 Can there be rationally justifiable claims that certain intrinsic preferences – i.e. preferences that are not dependent on other preferences – are wrong, or should be changed? The Humean position answers no. Hume distinguished reason from the passion, and argued “that reason alone can never be a motive to any action of the will; that it can never oppose passion in the direction of the will” (Treatise, Book II, Part III, Section III). Humeans often took this distinction between beliefs and desires to imply not only that beliefs alone cannot motivate action, but also that desires are not open to similar rational criticism as beliefs. Therefore, Humeans conclude, preferences can only be criticised if they are extrinsic – i.e. instrumentally derived from other preferences on the basis of beliefs – or inconsistent. Such criticism of extrinsic preferences would seem ultimately to be a criticism of false beliefs, and it could be argued that it is therefore not really criticism of preferences (Broome 1993). 