 Moreover, Ross at times suggests he aims to reflect the views of the ‘thoughtful and well-educated’ (RG 41) or, what comes to the same thing, what ‘we’ think (RG 40; FE 102, 104, 134, 172). But at other times he says he aims to reflect the views of the ‘plain man’ (RG 17, 20–21n1, 28, 57; FE 186, 187, 188; KT 31). If the views of the thoughtful and well-educated and the plain man are distinct, and Ross inclines (with some justification) toward the former rather than the latter, his approach to moral theorising may be closer on the matter of reform (though not of system) to Sidgwick’s (which, to be clear, emphasises what we think on reflection and the consensus of experts (Sidgwick 1907, 338–343)). This may cause Ross trouble. He faults rival moral views for conflicting with what ‘plain men’ think about ethics. If he is open to substantially revising the plain person’s views, he may weaken his case against rivals.