Supererogation and Social Responsibility: A Response to Chris Durante

Abstract

In this comment I suggest that the Parable of the Good Samaritan should be understood as distinguishing between three levels of normative guidance: the legal, the moral, and the supererogatory. The distinction between the obligatory and the supererogatory is taken as objective and independent of the kind of motivation or virtue underlying both kinds of actions. However, it is argued that states, as political institutions committed to justice and impartiality, cannot be agents of supererogatory action. Charity, in contrast, may be ascribed to institutions (like charities!) which act by the intention to do more than is strictly required. The final part of the comment examines the Jewish tradition with regard to acts held by the Catholic doctrine as supererogatory.