tend to start with normative theories and see what these theories say about activities in the business arena. The book briefly considers Ripstein's sovereignty principle as a competitor to the harm principle and legal moralism and legal paternalism as principles that some think must supplement the harm principle. It considers a basic objection to relying on a single value …

This conclusion presents some closing thoughts on the key concepts discussed in the preceding chapter of this book. The book discuses the role responsibilities of military officers and begins with, officers must consistently reinforce what the military organization as a whole should be teaching, namely, the centrality to military identity of adherence to the received rules of war. The book maintained that officers are not professionally responsible for ensuring that their subordinates fight only in justified wars. That, rather, is a responsibility, directly, of our political leaders and, indirectly, of all of us, especially in a democracy. It sails against the tide of recent philosophical work on the ethics of war, which is largely non-consequentialist in character. It has succeeded in advancing plausible and perhaps compelling answers to the basic ethical questions of war; this will redound to the credit of utilitarianism, enhancing its claim to …