Mindblown: a blog about philosophy.

In reply to mlyoung57. That’s one way to go, but I’m skeptical of supererogation as a concept. That’s a long story which I’ll spare you right now. LikeLike

In reply to mlyoung57. Ah, you have a point. I both say that there is a demand, and that there isn’t. But I think what I said is ultimately consistent. There’s an ambiguity in the phrase “we’ve done all we can do.” It has …

In reply to Irfan Khawaja. Finally, I want to say something about the “cash value” of all this. That is this: if one takes seriously and literally the idea that society is required to achieve full justice in its basic social structure, this…

In reply to Irfan Khawaja. The point is that, while the participants in a society might meet all of their requirements with respect to promoting some ideal of full justice (in the basic social structure) — as construed on the suggested analysis &…

In reply to Irfan Khawaja. I was responding to the ‘demand’ part of your: “There is no moral requirement being violated, but there is a social need going unmet, and morality (justice or benevolence or whatever) can demand that we take…

LikeLike

In reply to Roderick T. Long. I suspect that anything like the non-aggression principle does not have a precise-enough common understanding prior to public codification to automatically yield, through a kind of perfect compliance, a just public regime …

In reply to Irfan Khawaja. Yes. Plausibly, the social conditions have to concern one’s interests in important ways and one has to have no easy exit from them. Otherwise, the possibility of such permissions or requirements is not very realistic (c…