Rationalizing

In The Augean Stables, Poirot takes some dramatic action to discredit the X-Ray News. He rationalizes the actions based on two main considerations. One is the outcome of the event and the other is the fact that Percy Perry, the editor of the X-Ray News is a blackmailer. Even though the information that Perry had was the truth, and it was damaging, Poirot rationalized his actions based on the utilitarian virtue of the greatest good for the greatest number. Ferrier was known to be a good man while his opponent in this situation, Perry, was not. Actions that Perry was to undertake to reveal the scandal would have been good for Perry and for the potentially-dictatorial opposition party, but they would not have been good for Britain as a whole. Thus, the majority of the nation benefits from having the truth obfuscated.

There is an element of Kantian thought to Poirot's actions as well, because of the character of Percy Perry. Poirot justified his actions in part by rationalizing that a bad person deserves a bad outcome. This colors his actions as well -- had Perry been an upstanding journalist then perhaps Poirot would not have felt so justified in his actions against Perry. If, however, the character of the actors in question had been removed from consideration, then it seems evident that Poirot's actions would have been more difficult to justify.

The detective, then, was working within the confines of ethical philosophy that supported the decision he had already chosen. He chose to participate because of his own personal loyalties, and only applied the utilitarian justification after the fact. This shows that while we inherently consider consistency in ethical philosophy to be a virtue, in many instances people will rationalize their actions after the fact, taking advantage of the wide range of potential ethical philosophies at their disposal. Poirot only took a utilitarian viewpoint because it supported his actions.