It was noted that particular judgements and conclusions arrived at within a moral practice, could only be justified or rendered intelligible if certain things are considered right or wrong without standing in need of further justification. The view being advocated is that virtues can only be recommended if they constitute a good to the virtuous man. If virtues do not constitute such a good, they are frauds. For Polus, worldly success and prudence determine what is to count as happiness and advantage. For Polus, what is good and right is determined by what popular consent decrees to be advantageous. For Socrates what is advantageous is determined by what is good and right. Socrates is denying that one can give an account of morality in non-moral terms. He is the enemy of reductionism in ethics.