 The criterion of expected utility had another advantage for Russell. It allowed him to recommend a less “conservative and anti-reforming” version of Moore’s principle that “the individual can be confidently recommended … to conform to rules which are generally useful and generally practiced.” Russell was an act-consequentialist rather than a rule-consequentialist. An act is right if the expected consequences of performing it are as good or better than any other. It is not right because it conforms to some rule, even a rule that it is generally useful to obey. Nevertheless, rules are necessary because we do not have world enough and time to calculate the consequences of every act.