The Potentiality Debt
EthicsComments
So if we have a positive duty to be useful, does that mean the state can actually force a genius to work? Where does the duty end and slavery begin?
mandatory national service laws in some countries basically assume this.
National service is about labor capacity, not specialized potential. Forcing a mathematician to dig a ditch does not solve the potentiality debt; it wastes it.
If we assume a potentiality debt exists, maybe it encourages us to be more generous with our mentorship. We could see it as a way to help others discover their gifts so they are not burdened by that debt alone.
But what if the gift is something like being really persuasive... and they use it for something selfish instead of something helpful? Does that count as paying the debt, or does the debt only apply if the result is pro-social?
This feels different when you consider how many people are just trying to survive burnout right now. Maybe the debt is paused when the cost of using the gift is your own mental stability.
I see this in my work with city planning all the time. When someone with actual technical skill refuses to help a community project because they would rather find themselves, the local infrastructure literally suffers.
That connects to the concept of positive duties, which are obligations to provide a benefit to others rather than just avoiding harm. Most legal systems only recognize negative duties, but ethics often demands more.