Philosophical Studies 178 (6):2063-2075 (2020)
AbstractSupererogatory acts are those that lie “beyond the call of duty.” There are two standard ways to define this idea more precisely. Although the definitions are often seen as equivalent, I argue that they can diverge when options are infinite, or when there are cycles of better options; moreover, each definition is acceptable in only one case. I consider two ways out of this dilemma.
Similar books and articles
Supererogation in clinical research.Deborah R. Barnbaum - 2008 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 11 (3):343-349.
Repugnance or Intransitivity: A Repugnant But Forced Choice.Stuart Rachels - 2004 - In Jesper Ryberg Torbjorn Tannsjo (ed.), The Repugnant Conclusion: Essays on Population Ethics. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 163--86.
Supererogation Across Normative Domains.Brian McElwee - 2017 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 95 (3):505-516.
Sporting supererogation and why it matters.Alfred Archer - 2017 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 44 (3):359-373.
Deontological square, hexagon, and decagon: a deontic framework for supererogation.Jan C. Joerden - 2012 - Logica Universalis 6 (1-2):201-216.
Beyond Obligation: Reasons and Supererogation.Michael Ferry - 2015 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 77:49-65.
Supererogation, Inside and Out: Toward an Adequate Scheme for Common Sense Morality.Paul McNamara - 2011 - In Mark Timmons (ed.), Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics, Volume I. Oxford University Press. pp. 202-235.
Supererogation in deontic logic: Metatheory for DWE and some close neighbours.Edwin D. Mares & Paul McNamara - 1997 - Studia Logica 59 (3):397-415.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Rethinking the Good: Moral Ideals and the Nature of Practical Reasoning.Larry S. Temkin - 2012 - Oxford University Press.