Thus, backward-looking reasons can serve as the content of utility-maximizing rules without themselves being the foundational justification, dissolving the alleged incompatibility.

?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.

Utility-maximizing rules(in ethics, particularly in consequentialist theories): Guidelines or principles designed to produce the greatest amount of overall happiness, benefit, or well-being for people.
backward-looking reasons(Contrasted with forward-looking (consequentialist) reasons within the critique of utilitarianism.): Moral reasons whose justificatory force derives from past events, such as a person having performed a worthwhile action or entered into an agreement, rather than from the future consequences of an action or rule.
foundational justification(Foundationalist epistemology; the target of BonJour's regress-style objection): A form of justification in which a belief is justified independently of other beliefs — its justification does not derive from inferential relations to further justified beliefs.
incompatibility(Characterized as an apparently negative notion, which creates a problem for the positive truth-maker proposal.)

Based on where you are in your exploration