Passage Summary: Since we can't read people's minds to see if they are doing the right thing for the right reasons, we can't really judge their morality. Because of this, we should just look at the results of their actions instead.

Conclusion: One should judge an action based on its consequences rather than its morality.

Reasoning: It is impossible to determine if an action is truly moral because we can never know if a person is acting from a hidden, ulterior motive.

Analysis: The argument moves from a premise about what we *cannot* know (morality/motives) to a conclusion about what we *should* do (evaluate consequences). To justify this, we need a principle that bridges that gap. The argument assumes that if a certain standard of evaluation (morality) is unavailable or impossible to use, we must switch to a different, available standard (consequences). Look for a principle that makes the impossibility of judging motives a sufficient reason to rely solely on results.