Philosophy Bites — Elizabeth Harman on Moral Heroes

Date: August 4, 2024
Hosts: David Edmonds & Nigel Warburton
Guest: Elizabeth Harman

Overview

This episode explores Elizabeth Harman's nuanced view of moral heroism and the distinction between actions that are morally required, supererogatory, and those that, while not required, are such that "you should do them." The conversation discusses the frequency and character of such actions in everyday life, how these concepts apply in both ordinary and extraordinary circumstances, the subtleties of praise and criticism, and how Harman's ideas can clarify dilemmas like moral vegetarianism and charitable giving.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Defining Moral Heroism and Its Scope

• [00:42] Harman explains: Moral heroism involves actions that exceed moral obligation, yet, in some situations, all things considered, one should do them.
  • "Sometimes there's something that you don't have to do that morality doesn't require of you, and yet, all things considered, you should do it." — Elizabeth Harman [00:53]
• These cases exist in a spectrum: some actions that go “above and beyond” we should do, some we shouldn’t, and some are simply optional.

2. The Supererogatory: Above and Beyond

• [01:34] Discussion: Supererogatory actions—going beyond duty.
  • Harman is interested in cases where failing to do such acts is a mistake (“sometimes when you fail to do something supererogatory, you make a mistake because you should have done it. But other times... you haven't made any mistake at all.”) [01:46]

3. Everyday Examples: Heroism in the Ordinary

• [02:23]
  • Example 1: Making stew for a stressed friend who didn’t ask for it: All things considered, you should do it, but it’s not wrong if you don’t.
  • Example 2: If you know making the stew will trigger a migraine, you shouldn’t do it even though it would be nice.
  • "You might think, ‘oh, I should do that.’ And you might be right. So it might be that you should do it, even though, of course, you wouldn't be doing anything wrong if you failed to do it." — Harman [02:39]

4. Frequency and Real-Life Application

• [04:16]
  • Harman asserts these subtle, non-required-but-should-do actions are common in daily life. Heroic opportunities are rarer, but sometimes one should seize them.
  • "I think all the time we consider doing things for other people, small things often, that we realize, oh, all things considered, I should do that." — Harman [04:25]

5. Heroism: Obligatory vs. Supererogatory

• [05:07]
  • Heroic actions involve great sacrifice or risk. Some are required by morality, some are not—but sometimes, even when not required, you should take the risk.
  • Example: Saving a drowning stranger when you’re not a lifeguard—morality doesn’t demand it, but sometimes, “all things considered,” you should act. [05:56]

6. Praise, Blame, and Criticism

• [07:00]
  • Failure to perform a non-required but 'should' action is not blameworthy, yet it might be open to criticism.
  • "If you should do something above and beyond... and you don’t do it, then you’re not blameworthy... but at the same time, I think you can be criticizable." — Harman [07:00]
• [07:46]
  • Harman draws a line: It makes no sense to resent someone for not making an unrequested stew, but one could say, “You should have done it.” She uses such intuitions to support her position.

7. Worldly Obligations: Famine and Charity

• [08:52]
  • Discusses the classic “strangers on the other side of the world” case (charity, famine relief)
  • Sometimes, donating is not morally required, but you should do it, depending on the specifics of your circumstance.
  • “...you’re not morally required to specifically donate to that charity, but you could be in a situation where, all things considered, you should...” — Harman [09:22]

8. Moral Vegetarianism: Accommodating Others

• [11:25]
  • Harman applies her distinction to explain why moral vegetarians may reasonably accommodate meat-eaters (e.g., splitting the bill) without inconsistency:
    • Being a “moral vegetarian” doesn’t require holding that eating meat is morally wrong—instead, that, all things considered, one shouldn’t eat meat.
    • "You might think that while it’s wrong to accommodate wrongdoing, it may be okay to accommodate other people’s choices merely to do things that they shouldn’t do that aren’t morally wrong." — Harman [12:23]

9. The Aim: Moral Understanding

• [13:24]
  • Harman emphasizes deeper self-understanding and understanding others' moral motives, rather than changing behavior.
  • "When they realize that they’re not morally required to act in a particular way, nevertheless, moral reasons still have a grip on them… I want them to understand their own commitments and other people’s commitments differently." — Harman [13:24]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "Sometimes there's something that you don't have to do that morality doesn't require of you, and yet, all things considered, you should do it." — Harman [00:53]
• "Sometimes when you fail to do something supererogatory, you make a mistake because you should have done it. But other times... you haven't made any mistake at all." — Harman [01:46]
• "If you should do something above and beyond... and you don’t do it, then you’re not blameworthy... but at the same time, I think you can be criticizable." — Harman [07:00]
• "It makes no sense to resent someone for not making an unrequested stew, but you could say to yourself, ‘You should have done it.’" — Harman (paraphrased) [07:46]
• "You’re not morally required to specifically donate to that charity, but you could be in a situation where, all things considered, you should donate..." — Harman [09:22]
• "Being a moral vegetarian doesn’t require the view that eating meat is morally wrong, but rather that, all things considered, one shouldn’t eat meat." — Harman [12:23]

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:42 — What is a moral hero?
• 02:23 — Everyday examples: stew for a friend
• 05:07 — Defining heroism and examples
• 07:00 — Praise, blame, and criticism
• 08:52 — Moral obligations at a distance (charity, famine)
• 11:25 — Moral vegetarianism and social accommodation
• 13:24 — Big-picture implications and understanding

Tone and Style

The episode maintains a conversational, accessible tone, with Harman's philosophical distinctions clearly articulated and illustrated with relatable examples. The hosts probe for practical examples, making the subject matter engaging and inviting for listeners.