Rule-Consequentialism faces ‘the problem of partial
acceptance’: How should the ideal code be selected given the
possibility that its rules may not be universally accepted? A new contender,
‘Calculated Rates’ Rule-Consequentialism claims to solve
this problem. However, I argue that Calculated Rates merely relocates the
partial acceptance question. Nevertheless, there is a significant lesson from
this failure of Calculated Rates. Rule-Consequentialism's problem of
partial acceptance is more helpfully understood as an instance of the broader
problem of selecting the ideal code given various assumptions –
assumptions about who will accept and comply with the rules, but also about how
the rules will be taught and enforced, and how similar the future will be.
Previous rich discussions about partial acceptance provide a taxonomy and
groundwork for formulating the best version of Rule-Consequentialism.