Greatest Good Balancing Principle Invoked in Route Selection Case
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/123#Greatest_Good_Balancing_Principle_Invoked_in_Route_Selection_Case
Properties
Instance of
GreatestGoodBalancingPrincipleinPublicInfrastructureDecisions
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#GreatestGoodBalancingPrincipleinPublicInfrastructureDecisions
Applied to
Road route decision involving historic farmhouse condemnation
Balancing with
Do No Harm Obligation in Professional Engineering Services
Eminent Domain Advisory Obligation and Limits
Historic and Cultural Resource Impact Consideration in Infrastructure Engineering
Concrete expression
The Board applies the greatest-good-for-the-greatest-number standard to the road routing decision, concluding that condemnation proceedings would generally be justified under that standard, while simultaneously requiring Engineer A to identify creative alternatives that might avoid condemnation
Confidence
0.9
Importance
high
Interpretation
The greatest-good standard supports condemnation as a default, but professional engineering obligation requires Engineer A to identify creative alternatives — such as physically relocating the farmhouse — before recommending that default
Invoked by
Engineer A Route Selection Design Engineer
Tension resolution
The greatest-good standard is applied as a default while the creative-alternative obligation operates as a constraint that must be satisfied before the default is recommended
Source Evidence
Source text
While in general the Board is of the view that the rule in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number should prevail under the circumstances as those presented in this case—which would suggest potential condemnation proceedings—there may be alternative creative solutions that might exist to address the issue.
Text references
While in general the Board is of the view that the rule in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number should prevail under the circumstances as those presented in this case—which would suggest potential condemnation proceedings—there may be alternative creative solutions that might exist to address the issue
TTL
@prefix case123: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/123#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case123:Greatest_Good_Balancing_Principle_Invoked_in_Route_Selection_Case a proeth:GreatestGoodBalancingPrincipleinPublicInfrastructureDecisions,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Greatest Good Balancing Principle Invoked in Route Selection Case" ;
proeth:appliedto "Road route decision involving historic farmhouse condemnation" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Do No Harm Obligation in Professional Engineering Services",
"Eminent Domain Advisory Obligation and Limits",
"Historic and Cultural Resource Impact Consideration in Infrastructure Engineering" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "The Board applies the greatest-good-for-the-greatest-number standard to the road routing decision, concluding that condemnation proceedings would generally be justified under that standard, while simultaneously requiring Engineer A to identify creative alternatives that might avoid condemnation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.9" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "123" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-28T00:04:09.972985+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "123" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-28T00:04:09.972985+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The greatest-good standard supports condemnation as a default, but professional engineering obligation requires Engineer A to identify creative alternatives — such as physically relocating the farmhouse — before recommending that default" ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer A Route Selection Design Engineer" ;
proeth:principleclass "Greatest Good Balancing Principle in Public Infrastructure Decisions" ;
proeth:sourcetext "While in general the Board is of the view that the rule in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number should prevail under the circumstances as those presented in this case—which would suggest potential condemnation proceedings—there may be alternative creative solutions that might exist to address the issue." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The greatest-good standard is applied as a default while the creative-alternative obligation operates as a constraint that must be satisfied before the default is recommended" ;
proeth:textreferences "While in general the Board is of the view that the rule in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number should prevail under the circumstances as those presented in this case—which would suggest potential condemnation proceedings—there may be alternative creative solutions that might exist to address the issue" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 123 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T00:14:43.751983"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 123 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
123
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-28T00:04:09.972985+00:00
First case
123
Generated
2026-02-28T00:04:09.972985+00:00
Attributed to
Case 123 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-28T00:14:43.751983
Generated by
ProEthica Case 123 Extraction