Final answer:
The statement is true; nonconsequentialist moral theories determine the morality of an action based on its inherent nature rather than its consequences, in contrast to consequentialist theories like utilitarianism which focus on outcomes.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that nonconsequentialist moral theories say that the rightness of an action is dependent primarily on the nature of the action itself, not on its consequences, is true.
Nonconsequentialist theories, such as deontological ethics, assert that the morality of an action is based on whether it adheres to a set of rules or duties, irrespective of the consequences.
For example, Immanuel Kant's deontological approach emphasizes that actions are morally right if they accord with a universal moral law, and this law should be followed regardless of the outcomes of following it.
In contrast, consequentialist theories like utilitarianism argue that the rightness of an action is solely determined by its consequences.
For utilitarians, an action is morally right if it results in the greatest good for the greatest number, regardless of the nature of the action itself.
Thus, in utilitarianism, the consequences of the action are the most important factor in evaluating its morality.