 In contrast to the inseparable goods and social sanctions strategies that question the Foole’s characterization of the scenarios that give rise to a tension between morality and rationality, the reformed decision theory strategy recommends that agents like the Foole revisit their understanding of rational choice. In particular it proposes an account of rational choice that is more subtle than the orthodox Bayesian account according to which rational choice is a fairly straightforward matter of maximizing expected utility. David Gauthier (1986) and Edward McClennen (1990) are the most prominent exemplars of this approach, with Gauthier proposing a principle of constrained maximization and McClennen a principle of resolute choice. For ease of exposition we focus on Gauthier.