Abstract: Begins by explaining and arguing for certain criteria for assessing normative moral theories. Then argues that these criteria lead to a rule-consequentialist moral theory. According to rule-consequentialism, acts should be assessed morally in terms of impartially justified rules, and rules are impartially justified if and only if the expected overall value of their general internalization is at least as great as for any alternative rules. In the course of developing this theory, the book discusses impartiality, well-being, fairness, equality, and the question of how ‘general internalization’ of rules is to be interpreted. It also considers the main objections to rule-consequentialism. The book also discusses contractualism, utilitarianism, act-consequentialism, Ross-style pluralism, and the question of which moral prohibitions and which duties to aid others rule-consequentialism endorses. The last part of the book considers the implications of rule-consequentialism for some current controversies in practical ethics.

Keywords: act-consequentialism, consequentialism, contractualism, duties, duty, equality, ethics, impartiality, meta-ethics, moral theory, morality, normative, pluralism, Ross, rule-consequentialism, utilitarianism, well-being