 It is nice to know that no sordid or selfish consequences flow from defining the goodness in terms of the satisfaction of desire, but it is not at all clear that Russell has solved the problem that he had set himself. For propositions about what will satisfy desire are propositions about what will satisfy desire—that is, propositions about what will be. Underlying Russell’s argument is his evident desire to forge a conceptual connection between moral belief and action. The theory must (help) explain the fact that we often do what we believe to be our duty and usually pursue and promote what we believe to be good. This, not the thesis that we are necessarily motivated by our moral beliefs, is the premise of Hume’s famous Motivation Argument at Treatise, 3.1.1: