Are Acts of Supererogation Always Praiseworthy?

Theoria 82 (3):238-255 (2016)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
It is commonly assumed that praiseworthiness should form part of the analysis of supererogation. I will argue that this view should be rejected. I will start by arguing that, at least on some views of the connection between moral value and praiseworthiness, it does not follow from the fact that acts of supererogation go beyond what is required by duty that they will always be praiseworthy to perform. I will then consider and dismiss what I will call the Argument from Stipulation in favour of holding that acts of supererogation are always praiseworthy. Next, I will examine what I will call the Necessary Connection Argument, which posits a necessary connection between supererogation and praiseworthiness. I will argue that the intuitions used to motivate this argument are best explained by a debunking explanation.
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
ARCAAO-5
Upload history
Archival date: 2015-11-27
View other versions
Added to PP index
2015-11-27

Total views
368 ( #14,334 of 56,043 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
42 ( #18,787 of 56,043 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.