final end or purpose of things (the Greek Telos meaning "the end or purpose of an action"). According to this group of theories things are instrumentally valuable which help to achieve either specific or general ends, and underlying this, Schroeder tells us, is the relation of cause and effect. Frankena defined instrumental value as that which is good or useful for some purpose and he referred to Aristotle who, besides defining different kinds of cause, defined the good as "that at which all things aim". If for example the aim is to live a good life those things will be good or valuable which constitute the means for achieving such an end. However, what is good for a specific person and what is good for the world as a whole are two different things and are reflected, according to Schroeder, in the ideas of egoism and consequentialism respectively. Regarding the latter, Zimmerman writes that a value is good because of a perceived final end in which "all the consequences taken as a whole are good". Regarding the end at which people aim, Bentham, according to Elinor Mason, thought that the sole end was that of "pleasure", and that all other values such as beauty, friendship, knowledge etc. could be measured in accordance with the quantity of pleasure which each might afford. John Stuart Mill suggested that there were lower and higher pleasures and that these were fundamentally incommensurable. He went on to question, like Plato, whether the values of pleasure or satisfaction were in fact the ends at which intelligent people should aim. Mason also refers to James Griffin who was of the opinion that "well-being" was a better name for such an end, and which he saw in terms of "flourishing" or a "maximisation of life" in all its aspects. A "balancing of elements" is required whereby those activities which we value for well-being, such as work, rest, love, solitude, health, accomplishment etc. should be considered "in various combinations" in order to afford a "framework" or a "plan of life" for ourselves. This way of thinking was called by Elizabeth Anderson, in her article on John Dewey, "objective list theory" as opposed to theories like Bentham's based on pleasure or those of Dewey based on "informed desire". Dewey rejected the notion of a final end arguing instead that the "value of means and ends are reciprocally determined". According to