 Although Russell became a convert to the doctrines of Principia Ethica, he disagreed with Moore on two important points. Russell, like Moore was what is nowadays known as a consequentialist. He believed that the rightness or otherwise of an act is “in some way, dependent on consequences”. But for the young Moore, it is “demonstrably certain” (!) that “I am morally bound to perform this action” is identical [that is synonymous] with the assertion “This action will produce the greatest amount of possible good in the Universe” (PE: ch. 5, §89). Thus it is analytic that the right thing to do is the action that will, actually produce the best consequences. But in Russell’s view this claim is neither analytic nor true. Moore’s own Open Question Argument can be deployed to prove that it is not analytic, and a little critical reflection reveals that it is not true.