<Ul> <Li> A strict utilitarian will be forced to admit that, if it can be shown that punishing an innocent person would increase the total happiness of the whole society, then there are times when it is morally right to punish an innocent person . (See telishment) An ethically "easy" example would be when an informed person--such as an army cadet--voluntarily accepts the "punishment" or risk of "harm" for the greater good . </Li> <Li> The Euthyphro dilemma can be resolved in the mind of a divine command theorist by simply accepting that if God tells us to do something which appears to be immoral, then we are to accept that it really is moral in the bigger picture, and that it only appears to be immoral . </Li> <Li> A consequentialist believes that what is called right or wrong depends on what consequences come about as a result of a proposed action . As a way to test this view, some counterexamples may be considered which are intended to find out if this view holds up in extreme cases . For example, one may object that some actions appear to be right in principle even when terrible consequences have resulted from them . Also, there may be times when an action appears to be wrong in principle, but has wonderful consequences . A person wanting to stay faithful to the consequentialist view in the face of an extreme case may have to bite the bullet by taking the position that, even though these counterexamples do exist, the original view still holds up: </Li> </Ul> <Li> A strict utilitarian will be forced to admit that, if it can be shown that punishing an innocent person would increase the total happiness of the whole society, then there are times when it is morally right to punish an innocent person . (See telishment) An ethically "easy" example would be when an informed person--such as an army cadet--voluntarily accepts the "punishment" or risk of "harm" for the greater good . </Li> <Li> The Euthyphro dilemma can be resolved in the mind of a divine command theorist by simply accepting that if God tells us to do something which appears to be immoral, then we are to accept that it really is moral in the bigger picture, and that it only appears to be immoral . </Li> <Li> A consequentialist believes that what is called right or wrong depends on what consequences come about as a result of a proposed action . As a way to test this view, some counterexamples may be considered which are intended to find out if this view holds up in extreme cases . For example, one may object that some actions appear to be right in principle even when terrible consequences have resulted from them . Also, there may be times when an action appears to be wrong in principle, but has wonderful consequences . A person wanting to stay faithful to the consequentialist view in the face of an extreme case may have to bite the bullet by taking the position that, even though these counterexamples do exist, the original view still holds up: </Li>

Where does the expression bite the bullet come from