Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Many philosophers, in discussing supererogation, maintain that supererogatory actions must be done for the benefit of others (among other conditions). Most others, while not explicitly embracing such a requirement, typically use examples which involve agents risking their own well-being (or indeed sacrificing their own well-being) for the sake of others. On the other hand, some have allowed that agents can perform supererogatory actions without a concern for good consequences for others, if the agents are acting out of a concern for moral duty or principle.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jason Kawall (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: