 Before we get to this defense, though, it’s important to get clear on what the assumption is. It’s that just as we can refer to the average kinetic energy of the molecules in a pot of boiling water at one atmosphere of pressure using either the metric expression “100 degrees Celsius” or some equivalent non-metric expression such as “212 degrees Fahrenheit”, we can refer to what makes an act one that ought to be performed using either the consequentialist expression “has an outcome that outranks every available alternative” or some putatively equivalent non-consequentialist expression such as “is necessary to show the proper respect for humanity”. The thought, then, is that what matters is only what Dreier calls the “active ingredients”, not the expressions that we use to label them. And, in the case of what makes a pot of water boiling, the active ingredient is the average kinetic energy of the water’s molecules, whereas, in the case of what makes an act one that ought to be performed, it is, according to Dreier, the features of its outcome (which includes the act itself) that contribute to its deontic status—see Dreier 2011: 114.