 Some are motivated to consequentialize out of a desire to establish both that the consequentialist/non-consequentialist distinction is unimportant and that there is nothing uniquely compelling about act-consequentialism (see Dreier 2011 and Louise 2004). Because these philosophers hold that the act-consequentialist counterpart of a target non-consequentialist theory is a mere notational variant on that theory, I’ll call them notational consequentializers. They give what’s known as the assimilation argument for consequentializing (S. A. Schroeder 2017: 1480):