Wrongdoers recast a harmful flaw as an asset justified by its collateral benefits.

Evidence

Armstrong describes his personal flaw as a “relentless desire to win at all costs.” However, he does not regard the flaw as a defect, rather as a powerful asset that enables him to do extraordinary things. Any accompanying harm is an unavoidable side effect. This was the driving force, he explained, that enabled him to triumph over his metastasized cancer and to defeat his cycling challengers. These two benefits demonstrate that the flaw can result in good things as well as detrimental ones. Armstrong could also take pride in the good work done by his cancer foundation, for which he raised millions of dollars. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 244

Categorization

• XREF: The cost-benefit re-framing of a moral flaw as an asset parallels how exclusionary policy is defended via its claimed social benefits.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 244