Research On Utilitarianism And Supererogation

It is commonly assumed that utilitarianism cannot accommodate the supererogation,because the utilitarianism claims that all good deeds are within the obligation,while supererogation means that there are some behaviors outside the scope of the obligation.This paper is dedicated to discussing the relationship between utilitarianism and supererogation,that is,whether utilitarianism can accommodate supererogation.First,we will try to give a comprehensive introduction to supererogation,including the definition of supererogation and genre disputes.On this basis,we will compare supererogation and utilitarianism to show the contradiction between them,and illustrate the supererogation criticism that utilitarianism may face,such as criticism of insuficient space,criticism of kind will,and criticism of impartiality and so on.Then,we will introduce and classify some existing responses to utilitarianism,such as the Satisficing Consequentialism for the principle of maximization and the hybrid theory and the Position-Relative Consequentialism for the impartial attitude,etc.,and through the evaluation of these responses to show the pros and cons of different problem solving methods.Finally,we will try to provide a viable new response to solve the problem of supererogation while avoiding possible shortcomings,that is,to solve the problem of insufficient space through new reforms and interpretations of impartiality,and respond to criticism of supererogation.This new response makes the meaning of supererogation approach to the imperfect obligation.In order to avoid the imperfect obligation deconstructing the supererogation,we will give a new interpretation to the imperfect obligation to adapt it to the utilitarianism,and form a cross-containment relationship with supererogation.