The author’s goal in this paper was to argue that consequentialism should be construed as the view that the better a state of affairs the better the action that produces it and the more moral reason there is to perform that action. The author calls this view BETTER. He tries to show that treating this rather than a claim about the right as crucial to consequentialism has significant advantages. Finally, he demonstrates the relevance of his account to the issue of whether consequentialism is correct. It doesn’t provide a conclusive answer to that question (we should be suspicious if it did) but allows us to see it in a new light and hopefully, suggests new and fruitful ways to tackle it.
