<P> Common use of the term, in the realm of business ethics, has been criticized by scholar Gregory S. Kavka writing in the Journal of Business Ethics . Kavka refers back to philosophical concepts of retribution by Thomas Hobbes . He states that if something supposedly held up as a moral standard or common social rule is violated enough in society, then an individual or group within society can break that standard or rule as well since this keeps them from being unfairly disadvantaged . As well, in specific circumstances violations of social rules can be defensible if done as direct responses to other violations . For example, Kavka states that it is wrong to deprive someone of their property but it is right to take property back from a criminal who takes another's property in the first place . He also states that one should be careful not to use this ambiguity as an excuse recklessly to violate ethical rules . </P> <P> Conservative journalist Victor Lasky wrote in his book It Didn't Start With Watergate that while two wrongs don't make a right, if a set of immoral things are done and left unprosecuted, this creates a legal precedent . Thus, people who do the same wrongs in the future should rationally expect to get away as well . Lasky uses as an analogy the situation between John F. Kennedy's wiretapping of Martin Luther King, Jr. (which led to nothing) and Richard Nixon's actions in Watergate (which Nixon thought would also lead to nothing). </P> <P> Two wrongs don't make a right is a proverb that contradicts this fallacy--a wrongful action is not a morally appropriate way to correct or cancel a previous wrongful action, because these two wrong things has the different and irreverent conditions, or personality can be lower by second wrong done as who first wrong done . </P>

Where did the saying two wrongs don't make a right come from