If the counterpart theory is discarded after serving its pragmatic purpose, consequentialism gains no real explanatory unification over rival frameworks like Ross's prima facie duties.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Counterpart theory(as used in metaphysics and modal logic): A way of thinking about possible worlds where instead of asking 'could I have been different?', you ask 'is there a version of me in another possible world that is different?' That other version is your 'counterpart.'
Explanatory unification(as used in philosophy of science): When a theory ties together different phenomena under one clear framework, showing how seemingly separate things are actually connected.
Pragmatic purpose(as used in philosophy of language and epistemology): A practical goal or usefulness—something works well for solving a real problem, even if it might not be the deepest truth.
Ross's prima facie duties(as used in ethics): A list of basic moral duties proposed by philosopher W.D. Ross—like keeping promises and helping others—that are binding unless they conflict with an even stronger duty in a particular situation.

Based on where you are in your exploration