A duty to distribute surplus collapses the moral distinction between charity, which is supererogatory, and justice, which is enforceable, undermining the voluntarist basis of beneficence.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
The idea that something is based on free choice and cannot be forced on someone against their will.
beneficence(Used as the practical expression of the ideal of love of humanity)
The practice of doing good to others, presented here as the means through which love of humanity is expressed
charity(Used by Foot as a second moral criterion alongside rights in evaluating euthanasia)
A moral consideration concerning whether an action is good for the person affected, distinct from the question of rights
duty(The author argues 'duty' carries a different sense than 'expediency' even under a consequentialist theory.)
What one is morally obligated to do; distinct in meaning from expediency though potentially co-extensive with it.
supererogatory(Used to identify a moral category that act utilitarianism cannot accommodate, since act utilitarianism makes the optimal act obligatory, leaving no room for acts that exceed duty.)
Acts that go beyond what is morally obligatory; they are praiseworthy but not required.