How far can the argument against the Extreme Demand be extended? If living one kind of life, or pursuing one kind of good, is better than the alternatives in a significant enough way to ground requirements of beneficence on others to help me, it cannot be wrong for me to refuse to forgo it to help others. Moreover, there are some kinds of lives, and some kinds of goods (‘commitment goods’), that are morally defensible even when there are alternatives that would be no worse for me. This generates neither an ultra-permissive nor an ultra-ascetic view.
Keywords: commitment, demands of morality, friendship, good life, goods, moral permission, requirement of beneficence,