Furthermore, it attempts to present a moral theory that combines three traditional approaches in moral and political philosophy: Kantian deontology, consequentialism, and contractualism (of the sort advocated by T. M. Scanlon, and from the tradition of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and John Rawls).

As part of that series at Berkeley, Parfit's lectures were responded to by Allen W. Wood, T. M. Scanlon and Susan Wolf.

[7] Constantine Sandis raises an objection to Parfit's project: the various "theories may well converge on their recommendations, but to think that the actions that follow from them are all that matters is to already presuppose the truth of consequentialism".

Sandis jokes that the significance of Parfit's work, despite his scant publication record, should cause us to question the "publish or perish" demands of the Research Excellence Framework, but "whether it will change the way we think about morality remains to be seen".

[2] The sheer length of time Parfit took to write the text, and the increasing incompatibility of such extended work with the demands of academic life was raised by Nigel Thrift, vice-chancellor of the University of Warwick, in a blog post on the Chronicle of Higher Education website: The philosopher Roger Scruton questioned the appropriateness of the title of the book, writing in 2015 "Nothing that really matters to human beings – their loves, responsibilities, attachments, their delights, aesthetic values, and spiritual needs – occurs in Parfit’s interminable narrative.