Abstract

The paper puts forward a novel solution to the so-called All or Nothing Problem. Contrary to what many believe, I argue that it is permissible to go some way towards benefiting others without going all the way. Something Is Okay! If this is true, it is not the case (which would be absurd) that we should rather Do Nothing than Something if we are not going to do the Best. If my main claim is correct, this is a blow to a key tenet of Effective Altruism, namely, that if we do good (e.g., contribute to charities), we should do what is best. A side benefit of my solution is the introduction of a neglected sort of supererogation, namely, Self-Regarding Suboptimal Supererogation (i.e., the self-regarding equivalent of the more familiar other-regarding notion of going halfway towards supererogation). Regarding this, my view implies that we are not obliged to do what is best for ourselves (e.g., maximize our health or looks) once we go some way towards benefiting ourselves (incurring considerable costs in doing so).