I recall reading about this in Highschool, but I can't figure out who it was.
The premise was that every man has agency, and they are obligated to use that agency to change their environment for the better. I don't think it tried to establish what "better" meant, but left it up to whatever moral compass the person in question adhered to, trusting that the cumulative efforts of everyone to make their specific environment better would come out in the wash and lead to greater good.
An example would be WWII, Hitler used his agency to create/enforce an Aryan race. Everyone else used their agency to stop that because it was a bad idea. The end result was the Nazis lost the war.
I can't remember which time period this Philosopher lived it, but I think it was Western Philosophy. Maybe Late Renaissance or Ancient?
Google is not being of much help, so I'm hoping someone here knows what I'm talking about and can point me in the right direction.
More things I can remember:
Much like Maslow's Hierarchy, an individual had an obligation to smaller environmental units first. Like self, then family, then community, then nation. So you had and obligation to family first, then nation, etc.
I think the philosophy was based on the idea that we have no control over where fate puts us (born a king or born a pauper). So your obligation was to make what you can for the better. Like a king would have an obligation to the whole nation, but the pauper only to his family. And the more influence you got, the more you had an obligation to.