Moral Universality and the Phenomenon of Supererogatory Acts Andrey V. Prokofyev

The paper deals with a question whether the feature of universality characteristic to the whole sphere of moral values and norms despite the existence of supererogatory acts. The moral universality manifests itself in the application of requirements to all agents, the general significance of values and the impartial treatment of every person as having equal moral status. Supererogatory acts are discretionary benevolent acts grounded in moral motives or intentions. Their commission deserves more or less intense praise or admiration, but omission is blameless. Supererogatory acts include ordinary good deeds under the condition that they are committed more frequently then imperfect duties require and genuine heroic deeds involving self-sacrifice. The discretionary character of supererogatory acts can be understood as a persuasive argument against the thesis that all content of morality is universal. The thesis can be defended on two presumptions. First, the sphere of supererogation can be considered an illusion based on a glaring mistake — breaking the good-ought tie-up. But this reasoning distorts the idea of moral perfection and the inner logic of moral self-improvement. Second, it is possible to discover universality within the sphere of supererogation. We have not the direct universal ought there but the universal good is definitely present. The obligation to do good is transformed into the obligation to praise and to admire supererogatory acts.

Keywords

morality, normative ethics, moral universality, impartiality, supererogatory acts, imperfect duties, ought, good, benevolent actions, moral heroes

Received

28.09.2022

Publication date

28.09.2022

Number of characters

34579

Cite

GOST	Prokofyev A. Moral Universality and the Phenomenon of Supererogatory Acts Andrey V. Prokofyev // Chelovek – 2022. – V. 33. – Issue 4 C. 148-164 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://chelovek-journal.ru/S023620070022315-3-1 (circulation date: 02.05.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S023620070021632-2
MLA	Prokofyev, Andrey V "Moral Universality and the Phenomenon of Supererogatory Acts Andrey V. Prokofyev." Chelovek 33.4 (2022):148-164. DOI: 10.31857/S023620070021632-2
APA	Prokofyev A. (2022). Moral Universality and the Phenomenon of Supererogatory Acts Andrey V. Prokofyev. Chelovek 33(4), pp.148-164 DOI: 10.31857/S023620070021632-2

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 259

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Apressyan R.G. Fenomen universal’nosti v etike: formy kontseptualizatsii [The Phenomenon of Universality in Ethics: Forms of Conceptualization]. Voprosy filosofii. 2016. N 8. P. 79–88.

2. Kant I. Sochineniya na nemetskom i russkom yazykakh: v 5 t. Metafizika nravov: v 2 ch. [Works in German and Russian: in 5 vol. The Metaphysics of Morals: in 2 Pt]. T. 5, ch. 2: Metafizicheskie osnovnye nachala ucheniya o dobrodeteli [Vol. 5, Pt 2: Metaphysical First Principles of the Doctrine of Virtue], ed. by N. Motroschilova, A. Krouglov, B. Durflinger, D. Huning. Moscow: Kanon+: ROOI “Reabilitatsiya” Publ., 2019.

3. Andrade J. Morally-Demanding Inﬁnite Responsibility: The Supererogatory Attitude of Levinasian Normativity. Cham: Springer, 2021.

4. Archer A., Ridge M. The Heroism Paradox: Another Paradox of Supererogation. Philosophical Studies. 2015. Vol. 172, N 6. P. 1575–1592.

5. Atkins P., Nance I. Defending the Suberogatory. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy. 2017. Vol. 9(1). P. 1–8.

6. Baron M. Kantian Ethics Almost Without Apology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995.

7. Dentsoras D. The Birth of Supererogation. Epoche. 2014. Vol. 18, N 2. P. 351–372.

8. Driver J. The Suberogatory. Australasian Journal of Philosophy. 1992. Vol. 70. P. 286–296.

9. Flescher A.M. Heroes, Saints, and Ordinary Morality. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2003.

10. Heyd D. Supererogation: Its Status in Ethical Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

11. Hill T.E. Kant on Imperfect Duties and Supererogation. Kant-Studien. 1971. Vol. 62, N 1–4. P. 55–76.

12. Keller S. Partiality. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013.

13. Mellema G. Beyond the Call of Duty: Supererogation, Obligation, and Offence. Albany: SUNY Press, 1991.

14. Urmson J.O. Saints and Heroes. Essays in Moral Philosophy, ed. by A.I. Melden. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1958. P. 198–216.