As a result of certain recent episodes that have affected public life, there is speculation on several fronts that certain bad actions can, or even should, be compensated for by other good actions carried out by the same people. Thus we have seen how a French minister considered that it might be appropriate to take into account that a well-known film producer has contributed a great deal to French cinema when in the USA he is being held responsible for a long-standing crime that seems to have been proven. A prominent French politician has also declared, speaking of an alleged crime of a former mayor of Paris, that "... he has things to reproach himself for, but he has done a lot for the country". In our environment we have heard it proposed to "apply a discount in their sentences for work space created" to those responsible for alleged misappropriations of public capital known recently.

These are unfair and potentially very dangerous proposals. They propose to evaluate the actions of the same person independently of each other in order to calculate the total by compensating their positive and negative aspects. From "he cheats clients, but sells a lot" we will move on to "you asked me for a good salesman, not a good person" as argued by a head hunter, and to "he is not very scrupulous with the administration of public resources, but he does it for the good of the country", etc. What criteria will we use for the scale and the compensation? And who will apply them?

Let us not deceive ourselves. Every human act involves aspects that must be considered in themselves with absolute criteria. Or would we be willing to accept a level of homicides as long as it did not exceed a maximum (other than zero, of course)? How many work posts created would compensate for a rape? What crimes would it allow to have a Nobel? To enter into the consideration of accepting a little bit of bad things in exchange for some good things is an injustice and disrespectful to the people concerned. Also in companies: what Degree mistreatment of employee is acceptable in exchange for an increase in efficiency? It is not just a matter of avoiding justifying the means with the ends. It is that there are intrinsically unacceptable ends and means.