 We can see the norm of expected utility in one of two ways: maximize expected utility, or have preferences that obey the axioms. Because of this, normative arguments for expected utility can argue either for the functional form itself or for the normativity of the axioms. Examples of the former include the argument that expected utility maximizers do better in the long run, though these arguments fell out of favor somewhat as the popularity of the realist interpretations of utility waned. Examples of the latter include the idea that each axiom is itself an obvious constraint and the idea that the axioms follow from consequentialist (or means-ends rationality) principles. Of particular note is a proof that non-EU maximizers will either be inconsistent or non-consequentialist over time (Hammond 1988); how alternative theories have fared under dynamic choice has been a significant focus of arguments about their rationality.