Why Proximity Matters for the Concept of Supererogation

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The concept of supererogation is strictly correlated with duty, since its peculiar value is defined by acts that go beyond our regular obligations. This paper highlights the importance of proximity (relational closeness) in allowing the proper theoretical space to supererogation. As a matter of fact if we broaden our sense of duty, the possibility to perform supererogatory acts correspondingly decreases. Special obligations emphasize how difficult acts of supererogation are to perform if we stand in some morally-relevant special position with the recipient of our acts. Thus, we can conclude that the relationship between the agent and the recipient of the act (proximity) plays an important role both for our sense of duty (generating special obligations) and for the possibility of performing supererogatory acts. Furthermore, this analysis brings attention to the fact that whenever an act is supererogatory, it cannot, at the same time, be a special obligation (and vice versa). As a consequence, if proximity plays such a role, an objection to the possibility of self-regarding supererogation can be made.
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
GRIWPM-2
Upload history
Archival date: 2017-04-05
View other versions
Added to PP index
2017-04-05

Total views
222 ( #29,804 of 2,462,539 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
24 ( #32,113 of 2,462,539 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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