ABSTRACT
Some of the difficulties of deciding between satisfying and optimizing motive-consequentialism may give us reason to believe that neither of them can represent an entirely satisfactory form of motive-consequentialism and that the most adequate kind of motive-consequentialism is a scalar theory that makes only comparative judgments of better or worse between motives. This chapter considers whether a consequentialist satisfied with a scalar morality of motives should not also be contented with a purely scalar morality of actions. A consequentialist moral theory of goodness of character, for example, might justifiably prefer to rank total character-constellations as better or worse according to their consequences without saying anything about what counted, absolutely, as (a) good character. But the differences between the common-sense morality of actions and act-consequentialism nonetheless remain.
