Supererogatory Action

Some prominent Moral theories, notably Kant's, are 'Deontological', meaning, based on what one 'ought' to do. The 'ought' is generally conceived to be an impersonal requirement to perform a type of action classified as a 'Duty'. So, a 'Duty' is what anyone ought to do, and, hence, 'Goodness' consists in behaving Dutifully. One chronic problem for Deontology is 'Supererogatory' action, namely action that 'goes beyond the call of duty'. The problem is that if 'good' behavior='dutiful' behavior, Supererogatory action, e. g. heroism, has no Moral value, a significant shortcoming for a theory that means to accommodate all instances of praiseworthy activity. Some Deontologists have, following the conceptual logic of their Principle, gone so far as to deny the very possibility of 'Supererogatory' action. But, if there is a conceptual problem involved, it lies with their commitment to Universalizability as the criterion of Goodness, which cannot recognize differences in Individual capacities, e. g. that one person's heroism might be beyond the strength of another. So, Evolvementalism argues, to the contrary, that it is Dutiful Conduct that lacks Phronetic worth, because, 'doing what anyone should' is inadequate as an Idionomic Principle, and, furthermore, that any Idionomic motivation is beyond what 'anyone should do'. Hence, Evolvemental Phronetics is intrinsically Supererogatory.