Supererogatory and Offensive Omissions

Abstract

The aim of this essay is to find solutions to puzzles that arise when deciding whether certain types of omissions qualify as supererogatory. I consider three possible solutions and argue that one is the most satisfactory. Then I turn to the notion of offence, the mirror image counterpart to supererogation, and I demonstrate that similar puzzles arise when considering offensive omissions. I argue that the same strategy that solved the earlier puzzles is the most satisfactory solution to these puzzles.