Reasons First, Deontic Logic Second

I develop a novel view about how reasons normatively interact in determining the deontic status of actions that not only accounts for intuitive deontic verdicts across a wide range of cases but also entails important deontic principles, such as agglomeration. At its core is the Balancing View of ought, according to which one ought to x if, and only if, the reasons to x are weightier than those for every incompatible alternative. I argue that the Balancing View gets cases right only when supplemented by principles linking reasons for options to reasons for more specific ways of doing them, together with a principle restricting the aggregation of reasons. The resulting account yields formal deontic principles at no additional theoretical cost.