It disappoints me that this comment is currently at -1. Of all the comments I have made in the last week this was probably my favourite and it remains so now.

If "the standard reply of a consequentialist is the utility function" then the analogous reply of a deontologist is something very similar. It is unreasonable to compare consequentialism with a utility function with a deontological system in which rules are 'unbreakable'. The latter is an absurd caricature of deontological reasoning that is only worth mentioning at all because deontologists are on average less inclined to follow their undeveloped thoughts through to the natural conclusion.

Was my post downvoted because...?

1. Someone disagrees that a 'function' system applies to deontology just as it applies to consiquentialism.
2. I have missed the fact that conclusion is universally apparent and I am stating the obvious.
3. I included an appendix to acknowledge the consequences of the 'universal rule' system and elaborate on what a coherent system will look like if this universality can not be let go.