“In tracing the genealogy of consequentialist morals, Darr’s book offers a new critique of consequentialism. Consequentialist reasoning isn’t a natural, default way of doing ethics, a mode of moral reasoning in which we are free to engage as soon as we are liberated from the strictures of religion. Rather, it was invented, and invented for culturally contingent reasons. . . . Darr provides a detailed account of how consequentialist thinking evolved over the course of generations. These developments are fascinating, and I would recommend that anyone interested in them read the book.”

First Things

“Darr argues that contemporary secular consequentialism emerges out of the attempts of early modern moralists to make sense of God’s creative freedom, the existence of evil, and origins of human morality. This is a strikingly original thesis, defended by a close reading of the British moralists, informed by a keen sense of the philosophical and theological issues at stake. This book challenges our most fundamental assumptions about the history of moral thought and the reasonableness of the ‘greatest good’ as a moral standard.”

Jean Porter, University of Notre Dame

“Theologians and philosophers alike need more books like Darr’s rich account of the religious origins of consequentialist ideas. He brings to life texts most of us have forgotten but to which we owe more than we know. Darr argues that what we now consider a commonsense secular tradition had its origin in theological arguments about divine goodness. The clarity and originality of the story he tells offer a model of historical theology that I hope many will emulate."

Jesse Couenhoven, Villanova University

“Consequentialism is a dominant ethical framework among contemporary ethicists, economists, legal theorists, and policy makers, particularly in secular circles. Darr’s careful and convincing study reveals that key components of the consequentialist framework arose from theological debates in the early modern period—debates about what an omnipotent and perfectly good being would or should do.”

Andrew Chignell, Princeton University