Abstract
We argue that permissibility-based solutions to the paradox of supererogation encounter a nested dilemma. Such approaches solve the paradox by distinguishing moral and rational permissions. If they do not also include a bridge condition that relates these two permissions, then they violate a very plausible monotonicity condition. If they do include a bridge condition, then permissibility-based solutions either amount to rational satisficing or they collapse back into the classical account of supererogation and fail to resolve the paradox.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 723-731 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Analysis |
| Volume | 80 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Oct 2020 |