Scholarlink

<p>The phenomenology of heroic action seems to be at odds with commonsense morality: while the latter tells us that heroic acts of self-sacrifice are morally optional, heroes reliably believe that such acts are morally required of them. Do heroes systematically exhibit false moral beliefs, or does our commonsense commitment to the possibility of supererogation need revising? This paper argues, contrary to both supererogationists and anti-supererogationists, that we need not decide: as what we are morally required to do depends on how virtuous we are, heroes are right to believe that heroic actions are morally required <i>of them</i>, while ordinary folk morality is right that, <i>for ordinary folk</i>, these very same actions are morally optional. I arrive at this conclusion by supplementing the foremost contemporary account of supererogation with two naturally plausible claims about the virtue of selflessness.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Morality demands more of you the better you are

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月23日

查看全文
  • Alexander Sasha Arridge

摘要

The phenomenology of heroic action seems to be at odds with commonsense morality: while the latter tells us that heroic acts of self-sacrifice are morally optional, heroes reliably believe that such acts are morally required of them. Do heroes systematically exhibit false moral beliefs, or does our commonsense commitment to the possibility of supererogation need revising? This paper argues, contrary to both supererogationists and anti-supererogationists, that we need not decide: as what we are morally required to do depends on how virtuous we are, heroes are right to believe that heroic actions are morally required of them, while ordinary folk morality is right that, for ordinary folk, these very same actions are morally optional. I arrive at this conclusion by supplementing the foremost contemporary account of supererogation with two naturally plausible claims about the virtue of selflessness.