 The historical origins of the debate may be traced back to work by Lars Bergström and Hector-Neri Castañeda. In his A Problem for Utilitarianism (1968), Castañeda argues that, given a few standard assumptions, utilitarianism is formally incoherent. His argument may be stated rather straightforwardly. First, Castañeda assumes a principle of deontic logic known as “ought distributes through conjunction”. This principle holds that if an agent S ought to do both A and B, then S ought to do A and S ought to do B (1968: 141). The term “ought” is used in a variety of different ways in the ethics literature. However, when it is used in the formulation of views in the actualism/possibilism literature, it should be understood as denoting the ought of moral obligation. This idea may be represented more formally as  Ought Distributes Through Conjuction: 