"Applying your principles to these hypothetical situations might lead to a situation you, western consequentialist, would feel is abhorrent."
Yeah, we all know our feelings and intutions about what is right and wrong, and our reasonings, may not always match. Who hasn't felt guilt, or at least unease, about hurting someone you love, even though you knew it was for the best?
This is basically saying:
"Your best effort to reason a moral code from first principles doesn't match modern western moral intuitions about justice"
That's no challenge for consequentalism. It might be a challenging decision for someone trying to implement a justice system, but all justice systems are full of weird compromises and grey areas.
Even simpler: It shows that consequentionalism is not compatible with democractic justice systems and human rights most of the time. I'd even say always.
But consequentialism sure is an edgy example of first principle thinking. One that allows people to partray themselves as really tough, cold logical driven badasses ready to meet the hard decisions.
I won't speak to consequentialism because I'm not a philosopher, but using the ends to consider if the means are justified certainly can be valuable to justice systems and human rights in some cases.
Of course it would be foolish (or self-serving) to rigidly adhere to an overly simplistic and abusable system. But at the end of the day are we arguing over ivory tower dogmas, or are we discussing morality and law in the practical world?
(Also, I think there's a chance you are meaning to speak to retributivism rather than consequentialism)
"Applying your principles to these hypothetical situations might lead to a situation you, western consequentialist, would feel is abhorrent."
Yeah, we all know our feelings and intutions about what is right and wrong, and our reasonings, may not always match. Who hasn't felt guilt, or at least unease, about hurting someone you love, even though you knew it was for the best?
This is basically saying:
"Your best effort to reason a moral code from first principles doesn't match modern western moral intuitions about justice"
That's no challenge for consequentalism. It might be a challenging decision for someone trying to implement a justice system, but all justice systems are full of weird compromises and grey areas.