Iiiiil)lllliii|!|ll|!lii|il!iiliniiiii irpiMn iiilil!liliiiiiiH!iiyiiiiMiiiiiiiiiniiinihi ||iiiiiifi|i{iiiaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiiiiii!iiHiiiii Hiiii nil III ihiiyl li iih III II n niiiinii 1 1 mil m ii i h 111 '\ I. hiilllili'ilil'illil Ij 'lull I 1 1 1 1, nillilliliiili!liiilJlilill!iii!liil!iWl lU'iini "itii! iiiiiiiii! iiiiiiiiHiiiiiii iiihiiiiii] liiLi i[i lLutUiULuUiJ.iiuuuU4ini4.tiiiiu]m-iiin.iuiuMn,ir. Reid's arrangement, noth- ing appears more unaccountable, if not capricious, than to call our appe- tites animal principles, because they are common to man and to the brutes ; and, at the same time, to distinguish our institicts by the title o( mechanical ; — when, of all our active propensities, there are none in which the nature of man bears .so strong an analogy to that of the lower animals as in these instinctive impulses. Indeed, it is from the condition of the brutes that the word instinct is transferred to that of man by a sort of figure or met- aphor. Our acquired principles of action comprehend all those propensities to act which we acquire from habit. Such are our artificial appetites and artificial desires, and the various factitious motives of human conduct generated by association and fashion. At present, it being useless for any of the purposes which I have in view to attempt so comprehensive and detailed an examination of the subject, I shall confine myself to the general enumeration already mentioned, As our appetites, our desires, and our affections, whether original or ac- quired, stand in the same common relation to the Moral Paculty (the illustration of which is the chief object of this volume), I purposely avoid those slighter and less important subdivisions which might be thought to savour unnecessarily of scholastic subtilty. [For later classifications of our Active Principles, . see Upham's Ele- ments of Mental Philosophy, Vol. II., Introduction, Chap, ii., and Whewell'a Elements of Morality, Book I. Chap, ii.] BOOK I. OF OUR INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. CHAPTER I. OF OUE APPETITES. I. Their Nature, Use, and Abuse.] This class of our Active Principles is distinguished by the following cir- cumstances : — 1. They take their rise from the body, and are com- mod to us with the brutes. 2. They are not constant, but occasional. 3. They are accompanied with an uneasy sensation, which is strong or weak in proportion to the strength or weakness of the appetite. Our appetites are three in number, hunger, thirst, and the appetite of sex. Of these, two were intended for the preservation of the individual; the third for the continuation of the species ; and without them reason would have been insufficient for these important pur- poses. Suppose, for example, that the appetite of hunger had been no part of our constitution, reason and experience might have satisfied us of the necessity of food to our preservation ; but how should we have been able, without an implanted princi ,le, to ascertain, according to the varying state of our animal economy, the proper seasons for eating, or the quantity of food that is salutary to the body? The lower animals not only receive this information from nature, but are, moreover, directed by instinct to the particular sort of food that is proper for them to use in health and in sickness. The senses of taste an-d smell, in the savage 12 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. state of. our species, are subservient, at least in some degree, to the same purpose. Our appetites can, with no propriety, be called selfish, for they are directed to their respective objects as ulti- mate ends, and they must all have operated, in the first instance, prior to any experience of the pleasure arising from their gratification. After this experience, indeed, the desire of enjoyment will naturally come to be com- bined with the appetite ; and it may sometimes lead us to stimulate or provoke the appetite Avith a view to the pleasure which is to result from indulging it. Imagina- tion, too, and the association of ideas, together with the social affections, and sometimes the moral faculty, lend their aid, and all conspire together in forming a complex passion, in which the animal appetite is only one ingredient. In proportion as this passion is grati- fied, its influence over the conduct becomes the more irresistible, (for all the active determinations of our na- ture are strengthened by habit,) till at last we struggle in vain against its tyranny. A man so enslaved by his animal appetites exhibits humanity in one of its most miserable and contemptible forms. As an additional proof of the misery of such a state, it is of great importance to remark, that, while habit strengthens all our active determinations, it diminishes the liveliness of our passive impressions ; — a remarka- ble instance of which occurs in the effects produced by an immoderate use of strong liquors, which, at the same time that it confirms the active habit of intem- perance, deadens and destroys the sensibility of the pal- ate. In consequence of this law of our nature, the evils of excessive indulgence are doubled, inasmuch as our sensibility to pleasure decays in proportion as the cravings of appetite increase. In general, it will be found, that, wherever we at- tempt to enlarge the sphere of enjoyment beyond the limits prescribed by nature, we frustrate our own pur- pose. A man so enslaved by his appetites may undoubted- ly, in one sense, be called selfish; for, as he must ne- APPETITES. 13 cessarily neglect the duties he owes to others, he may be presumed to be deficient in the benevolent affec- tions. But it cannot be said of him that he is actuated by an inordinate self-love, (meaning by that word an excessive regard for his own happiness,) for he sacrifices to the meanest gratifications all the noblest pleasures of which he is susceptible, and sacrifices to the pleas- ure of the moment the permanent enjoyments of health, reputation, and conscience. This is true even when the desire of gratification is combined with the original appetite; for no two principles can be more widely at variance than the desire of gratification and the desire of happiness. Of the errors introduced into morals, in consequence of the vague use of the words selfishness and self-love, I shall afterwards take notice. What 1 wish chiefly to remark at present is, that in no sense of these words can we refer to them the origin of our animal appetites ; and that the active propensities comprehended under this title are ultimate facts in the human constitution. II. Acquired Appetites.] Besides our natural appe- tites we have many acquired ones. Such are our ap- petites for tobacco, for opium, and for other intoxicating drugs. In general, every thing that stimulates the ner- vous system produces a subsequent languor, which gives rise to a desire of repetition. The universality of this appetite for intoxicating drugs is a curious fact in the history of our species. " It seems," says Dr. Robertson, " to have been one of the first exertions of human ingenuity to discover some composition of an intoxicating quality; and there is hardly any nation so rude, or so destitute of invention, as not to have succeeded in this fatal research. The most barbarous of the American tribes have been so unfortunate as to attain this art ; and even those who are so deficient in knowledge as to be unacquainted with the method of giving an inebriating strength to liquors by fermentation can accomplish the same end by other means. The people of the islands of North 2 1 I INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. America and of California used for this purpose the smoke of tobacco, drawn up with a certain instrument into the nostrils, the fumes of which ascending to the brain, they felt all the transports and frenzy of intoxi- cation. In almost every part of the New World the natives possessed the art of extracting an intoxicating liquor from maize, or the manioc root, the same sub- stances which they convert into bread. The operation by which they effect this nearly resembles the common one of brewing, but with this difference, that, instead of yeast, they use a nauseous infusion of maize or manioc chewed by their women. The saliva excites a vigorous fermentation, and in a few days the liquor becomes fit for drinking. It is not disagreeable to the taste, and, when swallowed in large quantities, is of an inebriating quality. This is the general beverage of the Americans, which they distinguish by different names, and for which they feel such a violent and insatiable desire, as it is not easy either to conceive or describe." * Many striking confirmations of this remark occur in the voyages of Cook and of later navigators. III. Other analogous Propensities.] Our occasional propensities to action and to repose are, in many re- spects, analogous to our appetites. They have, indeed, all the three characteristics of our appetites already mentioned. They are common, too, to man and to the lower animals, and they operate, in our own species, in the most infant state of the individual. In general, every animal we know is prompted by an instinctive impulse to take that degree of exercise which is salu- tary to the body, and is prevented from passing the bounds of moderation by that languor and desire of repose which are the consequences of continued ex- ertion. There is something, also, very similar to this with respect to the mind. We are impelled by nature to the exercise of its different faculties, and we are warned * History of America, Book IV. \ 100. APPETITES. 15 when we are in danger of overstraining them, by a consciousness of fatigue. After we are exhausted by a long course of application to business, how delight- ful are the first moments of indolence and repose I O die bella cosa difar niente I We are apt to imagine that no inducement shall again lead us to engage in the bustle of the world : but, after a short respite from our labors, our intellectual vigor returns ; the mind rouses from its lethargy " like a giant from his sleep," and we feel ourselves urged by an irresistible impulse to return to our duties as members of society. The active principles already mentioned are common to man and to the brutes. But besides these, the latter have some instinctive impulses, of which I do not know that there are any traces to be found in the human race. Such are those antipathies which tiney discover against the natural enemies of their respective tribes. It is prob- able, 1 think, that their existence is guarded entirely by their appetites and antipathies ; for the desire of self- preservation implies a degree of reason and reflection which they do not appear to possess. Even in the case of man, this desire is probably the result of his experi- ence of the pleasures which life affords ; and, accord- ingly, as Dr. Beattie very finely remarks, Milton has, with exquisite judgment, represented Adam, in the first mo- ments of his being, as contemplating, without anxiety or regret, the idea of immediate annihilation: — " WTiile thus I callecl and strayed I knew not whither From where I first drew air, and first belield This happy light, when answer none returned, On a green, shady bank profuse of flowers Pensive I sat medown. There gentle sleep First found me, and with soft oppression seized My drowzied sense ; untkoubi-ed, though I thought I then was passing to my former state Insensible, and forthwith to dissolve." * * Paradise Lost, Book Vm. 283. 16 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. CHAPTER II. OF OUR DESIRES. Our desires are distinguished from our appetites by the following circumstances : — 1. They do not take their rise from the body. 2. They do not operate periodically after certain in- tervals, nor do they cease after the attainment of a particular object. The most remarkable active principles belonging to this class are, — 1. The Desire of Knowledge, or the principle of Cu- riosity. 2. The Desire of Society. 8. The Desire of Esteem. 4. The Desire of Power, or the principle of Ambition. 5. The Desire of Superiority, or the principle of Em- ulation. ">> Section I. THE DESIRE OF KNOVTLBDGE. I. Early and various Manifestations.] The principle of curiosity appears in children at a very early period, and is commonly proportioned to the degree of intellect- ual capacity they possess. The direction, too, which it , takes, is regulated by nature according to the order of our wants and necessities ; being confined, in the first instance, exclusively to those properties of material ob- jects, and those laws of the material world, an ac- quaintance with which is essential to the preservation of our animal existence. Hence the instinctive eagerness with which children handle and examine every thing which is presented to them ; an employment which we are commonly apt to consider as a mere exercise of their animal powers, but which, if we reflect on the limited DESIRE OF KNOWLEDGE. 17 province of sight prior to experience, and on the early period of Hfe at which we are able to judge by the eye of the distances and of the tangible quaUties of bodies, will appear plainly to be the most useful occupation in which they could be engaged, if it were in the power of a philosopher to have the regulation of their atten- tion from the hour of their birth. In more advanced years curiosity displays itself in one way or another in every individual, and gives rise to an infinite diversity in their pursuits, — engrossing the attention of one man about physical causes, of another about mathematical truths, of a third about historical facts, of a fourth about the objects of natural history, of a fifth about the trans- actions of private families, or about the politics and news of the day. Whether this diversity be owing to natural predis- position, or to early education, it is of little consequence to determine, as, upon either supposition, a preparation is made for it in the original constitution of the mind, combined with the circumstances of our external situa- tion. Its final cause is also sufficiently obvious, as it is this which gives rise in the case of individuals to a lim- itation of attention and study, and lays the foundation of all the advantages which society derives from the di- vision and subdivision of intellectual labor. II. Neither Selfish nor Moral in itself.] These ad- vantages are so great, that some philosophers have at- tempted to resolve the desire of knowledge into self- love. But to this theory the same objection may be stated which has already beeij made to the attempts of some philosophers to account, in a similar way, for the origin of our appetites; — that all of these are active principles, manifestly directed by nature to particular specific objects, as their ultimate ends; — that as the object of hunger is not happiness, but food, so the ob- ject of curiosity is not happiness, but knowledge. To this analogy Cicero has very beautifully alluded, when he calls knowledge the natural food of the understand- ing. " Est animorum ingeniorumque nostrorum na- 2* 18 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OP ACTION. turale quoddam quasi pabulum consideratio contem- platioque natursB." We can indeed conceive a being prompted merely by the cool desire of happiness to accumulate information; but in a creature like man, endowed with a variety of other active principles, the stock of his knowledge would probably have been scanty, unless self-love had been aided in this particular by the principle of curiosity. Although, however, the desire of knowledge is not resolvable into self-love, it is not in itself an object of moral approbation. A person may indeed employ his intellectual powers with a view to his own moral im- provement, or to the happiness of society, and so feir he acts from a laudable principle. But to prosecute study merely from the desire of knowledge is neither virtuous nor vicious. When not suifered to interfere with our duties it is morally innocent. The virtue or vice does not lie in the desire, but in the proper or improper reg- ulation of it. The ancient astronomer, who, when ac- cused of indifference with respect to public transactions, answered that his country was in the heavens, acted criminally, inasmuch as he suffered his desire of knowl- edge to interfere with the duties which he owed to mankind. III. But superior in Dignity and Use to the Appetites.] At the same time, it must be admitted that the desire of knowledge (and the same observation is applicable to our other desires) is of a more dignified nature than those appetites which are common to us with the brutes. A thirst for science has been always considered as a mark of a liberal and elevated mind ; and it generally cooperates with the moral faculty in forming us to those habits of self-government which enable us to keep our animal appetites in due subjection. There is another circumstance which renders this desire peculiarly estimable, that it is always accom- panied with a strong desire to communicate our knowl- edge to others ; insomuch, that it has been doubted if the principle of curiosity would be sufficiently power- DESIRE OF KNOWLEDGE. 19 ful to animate the intellectual exertions of any man in a long course of persevering study, if he had no pros- pect of being ever able to impart his acquisitions to his friends or the public. " Si quis in coelum ascendisset," says Cicero, " naturamque mundi et pulchritudinem siderum perspexisset, ipsuavem illam admirationem ei fore, quse jucundissima fuisset, si aliquem, cui narraret, habuisset. Sic natura solitarium nihil amat, semperque ad aliquod tamquam adrainiculum annititur, quod in amicissimo quoque dulcissimum est." * And to the same purpose Seneca : — " Nee me uUa res delectabit, licet sit eximia et salutaris, quam mihi uni sciturus sum. Si cum hac exceptione detur sapientia, ut illam inclusara teneam, nee enuntiem, rejiciam : nullius boni, sine socio, jucunda possessio est." f A strong curiosity, properly directed, may be justly considered as one of the most important elements in philosophical genius ; and, accordingly, there is no cir- cumstance of greater consequence in education than to keep the curiosity always awake, and to tarn it to use- ful pursuits. I cannot help, therefore, disapproving greatly of a very common practice in this country, that of communicating to children general and superficial views of science and history by means of popular in- troductions. In this way we rob their future studies of all that interest which can render study agreeable, and reduce the mind, in the pursuits of science, to the same state of listlessness and languor as when we toil through the pages of a tedious novel after being made acquainted with the final catastrophe. * De Amicitia, 23. Thus translated, or rather paraphrased, by 5Iol- moth: — ■' Were a man to be carried up to Iicaven, and the' beauties of universal nature displayed to his view, he would receive but little pleasure fi-om the wonderful scone, if there were none to -whom he might relate the glories he had beheld. Human nature, indeed, is so constituted as to be in- capable of lonely satisfaction : man, like those plants which arc formed to embrace others, is led by an instinctive impulse to recline on his species ; and ho finds his Iiappiest and most secure support in the arms of a faithful friend." t Seneca, Epist. Mor , Lib. I. Ep. 6. '■ Nor, indeed, would any thing give me pleasure; however excellent and salutary it might be, were I to licep tlie knowledge of it to myself. Were wisdom oifered me under such restriciion as to be obliged to conceal it, I would reject it. No enjoyment whatever can be agreeable without participation." 20 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. It would contribute greatly to the culture and the guidance of this principle of curiosity, if the ditferent sciences were taught as much as possible in the order of the anabjtic rather than in that of the synthetic method ;* a plan, however, which I readily admit it is not so practicable to carry into effect in a course of public as of private instruction. Such a mode of edu- cation, too, would be attended with the additional advantage of accustoming the student to the proper method of investigation ; and thereby preparing him in due time to enter on the career of invention and dis- covery. Nor is this all. It would impress the knowl- edge he thus acquired, in some measure by his own ingenuity, much more deeply on his memory than if it were passively imbibed from books or teachers ; — in the same manner as the windings of a road make a more lasting impression on the mind when we have once trav- elled it alone, and inquired out the way at every turn, than if we had travelled along it a hundred times trust- ing ourselves implicitly to the guidance of a companion. I am happy to be confirmed in this opinion by its coincidence with what has been excellently remarked on the same subject by Miss Edgeworth, in her treatise on Practical Education; a work equally distinguished by good sense and by originality of thought. The pas- sage I allude to more particularly at present is the short dialogue about the steam-engine, as improved by Mr. Watt.t Section II. THE DESIRE of SOCIETY. I. An Instinctive Principle.] Abstracted from those affections which interest us in the happiness of others, * AnalytimUy we discover, by a sort of decomposition, the simple laws wliich are concerned in the phenomenon under consideration ; sjjntheticalli/, taking the laws for granted, we determine a jiriori what the result will be of any hypothetical combination of tliein — Ed. t Essays on Practical Educalion, Chap. XXI. DESIRE OF SOCIETY. -. 21 and from "all the advantages which we ourselves derive from the social union, we are led by a natural and in- stinctive desire to associate with our species. This principle is easily discernible in the minds of children long before the dawn of reason. " Attend only," says an intelligent and accurate observer, " to the eyes, the features, and the gestures of a child on the breast when another child is presented to it ; — both 'instantly, pre- vious to the possibility of instructiork or habit, exhibit the most evident expressions of joy. Their eyes sparkle, and their features and gestures demonstrate, in the most unequivocal manner, a mutual attachment. When further advanced, children who are strangers to each other, though their social appetite be equally strong, discover a mutual shyness of approach, which, however, is soon conquered by the more powerful instinct of as- sociation." * In the lower animals, too, very evident traces of the same instinct appear. In some of these we observe a species of union strikingly analogous to political asso- ciations among men : in others we observe occasional unions among individuals to accomplish a particular purpose, — to repel, for example, a hostile assault ; — but there are also various tribes which discover a de- sire of society, and a pleasure in the company of their own species, without an apparent reference to any further end. Thus we frequently see horses, when con- fined alone in an inclosure, neglect their food and break the fences to join their companions in the contiguous field. Every person must have remarked the spirit and , alacrity with which this animal exerts himself on the road, when accompanied by another animal of his own species, in comparison of what he discovers when trav- elling alone ; and, with respect to oxen and cows, it has been asserted, that even in the finest pasture they d3 not fatten so rapidly in a solitary state as when th&y feed together in a herd.f * Smellie's Philosophy of Natural History, Chap. XI. t One of the best accounts of the social principle in animals is found in Swainson's Sabits and Inslincts of Animals, Chapters IX. and X. — Ed. 22 ' INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. What, is the final cause of the associating instinct in such animals as have now been mentioned it is not easy to conjecture, unless we suppose that it was in- tended merely to augment the sum of their enjoyments. But whatever opinion we may form on this point, it is indisputable that the instinctive determination is a strong one, and that it produces striking effects on the habits of the animal, even when external circumstances are the most unfavorable to its operation. Horses and oxen, for example, when deprived of companions of their own species, associate and become attached to each other. The same thing sometimes happens be- tween individuals that belong to tribes naturaJly hos- tile ; as between dogs and cats, or between a cat and a bird. If these facts be candidly considered, there will ap- pear but little reason to doubt the existence of the so- cial instinct ia our own species, when it is so agree- able to the general analogy of nature, as displayed through the rest of the animal creation. As this point, however, has been controverted warmly by authors of eminence, it will be necessary to consider it with some attention. ' II. The Theory of Hobbes stated and refuted.] The question with respect to the social or the solitary nature of man seems to me to amount to this ; whether man has any disinterested principles which lead him to unite with his fellow-creatures, or whether the social union be the result of prudential views of self-iaterest, sug- gested by the experience of his own insufficiency to procure the objec s of his natural desires. Of these two opinions, Hobbes has maintained the latter, and has endeavoured to establish it by proving, that, in what he calls the state of nature, every man is an enemy to his brother, and that it was the experience of the evils arising from these hostile dispositions that induced men to unite in a political society. In proof of this he in- sists on the terror which children feel at the sight of a stranger ; on the apprehension which, he says, a person DESIRE OF SOCIETY. 23 naturally feels when he hears the tread of a foot in the dark ; on the universal invention of locks and keys ; and on various other circumstances of a similar na- ture.* That this theory of Hobbes is contrary to the univer- sal history of mankind cannot be disputed. Man has always been found in a social state ; and there fs reason even for thinking, that the principles of union which nature has implanted in his heart operate with the greatest force in those situations in which the advan- tages of the social union are the smallest. As society advances, the relations among individuals are continu- ally multiplied, and man is rendered the more neces- sary to man : but it may be doubted, if, in a period of great refinement, the social affections be as warm and powerful as when the species were wandering in the forest. Besides, it does not seem to be easy to conceive in what manner Hobbes's supposition could be realized. Surely, if there be a foundation for any thing laid in the constitution of man's nature, it is for family union. The infant of our species continues longer in a help- less state, and requires longer the protecting care of both parents, than the young of any other animal. Be- fore the first child isable to provide for itself, a second and a third are produced, and thus the union of the sexes, supposing it at first to have been merely casual, is insensibly confirmed by habit, and cemented by the common interest which both parents take in their off- spring. So just is the simple and beautiful statement of the fact given by Montesquieu, that " man is born in society, and there he remains." From these considerations, it appears that the social union does not take its rise from views of self-interest, but that it forms a necessary part of the condition of man from the constitution of his nature. It is true, in- deed, that before he begins to reflect he finds himself connected with society by a thousand ties ; so that, in- * Leviathan, Part I. Chap. xiii. De Corpore Politico, Part I. Chap. i. 24 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. dependently of any social instinct, prudence would un- doubtedly prevent him from abandoning his fellow-crea- tures. But still it is evident that the social instinct forms a part of human nature, and has a tendency to unite men even when they stand in no need of each other's assistance. Were the case otherwise, prudence and the social disposition would be only different names for the same principle, whereas it is matter of common remark, that although the two principles be by no means inconsistent when kept within reasonable bounds, yet that the former, when it rises to any excess, is in a great measure exclusive of the latter. I have hinted, too, already, that it is in societies where individ- uals are most independent of each other as to their an- imal wants, that the social principles operate with the greatest force. III. The Wants and Necessities of Man help to de- velop, but do not create, his Social Principles.] Accord- ing to the view of the subject now given, the multi- plied wants and necessities of man in his infant state, hj laying the foundation of the family union, impose upon our species, as a necessary part of their condition, those social connections which are so essential to our improvement and happiness. And therefore nothing could be more unphilosophical than the complaints which the ancient Epicureans founded upon this cir- cumstance, and which Lucretius has so pathetically ex- pressed in the following verses : — " Turn porro puev, ut sievis projectas ab undis Navitii, nudus hnmi jacet, infans, indigus omni Vitali auxilio, cum primum in luminis oras Nixibus ex alvo matris natura profudit: -Vagituquo locum lugubri complet, ut nequum est, Cui tantum in vitA restat transire maloiiim." * * Lib. V. 223. " As when wild, wrecking tempests sweep the skies Ca-t on the shore the naked sailor lies : So the weak infant, when he springs to lio-ht. Thrown on the strand of life in helpless plight, With mournful cries the joyful mansion fills, The unheeded omens of a life of ills." DESIRE OF SOCIETY. 25 The philosophy of Pope is in this respect much more pleasing and much more solid : — " Heaven, forming each on other to depend, A master, or a servant, or a friend, Bids each on other for assistance call, Till one man's weakness grows the strength of all. Wants, frailties, passions, closer still ally The common interest, or endear the tie. To these we owe true friendship, love sincere, Each home-felt joy that life inherits here." * The considerations now stated afford a beautiful il- lustration of the beneficent design with which the phys- ical condition of man is adapted to the principles of his moral constitution ; an adaptation so striking, that it is not surprising those philosophers who are fond of simplifying the theory of human nature should have , attempted to account for the origin of these principles from the habits which our external circumstances im- pose. In this, as in many other instances, their atten- tion has been misled by the spirit of system from those wonderful combinations of means to particular ends, which are everywhere conspicuous in the universe. It is not by the physical condition of man that the essen- tial principles of his mind are formed ; but the one is fitted to the other by the same superintending wisdom which adapts the fin of the fish to the water, and the wing of the bird to the air, and which scatters the seeds of the vegetable tribes in those soils and expos- ures where they are fitted to vegetate. It is not the wants and necessities of his animal being which create his 'social principles, and which produce an artificial and interested league among individuals who are natu- rally solitary and hostile ; but, determined by instinct to society, endowed with innumerable principles which have a reference to his fellow-creatures, he is placed by the condition of his birth in that element where alone the perfection and happiness of his nature are to be found. * Essay on Man, Ep. 11. 249. See on this subject The Moralists of Lord Shaftesbury. 3 26 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. IV. Man's Nature adjusted beforehand to the Condi- tion in lohich he is placed.] In speaking of the lower animals, I before observed, that such of them as are in- stinctively social discover the secret workings of nature even when removed from the society of their kind. This fact amounts in their case to a demonstration of that mutual adaptation of the different parts of nature to each other which I have just remarked. It demon- strates that the structure of their internal frame is pur- posely adjusted to that external scene in which they are destined to be placed. As the Iamb, when it strikes with its forehead while y^ unarmed, proves that it is not its weapons which determine its instincts, but that ' it has preexistent instincts suited to its weapons, so when we see an animal deprived of the sight of his fellows cling to a stranger, or disarm, by his caresses, the rage of an enemy, we perceive the workings of a social instinct, not only not superinduced by external circumstances, but manifesting itself in spite of cir- cumstances which are adverse to its operation. The same remark may be extended, to man. When in solitude, he languishes, and, by making companions of the lower animals, or by attaching himself to inanimate objects, strives to fill up the void of which he is conscious. " Were I in a desert," says an author, who, amidst all his extravagances and absurdities, sometimes writes like a wise man, and, where the moral feelings are at all concerned, never fails to write like a ffood man, — "were I in a desert, I would find out wherewith in it to call forth my affections. If I could not do better, I would fasten them upon some sweet myrtle, or seek some melancholy cypress to con- nect myself to ; I would court their shade, and greet them kindly for their protection. I would cut my name upon them, and swear they were the loveliest trees throughout the desert. If their leaves withered I would teach myself to mourn, and when they re- joiced, I would rejoice along with them." The Count de Lauzun was confined by Louis XIV. for nine years in the castle of Pignerol, in a small DESIRE OF SOCIETY. 27 room where no light could enter but from a chink in the roof. In this solitude he attached himself to a spider, and contrived for some time to amuse himself with attempting to tame it, with catching flies lor its support, and with superintending the progress of its web. The jailer discovered his amusement, and killed the spider ; and the Count used afterwards to declare, that the pang he felt on the occasion could be com- pared only to that of a mother for the loss of a child. This anecdote is quoted by Lord Kames in his Sketches, and by the late Lord Auckland in his Princi- ples of Penal Law. It is remarkable that both these learned and respectable writers should have introduced it into their works on account of the shocking incident of the jailer, and as a proof of the pure and unprovok- ed malice of which some minds are capable, without taking any notice of it as a beautiful picture of the feelings of a man of sensibility in a state of solitude, and of his disposition to create to himself some object upon which he may rest#hose affections which have a ref- erence to society. It will be said that these are the feelings of one who has experienced the pleasures of social life, and that no inference can be drawn from such facts in opposi- tion to Hobbes. But if they do not prove in man an instinctive impulse towards society prior to experienci^, they at least prove that he feels a delight in the society of his fellow-creatures, which no view of self-interest is suffici^it to explain. It does not belong to our present speculation to illus- trate the importance of the social union to our im- provement and our happiness. Its subserviency to both (abstracted entirely from its necessity for the complete gratification of our ])hysical wants) is much greater than we should be disposed at first to appre- hend. In proof of this, it is sufficient to mention hero its connection with the culture of our intellectual facul- ties, and with the development of our moral princijiles. Illustrations of this may be drawn from the low state in which both these parts of our nature are generally 28 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. found in the deaf and dumb, and from the efFects which a few months' education sometimes has in un- folding their mental powers. The pleasing change which in the mean time takes place in their once vacant countenances, when animated and lighted up by an active and inquisitive mind, cannot escape the notice of the most careless observer.* Section III. THE desire of ESTEEM. I. An Original Principle of our Nature.]_ This prin- ciple, as well as those we have now been considering, discovers itself at a very early period in infants, who, long before they are able to reflect on the advantages resulting from the good opinion of others, and even before they acquire the use of speech, are sensibly mortified by any expression of neglect or contempt. It seems, therefore, to be an ori^^al principle of our * For an additional illustration of the same thing, see a remarkable case of recovery from deafness and dumbness in the history of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris for the year 1703. \ doctrine similar to that which I have now been controverting, con- cerning the origin of society, was maintained by some of the nncient sophists, and has found advocates in every age among those writers who wished to depreciate human natni-e. as well as among many who wore anxious to represent man as entirely the creature of education and Govern- ment, with the view of inculcating implicit and passive obedience to the civil magistrate. In Buchanan's elegant and philosophical Dialogue De Jan Ret/ni apud Scotos, the question is particularly discussed between the two interlocutors, one of whom ascribes the origin of society to views of utility, meaning by utility the private interest or advantage of the indi- vidual. On the contrary, Buchanan himself, who is the other speaker contends with great warmth for the existence of social principles in the nature of man, which, independently of any views of interest, lay~a foun- dation for the social union. ^ Part of this Dialogue is curious, as it shows how completely Buchanan had not only anticipated, but refuted, the veiy far-fetched argument which Hobbes was soon after to draw from his supposed state of nature in sun- port of Ills slavish maxims of government. [See the subject of man's natural sociality still further illustrated in connection with experiments in prison discipline, in De Beaumont andDe Tocqueville's Pmitmtiary System of the United States ; and in I'. C. Gray's Frison Discipline of America.] ' ■' DESIRE OF ESTEEM. 29 nature ; that is, it does not appear to be resolvable into reason and experience, or into any other principle; more genefal than itself. An- additional proof of this is the very powerful influence it has over the mind, — an influence more striking than that of any other active principle whatsoever. Even the love of life daily gives way to the desire of esteem, and of an esteem which, as it is only to aflect our memories, cannot be supposed to interest our self-love. In what manner the association of ideas should manufacture, out of the other principles of our constitution, a new principle stronger than them all, it is difficult to conceive. In these observation* I have had an eye to the theories of those modern philosophers who represent self-love, or the desire of happiness, as the only original principle of action in man, and who attempt to ac- count for the origin of all our other active principles from habit or the association of ideas. That this theory is just in some iijatances cannot be disputed. Thus, in the case of avarice, it is manifest that it is from habit alone it derives its influence over the mind ; for no man surely was ever brought into the world with an innate love of money. Money is at first de- sired, merely as the means of obtaining other objects; but in consequence of being long and constantly ac- customed to direct our efforts to its attainment on account of its apprehended utility, we come at last to pursue it as an ultimate end, and frequently retain our attachment to it long after we have lost all relish for the enjoyments it enables us to command. In like manner, it has been supposed that the esteem of our fellow-creatures is at first desired on account of its apprehended utility, and that it comes in time to be pursued as an ultimate end, without any reference on our part to the advantages it bestows. In opposition to this doctrine it seems to me to be clear, that as the object of hunger is not happiness, but food; as ^he object of curiosity is not happiness, but knowledge; so the object of this principle of action is not happi- ness, but the esteem and respect of other men. That 3* 30 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. this is not inconsistent with the analogy of our na- ture appears from the observations already made on our appetites and desires ; and that it reall^ is the fact may be proved by various arguments. Before touch- ing, however, on these, I must remark, that I consider this ■ as merely a question of speculative curiosity ; for, upon either supposition, the desire of esteem is equally the work of nature; and consequently, upon either supposition, it is equally unphilosophical to attempt, by metaphysical subtilties, to counteract her wise and beneficent purposes. Among the different arguments which concur to prove that the desire of i^teem is not wholly resolvable into the association of laeas, one of the strongest has already been hinted at, — the early period of life at which this principle discovers itself, — long before we are able to form the idea of happiness, far less to judge of the circumstances which have a tendency to pro- mote it. The difference in this respect between avarice and the desire of esteem is remarkable. The former is the vice of old age, and is, comparatively speaking, confined to a few. The latter is one of the most pow- erful engines in the education of children, and is not less universal in its influence than the principle of curiosity. II. The Desire of Posthumous Fame represented by WoUaston as Illusory.] The desire, too, of posthumous fame, of which no man can entirely divest himself, furnishes an insurmountable objection to the theories already mentioned. It is, indeed, an objection so obvious to the common sense of mankind, that all the philosophers who have leaned to these theories have employed their ingenuity in attempting to resolve this desire into an illusion of the imagination produced by habit. This, too, was the opinion of an excellent writer, and still more excellent man, Mr. WoUaston wh"o, from a well-meant, but very mistaken, zeal to weaken the influence of this principle of action on human conduct, has been at pains to give as ludicrous DESIRE OF ESTEEM. 31 an account as possible of its origin. As I differ widely from Wollaston on this point, both in his theoretical speculations and in the practical inferences he deduces from them, I shall quote the passage at length, and then subjoin a few remarks on it. " Men please themselves with notions of immortality, and fancy a perpetuity of fame secured to themselves by books and testimonies of historians ; but alas ! it is a stupid delusion when they imagine themselves joresert^ and enjoying that fame at the reading of their story after their death. And beside, in reality, the man is not known ever the more to posterity, because his name is transmitted to them. He doth not live, because his name does. "When it is said, 'Julius Caesar subdued Gaul, beat Pompey, and changed the Roman common- wealth into a monarchy,' it is the same thing as to say, ' The conqueror of Pompey was Caesar' ; that is, Caesar and the conqueror of Pompey are the same thing, and Cassar is as much known by the one designation as by the other. The amount, then, is only this, that the con- queror of Pompey conquered Pompey, or somebody con- quered Pompey ; or rather, since Pompey is now as little known as Cassar, somebody conquered somebody. Such a poor business is this boasted immortality ; and such as has been described is the thing called glory among us ! The notion of it may serve to excite them who, having abilities to serve their country in time of real danger or want, or to do some other good, have yet not philosophy enough to do this upon principles of virtue, or to see through the glories of the world (just as we excite children by praising them, and as we see many good inventions and improvements proceed from emu- lation and vanity) ; but to discerning rnen this fame is mere air, and the next remove from nothing, which they despise, if not shun. I think there are two considera- tions which may justify a desire of some glory or honor, and scarce more. When men have performed any vir- tuous actions, or sjach as sit easy on their memories, it is a reasonable pleasure to have the testimony of the world added to that of their own consciences, that they 32 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. li;iv(.i done well. And more than that, if the reputation ; I quired by any qualification or action may produce !; man any real comfort or advantage (if it be only protection from the insolence and injustice of mankind, or if it enables him, by his authority, to do more good to others), to have this privilege must be a great satis- faction, and what a wise and good man may be al- lowed, as he" has opportunity, to propose to himself. But then he proposes it no further than it may be use- ful, and it can be no further useful than he wants it. So that, upon the whole, glory, praise, and the like, are either mere vanity, or only valuable in proportion to defects and wants." * It appears from this passage, that WoUaston does not consider the desire of posthumous fame as an ul- timate fact in our nature, for he proposes a theory to account for it. " It is," says he, " a stupid delusion, when men imagine themselves present and enjoying that fame at the reading of their story after death." Mr. Smith, too, in his Theory of Moral Senliments, * Wollaston's Religion of Nature Delineated, Sect. V. § xix. A thought substantially the same with that of WoUaston occurs in Cowley's ode en- titled Lije and Fame. " Great Csesar's self a higher place does claim In the seraphic entity of fame. He, since that toy, his death, Doth fill each mouth and breath. 'T is true, the two immortal syllables remain ; But, O ye learned men, explain, What essence, what existence this, What substance, what subsistence, what hypostasis In six poor letters is t In tliose alone docs the great Cffisar live. 'T is all the conquered world could give." Notwithstanding the merit of these lines, I should hardly have thouo-ht it worth while to quote them, if Dr. Hurd (a critic of no common ingenuity as well as learning) had not shown, by his comment upon them, how com- pletely he had misapprehended the reasoning both of the poet and of the philosopher. He remarks : — " This lively ridicjdc 'on posthumous fame is well enough placed in a poem or declamation ; but we are a little surprised to find so grave a writer as WoUaston diverting himself with it. 'In reality,' says he ' the man is not known ever the more to posterity because his 'name is trans- mitted to them. He does not live, because his name does.' When it is said, 'Julius Ca^sar subdued Gaul,'&c, &c., the sophistry is apparent DESIRE OF ESTEEM. 33 seems to think that the desire of a posthumous fame is to be resolvable into an illusion of the imagination. " Men," says he, " have often voluntarily thrown away life to acquire after death a renown which they could no longer enjoy. Their imagination, in the mean time, anticipated that fame ►which was thereafter to be be- stowed upon them. Those applauses which they were never to hear rung in their ears, the thoughts of that admiration whose effects they were never to feel play- ed about their hearts, banished from their breasts the strongest of all natural fears, and transported them to perform actions which seem almost beyond the reach of human natru-e."* But why have recourse to an il- lusion of the imagination to account for a principle which the wisest of men find it impossible to extin- guish in themselves, or even sensibly to weaken ; and none more remarkably than some of those who have employed their ingenuity in attempting to turiT it into ridicule ? Is it possible that men should imagine them- selves present and enjoying their fame at the reading of Put Cato in the place of Csesar, and then see whether that great man do not live in his name substantially, that is, to good purpose, if the impression which these two immortal syllables make on the mind be of U30 in exciting posterity, or any one man, to the love and imitation of Cato's virtue." — Kurd's Cowley, Vol. I. p. 1 79. In this remark, Hurd plainly proceeds on" the supposition, that Wollas ton's sophistry is directed against the utility of the love of posthumous glory, whereas the only point in dispute relates to the origin of this prin- ciple, which WoUaston seems to have thought, if it could not be resolved in to the rational motive of self-love, must be the illegitimate and contemp- tible offsprings of our oivn stupidity and folly. ' How veiy different must Cowley's feelings have been when he wrote the metaphysical ode referred- to by Hurd, from those which inspired that first burst of juvenile emotion which forms the exordium to his Poetical Works ! " What shall I do to be for ever known, And make the age to come my own 'i I shall, like beasts or common people, die, Unless you write my elegy. What sound is 't strikes mine ear ? Sure I fame's trumpet hear. It sounds like the last trumpet, for it can Baise np the buried man." * Part ni. Chap. ii. 34 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. their story after death, without being conscious of this operation of the imagination themselves? Is not this to depart from the plain and obvious appearance of the fact, and to adopt refinements similar to those by which the selfish philosophers explain away all our disinter- ested affections? We might as well suppose that a man's regard for the welfare of his posterity and friends after his death does not arise from natural affection, but from an illusion of the imagination, leading him to suppose himself still present with them, and a fitness of their prosperity.* If we have confessedly various other propensities directed to specific objects as ulti- mate ends, where is the difficulty of conceiving that a desire, directed to the good opinion of our fellow-crea- tures (without any reference to the advantages it is to yield us either now or hereafter), may be among the number ? III. Vindication of this Principle.] It would not, in- deed, (as I have already hinted,) materially affect the argument, although we should suppose, with WoUaston, that the desire of posthumous fame is resolvable into an illusion of the imagination. For, whatever be its origin, it was plainly the intention of nature that all men should be in some measure under its influence; and it is perhaps of little consequence whether we re- gard it as a principle originally implanted by nature, or suppose that she has laid a foundation for it in other principles which belong universally to the species. * The two cases seem to be so exactly parallel, that it is somewhat sur- prising that no attempt should have been made to extend to the latter prin- ciple of action the same ridicule which has been so lavishly bestowed on the former. So far, ho\vever, from this being the case, I believe it will be universally granted, that, where the latter principle fails in producing its natural and ordinary effect on the conduct, there must exist some defect in the rational or moral character, for which no other good qualities can sufficiently atone- " He that careth not for his own house is worse than an infidel."' But if this be acknowledged with respect to the interest we take in the concerns of our connections after our own disappearance from the present scene, why judge so harshly of the desire of posthumous fame ? Do not the two principles often cooperate in stimulating our active exer- tions to the very same ends, more especially in those cases (alas ! too com- mon) where the inheritance of a respectable name is all that a good man has it in his power to bequeathe to his family? DESIRE OF ESTEEM. 35 How very powerfully it operates appears, not only from the heroical sacritices to which it has led in every age of the world, but from the conduct of the meanest and most worthless of mankind, who, when they are brought to the scaffold in consequence of the clearest and most decisive evidence of their guilt, frequently persevere to the last, with the terrors of futurity full in their view, in the most solemn protestations of their innocence ; and that merely in the hope of leaving be- hind them, not a fair, but an equivocal or problematical reputation. With respect to the other parts of Wollaston's rea- soning, that it is only the letters which compose our names that we can transmit to posterity, it is worthy of observation, that, if the argument- be good for any thing, it, applies equally against the desire of esteem from our contemporaries, excepting in those cases in which we ourselves are personally known by those whose praise we covet, and of whose applause we hap- pen ourselves to be ear-witnesses. And yet, undoubt- edly, according to the common judgment of mankind, the love of praise is more peculiarly the mark of a lib- eral and elevated spirit in cases where the gratification it seeks has nothing to recommend it to those whose ruling passions are interest or the love of flattery.* It is precisely for the same reason that the love of posthu- mous fame is strongest in the noblest and most exalted characters. If self-love were really the sole motive in all our actions, Wollaston's reasoning would prove * That the desire of esteem, if a fantastic principle of action in the one of these cases, is equally so in the other, is remarlicd by Pope ; liut, in- stead of availing himself of this consideration to justify the desire of pos- thumous renown, he employs it as an argument to expose the nothingness of fame in all cases whatsoever. " What 's fame ? a fancied life in others' breath, A thing beyond us e'en before our death. All that we feel of it liegins and ends In the small circle of our foes or friends ; To all beside, as much an empty shade An Eugene living as a Ca;sar dead." Essay on Man, Epistle IV. 237. 36 INSTINCTIVE PKINCIPLES OF ACTION. clearly the absurdity of any concern about our mem- ory. Such a concern, as Dr. Hutcheson observes, " no selfish being, who had the modelling of his own nature, would choose to implant in himself. But, since we have not this power, we must be contented to be thus nvtivitted by nature into a public interest against our will." * As to the fact on which Wollaston's argument pro- ceeds, is it not more philosophical to consider it as af- fording an additional stimulus to the instinctive love of posthumous fame, by holding it up to the imagination as the noblest and proudest boast of human ambition, to be able to entail on the casual combination of letters which composes our name the respect of distant ages, and the blessings of generations yet unborn ? Nor is it an unworthy object of the most rational benevolence to render these letters a sort of magical spell for kin- dling the emulation of the wise and good wherever they shall reach the human ear. Nor is it only in this instance that nature has " thus outwitted us " for her own wise and salutary purposes. By a mode of reasoning analogous to that of Wollas- ton, it would be easy to turn most, if not all, our ac- tive principles into ridicule. But what should we gain by the attempt, but a ludicrous exposition of that mor- al constitution which it has pleased our Maker to give us, and which, the more we study it, will be found to abound the more with marks of wise and beneficent design ? It is fortunate, in such cases, that, although the rea- sonings of the metaphysician may puzzle the under- standing, they produce very little effect on the conduct. He may tell us, for example, that the admiration of fe- male beauty i.s absurd, because beauty, as well as color, U a quality not existing in the object, but in the mind of the spectator; or (which brings the case still nearer to that under our consideration) he may allege that the whole charm of the finest countenance would van- * Nature and Conduct of the Passions, Sect. I. Art. IV. DESIRE OF ESTEEM. 37 ish it' it wore examirjed with the aid of a microscope. In all such cases, as well as in the instance referred to by WolUistoo, we are determined very powerfully by Ditiiic : ill a way, indeed, that our reason cannot ex- plain, l)nt which we never fail to find subservient to valuabk' ends. For I am far from thinking that it would be of advantage to mankind if WoUaston's views were generally adopted. That the love of glory has sometimes covered the earth with desolation and bloodshed I am ready to grant ; but the actions to which it generally prompts are highly serviceable to the world. Indeed, it is only by such actions that an enviable fame is to be acquired. A strong conviction of this truth has led Dr. Aken- side to express himself in one of his odes with a warmth wliich passes, perhaps, the bounds of strict propriety, but for which a sufficient apology may be found in the poetical enthusiasm by which it was in- spired. The ode is said to have been occasioned by a sermon against the love of glory. " Come, then, tell me, sage divine, Is it an offence to own That our bosoms e'er incline Towards immortal glory's throne ? For witli me nor pomp nor pleasure, Bourbon's might, Braganza's treasure. So can fitncy's dream rejoice, So conciliate reason's choice, As one approving word of her impartial voice. "If to spurn at noble praise Be the passport to thy heaven, Follow thou these gloomy ways ; No such law to me was given : Nor, I trust, shall I deplore me Faring like my friends before me, Nora holier heaven desire Thnn Timolcon's arms acquire. And Tully's curule chair, and Milton's golden lyre." Having mentioned the name of Wilton, I cannot for- bear to add, that he too has called the love of fame an i/i//;-m%, although he has qualified this implied censure by calling it the " infirmUy of a noble mind." He has distinctly acknowledged, at the same time, the heroic 4 3S INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. sacrifices of ease and pleasure to which it has prompt- ed the most distinguished benefactors of the human race. " Fame is the spur that the clear spirit doth raise (The last infirmity of noble minds) To scorn delights and live laborions days." IV. Hume's Theory respecting its Origin.] I must not dismiss this subject without taking some notice of a theory started by Mr. Hume with respect to the ori- gin of the love of praise ; a theory which applies to this passion even when it has for its object the praise of our contemporaries. " Of all opinions," he ob- servei5, " those which we form in our own favor, how- ever lofty and presuming, are at bottom the frailest, and the most easily shaken by the contradiction and oppo- sition of others. Our great concern in this case makes us soon alarmed, and keeps our passions upon the watch ; our consciousness of partiality still makes us dread a mistake; and the very difficulty of judging concerning an object which is never set at a due dis- tance from us, nor seejii in a proper point of view, makes us hearken anxiously to the opinion of others who are better qualified to form opinions concerning us. Hence that strong love of fame with which all mankind are possessed. It is in order to fix and con- firm their favorable opinion of themselves, not from any original passion, that they seek the applause of others." * I think it cannot be doubted that the circumstance here mentioned by Mr. Hume adds greatly to the pleas- ure we derive from the possession of esteem; but it sufficiently appears from the facts already stated, partic- ularly from the early period of life at which this princi- ple makes its appearance, that there is a satisfaction arising from the possession of esteem perfectly uncon- nected with the cause referred to by this author. Mr. Hume has therefore mistaken a concomitant effect for iliR cause of the phenomenon in question. * Disseri.atlon on the Paasions^ Soot. JT. v^ 10. DESIRE OF ESTEEM. 39 III remarking, however, this . concomitant effect, he muvst be allowed to have called our attention to a I'act of some importance in the philosophy of the human mind, and which ought not to be overlooked in analyz- ing the compounded sentiment of satisfaction we de- rive from the good opinion of others. Nor is this the only accessory circumstance that enhances the pleasure resulting from the gratification of the original principle. If in those cases where w& are somewhat doubtful of the propriety of our own conduct we are anxious to have in our favor the sanction of public opinion, so, on the other hand, when we are satisfied in our own minds that our conduct has been right, part of the pleasure we receive from esteem arises from observing the just views and candid dispositions of others. Nor is it less indisputable, on the contrary supposition, that when, in consequence of calumny and misrepresenta- tion, we fail in obtaining that esteem to which we know ourselves to be entitled, our disappointment at missing our just reward is aggravated, to a wonderful degree, by our sorrow for the injustice and ingratitude of mankind. Still, however, it must be remembered that these are only accessory circumstances, and that there is a pleasure resulting from the possession of es- teem which is not resolvable into either of them, and which appears to be an ujtimate fact in the constitu- tion of our nature. V. Incidental Benefits resulting from the Love of Fame.] From the passage formerly quoted from Wol- laston it appears that he apprehended the love of fame to be justifiable only in two cases. The one is, when we desire it as a confirmation of the rectitude of our own judgments ; the other, when the possession of it can be attended with some real and solid good. But why, I must again repeat, offer any apology for our obeying a natural principle of our constitution, so long as we preserve it under due regulation ? It is not unworthy of remark, that this principle is one of those with which our fellow-creatures are most 40 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. disposed to sympathize. With what indignation do \v« hear the slightest reflection cast on the memory of one wlio was dear to us, and how sacred do we feel the duty of coming forward in his defence ! Nor is this sympathy confined to the circle of our acquaintance. It embraces the wise and good of the most remote ages, and prompts us irresistibly to protect their fame from the assaults of envy and. detraction. Whatever theory phi- losophers may adopt as to the origin of this sympathy, its utility in preserving immaculate the reputation of those ornaments of humanity whom mankind look up to as models for imitation is equally indisputable. I have already said that the desire of esteem is, on the whole, a useful principle of action ; for, although there are many cases in which the public opinion is erroneous and corrupted, there are many more in which it is agreeable to reason, and favorable to the interests of virtue and of mankind. The habits, therefore, which this principle of action has a tendency to form are likely, in most instances, to coincide with those which are recommended by a sense of duty. In many men, accordingly, who are very little influenced by higher principles, a regard to the opinion of the world (or, as we commonly express it, a regard to character) produces a conduct honorable to themselves and bene- ficial to society. To this observation it may be added, that the habits to which we are trained by the desire of esteem render the acquisition of virtuous habits more easy. The de- sire of esteem operates in cliildren before they have a capacity to distinguish right from wrong ; or at least the former principle of action is much more powerfpl in their case than the latter. Hence it furnishes a most useful and effectual engine in the business of education, more particularly by training us early to exertions of self-command and self-denial. It teaches us, for exam- ple, to restrain our appetites within those bounds which decency prescribes, and thus forms us to habits of mod- eration and temperance. And although our conduct cannot be denominated virtuous so long as a reo-ard to BESIRr OF F.STEEM. 41 the opinion of others is our only motive, yet the habitis we thus acquire in infancy and childhood render it more easy for us to subject our passions to the authority of reason and conscience as we advance to maturity. " In that young man," said Sylla, speaking of Caesar, " who walks the streets with so little regard to modesty, I fore- see many Mariuses." His idea probably was, that on a temper so completely divested of sympathy with the feelings of others society could lay little hold, and that whatever principle of action should happen to gain the ascendant in his mind was likely to sacrifice to its own gratification the restraints both of honor and of duty. VI. Adam Smith confounds Desire of Esteem with the Moral Motive.] These, and some other considerations of the same kind, have struck Mr. Smith so forcibly, that he has been led t« resolve our sense of duty into a regard to the good opinion, and a desire to obtain the sympathy, of our fellow-creatures. I shall afterwards have occasion to examine the principal arguments he alleges in support of his conclusions. At present I shall only remark, that, although his theory may account for the desire which all men, both good and bad, have to assume the appearance of virtue, it never can explain the origin of our notions of duty and 'of moral obligation. One striking proof of this is, that the love of fame can only be completely gratified by the actual possession of those qualities for which we ^wish to be esteemed ; and that, when we receive praises which we know we do not de- serve, we are conscious of a sort of fraud or imposition on the world. " All fame is foreign but of true desert, — Plays round the head, but comes not to fte heart." In further confirmation of the same doctrine it may be observed, that, although the desire of esteem is often a useful auxiliary to our sense of duty, and although, in most of our good actions, the two principles are per- haps more or less blended together, yet the merit of vir- 4* 42 INSTINCTIVE PEINCIFI.ES OF ACTION. tuous conduct is always enhanced, in the opinion of mankind, when it is discovered in the move private sit- uations of life, where the individual cannot be suspected of any views to the applauses of the world. Even Cicero, in whose mind vanity had at least its due sway, has borne testimony to this truth: — " Mihi quidem- laudabiliora videntur omnia, quae sine venditatione et sine populo teste fiunt: non quo fugiendus sit (omnia enim benefacta in luce se coUocari volunt) sed tamen nullum theatrum virtuti conscientia majus est."* So • Tusc. Disp., Lib. II. 26. " Besides, to me, indeed, every thing seems the more commendable, the less the people are courted, and the fewef eyes there are to see it. |Not that observation is to be avoided, for every gener- ous action loves the public view ; still, there is no theatre for virtue like the witness of a good conscience." The same remark is made by Pliny in one of his epistles. Lib. III. Epist. XVI., where it is illustrated by one of the most beautiful anecdotes recorded in tlie annals. of our species. Although no English version can possibly do justice to the conciseness and spirit of Pliny's own language, I shall, for the sake of my unlearned read- ers, quote the anecdote referred to above, in the admirable translation of Mr. Mel moth. "I have frequently observed, that, amongst the noble actions and re- markable sayings of distinguished persons in either sex, those which have been most celebrated have not always been the most illustrious ; and I am confirmed in this opinion by a conversation I had yesterday with Fannia. This lady is gi-anddaughter to that celebrated Arria who animated her husband to meet death by her own glorious example. She informed me of several particulars relating to Arria, not less heroical than this famous action of hers, though less taken notice of, which, I am persuaded, will raise your admiration as much as they did mine. Her husband, Ceecinna PsEtus, and his son, were both at the same time attacked.with a dangerous illness, of which the son died. This youth, who had a most beautiful per- son and amiable behaviour, was not less endeared to bis parents by his virtues than by the ties of affection. His mother managed his funeral so privately, that Paitus did not know of his death. Whenever she came W his bed-chamber she pretended her son was better ; and, as often as he in- quired after his health, would answer that he had rested well or had c-at with an appetite. AVlicn she found she could no longer restrain her grief hut her tears were gushing out, she would leave the room, and, having given vent to her passion, return again with dry eyes, as if she had dis- missed every sentiment of sorrow at her entrance. ■ The action was no doubt truly noble, when, di awing the dagger, she plunged it in her breast and then presented it to her husband, with that ever memorable I had atmost said divine expression, — ' Pmlns. it is not painful.' It must how- ever, be considered that, when she si)oke and acted thus, she had the' pros- pect of immortal glory before her eyes to encourage and support her But was it not something much greater, without the view of such power- ful motives, to hide her tears, to conceal her grief, and cheerfully seem the mother when she was so no more 1" BESIRE OF ESTEEM. 43 far, therefore, are the desire of esteem and the sense of duty from being radically the same principle of action, that the former is only an auxiliary to the latter, and is always understood to diminish the meri! of the agent in proportion to the influence it had over his determi- nations. An additional proof of this may be derived from the miserable effects produced on the conduct by the desire of fame, when it is the sole, or even the governing, prin- ciple of our actions. In this case, indeed, it seldom fails to disappoint its own purposes, for a lasting fame is scarcely to be acquired without a steady and consistent conduct, and such a conduct can only arise from a con- scientious regard to the suggestions of our own breasts. The pleasure, therefore, which a being capable of reflec- tion derives from the possession of fame, so far from be- ing the original motive to worthy actions, presupposes the existence of other and of nobler motives in the mind. Nor is this all ; when a competition happens between the desire of fame and a regard to duty, if Tve sacrifice the latter to the former we are filled with remorse and self-condemnation, and the applauses of the world afford us but an empty and unsatisfactory recompense ; where- as a steady adherence to the right, even although it should accidentally expose us to calumny, never fails to be its own reward. Whether, therefore, we regard our lasting happiness or our lasting fame, the precept of Cicero is equally deserving of our attention. " Neither make it your study to secure the applauses of the vulgar, nor rest your hopes of happiness on re- wards which men can bestow. Let virtue, by her own native attractions, allure you in the paths of honor. What others may say of you is their concern, not yours; nor is it worth your while to be out of humor for the topics which your conduct may supply to their conver- sation." — " Neque sermonibus vulgi dederis te, nee in prsBmiis humanis spem posueris rerum tuarum ; suis te oportet illecebris ipsa viiius trahat ad verum decus. Quid de te alii loquantur, ipsi videant: sed loquentur tameii." * * Somn. Scipionis. 44 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. Section IV. THE DESIRE OF POWER. I. Early Manifestations of this Principle.] The man- ner in which the idea of power is at first introduced into the mind has been long a perplexing subject of specu- lation to metaphysicians, and has given rise to some of the most subtile disquisitions of the human understand- ing. But, although it be difficult to explain its origin, the idea itself is familiar to the most illiterate, even at the earliest period of life ; and the desire of possessing the corresponding object seems to be one of the strong- est principles of human conduct. In general, it may be observed, that, whenever we are led to consider ourselves as the authors of any effect, we feel a sensible pride or exultation in the conscious- ness of power, and the pleasure is in general propor- tioned to the greatness of the effect, compared with the smallness of our exertion. "What is commonly called the pleasure of activity is in truth the pleasure of power. Mere exercise, which produces no sensible effect, is attended with no enjoy- ment, or a very slight one. The enjoyment, such as it is, is only corporeal. The infant, while still on the breast, delights in exert- ing its little strength on every object it meets with, and is mortified when any accident convinces it of its own imbecility. The pastimes of the boy are, almost with- out exception, such as suggest to him the idea of his poioer. When he throws a stone, or shoots an arrow, he is pleased with being able to produce an effect at a distance from himself; and, while he measures with his ey« the amplitude or range of his missile weapon, con- templates With satisfaction the extent to which his power has reached. It is on a similar principle that he loves to bring his strength into comparison with that of his fellows, and to enjoy the consciousness of superior prowess. Nor need we search in the malevolent dispo- DESIRE OF POWER. 45 sitions of oxir nature for any other motive to the appar- ent acts of cruelty which he sometimes exercises over the inferior animals, — the sufferings of the animal, in such cases, either entirely escaping his notice, or being overlooked in that state of pleasurable triumph which the wanton abuse of power communicates to a weak and unreflecting judgment. The active sports of the youth captivate his fancy by suggesting similar ideas, — of strength of body, of force of mind, of contempt of hardship and of danger. And accordingly such are the occupations in which Virgil, with a characteristical propriety, employs his yoiing Ascanius. " At puer Ascanius mediis in vallibus acri Gaudet eqao ; jamque Iios ciiisu, jam praeterit illos ; Spumantemque dari pecora inter inertia votis Optat aprum, aut fulvuin descendere monte leonem." * II. Increases our Desire of Knowledge in after Life.] As we advance in years, and as our animal powers lose their activity and vigor, we gradually aim at extending OUT influence over others by the superiority of fortune and statign, or by the still more flattering superiority of intellectual endowment, by the force of our under- standing, by the extent of our information, by the arts of persuasion, or the accomplishments of address. What but the idea of power pleases the orator in managing the rehis of an assembled multitude, when he silences the reason of others by superior ingenuity, bends to his purposes their desires and jjassions, and, without the aid of force or the splendor of rank, becomes the arbiter of the fate of nations ! To the same principle we may trace, in part, the pleasure arising from the discovery of general theorems * ^neid.. Lib. IV. 156. " "While there, exulting, to his utmost speed The young Ascanius spurs his fiery steed, Outstrips by turns the flying social train. And scorns the meaner triumphs of the plain: The hopes of glory all his soul inflame ; Eager he longs to run at nobler game, And drench his youthful javelin in the gore Of the fierce lion, or the mountain boar." 46 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OP ACTION. in the sciences. Every such discovery puts us in pos- session of innumerable particular truths or particular facts, and gives us a ready command of a great stock of knowledge, of which we could not, with equal ease, avail ourselves before. It increases, in a word, our in- tellectual power in a way very ansjilogous to that in which a machine or engine increases the mechanical power of the human body. The discoveries we make in natural philosophy Jiave, beside this effect, a tendency to enlarge the sphere of our power over the material universe ; first, by enabling us to accommodate our conduct to the established course of physical events ; and secondly, by enabling us to call to our aid many natural powers or agents as instruments for the accomplishment of our purposes. In general, every discovery we make with respect to the laws of nature, either in the material or moral worlds, is an accession of power to the human mind, ' inasmuch as it lays the foundation of prudent and ef- fectual conduct in circumstances where, without the same means of information, the success of our pro- ceedings must have depended on chance alone. The desire of power, therefore, comes, in the progress of reason and experience, to act as an auxiliary to our in- stinctive desire of knowledge ; and it is with a view to strengthen and confirm this alliance that Bacon so often repeats his favorite maxim, that knowledge and power are synonymous or identical terms. III. Other Passions resolvable, in part at least, into the Desire of Power.] The idea of power is, partly at least, the foundation of our attachment to properly. It is not enough for us to have the use of an object. We desire to have it completely at our own disposal, with- out being responsible to any person whatsoever for the purposes to which we may choose to turn it. " There is an unspeakable pleasure," says Addison, " in calling any thing one's own. A freehold, though it be but in ice and snow, will make the owner pleased in the pos- session and stout in the defence of it." DESIRE OF POWER. 47 Avarice is a particular modification of the desire of power, arising from the various functions of money in a commercial country. Its influence as an active princi- ple is greatly strengthened by habit and association, in- somuch that the original desire of power is frequently lost in the acquired propensities to which it gives birth; the possession of money becoming, in process of time, an ultimate object of pursuit, and continuing to stimu- late the activity of the mind after it has lost a relish for every other species of exertion.* The love of liberty proceeds in part, if not wholly, from the same source ; from a desire of being able to do whatever is agreeable to our own inclination. Slav- ery mortifies us, because it limits our power. ■ Even the love of tranquillity and retirement has been resolved by Cicero into the desire of power. " Malti autem et sunt et fuerunt, qui earn, quam dico, tranquil- litatem expetentes, a negotiis publicis se removeririt, ad otiumque perfugerint His idem propositum fuit quod regibus, ut ne qua re egerent, ne cui parerent, libertate uterentur ; cujus proprium est sic vivere ut velis. Quare, cum hoc commune sit potentiae cupido- rum cum iis quos dixi otiosis ; alteri se adipisci id pos- se arbitrantur, si opes magnas habeaflt, alteri, si con-' tenti sint et suo, et parvo. " f * Berkeley in his Querist has started the same idea. "Whether the real end and aim of men be not power? and whether he who could have every thinpj else at his wish or will would value moneij ? " To this query the good Bishop has subjoined another, which one would hardly have expected from a writer so zealously attached to Tory and High-Church principles. " Whether the public aim in eveiy well-governed state be not, that each member, according to his just pretensions and industiy, should have POWER t " Naturam expeVas fared, tamen usque recWTct. t De Off., Lib. i. 20, 21 . "Now there have been and are many who have withdrawn from public business, and sought in retirement the tran- quillity of which I am speaking. The.'ic men have proposed to themselves tlie same end with kings; namely, that they may need nothing, be subject to no one, and enjoy freedom, the leading privilege of which is to live as you please. They, therefore, who aspire after power have this in common with those who court retirement, that the former think they are able to at- tain the same object by the possession of a vast fortune which the other look for in contentment with their present means, however humble." 48 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. The idea of power is also, in some degree, the foun- dation of the pleasure of virtue. We love to be at lib- erty to follow our own inclinations, without being sub- ject to the control of a superior ; but even this is not sufficient to our happiness. When we are led by vi- cious habits, or by the force of passion, to do what rea- son disapproves, we are sensible of a mortifying sub- jection to the inferior principles of our nature, and feel our own littleness and weakness. On the other hand, he that rulethhis spirit feels himself greater than he that taketh a city. " It is pleasant," says Dr. Tillotson, " to be virtuous and good, because that is to excel many others. It is pleasant to grow^ better, because that is to excel ourselves. It is pleasant to mortify and subdue our appetites, because that is victory. It is pleasant to command our passions, and keep them within the bounds of reason, because this is empire." From the observations now made, it appears that the desire of power is subservient to important purposes in our constitution, and is one of the principal sources both of our intellectual and moral improvements. An examination of the effects which it produces on so- ciety would open views very strikingly illustrative of benevolent intention in the Author of our frame. I shall content myself, however, with remarking, that the general aspect of the fact affords a very favorable view of human nature. When we consider how much more every man has it in his power to injure others than to promote their interests, it must appear manifest that society could not possibly subsist unlesss the benevolent affections had a very decided predominance over those principles which give rise to competition and enmity. Whoever reflects duly on this consideration will, if I do not deceive myself, be inclined to form conclusions concerning the dispositions of his fellow-creatures very different from the representations of them to be found in the writings of some gloomy and misanthropical moralists.* * On ambition see Licber, Political Ethics, Book III. Chap, iv Ed. DESIRE OF SUPERIORITY. 49 Section V. EMULATION, OR THE DESIRE OF SUPERIORITY. I. Not a Malevolent Affection.] This principle of action is classed by Dr. E.eid with the affections, and is considered by him as a nMlevolent affection* He tells us, however, that he does not mean by this epithet to insinuate that there is any thing criminal in emulation, any more than in resentment when excited by an inju- ry ; but he thinks that it involves a sentiment of ill-will to our rival, and makes use of the word malevolent to express this sentiment, as the language affords no soft- er epithet to convey the idea. I own it appears to me that emulation, considered as a principle of action, ought to be classed with the de- sires, and not with the affections. It is, indeed, fre- quently accompanied with a malevolent affection ; but it is the desire of superiority which is the active princi- ple, and the affection is only a concomitant circum- stance. I do not even think that this malevolent affection is a necessary concomitant of the desire of superiority. It is possible,, surely, to conceive (although the case may happen but rarely) that emulation may take place between men who are united by the most cordial friend- ship, and without a single sentiment of ill-will disturb- ing their harmony. II. Distinction betioeen Emulation and Envy.] When emulation is accompanied with malevolent affection, it assumes the name of envy. The distinction between these two principles of action is accurately stated by Dr. Butler. " Emulation is merely the desire of superi- ority over others, with whom we compare ourselves. To desire the attainment of this superiority by the par- ticular means of others beina: brouijht down below our ' * Essays on the Active Powers, Essay III. Part II. Chap. y. 5 OO INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. own level is the distinct notion of envy. From whence it is easy to see, that the real end which the natural passion, emulation, and which the unlawful one, envy, aims at is exactly the same ; and, consequently, that to do mischief is not the end of envy, but merely the means it makes use of to attain its end." * Dr. Rei.l himself seems to have clearly perceived the distinction, although in other parts of the same section he has lost sight of it again. " He who runs a race," says he, « feels uneasiness at seeing another outstrip him. This is uncorrupted nature, and the work of God within him. But this uneasiness may produce either of two very different effects. It may incite him to make more vigorous exertions, and to strain every nerve to get before his rival. This is fair and honest emulation. This is the effect it is intended to produce. But if he has not fairness and candor of heart, he will look with an evil eye on his competitor, and will endeavour to trip him, or to throw a stumbling-block in his way. This is pure envy, the most msilignant passion that can lodge in the human breast, which devours, as its natural food, the fame and the happiness of those who are most deserving of our esteem." f In quoting these passages, I would not be under- stood to represent this distinction between emulation * Sermon I., On Human Nature. t Eeid, On the Active Powers, Essay III. Part 11. Chap. v. Dr. Beattie, in his Elements of Moral Science, after stating very correctly the speculative distinction between emulation and envy, observes with great truth, that it is extremely difficult to preserve the former wholly unmixed with the latter, and that emulation, though entirely different from envy, is very apt, through the weakness of our nature, to degenerate into it. To this re- mark he subjoins the following veiy striking practical reflection. " Let the man," says he, "who thinks he is actuated by generous emulation only, and wishes to know whether there be any thing of envy in the ca.ic, examine his own heart, and ask himself whether his friends, on becomi-.i;,;, though in an honorable way, his competitors, have less of his alfeciiou than they had before ; whether he be gratified by hearing them depreciat- ed ; whether he would wish their merit less, that he might the more easily w]iial or excel them : and whether he would liave a more sincere regard t'ui- tlicm if the woi'ld were to acknowledge liim their superior. If his lieavt answer all or any of these questions in the affirmative, it is time to look f.ut for a cure, for the symptoms of envy are but too apparent." Part 1. Chap. ii. § 5. DESIRE OF SUPERIORITY. 51 and envy as a novelty in the science of ethics ; for the very same distinction was long ago stated with admira- ble conciseness and justness by Aristotle ; whose deji- nilions, (I shall take this opportunity of remarking by the way,) however censurable they may frequently be when they relate to physical subjects, are, in most in- stances, peculiarly happy when they relate to moral ideas, "^mulatio bonum quiddam est, et bonis viris convenit; at invidere improbum est, et hominum improborum; nam semulans talem efficere se studet, ut ipsa bona quoque nanciscatur: at invidens studet efficere, ut ne alter boni quid habeat." * Before leaving the subject, I think it of consequence again to repeat, that, notwithstanding the speculative distinction I have been endeavouring to make between emulation and envy, the former disposition is so seldom altogether unmixed with the latter, that men who are conscious of possessing original powers of thinking can scarcely be at too much pains to draw a veil over their claims to originality, if they wish to employ their talents to the best advantage in the service of mankind. " Men must be taaght as if you taught them not, And things unknown proposed as things forgot." f In the observations which I have hitherto made upon emulation, I have proceeded on the supposition, that the subject of competition is the personal qualities of the individual. These, however, are not the great objects of ambition with the bulk of mankind, nor perhaps do they occasion jealousies and enmities so fatal to our morals and our happiness, as those which are occasioned by the seemingly partial and unjust distribution of the goods of fortune. To see the natural rewards of industry and genius fall to the * Aristot., /J/irfor., Lib. II. Cap. xi. The whole chapter is excellent. I have adopted in the text the Latin version of Buhle. " Emulation is a good thing, and belongs to good men; envy is bad, and belongs to bad men. What a man is emulous of he strives to attain, that he may really possess the desired object ; the envious are satisfied if nobody has it." t Pope's Essay on Criticism, 1. 574. 52 INSTINCTIVE PBINOIPIiES OF ACTION. share of the weak and the profligate can scarcely fail to excite a regret in the best regulated tempers ; and to those who are disposed (as every man perhaps is in some degree) to overrate their own pretensions, and to undervalue those of their neighbours, this regret is a source of discontent and misery, which no measure of external prosperity is sufficient to remove. The feel- ing, when it does not lead to any act of injustice or dishonor, is so intimately connected with our sense of merit and demerit, that many allowances for it will be made by those who reflect candidly on the common infirmities of humanity; and much indulgence is due from the prosperous to their less fortunate rivals. So much, indeed, is this indulgence recommended to us by all the best principles of our nature, and so painful is. the reflection that we are even the innocent cause of disquiet to others, that it may be doubted whether the constraint and embarrassment produced by great and sudden accessions of prosperity be not more than sufficient to counterbalance any solid addition they are likely to bring to our own happiness.* * The following admirable passage is from Smith's Theory of the Moral Sentiments., Part I. Sect II. Chap, v.: — ■■The man -ivho, by some sndden revolution of fortune, is lifted up all at once into a condition of life greatly above what he had formerly lived in, may be assured tliat the congratula- tions of his best friends are not all of tlie'm perfectly sincere. An upsturf, though of the gi-eatest merit, is gcnci^ally disagrecalile, and a sentiment of envy commonly prevents us from heartily sympathizing with liis joy. If he has any judgment, he is sensible of this," and, instead of appearing to be elated with his good fortune, lie endeavours, as mucli as he can', to smother his joy, and keep down that elevation of mind witli which his new circumstances naturally inspire liim. Ho affects the same plainness of dross, and the same modesty of behaviour, which became him in his. former station. He redouble.? his attentions to his old friends, and endeav- ours more than ever to be humble, assiduous, and complaisant. And this' is the behaviour wliich in his situation we most approve of; because wc expect, it seems, that he should have more sympathy with our envy and- aversion to his happiness than we have to his happiness. It is seldom that, with all this, ho succeeds. We suspect the sincerity of his Immility, and' ■he grows weary of this constraint. In a little time, therefore, he "■etierallv leaves all his old friends behind him, some of the meanest of them except- ed, who may, perhaps, condescend to'bccome his dependents: nor does he always acquire .any now ones ; thepride of his new connections is as much affronted at finding him their equal, as thnt of his old ones had been hv his I.econiing'thcivsnperior; and it requires the most obstinate and persevering, modesty to atone for this mortification to cither. Hegenerally grows weary DESIRE OF SUPERIORITY. 53 III. The Desire to excel a universal Passion.] Among the lower animals we see many symptoms of emulation, but in thevi its effects are perfectly insignifi- cant when compared with those it produces on human conduct. Their emulation is chiefly confined to swift- ness,* strength, or favor with their females. I think, too, among dog's we may perceive something like jealousy or rivalship in courting the favor of man. In our own race emulation operates in an infinite variety of directions, and is one of the principal sources of human improvement. Human life has been often likened to a race, and the parallel holds, not only in the general resemblance, but in many of the minuter circumstances. When the horses first start from the barrier, how easy and sportive are their sallies, — sometimes one taking the lead, sometimes another! If they happen to run abreast, their contiguity seems only the effect of the social instinct. In proportion, however, as they advance in their career, the spirit of emulation becomes grad- ually more apparent, till at length, as they draw near to the goal, every sinew and every nerve is strained to the utmost, and it is well if the competition closes without some suspicion of jostling and foul play on the part of. the winner. too soon, and is provoked, by the sullen and suspicions pride of the one, and by the saucy contempt of the other, to treat the first with neglect and the sec- ond with petulancef, till at last he gi-ows habitually insolent, and forfeits the esteem of all. If the chief part of human happiness arises from the con- sciousness of being beloved, as I believe it does, these sudden changes of fortune seldom contribute much to happiness. He is happiest who advan- ces more gradually to greatness, whom the public destines to every step of his preferment long before he arrives at it, in whom, upon that account, when it comes, it can excite no extravagant joy, and with regard to whom it cannot reasonably create either any jealousy in those he overtakes, or any envy in those he leaves behind." in Bacon's Essays there is an article on Envy, abounding with original, and, in the main, just reflections. Even those which are somewhat ques- tionable may be useful in suggesting materials of thought to others. * One of the most remarkable instances of this that I have read of is the emulation of the race-horses at Rome when run without riders. This emulation is even said to be inspirited by the concourse of spectators. — See Observations made in a Tour to Italy, by the celebrated M. de la Coa- damlne. 5* 04 INSTINCTIVE PRIXCiP-LIJS OF- 'ACTIOIV. Ho\\r exact and melancholy a picture of the ra!ce of ambition, of the insensible and almost inevitable effect of political rivalship in extinguishing early friendships, and of the increasing eagerness with which men contin- ue to grasp at the palm of victory till the fatal moment arrives when it is to drop from their hands for ever ! Artificial Desires.] As we have artificial appetites, so we have also artificial desires. Whatever conduces to the attainment of any object of natural desire is itself desired on account of its subservience to this end, and frequently comes in process of time to be regarded as valuable in itself, independent of this subservience. It is thus (as was formerly observed) that wealth becomes with many an ultimate object of desire, although it is undoubtedly valued at first merely on account of its subservience to the attainment of other objects. In like manner we are led to desire dress, equipage, retinue, furniture, on account of the estimation in which they are supposed to be held by the public. I)r. Hutcheson calls such desires secondary desires, and ac- counts for their origin in the way Ihave now mention- ed. "Since we are capable," says he, "of reflection, memory, observation, and reasoning about the distant tendencies of objects and actions, and not confined to things present, there must arise, in consequence of our original desires, secondan/ desires of every thing imag- ined to be useful to gratify any of the primary desires, and that with strength proportioned to the several original desires, and the imagined usefulness or neces- sity of the advantageous object." — " Thus," he contin- ues, "as soon as we come to apprehend the use of wealth or power to gratify any of our original desires, we must also desire them. Hence arises tbe universal- ity of the desires of wealth and poioer, since they are the means of gratifying all other desires."* The only * Nature and Conduct of the Passions, Sect. I. Art. II. AKTIPICTAL DESTRES. 55 fhing exceptionable in the foregoing passage is, that the author classes the desire of ptjwer with that of wealth; whereas I apprehend it to be clear, according to Hutcheson's own definition, that the former is a pri- mary desire, and the latter a secondary one. Avarice, indeed, (as I have already remarked,) is but a particular modification of the desire of power generated by the conventional value which attaches to money in the progress of society, in consequence of which it becomes the immediate and the habitual object of pursuit in all the various departments of professional industry. The author, also, of the Preliminary Dissertation pre- fixed to King's Origin of Evil attempts to explain, by means of the association of ideas, the origin, not only of avarice, but of the desire of knowledge and of the desire of fame, both of which I have endeavoured to ■ show, in th-e preceding pages, are justly entitled -to rank with the primary and most simple elements of our active constitution. That they, as well as all the other original principles of our nature, are very powerfully in- fluenced by association and habit, is a point about which there can be no dispute ; and hence arises the plausibility of those theories which would represent them as wholly factitious.* * Dr. Hartley's once celebrated worif, entitled Obseniations on Man, in which he has pushed the theory of association to so extravagant a length, and which, not many years ago, found so many enthusiastic admirers iu England, seems to have owed its existence to the dissertation here referred to. " Tlie work here offered to the public," he tells us himself in his preface, " consists of papers written at different times, but taking their rise from the following occasion. ' " About eighteen years ago I was informed that the Rev. Mr. Gay, then living, asserted the possibility of deducing all our intellectual pleasures and pains from association. This put me upon considering the power of association. Mr. Gay published his sentiments on this matter, about the same time, in a Dissertation on the Fundamental Principle of Virtue, prefixed to Mr. Archdeacon Law's translation of Archbishop King's Origin of Evil." [Mr. Stewart speaks with too much confidence of the waning influence of the " once celebrated work " of Hartley. Since he wrote this note, one of the ablest defences of the Hartleian view has appeared in the Analysis of the Hitman Mind, by James Mill. Most writers, holding with Stewart to a plurality of elementary desires, differ from him in making the desire of property and the desire of -iolf- preservatiou to be of this number. See Upham's Mental Philosophi/, Vol. 56 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. CHAPTER III. OF OUB AFFECTIONS. Seqtion I. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS. I. What Principles included under this Head.] Under this title are comprehended all those active principles whose direct and ultimate object is the communication either of enjoyment or of suffering to any of our fel- low-creatures. According to this definition, which has been adopted by some eminent writers, and among oth- ers by Dr. Reid, resentment, revenge, hatred, belong to the class of our affections, as well as gratitude or pity. Hence a distinction of the affections into benevolent and malevolent. I shall afterwards mention some con- siderations which lead me to think that the distinction requires some limitations in the statement. Our benevolent affections are various, and it would not perhaps be easy to enumerate them completely. II. Part. I. Chap iv., and Wliewell's Elements of Morality, Book I. Chap, ii. On the desire of property, consult Lieber's Political Ethics, Book II. Chap, ii., and Illustrations of the Passions, Vol. I. Chap. v. Also the phre- nologists, and particularly Gall. On the other hand, the author of the article Di^sir in the Dicfionnaire dei Sciences Philosophiques reduces them to three, curiosity, ambition, and sym- pathy. This writer observes : — " The mind always knows, more or less, that which it desires ; reason illuminates what sensibility pui-sues. Male- branche gave the saying of the poet. Tgnoti nulla cupido, under a philosoph- ical form of expression, when he defined desire to be ' the idea of a good which a man possesses not, but hopes to possess.' Desire is distinguished by this from the blind tendency which urges every being towards its end, whether it knows it or not. It is a spontaneous movement of nature transformed by intelligence, and constitutes, therefore, a phenomenon which cannot take place except among intelligent beings. A stone has its affini- ties ; a brute has its instincts ; man alone has his desires, because he alone has received the gift of thought." Consult, also, on the subjects treated of in this chapter and the follow- ing, Gibon, Cours de Philosophic, Tom. I. p. 226 et seq. ; Bantain, Philoso- phic Morale. Tom. I. Chap. iv. ; Dr. Whewell's edition of Butler's Thret Sermons on Buman Nature; with a Preface and Notes.] BENEVOLENT AFFECTIONS. 57 The parental and the filial affections, the affections of kindred, love, friendship, patriotism, universal beneva- lence, g-ratitiide, pili/ to the distressed, are some of the most important. Besides these there are peculiar be- nevolent affections excited by those moral qualities in other men which render them either amiable or respect- able, or objects of admiration. In the foregoing enumeration, it is not to be under- stood that all the benevolent affections particularly- specified are stated as original principles, or ultimate fa(its in our constitution. On the contrary, there can be little doubt that several of them may be analyzed into the same general principle, differently modified ac- cording to the circumstances in which it operates. This, however, (notwithstanding the stress which has been sometinies laid upon it,) is chiefly a question of arrangement. Whether we suppose these principles to be all ultimate facts, or some of them to be resolvable into other facts more general, they are equally to be re- garded as constituent parts of human, nature, and, upon either supposition, we have equal reason to admire the wisdom with which that nature is adapted to the situ- ation in which it is placed. The laws which regulate the acquired perceptions of sight are surely as much a part of onr frame as those which regulate any of our original perceptions ; and although they 'require for their development a certain degree of experience and observation in the individual, the uniformity of the re- sult shows that there is nothing arbitrary or accidental in their origin. The question, indeed, concerning the origin of our different affections, leads to some curious disquisitions, but is of very subordinate importance to those inquiries which relate to their nature and laws and uses. In many philosophical systems, however, it seems to have been considered as the most interesting subject of dis- cussion connected with this part of the human consti- tution. il. Tivo Circumstances in which all the Benevolent 58 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. Afections agree.] Before we proceed io consider any of our benevolent affections in detail, I shall make a few observations on two circumstances in which they all agree. In the first place, they are all accompanied with an agreeable feeling; and, secondly, they imply a desire of happiness or of good to their respective objects.* 1. That the exercise of all our kind affections is ac- companied with an agreeable feeling will not be ques- tioned. Next to a good conscience it constitutes the principal part of human happiness. With what satis- faction do we submit to fatigue and danger in the ser- vice of those we love, and how many cares do even the most selfish voluntarily bring on themselves by their attachment to others! So much, indeed, of our happi- ness is derived from this source, that those authors whose object is to furnish amusement to the mind avail themselves of these affections as one of the chief vehi- cles of pleasure. Hence the principal charm of trage- dij., and of every other species of pathetic composition. How far it is of use to separate in this manner "the luxurij of pity " from the opportunities of active exer- tion may perhaps be doubted. My own opinion on this question I have stated at some length in the Phi- losophy of the Human Mind.f Without entering, however, in this place into the ar- gument I have there endeavoured to support, I shall only remark at present, that the pleasures of kind affec- tion are by no means confined to the virtuous part of our species. They mingle also with our criminal indul- gences, and often mislead the young and thoughtless by the charms they impart to vice and folly. It is, indeed, from this very quarter that the chief dangers to morals are to be apprehended in early life ; and it is a melan- choly consideration to add, that these dangers are not a little increased by the amiable and attractive qualities by which nature often distinguishes those unfortunate * See Reitl On tlie Active Powers, Essay III. Part II. Chap. lii. t Part I. Chap. vii. Sect. v. BENEVOLENT AFFECTIONS. 59 men who would seem, on a superficial view, to be her peculiar favorites. Nor is it only when the kind affections meet with circumstances favorable to their operation that the ex- ercise of them is a source of enjoyment. Contrary to the analogy of most, if not all, of our other active principles, there is a degree of pleasure mixed with the pain even in those cas^s in which thi-y are disappointed in the attainment of their object. Nay, in such cases it often happens that the pleasure predominates so far over the pain as to produce a mixed emotion, on which a wounded heart loves to dwell. When' death, for ex- ample, has deprived us of the society of a friend, we derive some consolation for our loss from the recollec- tion of his virtues, which awakens in our mind all those kind affections which the sight of him used to in- spire ; and in such a situation the indulgence of these affections is preferred, not only to every lighter amuse- ment, but to every other social pleasure. Heu quanto minus est cum reliquis versari quam tui vieminisse I The final cause of the agreeable emotion connected with the exercise of benevolence in all its various modes was evidently to induce us to cultivate with peculiar care a class of our active principles so immediately subservient to the happiness of society.* 2. All our benevolent affections imply a desire of happiness to their respective objects. Indeed, it is from this circumstance they derive their name. ni. Our Benevolent Affections not resolvable into Self-love.] The philosophers who have endeavoured to resolve our appetites and desires into self-love have given a similar account of our benevolent affections. * See Lucan's picturesque and pathetic description of tlie behaviour of Conielia, when she retired to the liold of the ship, to indulge her grief in solitude and darkness, after the murder of Pompey. " Caput ferali obduxit amit'tu, Decrevitgue pati tenebias, puppisque cavemis Delituit ; scevumque arcti complexa dolorem Perfruitur lacrymis, et amat pro conjuge luctum," &c., &c. Pharsalia, Lib. IX. 109. 60 INSTINCTIVE PKINCIPLES OF ACTION. It is evident that this amounts to a denial of their ex- istence as a separate class of active principles; for >vhen a thing is desired, not on its own account, but as instrumental to the attainment of something else, it is not the desire of the vieans, but that of the end, which is in this case the principle of action. In the course of my observations on the different af- fections, when I come to consider them particularly, I shall endeavour to show that this account of their ori- gin is extremely wide of the truth. In the mean time, it may be worth while to remark, in general, how strongly it is "opposed by the analogy of the other ac- tive powers already examined. We have found that the preservation of the individual and the continuation of the species are not intrusted to self-love and reason alone, but that we are endowed with various appetites, which, without any reflection on our part, impel us to their respective objects. We have also found, with re- spect to the acquisition of knowledge, (on which the perfection of the individual and the improvement of the species essentially depend,) that it is not intrusted solely to self-love and benevolence, but that we are prompted to it by the implanted principle of curiosity. It further appeared, that, in addition to our sense of duty, another incentive to worthy conduct is provided in the desire of esteem, which is not only one of our most powerful principles of action, but continues to op- erate in full force to the last moment of our being. Now, as men were plainly intended to live in society, and as the social union could not subsist without a mutual interchange of good .offices, would it not be reasonable to expect, agreeably to the analogy of our nature, that so important an end would not be intrust- ed solely to the slow deductions of reason, or to the metaphysical refinements of self-love, but that some provision would be made for it, in a particular class of active principles, which might operate, like our appe- tites and desires, independently of our reflection ? To say this of parental affection or of pity is saying nothing more in their favor than what was affirmed of hunger AFFECTIONS OP KINDRED. 61 and thirst, that they prompt us to particular objects without any reference to our own enjoyment. I have not offered these objections to the selfish the- ory with any view of exalting our natural affections into virtues ; for, in so far as they arise from original constitution, they confer no merit whatever on the in- dividual, any more than his appetites or desires. At the same time, (as Dr. Reid has observed,) there is .a manifest gradation in the sentiments of respect with which we regard these different constituents of char- acter. Our desires, (it was formerly observed,) although not virtuous in themselves, are manly and respectable, and plainly of greater dignity than our animal appetites. In like manner it may be remarked that our benevolent affections, although not meritorious, are highly amiable. A want of attention to the essential difference between the ideas expressed by these two words has given rise to much confusion in different systems of moral philos- ophy, more particularly in the systems of Shaftesbury and Hutcheson. As it would lead me into too minute a detail to con- sider our different benevolent affections separately, I shall confine myself to a few detached remarks on some of the most important. The first place is undoubtedly due to what we com- monly call natural affection, including under the term the affections of parents and children, and those of other near relations. Section II. OF THE affections OF KINDRED. I. The Parental Affection common to Animals and Men.] The parental affection is common to us with most of the brutes, although with them it is variously modified according to their respective natures, and ac- cording as the care of the parent is more or less neces- sary for the preservation and nurture of the young. 6 62 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. Cicero remarks that this is no more thao might have been expected from that beneficent providence every- where conspicuous in nature. " Hsec inter se congru- ere non possunt, ut natura et procreari vellet et diligi procreatos non curaret." * — " Commune animantium omnium est conjunction is appetitus, et cura quaedam eorum quae procreata sunt."f . When I ascribe parental affection to our own spe- cies, I do not mean to insinuate that there is any foun- dation for those stories which poets have feigned, of particular discriminating feelings which have enabled parents and children, after a long absence, or when they have never met before, mutually to recognize each other. The parental affection takes its rise from a knowledge of the relation in which the parties stand, and it is very powerfully confirmed by habit. All that I assert is, that it results naturally from that knowledge, and from the habits superinduced by the relation which the parties bear to each other; in which sense it may be justly said, (to adopt a beautiful and philosophical expression of Dr. Ferguspn's,) that " natural affection springs up in the soul as the milk springs in the breast of the mother." % Accordingly, it operates, in a great measure, independently of reflection and of a sense of duty. Reason, indeed, might satisfy a man that his children are particularly intrusted to his care, and that it is his duty to rear and educate them, — as reason might have induced him to eat and drink without the appetites of hunger and thirst ; but reason cannot cre- ate an affection any more than an appetite. And, con- sidering how little the conduct of mankind is in gen- eral influenced by a sense of duty, there are good grounds for thinking, that, were not reason in this case aided by a very powerful iipplanted principle, a very * De Finihiis, III. 19. "Nature would have been inconsistent if she had intended men to procreate, without providing at the same time that they should love their offspring." t De Offic , I. 4 " The passion which unites the sexes, and a certain affection for their voung, are common to all animals." X Principles of Moral and Political Science, Vol. I. p. 31. AFFECTIONS OF KINDRED. 63 Ismail proportion out of the whole number of children brought into the world would arrive at maturity. How much this affection depends upon habil appears from this, that, when the care of a child is devolved upon one who is not its parent, the parental affection is, in a great measure, transferred along with it. This (as Dr. Reid observes) is plainly " the work of nature," and is an additional provision made by her for the con- tinuation and preservation of the species. The parental affection, as we have hitherto consid- ered it, is common to both sexes ; but it cannot, I think, be denied, that it is in the heart of the mother that it exists in the most perfect strength and beauty. In- deed, I do not think that those have gone too far who have pronounced " the heart of a good mother to be the masterpiece of nature's works." * There is no form, cer- tainly, in which humanity appears so lovely, or pre- sents so fair a copy of the Divine image after which it was made. 11. Affections of Kindred the Foundation of our So- cial and Political Virtues.] Nor are these affections of parent and child useful solely for the preservation of the race. They form the heart in infancy for its more extensive social duties, and gradually prepare it ibr those affections which constitute the character of the good citizen ; not to mention that, in every period of life, it is our private attachments which furnish the most powerful of all incerltives to patriotism and hero- ic virtue. Nothing, therefore, could be more unphilo- sophical than the opinion of Plato, that the iudulgence of the domestic charities unfitted men for the discharge of their political duties ; an opinion which he carried so far as to propose, that, as soon as a child was born, it should be separated from its parents, and educated ever after at the expense of the public. It has been oft^n observed that persons brought up in foundling hospitals have seldom turned out well in the world ; and al- * See Marmontel, Leqons sw la Morale, p. 132, et seq. 64 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. though I doubt not that various splendid exceptions to this proposition maybe quoted, I am inclined to think, that, if the special accidents connected with these ex- ceptions were fully known, they would be found, instead of invalidating, to confirm the general rule. One thing, at least, is obvious, that, in that best of all education.s which nature has provided for us in the ordinary cir- cumstances of our condition, it formed an important part of her plan to soften the heart betimes amid the scenes of domestic life; and, accordingly, it is under the shelter of these scenes that all the social virtues may be seen to shoot up with the greatest vigor and luxuriancy. Even the sterner qualities of fortitude and bravery, so far from being inconsistent with a warm and susceptible heart, are almost its inseparable attend- ants, insomuch that we always expect to 6.nd them unit- ed. How true, in this respect, io all the best feelings of our nature, is the beautiful story recorded of Epani- inondas, that, after the battle of Leuctra, he thanked the gods that his parents still survived to enjoy his fame ! It is remarked by Dr. Beattie that Homer and Virgil, the most accurate of all observers, and the most faith- ful of all painters of human character, always unite the domestic attachments with the more splendid vir- tues of their heroes. The scene between Hector and Andromache, and the interview between Ulysses and his father after an absence of twenty years, are pro- nounced by the same excellent critic to be the finest passages in the Iliad and Odyssey. He observes fur- ther, that, in the portrait of Achilles, his love to his par- ents forms one of the most prominent and distinguish- ing features, smd that " this single circumstance throws an amiable softness into the most terrific human per- sonage that was ever described in poetry." How pow- erful a charm the iEneid derives from the same source it is needless to mention, as it is the chief -groundwork of the interest inspired by the whole texture of the fa- ble. In no instance is it more affecting than in the ad- dress of Euryalus to Nisus before they set out on their AFFECTIONS OF KINDRED. 65 desperate expedition by night ; and I believe few will deny that the pious concern which he expresses for his aged parent in that moment of approaching peril ac- cords perfectly with the gallantry of his spirit, and in- terests us more than any thing else in his fortunes. " Contra quera talia fatur Euryalus : me nulla dies tam fortibus ausis Dissimilem arguerit ; tant^m fortuna secunda, Hand adversa cadat : sod te super omnia dona, TJnum ore : genetrix Priami de gente vetusta Est mihi, qnam miseram tenuit non Ilia tellus, Mecutn excedentem, non mcenia regis Acestse : Hanc ego nunc ignaram hujas quodc.umque pericli est Inque salutatam linquo nox, et tua testis Dextera, quJd nequeam lacrymas perferre parentis. At tu, oro, solare inopem, et succurre relictse. Hanc sine me spem ferre tui : au4entior ibo In casus omnes. Percussa mente dederunt Dardanidae lacrymas: ante omnes pulcher lulns, Atque animum patrisE strinxit pietatis imago." * I shall conclude this section in the words of Lord Bacon : — " Unmarried men are best friends, best rnas- * JSneid., Lib. IX. 280. " ' All of my life,' replies the youth, ' shall aim, Like this one hour, at everlasting fame. Though fortune only our attempt can bless, Yet still my courage shall deserve success. But one reward I ask, before I go, — The greatest I can ask, or you bestow. * My mother, — tender, pious, fond, smd good. Sprung, like thy own, from Priam's royal blood, — Such was her love, she left her native Troy, , And fair Trinacria, for.her darling boy ; Anil such is mine, Uiat I must keep unknown Prom her the danger of so dear a son; To spare her anguish, lo ! I quit the place Without one parting kiss, one last embrace ! By night, and that respected hand, I swear, Her melting tears are more than I can bear ! For her, good prince, your pity I implore ; Support her, childless, and relieve her, poor; 0, let her, let her find, (when I am gone,) In you, a friend, a guardian, and a son ! With that dear hope, emboldened shall I go, Brave every danger, and defy the foe.' " Charrned with his virtue all the Trojan peers, But, more than all, Ascanius melts in tears. To see the sorrows of a duteous son And filial love, a love so like his own." 6* 66 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. ters, best servants, but not always best subjects, for they are light to run away, and almost all fugitives are of that condition. For soldiers, I find that the gener- als in their hortatives commonly put men in mind of their wives and children ; and I think the despising of marriage among the Turks maketh the vulgar soldier the more base. Certainly, wife and children are a kind of discipline of humanity; and single men, though they be many times more charitable, because their means are less exhaust, yet, on the other side, they are more cruel and hard-hearted, because their tenderness is not so often called upon." * Section III. OF FRIENDSHIP. I. Pleasures of Friendship.] Friendship, like all the other benevolent affections, includes two things, an agreeable feeling, and a desire of happiness to its object. Besides, however, the agreeable feeling common to all the exertions of benevolence, there are some pecu- liar to friendship. I before took notice of the pleasure we derive from communicating our thoughts and our feelings to others; but this communication prudence and propriety restrain us from making to strangers ; and hence the satisfaction we enjoy in the society of one to whom we can communicate every circumstance in our sitjiation, and can trust every secret of our heart. There is also a wonderful pleasure arising from the sympathy of our fellow-creatures with our joys and with our sorrows, nay, even with our tastes and our humors ; but, in the ordinary commerce of the world, we are often disappointed in our expectations of this enjoyment, — a disappointment which is peculiarly in- cident to men of genius and sensibility superior to the common, who frequently feel themselves " alpne in the midst of a crowd," and reduced to the necessity of ac- * Bacon's Essays. Of Marriage and Single Life. FRIENDSHIP. 67 commodating their own temper, and their own feeling:^, to a standard borrowed from those whom they caniiot help thinking undeserving of such a sacrifice. It is only in the society of a friend that this sym- pathy is at all times to be found ; and the pleasing re- flection, that we have it in our power to command so exquisite a gratification, constitutes, perhaps, the prin- cipal charm of this connection. " What we call affec- tion," says Mr. Smith, "is nothing but an habitual sympathy." I will not go quite so far as to adopt this proposition in all its latitude, but I perfectly agree with this profound and amiable moralist in thinking, that the experience of this sympathy is the chief foundation of friendship, and one of the principal sources of the pleasures which it yields. Nor is it at all inconsistent with this observation to remark, that, where the ground- work of two characters in point of moral worth is the same, there is sometimes a contrast in the secondary qualities, of taste, of intellectual accomplishments, and even of animal spirits, which, instead of presenting obstacles to friendship, has a tendency to bind more strongly the knot of mutual attachment between the parties. Two very interesting and memorable exam- ples of this may be found in Cuvier's account of the friendship between Buffbn and Daubenton,* and in Playfair's account of the friendship between Black and Hutton.f I do not mean here to enter into the consideration of the various topics relating to frierfdship which are commonly discussed by writers on that subject. Most of these, indeed I may say all of them, are beautifully illustrated by Cicero in the treatise De Aniicitia, in which he has presented us with a summary of all that w^s most valuable on this article of ethics in the writings of preceding philosophers ; and so compre- hensive is the view of it which he has taken, that the modern authors who have treated of it have done little more than to repeat his observations. * jRecueil des Eloges Historiques. M. Daubenton. t Biographical Account of tlie late Dr. James Button.' Worries, Vol. IV. 68 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. II. Can Friendship subsist between more than Tivo Persons?] One question concerning friendship much cigitated in the ancient schools was, whether this con- nection can subsist in its full perfection between more than two persons; — and I believe it was the common decision of antiquity that it cannot. For my own part, I can see no foundation for this limitation, and I own it seems to me to have been suggested more by the dreams of romance, or the fables of ancient mjrthology, than by good sense or an accurate knowledge of man- kind. The passion of love between the sexes is indeed of an exclusive nature; and the jealousy of the one party is roused the moment a suspicion arises that the attachment of the other is in any degree divided ; (and, by the way, this circumstance, which I think is strongly characteristical of that connection, deserves to be add- ed to the various other considerations which show that monogamy has a fcMndation in human nature.) But the feelings of frienaship are of a perfectly different sort. If our friend is a man of discernment, we rejoice at every new acquisition he makes, as it affords us an opportunity of adding to our own list of worthy and amiable individuals, and we eagerly concur with him in promoting the interests of those who are dear to his heart. Wh^n we ourselves, on the other hand, have made a new discovery of worth and gejiius, how do we long to impart the same satisfaction to a friend, and to be instrumental in bringing together the various respectable and 'worthy men whom the accidents of life have thrown in our way! I acknowledge, at the same time, that the number of our attached and confidential friends cannot be great, otherwise our attention would be too much distracted by the multiplicity of its objects, and the views for which this affection of the mind was probably implanted would be frustrated by its engaging us in exertions beyond the extent of our limited abilities ; and, accord- ingly, nature has made a provision for preventing this inconvenience, by rendering friendship the fruit only of long and intimate acquaintance. It is strengthened FRIENDSHIP. 69 by the acquaintance which the parties have, not only with each other's personal qualities, but with their histories, situations, and connections from infancy, and every particular of this sort which falls under their mutual knowledge forms to the fancy an additional re- lation by which they are united. Men who have a very wide circle of friends, without much discrimination or preference, are justly suspected of being incapable of genuine friendship, and indeed are generally men of cold and selfish characters, who are influenced chiefly by a cool and systematical regard to their own comfort, and who value the social intercourse of life only as it is subservient to their accommodation and amusement. III. How we are affected by the Distresses of our Friends.] That the aflection of friendship includes a desire of happiness to the beloved object, it is unne- cessary to observe. There is, however, a certain limita- tion of the remark, which occurs among the Maxims of La Rochefoucauld, and which has been often repeated since by misanthropical moralists, "That, in the dis- tresses of our best friends, there is always something which does not displease us." It may be proper to consider inwhat sense this is to be understood, and how far it has a foundation in truth. It is expressed in somewhat equivocal terms ; and, I suspect, owes much of its plausibility to this very circumstance. From the triumphant air with which the maxim in question has been generally quoted by the calumniators of human nature, it has evidently been supposed by them to imply that the misfortunes of our best friends give us more pleasure than pain.* But this La Roche- foucauld has not said, nor, indeed, could a proposition ,so obviously false and extravagant have escaped the pen * It was plainly in this sense that Swift understood it when he prefixed it as a motto to the verses on his own death. "As Rochefoucauld his maxims drew From nature, I believe them true. If what he says be not a joke, We mortals are strange kind of folk." 70 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. of SO acute a writer. What La Rochefoucauld has said amounts only to this, that, in the distresses of our best friends, the pain we' feel is not altogether unmix- ed ; — a proposition unquestionably true, wherever we have an opportunity of soothing their sorrows by the consolations of sympathy, or of evincing, by more sub- stantial services, the sincerity and strength of our at- tachment. But the pleasure we experience in such cases, so far from indicating any thing selfish or malevolent in the heart, originates in principles of a directly opposite description, and will be always most pure and exquisite in the most disinterested and gen- erous characters. The maxim, indeed, when thus in- terpreted, is not less true when applied to our own distresses than to those of our friends. In the bitterest cup that may fall to the lot of either, there are always mingled some cordial drops, — in the misfortunes of others, the consolation of administering- relief, — in our own, that of receiving' it from the sympathy of those we love. Whether La Rochefoucauld, in the satirical humor which dictated the greater part of his maxims, did not wish, in the present instance, to convey by his words a little more than meets the ear, I do not presume to de- termine. Section IV. OF patriotism. I. Provision made for a Division of Mankind into distinct Communities.] Notwithstanding the principles of union implanted by nature in the human breast, it was plainly not her intention that society should always go on increasing in numbers. A foundation is laid for a division of mankind into distinct communities, in those natural divisions on the surface of the globe that are formed by chains of mountains, impassable rivers, and the oceans which separate the larger continents ; and the same end is further answered by those principles of PATRIOTISM. 71 enmity which, in the earlier stages of society, never fail to estrange neighbouring tribes from each other, and which continue to operate with a very ' powerful effect even in periods of knowledge and refinement. I shall not at present attempt to analyze particularly the origin of these principles of disunion among man- kind. I shall only remark, that they do not imply any original malignity in the human heart; on the contrary, they seem to have their source in the social nature of man, — in those affections which attach him to the tribe he belongs to, and to the country which gave him birth. This remark has been so excellently illui|trated by Lord Shaftesbury and by Dr. Ferguson, that it would be quite superfluous to enlarge upon it here. Contenting myself, therefore, with a reference to their works,* I ahall proceed to some other views of the sub- ject, where the field of observation does not seem to be so completely exhausted. * See Shaftesbury's Essay on the Freedom of Wit and Humor, Part III. Sect. 2, and Ferguson's Essai/ on the Flislorij of Civil Soa'eti/, Part I. Sect. 4. The former observes : — ''It is strange to im.agine that war, which of ail tilings appears the most savage, should be the passion of the most he- roic spirits. But it is in war that the knot of fellowship is closest drawn. It is in war that mutual succor is most given, mutual danger run, and coTumon affection most exerted and employed. For heroism and philan- thropy are almost one and the same. Yet, by a small misguidance of the affection, a lover of mankind becomes a ravager; a hero and deliverer becomes an oppressor and destroyer." " Vast empires are in' many re- spects unnatural ; but particularly in this, that, he they ever so well consti- tuted, the affairs of many must in such governments turn upon a very few; and the rel_alion be less sensible, and in a manner lost, between the magis- trate and people, in a body so unwieldy in its limbs, and whose members lie so remote from one another, and distant from the head. It is in such bodies as these that strong factions are aptest to engender. The associat- ing spirits, for want of exercise, form new movements, and seek a nar- rower sphere of activity, when they want action in a greater. Thus we have wheels within wheels. And in some national constitutions, (notwith- standing the absurdity in polities,) we have one empire within .another. Nothing is so delightful as to incorporate." In the same strain Ferguson: — " The titles of fellow-citizen and countri/man, unopposed by those of alien smii foreigner, to which they refer, would fall into disuse, and lose their meaning. We love individuals on account of persdnal qualities ; but we love our country, as it is a party in the divisions, of mankind ; and our zeal for its interests is a predilection in behalf of the side we maintain." '■ ' Mv father,' said a Spanish peasant, ' wonld rise fiom his grave, if he could foresee a war with France.' What interest had he, or the bones of his father, in the quarrels of princes ? " 72 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. The foundation which nature has laid for a diversity of languages, of customs, of manners, and of institu- tions among mankind, adds force to the principles of division and repulsion already mentioned. These cir- cumstances derive their effect, indeed, from the igno- rance of men, which is apt to mistake a diversity of arbitrary signs and arbitrary ceremonies for a diversity of opinions and of moral sentiments ; and accordingly, as society advances, and reason improves, the effect be- comes gradually less and less sensible. As the effect, however, is universal among rude nations, and as it is the unavoidable result of the general laws of our con- stitution when placed in certain circumstances, we may consider it as a part of the plan of Providence with re- spect to our species ; and we may presume that here, as in other instances, that plan tends ultimately, to some wise and beneficent purpose, though by means which appear to us, at first view, to have a very unfa- vorable aspect. What these purposes are it is impossi- ble for our limited faculties to trace completely ; but even we, narrow and partial as our views at present are, may perceive some salutary consequences resulting from these apparent disorders of the moral world. I shall only mention the tendency which a constant state of hostility and alarm must have among barbarous tribes to bind and consolidate in each of them apart the political union ; and, by strengthening the hands of government, to prepare the way for the progress of society. We may add, the exercise which it gives to many of our most important moral principles, and the powerful stimulus it applies to our intellectual capaci- ties. The discipline is indeed rough, but it is perhaps the only one of which the mind of man, in a certain state of his progress, is susceptible. II. Tendency of Civilization to diminish the Causes of Disunion.] If these observations are well founded, may we not presume to offer a conjecture, that, as this final cause ceases to exist in proportion as government ad- vances to maturity, and as the moral causes of hostili- PATRIOTISM. 73 ty among nations (arising from diversity of language and of manners) cease to operate upon men of enlight- ened and liberal minds, the tendency of civilized socie- ty is to diminish the dissensions among different com- munities, and to unite the human race in the bonds of ninity? The just views of political economy which Mr. Smith and some other authors have lately opened, and which demonstrate the absurdity of commercial jealousies, all contribute to encourage the same pleas- ing prospect ; but, alas ! it is a prospect which the vices and prejudices of men allow us to indulge only in those moments of enthusiasm when our benevolent wishes for mankind, and our confidence in the wisdom and goodness of Providence, transport us from the ca- lamities and atrocities of our own times, to anticipate the triumphs of reason and humanity in a more fortu- nate age. In my Philosophy of the Human Mind I have remark- ed, that " there anre many prejudices which are found to prevail universally among our species in certain periods of society, and which seem to be essentially necessary for maintaining its order in ages when men are unable to comprehend the purposes for which governments are instituted. As society advances, these prejudices grad- ually lose their influence on the higher classes, and would probably soon disappear altogether, if it were not supposed to be expedient to prolong their existence as a source of authority over the multitude. In an age, however, of universal and unrestrained discussion, it is impossible that they can long maintain their empire ; nor ought we to regret their decline, if the important ends to which they have been subservient in the past experience of mankind are found to be accomplished by the growing light of philosophy. On this supposi- tion, a history of human prejudices, in so far as they have supplied the place of more enlarged political views, may, at some future period, furnish to the phi- losopher a subject of speculation no less pleasing and instructive than that beneficent wi.sdom of nature which guides t!ie operations of the lower animals, and 74 INSTINCTIVE PBINCIPLES OF ACTION. which, even in our own species, takes upon itself the care of the individual in the infancy of human reason." * The remarks which have been now made on the sources of disunion and hostility among mankind in the earlier periods of society, and on the final causes to which this constitution of things is subservient, afford one remarkable illustration of the conjecture which I have hazarded in the foregoing passage. Before proceeding to consider the affection of patri- otism, it was necessary to turn our attention for a mo- ment to the principles of disunion in our species, as the idea of patriotism proceeds on the supposition, that mankind are divided into distinct communities, with separate, if not with rival and hostile interests. III. Exciting Causes of Patfiotism.] The exciting causes of patriotism (abstracted from all considera- tions of reason and duty) are many. We are formed with so strong a disposition to associate with and to love our own species, that the imagination lays hold with eagerness of every circumstance, how slight so- ever, that can form a bond of union ; a common lan- guage, a common religion, common laws, even a com- mon appellation, — not to mention the prudential con- siderations of common enemies and a common interest. The feelings which these uniting circumstances inspire attach us even to the territory which our_ fellow-citizens inhabit, by the same law of association that endears to us the spot where a friend was born, or the scene where we have enjoyed any social pleasure ; and thus the imagination forms to itself a complex idea of coun- trymen and country, which impresses every susceptible heart with irresistible force. In perusing the history of either, how remote soever the period it describes may be, we feel an interest which no other narrative inspires. We sympathize with the fortunes of those who trod the :i^me ground that we now tread, and we appropriate to Oiirrtclves a share of the glory they acquired by their * Part T. Chap. iv. Sot. viii. PATRIOTISM. 75 bravery and virtue. "When the late Mr. Anson (Lord Anson's brother) was on his travels in the East, he hired a vessel to visit the Isle of Tenedos. His piloi, an old Greelf, as they were sailing along, said with some satisfaction, ''Twas there our fleet lay.' Mr. Anson demanded, ^ What fleet?' ^Wliat fleet." replied the old man, a little piqued at the question, 'why,- our Grecian fleet at the siege of Troy.' " This anecdote, (which I borrow from the Philological Inquiries of Mr. Harris,*) naturally excites a smile; but it is, at the same time, so congenial to feelings inseparable from our con- stitution, that its effect seems to me to border on the pathetic, and I presume there are few who have read it without some emotion. It is not a little remarkable, with respect to this nat- ural attachment to the scenes of our infancy and youth, that it is commonly strongest among the inhabitants of bkrren and mountainous countries. This would ap- pear to indicate that it is produced less by the recollec- tion of agreeable physical impressions than of moral pleasures, — pleasures which probably derive an ad- ditional zest from the absence of those interesting or amusing objects which dissipate the attention by invit- ing the thoughts abroad. Where nature has been spar- ing in her external bounty, men become the more de- pendent for their happiness on internal enjoyment ; it is thus that the storms and gloom of winter give a high- er relish to the pleasijres of society. Perhaps, too, the thin and scattered population of such countries may contribute something to the romantic enthusiasm of the domestic and private attachments, as it is certain that the opposite extreme of a crovsrded and busy population seldom fails to extinguish all the more ardent social af- fections.. Among the inhabitants of Europe this attach- ment to home is said to be the most remarkable in the Swiss and the Laplanders, who, when removed to a dis- tance from their native scenes, are subject to a particu- lar species of despondency, to which medical writers * Part III. Chap. .. 76 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. have given the name of nostalgia. It is thus described by Haller, who was himself a native of Switzerland, and who, in some of his poetical pieces, composed dur- ing the period of his academical studies in Holland, has sufficiently shown that his own heart was not prooi' against its influence. " Nostalgia genus est raceroris subditis reipublicas mesB familiaris, etiam civibus, a desiderio nati suorum. Is sensim consumit segros et destruit, nonnunquam in rigorem et maniam abit, alias in febres lentas. Eum spes sanat. Etiam animalia consueta societate privata, nonnunquam depereunt, et ex pullis amissis etiam lutrse maris Kamtschadalensis. Sic ex amore frustrate lenta et insanabilis consumptio sequitur, quod Angli cor rup- lum vocant." * We are informed by another medical writer, (Sauva- ges,) that he has known this disorder in the son of a common beggar, who could scarcely be said to have^any home but the streets and public roads.f " Thus every good his native wilds impart Imprints the patriot passion on his heart. And even the ills that round his mansion rise Enhance the bliss his scanty fund supplies. Dear is that shed to which his sonl conforms, And dear that hill that lifts him to the storais. * And as a child, when scaring sounds molest, Clings close and closer to its mother's breast, So the loud tempest and the whirlwind's roar But bind hira to his native mountains more." % The sources of patriotism hitherto mentioned arise chiefly from the imagination and from the association of ideas, and have little or no connection with our rational and moral powers. They presuppose, indeed, sensibility, social attachment, and force of mind, but they do not * Elem. Physiol,., Lib. XVII. Sect. 2, § 5. " Nostalgia is a malady com- mon among my conntiymen, originating in a longing for home. It grad- ually consumes ' and wears out the patient, sometimes going off in chills and mania, sometimes in a slow fever. Hope cures it. jiven animals when deprived of their accustomed companions, will sometimes die ; as is the case with the .sea-otter of Kamtschatka when bereft of her young. So, likewise, a lingering and incurable consumption follows disappointed love, which The English call a hrohp.n h ffj-f.'' t yavjir/ia Miithvli'-a. J Goldsmith's TraviMtr. PATRIOTISM. 77 necessarily imply reflection or a sense of duty. They are the natural result of our constitution when placed in certain, circumstances ; and hence, though not coeval with our birth, nor after their appearance unsusceptible of analysis, the affection they produce, in so far as it arises from them without the cooperation of any other motive, may be considered as a blind impulse, analogous in its operation to those desires and appetites which have been already mentioned. This affection may be called, for the sake of ^distinction, instinctive patriotism. IV. Patriotism in Small and in Large Countries.] The circumstances which have been enumerated as the sources of instinctive patriotism operate with peculiar force in small communities, where the extent of the ter- ritory and the body of the people, falling under the habitual observation of every citizen, present more defi- nite objects to the imagination, and affect the heart more deeply, than what is only conceived from descrip- tion. Here, too, the individual feels his importance as an active member of the state, and the consciousness of what he is able to do for its prosperity contributes powerfully to promote his patriotic exertions. In an extensive and populous country, the instinctive affection of patriotism is apt to grow languid among the mass of the people, and therefore it becomes the more necessary to impress on their minds those consid- erations of reason and duty which recommend public spirit as one of the principal branches of morality. What these considerations are, I shall afterwards en- deavour to point out in treating of the duties we owe to our fellow-creatures. At present I shall only remark, that, as instinctive patriotism decays, so rational patriot- ism acquires force, in proportion to the extent of terri- tory and to the multitude of fellow-citizens it embraces ; in other words, in proportion to the magnitude of that sum of happiness which it aspires to secure and to augment. ■ Such considerations, however, can have weight only with men whose sense of duty is strong ; and as, un- 7* 78 ].\o'TiKCTivK FRis€n'i.::s OF Acnoy. Ibrtanately, this is not the case with a great proportioH of mankind, it is of the utmost consequence, in every state of society, to cherish as much as possible the in- stinctive affection of patriotism, and to counteract those causes that tend to extinguish it. For this purpose, nothing is more likely to be effectual than to dijfuse a general taste for historical and geographical reading. A peasant who has never extended his thoughts beyond his own province, and who sees every thing flourishing and happy around him, is apt to consider the enjoy- ments he possesses as inseparable from the human race, and no more connected with any particular system of laws than the advantages he derives from the immedi' ate bounty of nature. It is the study of history and geography alone that can remove this prejudice, by show- ing us, on the one hand, the narrow limits within which the political happiness of our species has hitherto been confined, and, on the other, the singular combination of accidental circumstances to which we are indebted for the blessings we enjoy. This effect of history, indeed, tends rather to cherish rational than instinctive patriot- ism; but it operates also wonderfully on the latter affec- tion, by leading us to contrast our own country and coun- trymen with other lands and other nations, and thereby presenting a more definite and interesting object to the imagination and to the heart. When, from the trans- actions of past ages and of foreign lands, we return to what is near and familiar, we are affected somewhat in the same manner as if we met with a fellow-citizen in a distant country. Absence from home never fails to en- dear it to a mind possessed of any sensibility. The extent of our country, too, seems to diminish to our intellectual eye in proportion as the object recedes from us, and we feel a sensible relation to what we before regarded with complete indifference. The natives of the same coun- try in Scotland feel towards each other a partial pre- dilection when they meet in the meti-opolis of Great Britain ; and the circumstancg of being born in this island forms a tie of friendship between individuals in the other quarters of the gjobe. The study of history PATRIOTISM. 79 operates somewhat in the same manner, though net perhaps in the same degree. By transporting us in im- agination over the surface of this planet, and by as- sembling before our view the myriads who have occu- pied it before us, it serves to define to our thoughts more distinctly the particular community to which we belong, and strengthens the bond of relationship that unites us to all its members. I shall only add further on this subject, that, when the extent and population of a country are so very great as to give it a decided preeminence among neigh- bouring nations, it has a tendency to produce (partly by interesting the vanity, and partly by dazzling the imagination) an attachment to national glory, which operates both on the vulgar and on men of better edu- cation in a way extremely analogous to the instinctive patriotism felt by the member of a small community. A remarkable instance of this occurred in the national character of the French prior to the late revolution ; nor does it seem to have altered in this respect since that event, if we may judge from the indignation with which the idea of a confederate republic has always been re- ceived. A feeling of the same kind may be traced in various expressions employed by Livy in the preface to his Roman History. " Utcunque erit, juvabit tamen rerum gestarum memoriae principis terrarum populi, pro virili parte, et ipsum consuluisse ; et si in tanta scrip- torum turba mea fama in obscuro sit, nobilitate ac magnitudine eorum qui nomini efficient meo me con- soler. Res est prsterea et immensi operis, ut quae supra septingentesimum annum repetatur, et quae ab exiguis profecta initiis eo creverit, ut jam magnitudine laboret sua: et legentium plerisque haud dubito, quin primse origines proximaque originibus, minus praebitura vo- luptatis sint, festinantibus ad hsec nova, quibus jam- pridem prsevalentis populi vires se ipsae conficiunt." * * " However that may be, I shall at all events derive no small snti^fiu- tion from the reflection that ray best endeavom-s have been exerted in f "i-- mitting to posterity the achievements of the greatest peo|ile in the v •■■ I ; and if, amidst such a multitude of writers, my name should not e:HLi„e 80 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. The very danger which such an empire was exposed to from its enormous magnitude, and from the seeds of destruction which it carried in its bosom, seems to heighten the patriotic affection of the historian, by- awakening an anxious solicitude for its impending fate. The contrast between this feeling of national pride, and a melancholy anticipation of those calamities to which national greatness leads, gives the principal charm to this exquisite composition. Section V. of pity to the distressed. I. Office and important Uses of Compassion.] As the unfortunate chiefly stand in need of our assistance, so there is provided in every breast a most powerful advo- cate in their favor; an advocate, to whose solicitations it is impossible even for the most obdurate to turn always a deaf ear. The appropriation of the word humanity to this part of our constitution affords sufficient evidence of the common sentiments of mankind upon the subject. " Mollissima corda Humano generi dare se natura fatetur, Quae lacrymas dedit. HiEC nostii pars optima sensfts. Separat hoc nos A grege mutonim." * from obscurity, I shall console myself by considering the distinguished reputation and eminent merit of those who stand in my way in the pursuit of fame. It may be further observed, that such a subject must require a work of immense extent, as our researches must be carried back through a space of more than seven hundred years ; that the state has, from very small beginnings, gradually increased to such a magnitude that it is now distressed by its own bulk ; and, besides, that there is every reason to ap- prehend that the generality of readers will receive but little pleasure from the accounts of its first origin, or of the times immediately succeeding, but will be impatient to arrive at these modern times, in which the powers of this overgrown state have been long employed in working their own de- struction." * Jut., So*. XV. 131, 142. " Nature, who gave us tears, by that alone Proclaims she made the feeling heart our own ; And 't is our noblest sense . . . . This marks our birth ; Oar great distinction from the beasts of earth.'' PITY TO THE DISTRESSED. 81 The general (Ifticiple of benevolence, or of gooii- will to our fellow-creatures, (of which I shall treat after- wards, when I come to consider our moral duties,) as it disposes us to promote the happiness of others, so it restrains us from doing them evil, and prompts us to relieve their distresses. The office of compassion or pity is more limited. It impels us to relieve distress ; it serves as a check on resentment and selfishness, and the other principles which lead us to injure the interests of others ; but it does not prompt us to the communi- cation of positive happiness. Its object is to relieve, and sometimes to prevent, suffering; but not to aug.- ment the enjoyment of those who are already easy and comfortable. We are disposed to do this by the gen- eral spirit of benevolence, but not by the particular af- fection of pity. The final cause of this constitution of our nature is very ingeniously and happily pointed out by Dr. Butler in his second sermon On Compassion. This profound philosopher observes, that, " supposing men to be capa- ble of happiness and of misery in degrees equally in- tense, yet they are liable to the latter during longer peri- ods of time than they are susceptible of the former. We frequently see men suffering the agonies of pain for days, weeks, and months together, without any in- termission, except the short suspensions of sleep, — a stretch of misery to which no state of high enjoyment can approach in point of duration. Such, too, is our constitution, and that of the world around us, that the sources of our sufferings are placed much more within the power of other men than the sources of our pleas- ures, so that there is no individual (however incapable he may be to add to the happiness of his fellow-crea- tures) who has it not in his power to do them great and extensive mischief. To prevent the abuse of this power when we are under the influence of any of the angry passions, by means of a particular affection tending to check the excess of resentment, was, therefore, of more consequence to the comfort of human life than it would have been to superadd to the general principle of good- 82 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. will a particular affection promptingtfto the communi- cation of positive enjoyment. The power we have over the misery of our fellow-creatures being a more impor- tant trust than our power of promoting the happiness of those already comfortable, the former stood more in need of a guard to check its excesses than the latter of a stimulus to animate its exertions. But, further, as it is more in our power to communicate misery than hap- piness, so it is more in our power to relieve misery than to superadd enjoyment. Hence an additional reason for implanting in our constitution the affection of com- passion, while there is none analogous to it urging us by an instinctive impulse to acts of general benevolence." The final causes of compassion, then, are to prevent and to relieve misery, — to prevent misery by checking the violence of our own angry passions, and to relieve misery by calling our attention, and engaging aur good offices, to every object of distress within our reach. The latter is the more common and the more impor- tant of its offices, at least in the present state of society. And it is this which I have chiefly in view in the fol- lowing observations. I have said that compassion calls or arrests our atten- tion to the distressed objects within our reach. When we are immersed in the business of the world, or intox- icated with its pleasures, we are apt to overlook, and sometimes to withdraw from, scenes of misery. It is the office of compassion to plead the cause of the wretched, or rather to solicit us to take their case under our consideration ; for so strong is the sense which all men have of the duty of beneficence, that, if they could only be brought to exercise their powers of reflection on the facts before them, they could scarcely ever fail to relieve distress, when, in consistency with other ob- ligations, it was in their power to do so. One striking proof of this is, that the active zeal of humanity is \cceteris paribus) strongest in those men whose warm imaginations present to them lively pictures of the s\if- ferings of others ; and that there is scarcely any man, however callous and selfish, whose beneficence may not PITY TO THE DISTRESSED. 83 be called forth by a skilful and eloquent description of any scene of misery. General considerations with re- gard to our social duties will often have little weight ; but if the attention can only be fixed to facts, nature, iji most instances, accomplishes the rest. " Hence the importance in our constitution of the affection of com- passion, which, amidst the tumult of business or of pleasure, stops us suddenly in our career, and reminds us that we have social duties to fulfil ; calls upon us to examine the claims of the helpless, and aggravates our guilt if we disregard its admonition. II. An Instinctive., and not, in itself, a Moral Princi- ple.'] Compassion, according to the view now given of it, is an instinctive impulse prompting to a particular object, analogous in many respects to the animal appe- tites already considered. It is, indeed, one of the most . amiable, and one of the most important parts of our constitution ; but it is not an object of moral approba- tion.' Our duty lies in the proper regulation of it, — in considering with attention the facts it recommends to our notice, and in acting with respect to them as reason and conscience prescribe. It is hardly necessary for me to add, that there are cases in which these inform us that we ought not to follow the impulse of compassion, and in which it is no less meritorious in us to resist its solicitations than to deny ourselves the unlawful grati- fication of a sensual appetite ; and even in those in- stances in which our duty calls us to obey its impulse, our merit does not arise from the affection we feel, but from doing what our conscience approves of as rig-ht, on a deliberate consideration of the action we are to perform, when examined in all its bearings and con- sequences. Notwithstanding, however, the unquestionable truth of this theoretical conclusion, it is nevertheless certain, that a strong and habitual tendency to indulge this af- fection affords no slight presumption in favor of the worth and benevolence of a character. Whoever re- flects, on the one hand, upon its general coincidence 84 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. with what a sense of duty prescribes, and, upon the other, on the nature of those circumstances by which its indulgence is checked and discouraged among men of the world, will, I apprehend, readily assent to the truth of this observation. The poet, perhaps, went a little too far when he stated, as a general and unquali- fied maxim, 'Ayafiol SipiSdKpvis &vdpes ; * but, upon the whole, I am inclined to think that this maxim, with all the ex- ceptions which may contradict it, will be found much nearer to the fact than they who have been trained in the schools of fashionably persiflag-e ^-will be disposed to acknowledge. III. The Affection of Pity not a Modification of Self- love.] The philosophers who attempt to resolve the whole of human conduct into self-love have adopted various theories to explain the affection of pity. With- out stopping to examine these, I shall confine myself to a simple statement of the fact, which statement will at once show how far all of these are erroneous, and will point out the oversight in which they have origi- nated. Whoever reflects carefully on the effect pro- duced on his own mind by objects which excite his pity must be sensible that it is a compounded one ; and therefore, unless we are at pains to analyze it carefully, we may be apt to mistake some one of the ingredients for the whole combination. * " Gooil men are prone to shed tears." — " The poets," says Mr. Wol- laston, " who of all writers undertake to imitate nature most, oft introduce even their heroes weeping. (See how Homer represents Ulysses, Od., E l.'il et seq.) The tears of men are in tnath very different from the cries and ejulations of children. They are silent streams, and flow from other causes, commonly some tender, or perhaps philosophical reflection. It is easy to see how hard hearts and dry eyes come to be fashionable. But for all that, it is certain the gkmdulce lacnjmales are not made for notliing." Religion of Nature Delineated, Sect. VI. § xvii. It is also remarked by Descartes, that the tears of children and of old men (in which both are apt to indulge) flow from different sources. " Senes sa?pe lacrymantur ex amore et gaudio Infantes raro ex laetilia lacrymantur, sa^pius ex trisiitia, etiam quam amor non comitatur." (De Passionibus, Secunda Pars, Art. cxxxiii ) The important facts here de- scribed have seldom been remarked ; and the statement of them does honor .to Descartes, a<: an attentive and accurate observer of human nature in the beginning and towards tKe close of its history. PITY TO THE DISTRESSED. 80 On the sight of distress we are distinctly conscious, I think, of three things: — 1st. A painful emotion in consequence of the distress we see. 2d. A selfish desire to remove the cause of this uneasiness. 3d. A disposition to relieve the distress from a benevolent and disinterested concern about the sufferer. If we had not this last disposition, and if it were not stronger than the former, the sight of a distressed object would invariably prompt us to fly from it, as we frequently see those men do in whom the second ingredient pre- vails over the third. In ordinary cases, the impulse of pity attaches us to the cause of our sufferings ; and we cling to it, even although we are conscious that we can afford no relief but the consolation of sympathy; — a demonstrative proof that one at least of the ingredients of pity (and in most men the prevailing ingredient) is purely disinterested in its nature and origin.* * There is a passage in Hazlitt's Essays on the Principles of Hainan Action, 2d ed., pp. 131 et seq., which exposes a common fallacy on this subject. "It is absurd to say, that, in compassionatin■ analogous to this. Such, for example, is the instinctive effort we make to recover ourselves when we are in danger of losing our balance,* and the instinctive de- * Although I have followed Dr. Reid's language in calling this an in- stinctive effort, I am abundantly aware that the expression is not unexcep- tionable. On this head I perfectly agree (excepting in one single point) with the following remarks of Gravesande : — " II y a quelque chose d'admirable dans le moyen ordinaire dont les hommes se servent, pour s'empecher de tomber : car dans le tems que, par quelque mouvement, le poids du corps s'augmente d'une cotfe, un autre mouvement retahlit I'equilibre dans I'instant. On attribue commune- ment la chose a un instinct naturel quoiqu'il faille necessairement I'attriba- er 4 un art perfectionni par I'exercise. " Les enfans ignorent absolument cat art dans les preraiires ann6es de Icur vie ; ils I'apprennent peu a peu, et s'y perfectionnent, parce qu'ils ont continuellement oitcasion de s"y exercer ; exercise qui, dans la suite, n'exi- ge preaque plus aucune attention de leur part ; tout comrae un musicien remue les doigts, suivant les regies de I'art, pendant qu'il apper<;oit li peine qu'il y fasse le moindre attention." — (Eiwres P/dlosophiques de M. S'Gnive- sande, p. 121, 2de Partie, Amsterdam, 1774. The only thing I am disposed to object to in the foregoing passage is that clause where the author ascribes the effort in question to an art. Is it not manifestly as wide of the truth to refer it to this source as to >■ pure in.stinct ? The word art implies intelligence, — the perception of an end, and tlie choice of means. But where is there any appearance of either in an oper- ation common to the whole species, (not excepting the idiot and the in- sane,) and which is practised as successfully by the brutes as by rational creatures ? Elephants (It is well known) were taught by the ancients to walk on the tight rope, on which occasions their trunk probably performed the office of a pole. Whoever has seen a peacock walk in a windy day along the branch of a tree must have observed the address with which he avails himself of his tail for the same purpose. Nothing, however, can place in a stronger light the capacity of the brutes to acquire the nice management of the centre of gravity, than the mathematical exactness with which we may daily see horses in the ciirus adjusting the inclination of their bodies to the velocity of their circular speed. Here, indeed, a good deal is to bo ascribed to the effects of human dijicipline, but by far the greater part of the groundwork is laid by nature in the instinctive dispositions of the animal. The acquisition seems to be almost as easy as that of the habits which constitute the acquired percep- tions of sight. In one of the last volumes of Dr. Clarke's Travels there is a figure of a goat, whom the author saw standing with its four feet collected together on the top of a cylindrical piece of wood of a few inches diametci- No- body can doubt that the effects of disci|iline were greatly facilitated in this instance by the natural instincts of the goat, which probably accommo- dated themselves witli very little instruction to the artificial circumstances in which they were forced to operate. MALEVOLENT AFFECTIONS. 95 spatch with which we shut the eyelids when an object is made to pass rapidly before the face. In general it will be found, that, as nature has taken upon herself the care of our preservation daring the infancy of our reason, so in every case in which our existence is threat- ened by dangers, against which reason is unable to supply a remedy loilh sufficient proviptilude, she contin- ues this guardian care through the whole of life. The disposition which we sometimes feel, when un- der the influence of instinctive resentment, to wreak our vengeance upon inanimate objects, has suggested to Dr. Reid a very curious query. Whether, upon such an occasion, we may have a momentary belief that the object is alive ? For my own part, I confess my incli- nation to answer this question in the affirmative. I agree with Dr. Reid in thinking, that, unless we had such a belief, our conduct could not possibly be what it frequently is, and that it is not till this momentary belief is at an end that our conduct appears to our- selves to be absurd and ludicrous. With respect to in- fants, there are many facts besides that now under con- sideration which render it probable that their first ap- prehensions lead them to believe all the objects around them to be animated, and that it is only in consequence of experience and reason that they come to form the notion of insentient substances. If this be the case, the illusion of imagination which leads us to ascribe life to things inanimate, when we are under the influ- ence of instinctive resentment, may perhaps be owing to a momentary relapse into those apprehensions which were habitually familiar to us in the first years of our existence. Bat whatever theory we adopt on the subject, there can be no doubt about the fact, that the final cause of this law of our jiature was to secure and guard us against the sudden effects of external injuries in cases where there is not time for deliberation and judgment. With respect to the injuries we are liable to from our fellow-creatures, it secures us further by its effect in re- straining tliein from acts of violence. " It is a kind of 96 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF a'CTION. penal statute promulgated by nature, the execution of which is committed to the sufferer." * - IV. Final Cause of Deliberate Resentment] In man the instinctive resentment subsides as soon as he is sat- isfied that no injury was intended ; and it is only inten- tional injury that is the object of settled and deliberate resentment. The final cause of this species of resent- ment is analogous to that of the other, — to serve as a check on those men whose^ violent or malignant pas- sions might lead them to disturb the happiness of their fellow-creatures. In order to secure still more eifectually so very im- portant an end, we are so formed that the injustice of- fered to others, as well as to ourselves, awakens our re- sentment against the aggressor, and prompts us to take part in the redress of their grievances. In this case the emotion we feel is more properly denoted in out lan- guage by the word indigTiation ; but (as Butler has re- marked) our principle of action is in both cases funda- mentally the same, — an aversion or displeasure at in- justice and cruelty, which interests us in the punishment of those by whom they have been exhibited. Resent- ment, therefore, when restrained within due bounds, seems to be rather a sentiment of hatred against vice than an affection of ill'-will against any of our fellow- creatures ; and, on this account, I am somewhat doubt- ful (notwithstanding the apology I have already made for the title of this section) whether I have not followed Dr. Reid too closely in characterizing resentment, con- sidered as an original part of the constitution of man, by the epithet of malevolent. An additional confirmation of this doctrine arises from the following consideration : — that, in candid and generous minds, the whole object of resentment is to convince the person who has injured them that he has treated them unjustly, — to show him that he has formed an unfair estimate of their characters and of * Reid, On the Active Powers, Essiiy III. Part II. Cha MALEVOLENT AFFECTIONS. 97 their lalent?, and to obtain snch a superiority over him in point of power as to be able, by a generous forgive- ness of his aggressions, to convert liis malice into g-rafitude. In other words, in such minds the great object of resentment is to correct the faults of the delinquent, and to make a friend of an enemy. This last observation points out, by the way, the final cause of a very remarkable circumstance accom- panying the affection of resentment when excited by an injury offered to ourselves. We desire not o^nly the punishment of the offender, but that we should have the power of inflicting the punishment with our own hand. It is probable that this originates partly in our love of power ; but I believe it is chiefly owing to a secret wish of convincing our enemy, by the magna- nimity of our conduct, how much he had mistaken the object of his hatred. In the mean and the malicious, the passion of revenge is gratified by any suffering in- flicted on an enemy, whether by an indifferent person or by the hand of Heaven. After all, however, that I have advanced in justifica- tion of this part of the human constitution, I must ac- knowledge that there is no principle of action which requires more pains, even in the best minds, to restrain it within the bounds of moderation. The imagination exaggerates the injuries that we ourselves have re- ceived; and mistaken views of human nature, concur- ring with low spirits or disappointed ambition, lead us to ascribe to our opponents worse motives than those from which they really have acted. We seldom, too, are sufficiently attentive to the situations and feelings of other men, and even where we do make an effort to place ourselves in their circumstances, it is not every nmn who is possessed of the degree of imagination requisite for that purpose. Our own sufferings, at the same time, are always present to our view, and force themselves on the notice of the most thoughtless with- out any effort on their part. • And hence it is that an irritability to personal injury is often accompanied with a callousness to the feelings of others, and even with a 9 98 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. , disposition to put unfavorable constructions on their actions. ^ V. How checked and restrained by Indignation in Others.] In order to check the excesses to which this ungovernable passion is apt to lead us, nature has made a beautiful provision in that sentiment of indig- nation which the sight of injustice excites in the breast of the unconcerned spectator. This sentiment inter- ests society in general in the cause of the oppressed, and serves to protect the weak against the wrongs of the powerful. As it is not, however, liable to the same ex- cesses with the passion of resentment excited by a per- sonal injury, it sympathizes only with the injured while his retaliations are restrained within the bounds of mod- eration. When resentment rises to cruel and relent- less revenge, unconcerned spectators become disposed to abandon the cause they had espoused, and to trans- fer their protection to the original aggressor. It does not follow from this observation that resent- ment and indignation are two distinct principles ; for the whole difference between them may be accounted for from the different views we naturally take of our own wrongs and those of others. They are both found- ed in a sentiment of aversion and ill-will excited by injustice ; but the one is more apt to pass the bounds of moderation than the other, in consequence of the facts being more strongly obtruded on our notice, and often exaggerated by the heightenings of imagination. Mr. Smith has endeavoured, on the principles now stated, to account for the origin of our sense of justice. The passion of resentment, he thinks, when excited by a personal injury, would set no bounds to its gratifica- tion, but would lead us to sacrifice every thing to re- venge. But, as we finA that other men would not go along with us when our revenge ceases to bear any proportion to the original injury, we learn to adjust our retaliations, not to our o^i\ feelings,' but to those of the impartial spectator. Hence the origin of our sense of justice, our regard for which arises from our desire of obtaining the sympathy and the support of society. ^ MALEVOLENT AFFECTIONS. 99 I shall afterwards state some objections to this theo- ry, which appear to me unanswerable. In particular, I shall attempt to show, that, so far is our idea of justice from being posterior to the affections of resentment and indignation, and to a comparison between our own feelings and those of other men, that the very emotion of deliberate resentment presupposes the idea of jus- tice, and of what is morally right and wrong. The fact, however, on which the theory proceeds is a most important one, and Mr. Smith has had great merit in illustrating it so fully. Lord Kames, in his Historical Law Tracts, has made a happy application of it to ex- plain the origin and progress of criminal law. Which of these two authors first conceived the idea of apply- ing it to jurisprudence does not appear to me to be per- fectly certain. Both of them have evidently been much indebted, in their speculations concerning this part of human nature, to the Sermons of Bishop Butler. VI. All the Malevolent Affections attended by a Sense of Pain.\ I shall conclude this subject at present by remarking, that, as all the benevolent affections are ac- companied with pleasant emotions, so all the malevo- lent^ affections are sources of. pain and disquiet. This is true even of resentment, how justly soever it may be roused by the injurious conduct of others. Here, too, we may perceive a final cause perfectly analogous to that of which I formerly took notice in treating of the benevolent affections. As the pleasant emotion accom- panying these seems evidently to have been intended as an incitement to us to cultivate and cherish them, so the painful feeling accompanying resentment, and every other aflfection which is hostile to our fellow-creatures, serves as a check on the habitual indulgence of them, and induces us, as soon as the first impulse of passion is over, and reason begins to reassume her empire, t^ obliterate every trace of them from the memory. Dr. Reid has expressed this last observation with great beauty, and has enforced it with uncommon felicity of illustration. " When we consider that, on the one 100 INSTINCTIVE PRINCIPLES OF ACTION. hand, every benevolent affection is pleasant in its na- ture, is health to the soul and a cordial to the spirits ; that nature has made even the outward expression of benevolent affections in the countenance pleasant to every beholder, and the chief ingredient of beauty in 'the human face divine'; that, on the other hand, every malevolent affection, not only in its faulty excesses, but in its moderate degrees, is vexation and disquiet to the mind, and even gives deformity to the countenance, it is evident that by these signals nature loudly admon- ishes us to use the former as our daily bread, both for health and pleasure, but to consider the latter as a nau- seous medicine, which is never to be taken without ne- cessity, and even then in no greater quantity than the necessity requires." * After the clear, and, at the same time, cautious terms in which Butler, Kames, and Smith have expressed themselves concerning resentment, it is surprising to find some late writers of considerable name speaking of the pleasure of revenp;e as a natural gratification, of which every man is entitled to look forward to the en- joyment; and which, after the establishment of the po- litical union, every man has a right to insist upon at the hands of the civil magistrate. Such, in particular, seems to be the opinion of Mr. Bentham, and of his very ingenious and eloquent commentator, M. Du- mont: — " Every species of satisfaction naturally brings in its train a punishment to the defendant, a pleasure of ven- geance for the party injured. This pleasure is a gain : it recalls the riddle of Salmson ; it is the sweet which comes out of the strong; it is the honey gathered from the carcass of the lion. Produced without expense, net result of an operation necessary on other accounts, it is an enjoyment to be cultivated as well as any oth- er ; for the pleasure of vengeance, considered abstract- ly, is, like every other pleasure, only good in itself. It is innocent so long as it is confined within the limits * On the Active Powers, Essay III. Part II. Chap. vi. MALEVOLENT AFFECTIONS. 101 of the laws; it becomes criminal at the moment it breaks them Useful to the individual, this mo- tive is also useful to the public, or, to speak more cor- rectly, necessary. It is this vindictive satisfaction which often unties the tongue of the \^ntness ; it is this which generally animates the breast of the accuser, and engages him in the service of justice, notwith- standing the trouble, the expenses, the enmities, to which it exposes him ; it is this which overcomes the public pity in the punishment of the guilty " Some commonplace moralists, always the dupes of words, cannot understand this truth. ' The desire of vengeance is odious ; all satisfaction drawn from this source is vicious ; forgiveness of injuries is the noblest of virtues.' Doubtless, implacable characters, whom no satisfaction can soften, are hateful and ought to be so. The forgiveness of injuries,is a virtue necessary to humanity; but it is only a virtue when justice has done its work, when it has furnished or refused a sat- isfaction. Before this, to forgive injuries is to invite their perpetration, — is to be, not the friend, but the enemy of society. What could wickedness desire more than an arrangement by which oifences should be al- ways followed by pardon ? " * The observations above quoted from Butler, Reid, and Smith will at once point out the limitations with which this passage must be understood, and will fur- nish a triumphant reply to it where it departs from the truth.f * Bentliam's Principles of Penal Law, Part I. Chap. xvi. The French translation by M. Dumont was published before the original, and was quot- ed by Mr. Stewait. I have taken the liberty to substitute the original, which has since ajipearcd — Ed. 1 To the works already cited or referred to in this and the preceding chapters as illustrating what Mr. Stewart calls the Instinctive Principles of Action should he added Brown's Philmopliy of the Human ifind, Leet. liXV.- LXXII. ; Cogim's Philosophical Treatise on the Passions; lianch's Psycholofji/, Part U. Sect. 11.; Damiron, Psychologies Sect. IL Chap. u. — Ed. BOOK II. OF OUR RATIONAL* AND GOVERNING PRINCI- PLES OF ACTION. CHAPTER I. OF A PRUDENTIAL REGARD TO OUR OWN HAPPINESS, OR WHAT IS COMMONLY CALLED BY MORALISTS THE PRINCIPLE OE SELF-LOVE. I. Difference between the Animal and Rational Na- tures.] The constitution of man, if it were composed merely of the active principles hitherto mentioned, would, in some important respects, be analogous to that of the brutes. ^ His reason, however, renders his nature and condition, on the whole, essentially differ- ent from theirs ; and, by elevating him to the rank of a moral agent, distinguishes him from the lower animals still more remarkably than by the superiority it imparts to his intellectual endowments. Of this want of reason in the brutes, it is an obvious result, that they are incapable of looking forward to consequences, or of comparing together the different gratifications of which they are susceptible; and, ac- cordingly, as far as we can perceive, they yield to every present impulse. Among the inhabitants of this globe * To various active principles which have been already under our con- sideration, such, for instance, as the desire of knowledge, the desire of es- teem, pity to the distressed, &c., &e., the epithet rational may undoubtedly be applied in one sense with propriety, as they exclusively belong to ration- al beings ; but they are yet of a nature essentially different from tho>.e ac- tive principles of which we are now to treat, and which I have distin- guished by the title of Rational and Gooerning. My reasons for using this language will appear in tlie sequel. SELF-LOVE. 103 it is the exclusive prerogative of man, as an intelligent being, to take a comprehensive survey of his various principles of action, and to form plans of conduct for the attainment of his favorite objects. He is possessed, therefore, of the power of self-government; for how could a plan of conduct be conceived and carried into execution, without a power of refusing occasionally to particular active principles the gratification which they demand? This difference between the awmaZ and the rational natures is well and concisely described by S-neca in the following words: — ^^ Animalibus pro ratione impetus; homini pro impetu ratio."* According to the particular active principle which influences habitually a man's conduct, his character re- ceives its denomination of covetous, ambitious, studious, or voluptuous; and his conduct is more or less syste- matical as he adheres to his general plan with steadiness or inconstancy. II. Importance of Self-control and of systematic and concentrated Action.] It is hardly necessary for me to remark how much a man's success in his favorite pursuit depends on the systematical steadiness with which he keeps his object in view. That an un- common measure of this quality often supplies, to a great degree, the place of genius, and that, where it is wanting, the most splendid endowments are of little value, are facts which have been often insisted on by philosophers, and which are confirmed to us by daily experience. The effects of this concentration of the attention to one particular end on the development and improvement of the intellectual powers in general have not been equally taken notice of. They are, however, extremely remarkable, as every person will readily acknowledge, who compares the sagacity and penetration of those individuals who have enjoyed its advantages with the weakness and incapacity and * Seneca, De Ira, II. 16. "Animals have impulse for reason; n\uii, reason for impulse." 104 , SELF-LOVE. dissipation of thought produced by an undecided choice among the various pursuits which human life presents to us. Even the systematical voluptuary, while he commands a much greater variety of sensual indulgences, and continues them to a much more advanced age, than the thoughtless profligate, seldom fails to give a certain degree of cultivation to his understanding, by employing his faculties habitually in one direction. The only exception, perhaps, which can be men- tioned to this last remark, occurs in the case of those men whose leading principle of action is vanity, and who, as their rule of conduct is borrowed from with- out, must, in consequence of this very circumstance, be perpetually wavering and inconsistent in their pursuits. Accordingly, it will be found that such men, although they have frequently performed splendid actions, have seldom risen to eminence in any one particular career, unless when, by a rare concurrence of accidental circumstances, this career has been steadily pointed out to them, through the whole of their lives, by public opinion. " Alcibiades," says a French writer, " was a man not of" ambition, but of vanity, — a man whose ruling passion was to rnaite a noise, and to furnish matter of conversation to the Athenians. He possessed the genius of a great man, but his soul, the springs of which were too much slackened to urge him to con- stant application, could not elevate him, but by starts, to' pursuits worthy of his powers. I can scarcely bring myself to believe that a man, whose versatility was such as to enable him when in Sparta to assume the severe manners of a Spartan, and when in Ionia to indulge in the refined voluptuousness of an Ionian, had received from nature the stamina of a great char- acter." • To what has been now observed in favor of syste- * Quoted by Warburton in his note on Pope's character of the Duke of Wharton, Morgl Essays, Ep. I. 190. SELF-LOVE. 105 matical views in the cqnduct of life, it may be added, that they are incomparably more conducive to hap- piripss than a course of action influenced merely by oc- casional inclination and appetite. Lord Shaftesbury goes so far as to assert, that even the man who is uni- formly and systematically bad enjoys more happiness (perhaps he would have been nearer the truth if he had contented himself with saying that he suffers less misery) than one of a more mixed and more inconsistent char- acter. " It is the thorough profligate knave alone, the complete unnatural villain, who can any way bid for happiness with the honest man. True interest is whol- ly on one side or on the other. All between is incon- sistency, irresolution, remorse, vexation, and an ague fit, — from hot to cold, — from one passion to another quite contrary, — a perpetual discord of life, and an al- ternate disquiet and self-dislike. The only rest or re- pose must be through one determined considerate reso- lution, which, when once taken, must be courageously kept, and the passions and afl'ections brought under obedience to it, — the temper steeled and hardened to the mind, — the disposition to the judgment. Both must agree, else all must be .disturbance and confu- sion." * To the same purpose Horace : — " Qimnto constantior idem In vitiis, tanto levior miser, ac prior illo Qui jam contento, jam laxo fune Jaboret." t III. Examples of the Evils of Inconstancy.] Of the state of a mind originally possessed of the most splen- did endowments, but where every thing- has been suf- fered to run into anarchy from the want of some con- trolling and steady principle of action, a masterly pic- ture is drawn by Cicero in the following account of Catiline. * Essny on the Freedom of Wit and Humor. Part IV. Sect. 1. t Hor., Sermo., Lib. II., Sat. VII. 18. " So constant was ha to his darling vice, Yet less a wretch than he who now maintains A steady course, now drives with looser reins." 106 SELF-LOVE. " Utebatur hominibus improbis multis, et quidem op- timis se viris deditum esse simulabat>; erant apud il- ium illecebrse libidinum multse ; erant etiam industriae quidam stimuli ac laboris: flagrabant libidinis vitia apud ilium ; vigebant etiam studia rei militaris : neque ego unquam fuisse tale monstrum in terris ullura puto, tam ex contrariis diversisque inter se pugnantibus natu- rEB studiis cupiditatibusque eonflatum. Quis clariori- bus viris quodam tempore jucundior? quis turpioribus conjunctior? quis civis meliorum partium aliquando? quis tetrior hostis liuic civitati? quis in voluptatibus inquinatior? quis in laboribus patientior? quis in rapa- citate avarior ? quis in largitione effusior ? " * In a person of this description, whatever indications of genius and ability he may discover, and whatever may be the great qualities he possesses, there is un- doubtedly some tendency to insanity, which, if it were not the radical source of the evil, could hardly fail, sooner or later, to be the effect of a perpetual conflict between different and discordant passions. And, ac- cordingly, this is the idea which Sallust seems to have formed of, this extraordinary man. " His eyes," he ob- serves, " had a disagreeable glare ; his complexion was pale; his walk sometimes quick, sometimes slow; and his general appearance indicated a discomposure of mind approaching to madness." I would not be understood to insinuate by this last observation, that, in every case in which we observe a conduct apparently inconsistent and irregular, we are entitled to conclude, all at once, that it proceeds from accidental humor, or from a disordered understanding. * Oralio pro M. Ccelio, Sect. V. and VI "He was acqu.ainted with a great number of wicked men, yet a pretended admirer of the virtuous, ilis house wiis furnished with a variety of temptations to lust and lewd- ness, yet with several incitements also to industry and labor: it was a scene of vicious pleasures, yet a school of martial exorcises. There nev- er was such a monster on earth, compounded of passions so contrary and opposite. Wlio was ever more. aureeaHle at one time to the best citizens ? who more intimate at another with tlie worst? who a man of better pro- fessions f who a fouler enemy to tliis city 1 who more intemperate in pleasure ? who more patient in labor ? who more rapacious in plundering t who more profuse in squandering i " SELF-LOVE. 107 The knowledge of a man's ruling passion is often a key to what appeared, on a superficial view, to be per- fectly inexplicable. Some excellent reflections on this subject are to be found in the first of Pope's Moral Essays, where they are most happily and forcibly illus- trated by the character of the Duke of Wharton. " Search, then, the ruling passion : there alone The wild are constant, and the cunning known ; The fool consistent, and the false sincere ; Priests, princes, women, no dissemhiers here. This clew, once found, unravels all the rest, The prospect clears, and Wharton stands confessed,— Wharton, the scorn and wonder of our days. Whose rilling passion was the lust of praise. Born with whate'er could win it from the wise. Women and fools must like him, or he dies. Ask you why Wharton broke through every rule ? 'T was all for fear the knaves should call him fool. Nature well known, no prodigies remain, Comets are regular and Whai-ton plain." I have only to add to these observations of Pope, that I believe the inconsistencies he describes are chiefly to be found in the conduct of men whose ruling prin- ciple of action is vanily. I have already remarked, that while every other principle which gains an ascen- dant over the rest has a tendency to systematize our course of action, vanity has, on the contrary, a tenden- cy to disorganize it, leading us always to look abroad for our rule of conduct, and thereby rendering it as wa- vering and inconsistent as the opinions and fashions of mankind. Where vanity, therefore, is the ruling pas- sion of any individual, a want of system may be re- garded as a necessary consequence of his general char- acter. IV. Why the Desire of Happiness should be account- ed a Rational, and not an Instinctive, Principle of Ac- tion.] From the foregoing considerations it sufficiently appears how much the nature of man is discriminated from that of the brutes, in, consequence of the compre- hensive view which his reason enables him to take of his different principles of action, and of the deliberate 108 SELF-LOVE. choice he has it in his power to make of fhe general plan of conduct he is to pursue. There is another, however, and a very important respect, in which the ra- tional nature differs from the animal, — that it is able to i'orm the notion of happiness, or loliat is g-ood for it vpon the tvhole, and to deliberate about the most effec- tual means of attaining it. It is owing to this distin- guishing prerogative of our species that we can avail ourselves of our past experience in avoiding those en- joyments which we know will be vsucceeded by suffering, and in submitting to lesser evils which we know are to be instrumental in procuring us a greater accession of good. " Sed inter hominem et belluam," says Cicero, " hoc raaxime interest, quod haec tantum quantum sensu movetur, ad id solum quod adest, quodque prEesens est, se accommodat, paullulum admodum sentiens prseteri- tum aut futurum. Homo autem, quoniam rationis est particeps, per quam consequentia cernit, causas rerum videt, earuraque prasgressus et antecessiones non igno- rat; similitudines comparat, et rebus prsesentibus ad- jungit atque annectit futuras ; facile totius vitee cursum videt, ad eamque degendam praeparat res necessarias." * It is implied in the very idea of happiness that it is a desirable object, and therefore sell-love is an active principle very different from those which have been hitherto considered. These, for aught we know, may be the effect of arbitrary appointment, and they have accordingly been called implanted principles, or princi- ples resulting from a positive accommodation of the constitution of man to the objects with which he is surrounded. The desire of happiness may be called a rational principle of action, being peculiar to a rational nature, and inseparably connected with it. It is im- * De Off, Lib. I. 4. "But between man and the lower animals there' is in other respects tlie greatest difference. The latter, fjuitled by tlio im- pulse of their senses alone, are confined to what is present, (pr near, with a very sliKhi knowledge of the past or the future. Man, however, who par- takes of rciison, distinguishes the causes and the consequences of events observes their progress, compares similar circumstances, connects the past with the future, surveys the whole course of life, and makes the necessary provision for its well-being." SELF-LOVE. 109 possible to conceive a being capable of forming the notions of happiness and misery, to whom the one shall not be an object of desire, and the other of aversion.* V. Objections to the Term Self-love.] In prefixing to this chapter the title of Self-love, the ordinary language of modern philosophy has been followed, as I am always anxious to avoid unnecessary innovations in the use of words. The expression, however, is ex- ceptionable, for it suggests an analogy (where there Is none in fact) between that regard which every rational being must necessarily have to his own happiness, and those benevolent affections which attach us* to our fellow-creatures. There is surely nothing in the former of these principles analogous to the affection of love; and, therefore, to call it by the appellation of self-lave is to suggest a theory with respect to its nature, and a theory which has no foundation in tiaith. The word (^CKam-ia was used among the Greeks nearly in the same sense, and introduced similar inac- curacies into their reasonings concerning the principle of morals. In our language, however, the impropriety does not stop here ; for not only is the phrase self-love used as synonymous with the desire of happiness, but it is often confounded (in consequence of an unfor- tunate connection in their etymology) with the word selfishness, which certainly, in strict propriety, denotes a very different disposition of mind. In proof of this * From this constitution of the human mind, as at once sensitive and rational, arise necessarily the emotions of hope and fear, joy and sorrow. The pleasurable emotion arising from pjood in expectation is called hope, the painful emotion arising from apprehended evil is called fear. The words ;oy and sorrow are more general, applicaliie alike to the emotions arising from the experience and from the apprehension of good and of cvii. The interest which our benevolent affections give us in the concerns of othfrs inspires us (more particularly in the case of those to whom we are fondly attached) with emotions analogous to those which have a reference to onr own condition. The laws which regulate thee emotions connected with the sensitive nature of man deserve a careful examination; but the subject does not fall under the present part of my plan. 10 110 SELF-LOVE. it is sufficient to observe, that the word selfishness is always used in an unfavorable sense, whereas self-love, or the desire of happiness, is inseparable from our nature as rational and sensitive beings. The mistaken notion that vice consists in an exces- sive self-love naturally arose from the application of the terra self-love, or ^CKavria, to express the desire of hap- piness. As benevolence, or the love of mankind, con- stitutes, in the opinion of many moralists, the whole of virtue, so it was not unnatural to conclude that the love of ourselves (which this mode of speaking seems to contrast with benevolence) was the radical source of all the vices. And, accordingly, this conclusion has been adopted by many writers, both ancient and modern. " If we scan," says Dr. Barrow, " the partic- ular nature, and search into the original causes of the several kinds of naughty dispositions in our souls, and of miscarriages in our lives, we shall find inordinate self-love to be a main ingi-edient, and a common source of them all, so that a divine of great name had some reason to affirm that original sin (or that innate distemper from which men generally become so very prone to evil and averse to good) doth consist in self- love disposing us to all kinds of irregularity and excess." * In this passage, Dr. Barrow refers to the opinion of Zuinglius, who has expressly called self-love the original or radical sin in our nature. "Est prgo ista ad peccandum amore sui propensio, peccatum originale." It is chiefly, however, from some of our English moralists that this notion concerning the nature of vice has derived its authority; and the plausibility of their reasonings on the subject has been much aided by that indiscriminate use of the words self-love and selfsliness of which I have already taken notice. I shall afterwards have occasion to show that vice does not consist in an excessive regard to our own happiness. At present I shall only remark, in addition * Sermon, On Self-Love in general. SELF-LOVE. Ill to what was said above with respect to the distinction between the meanings of the words self-love and self- ishness, that the former is so far from expressing any- thing blamable, that it denotes a principle of action which we never sacrifice to any of our implanted appetites, desires, or affections without incurring re- morse and self-condemnation. When we see, for example, a man enslaved by his animal appetites, so far from considering him as under the influence of an excessive self-love, we pity and despise him for neglect- ing the higher enjoyments which are placed within his reach. Accordingly, those very authors who tell us that vice ccfnsists in an inordinate self-love are forced to confess that there are some senses of the word in which it expresses a worthy and commendable princi- ple of action. " Reason," says Dr. Barrow, " dictateth and prescribeth to us, that we should have a sober regard to our true good and welfare ; to our best inter- est and solid content; to that which (all things being rightly stated, considered, and computed) will in the end prove most beneficial and satisfactory to us; a self-love working in prosecution of such things, com- mon sense cannot but allow and approve."* — "tw /xeV dyadov," says Aristotle, " S« ^CKavTov elvai." And in another passage of the same chapter, " Ao^eie S av 6 toioHtos /iaXXow As a further proof that selfishness is not synonymous with the desire of happiness, it may be observed, that, although we apply the epithet selfish to avarice and to low private sensuality, we never apply it to the desire of knowledge or to the pursuits of virtue, which are certainly sources of more exquisite pleasure than riches or seaisuality can bestow. " Yet at the darkened eye, the withered face, Tlie lioaiy head, I never will rct)ine : But spare, O time ! whatc'cr of mental grace, Of candor, love, or sympathy divine, Wliate'cr of fancy's ray, or friendship's flame, was mine." " Sermon. On Si-lf-Love in ijeneral. t Ethic. lYi'c , Lib. IX. Cap. viii. "A good man mnst bo a lover of himself." " Such a man would seem to be the greatest of self-lovers." 112 SELF-LOVE. Such a"wish is surely dictated by the most rational view of our real interest; and yet no man will pretend that it contains any thing inconsistent with a generous and heroic mind. Had it been directed to wealth, to long life, or to the preservation of youthful beauty and vigor, it would have been universally condemned as selfish and contemptible. VI. Wliy some Pursuits are called Selfish, while oth- ers, though contributing still more to our own Good, are not.] This restriction of the term selfishness to a par- ticular class of human pursuits is taken notice of by Dr. Ferguson in his Essay on Civil Society, and seems to be considered by him as originating in a capricious, or rather in an inconsistent, use of language. ' " It is somewhat remarkable, that, notwithstanding men value themselves so much on qualities of the mind, on parts, learning, and wit, on courage, generosity, and honor, those men are still supposed to be in the highest degree selfish, or attentive to themselves, who are most careful about animal life, and who are least mindful of render- ing that life an object worthy of care, It will be diffi- cult, however, to tell why a good understanding, a resolute and generous mind, should not, by every man in his senses, be reckoned as much parts of himself as either his stomach or his palate, and much more than his estate or his dress. The epicure who consults his physician how he may restore his relish for food, and, by creating an appetite, renew his enjoyment, might at least, with an equal regard to himself, consult how he might strengthen his affection to a parent or a child, to hi« country or to mankind; and it is probable that an appetite of this sort would prove a source of enjoy- ment no less than the former." * Of the difficulty here remarked by Dr. Ferguson, the solution appears to me to be this, that the word selfish- ness, when applied to a pursuit, has no reference to the viotive from which the pursuit proceeds, but to the effect * Part I. Sect. II. SELF-LOVE. 113 it has on the conduct. Neither our animal appetites, nor avarice, nor curiosity, nor the desire of moral mi- provement, arise from self-love, but some of these active principles disconnect us with society more than others; and consequently, though they do not nidicate a greater regard for our own happiness, they betray a greater unconcern about the happiness of our neigh- bours. The pursuits of the miser have no mixture whatever of the social affections ; on the contrary, they continually lead him to state his own interest in op- position to that of other men. The enjoyments of the sensualist all expire within his own person ; and, there- fore, whoever is habitually occupied in the search of them must of necessity neglect the duties which he owes to manidnd. It is otherwise with the desire of knowledge, which is always accompanied with a strong desire of social communication, and with the love ot moral excellence, which, in its practical tendency, co- incides so remarkably with benevolence, that many au- thors have attempted to resolve the one principle into the other. How far their conclusion, in this instance, is a necessary consequence of the premises from which it is deduced, will appear hereafter. The foregoing observations coincide so remarkably with a passage in Aristotle's Ethics, that I am tempted to quote it at length ia the excellent English transla- tion of Dr. Gillies. After stating the same inconsisten- cies in our language about self-love which Dr. Ferguson has pointed out, Aristotle proceeds thus: — " These contradictions cannot be reconciled* but by distinguishing the different senses in which man is said to love himself. Those who reproach self-love as a vice consider it only as it appears in worldlings and volup- tuaries, who arrogate to themselves more than their due share of wealth, power, or pleasure. Such things are to the multitude the objects of earnest concern and ea- gor contention, because the multitude regards them as jirizes of the highest value, and, in endeavouring to at- tain them, strives to gratify its passion at the expense of its reason. This kind of self-love, which belongs to 10* 114 SELF-LOVE. the contemptible multitude, is doubtless obnoxious to blame, and in this acceptation the word is generally- taken. But should a man assume a preeminence in exercising justice, temperance, and other virtues, though such a man has really more true self-love than the mvil- titude, yet nobody 'S'^ould impute this affection to him as a crime. Yet he takes to himself the fairest and greatest of all goods, and those the most acceptable to the ruling principle in his nature, which is properly him- self, in the same manner as" the sovereignty in every community is that which most properly constitutes the state. He is said, also, to have, or not to have, the command of himself, just as this principle bears sway, or as it is subject to control ; and those acts are consid- ered as most voluntary which proceed from this legisla- tive or sovereign power. Whoever cherishes and grati- fies this ruling part of his nature is strictly and pecu- liarly a lover of himself, but in a quite different sense from that in which self-love is regarded as a matter of reproach ; for all men approve and praise an affection calculated to produce the greatest private and the great- est public happiness ; whereas they disapprove and blame the vulgar kind of self-love, as often hurtful to others, and always ruinous to those who indulge it." * * Aristotle's Ethics, Book IX. Chap. viii. Jonffroy accounts thus for the appearance of self-love (dgotsme) in human nature : — " Tlie faculties, as long as they are abandoned to the impulse of the passions, obey that passion which happens to be the strongest at the time, from which a twofold inconvenience ensues. In the first place, the passions are of all tilings the most unstable, the dominion of one being almost immediately supplanted by that of another, so that the faculties wliile under their exclusive control arc incapable of continuous and con- nected effort, and consequently nothing of importance is effected. And, again, the good found in the satisfaction of the dominant passion at the moment often leads to serious evil, wliile, on the other hand, the evil of its not being satisfied often results in great and permanent good ; from which it appe.ivs that nothing" is less favorable to the attainment of our highest good than this exclusive dominion of the passions. Eeason is not slow to discover this, or to conclude from it that, in order to obtain the highest possible good, our effective force must no longer be the prey of the me- chanical impulse of the passions. It sees, on the contrary, how much bet- ter it would be, if, instead of being hurried away each instant by such im- pulse to the gratification of some new passion, it were freed from this con- straint, and directed exclusively to the realization of the interest of all the THE MORAL FACriiTY. 115 CHAPTER II. OF THE MOEAL FACULTY. Section L the mokal faculty not resolvable into self-love. I. Duty and Interest not the same.] As some authors have supposed that vice consists in an excessive regard passions taken together, — that is to say, the greatest good of our -whole nature. Moreover, with the same degree of clearness that our reason con- ceives this course to he wise, it also conceives it to be practicable. We are certainly capable of judging what the highest good of our nature is ; our reason enables us to do it. Equally certain is it that we can, if we please, take possession of our own faculties, and employ them to carry out this idea of our reason. That we have this power lias been revealed even un- der the exclusive empire of passion ; we have felt it in the spontaneous effort by which, in order to satisfy the dominant passion for the time being, we have concentrated all our forces on a single point. It is only necessary that we should do voluntarily what before we have (}one spontaneously, SLndyree will appears. No sooner is this great revolution conceived, than it is accomplished. A new principle of action springs up within us, inter- est iccll widersfood, — a principle which- is not a passion, but an idea; not a blind and instinctive prompting of our nature, but an intelligible, deliber- ate, and rational purpose ; not an impulse^ but a viotive. Finding a point of support in this motive, the natural power we have over our faculties takes these faculties under its control, and in its effort to direct them according to this motive shakes off the bondage of the passions, and becomes itself more and more developed and free. From this time our active powers are delivered from the irregular, vacillating, and turbulent empire of the passions, and become submissive to the law of reason, which considers what will be for the greatest possible satisfaction of our tendencies, that is to say. the highest good of the individual, or self-interest well understood.'' — Coiirs de Droit Nnturel, LeQon II. See the whole of this Lecture and the following one in the original, or in Mr. Channing's translation. No writer has treated the subject of self-love with so much care and minuteness of discrimination as Jeremy Bentham, in the first volume of his Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Here we have what has been called his Moral Arithmetic, by which he thinks to deter- mine the relative value of different "lots of pleasure or pain" ; and also what has been called his Moral Dynamics, or the doctrine of forces, mo- tives, or sanctions, by which self-love, and through that the human will, is influenced and determined in all cases. » Paley, not content with making pleasure, considered as constituting hu- man happiness, the only ultimate object of human pursuit, denies that the rational and moral pleasures, as such, are entitled to more regard than the rest. " In this inquiry," says he, " I will omit much usual declamation on 116 THE MORAL FACULTY to our own happiness, so others have gone into the op« posite extreme, by representing virtue as merely a matter of prudence, and a sense of duty but another name for a rational selj-hve. This view of the subject is far from being unnatural ; for we find that these two principles lead in genera] to the same course of action; and we have every reason to believe, that, if our knowledge of the universe were more extensive, they would be found to do so in all instances whatever. Accordingly, by many of the best of the ancient moralists, our sense of duty was considered as resolvable into self-love, and the whole of ethics was reduced to this question, What is the supreme good ? or, in other words. What is most conducive, on the whole, to our happiness ? The same opinion, as will soon appear, has been adopted by vari- ous philosophers of the first eminence in England, and was long the prevailing system on the Continent. That we have, however, a sense of duty, which is not resolvable into a regard to our happiness, appears from various considerations. II. First Argument. Expressed by distinct Terms in all Languages.] There are, in all languages, words equivalent to duty and to interest, which men have con- stantly distinguished in their signification. They coin- cide in general in their applications, but they convey very different ideas. When I w^ish to persuade a man to a particular action, I address some of my arguments the dignity and rapacity of our nature ; the superiority of the sonl to the bofly, of the rational to the animal part of our constitufon ; upon tlio wortliincss, reflncmert, and delicacy of some satisfactions, or the mcnn- ncss, jjrossness, and sensuality of others ; because I hold that pleasures differ in nothing but in continuance and intensity." — Moral P/iilosophi/, Book I. Cliap. vi. Dr. Whewell, in the Preface to his edition of Sir James Mackintosh's Dissertation on the Progress of Ethical Philosopkt/, says of tliis passajie, ■ — " If we could use such a term without an unbecoming disre- spect towards a virtuous and useful writer, this opinion might properly he called brutish, since it recognizes no difference between the pleasures of man and those of the loj^est animals." For a very original and ingenious speculation respecting the nature of self-love and the natni-al disinterestedness of the human mind, see Hazlitt's Essays on the Principles of Human Action. Also his Literary Remains, Es- say X., On Self-love. NOT RESOLVABLE INTO SELF-LOVE. 117 to a sense of duty, and others to the regard he has to his own interest. I endeavour to show him that it is not only his duty, but his interest, to act in the way that I recommend to him. This distinction was expressed among the Roman moralists by the words honestum and utile. Of the former Cicero says, " Quod vere dicimus, etiamsi a nullo laudetur, natura esse laudabile." * The TO /coXoV among the Greeks corresponds, when ap- plied to the conduct, to the honestum of the Romans. Dr. Reid remarks that the word Ka6TjKov {pfficium) ex- tended both to the honestum and the utile, and compre- hended every action performed either from a sense of duty, or from art enlightened regard to our true inter- est.! In English we use the word reasonable with the same latitude, and indeed almost exactly in the same sense in which Cicero defines ojpcium : — " Id quod cnr factum sit ratio probabilis reddi potest." $ In treating of such offices, Cicero, and Pancetius before him, first point out those that are recommended to us by oui love of the honestum, and next those that are recom.- mended by our regard to the utile. This distinction between a sense of duty and a re- gard to interest is acknowledged even by men whose moral principles are not the purest, nor the most con- sistent, what unlimited confidence do we repose in the conduct of one whom we know to be a man of honor, even in those cases in which he acts out of the view of the world, and where the strongest temptations of worldly interest concur to lead him astray ! We know that his heart would revolt at the idea of any thing base or unworthy. Dr. Reid observes that what we call honor, considered as a principle of conduct, " is * De Offic. Lib. I, 4. " Which, though none shonld praise it, we main- tain with truth to be of ifself praiseworthy." t Essaijs on the Active, Powers, Essay lit. Part III. Chap. v. } De Offic, Lib. I. 3. " That, for the doing of which a reasonable mo- tive can be assigned." But, as Sir W. Hamilton says in a note to tlie pas- sage in Eeid, ■' this definition does not apply to KaSrjKov or officium in gen- eral, bat only to KaBrJKov fiicrov, officium commune." — Ed. 118 THE MOEAL FACULTY only another name for a regard to duty, to rectitude, to propriety of conduct." This, I think, is going rather too far; for, although the two principles coincide in general in the direction they give to our conduct, they do not coincide always ; the principle of honor being liable, from its nature and origin, to be most unhappily perverted in its applications by a^bad education and the influence of fashion. At the same time, Dr. Reid's re- mark is perfectly in point, for the principle of honor is plainly grafted on a sense of duty, and necessarily pre- supposes its existence. Dr. Paley, one of the most zealous advocates for the selfish system of morals, admits the fact on which the foregoing argument proceeds, but endeavours to evade the conclusion by means of a theory so extraordinary, that I .shall state it in his own words. " There is al- ways understood to be a difference between an act of prudence and an act of duty. Thus, if I distrusted a man who owed me a sum of money, 1 should reckon it an act of prudence to get another person bound with him ; but I should hardly call it an act of duty. On the other hand, it would be thought a very unusual and loose kind of language to say, that, as I had made such a promise, it was prudent to perform it; or that, as my friend, when he went abroad, placed, a box of jewels in my hands, it would be prudent in me to preserve it for him till he returned. " Now, in what, you will ask, does the difference con- sist, inasmuch as, according to our account of the mat- ter, both in the one case and the other, in acts of duty as well as acts of prudence, we consider solely what we ourselves shall gain or lose by the act. " The difference, and the only difference, is this ; that in the one case we consider what we shall gain or lose in the present world; in the other case, we consider also what we shall lose or gain in the world to come." * * Moral Phihsophi/, Book II. Chap. iii. It is in view of pa-^isages liko tTie.se that Dr. Brown expresses himself with indignant severity- " This form of the selfisli system, which has been cmhracecl by many theological writers of undoubted piety and purity, is notwithstanding, I cannot but NOT RESOLVABLE INTO SELF-LOVE. 119 On this curious passage I have no comment to offer. A sufficient an&wer to it may, I trusty be derived from the following reasonings. In the mean time, it will be allowed to be at least one presumption of an essential distinction between the notions of duty and of interest, that there are different words to express these notions in all languages, and that the most illiterate of man- kind are in no danger of confounding them together. III. Second Argument. Moral Emotions differ from all others in Kind.] But, secondly, the emotions arising from the contemplation of what is right and wrong in conduct are different both in degree and in kind from those which are produced by a calm regard to our own happiness. Of this, I think, nobody can doubt, who considers with attention the operation of our moral principles in cases where their effects are not counter- acted or modified by a combination with some other principles of our nature^ In judging, for example, of our own conduct, our moral powers are warped by the influ- ence of self-partiality and self-deceit ; and, accordingly, think, as degrading to the human character as any other form of the doc- trine of absolute selfishness ; or rather, it is in itself the most degrading of all rhe forms which the selfish system can assume : hecause, while tiie selfishness which it maintains is as absolute and unremitting as if the ob- jects of personal gain were to be found in the wealth, or honors, or sen- sual pleasures of this earth, this very selfishness is rendered more ofl^cnsive by the noble image of the Deity which is continually presented to our mind, and presented in all his benevolence, — not to be Joved, but to be courted with a mockery of affection. The sensualist of the common sys- tem of selfishness, who never thinks of any higher object in the pursuit of the little pleasures which he is miserable enough to regard as happiness, seems to me, even in the brutal stupidity in which he is sunk, a being more worthy of esteem than the selfish of another life ; to whose view God is evcy present, but who view him always only to feel constantly in their heart that in loving him who has been the dispenser of all these blessings which tliey have enjoyed, and who has revealed himself in the glorious character of the dilfuser of an immortality of happiness, they love not the Giver him- self, but only the gifts which they have received, or the gifts that are prom- ised." — Phihsnjihji of the Human Mind, Lect, LXXIX Wainewright en- deavours to defend Palcy a^•ainst these and other charges. Vindication of Dr. Puh'ifs Theorij of ^lom/s. Chap, iv., et passim. The strict followers of Palcy generally hold that we are indebted to the Christian revelation for our belief in a future retribution. If so, it would «eem to follow from the passage in the text that none but Christians, or those who might be Christians, liave any thing to do with "duties." — Ed. 120 THE MORAL FACULTY wq daily see men commit, without any remorse, actions, which, if performed by another person, they would have rea;arded with the liveliest sentiments of indigna- tion and abhorrence. Even in this last case the experi- ment is not always perfectly fair; for where the actor has been previously known to us, our judgment is gen- erally affected, in a gi-eater or less degi-ee, by our pre- possessions or by our prejudices. In contemplating the characters exhibited in histories and in novels, the emo- tions we feel are the immediate and the genuine result of our moral constitution ; and although they may be stronger in some men than in others, yet they are in all distinctly perceivable, even in those whose want of tem- per and of candor render them scarcely conscious of the distinction of right and wrong in the conduct of their neighbours and acquaintance. And hence, probably, (we may observe by the way,) the chief origin of the pleasure we experience in this sort of reading. The representations of the stage, however, afford the most favorable of all opportunities for studying the moral constitution of man. As the mind is here perfectly in- different to the parties whose character and conduct are the subject of the fable, the judgments it forms can hardly fail to be impartial, and the feelings arising from these judgments are much more conspicuous in their external effects than if the play were perused in the closet; for every species of enthusiasm operates more forcibly when men are collected in a crowd. On such an occasion the slightest hint suggested by the poet raises to transport the passions of the audience, and forces involuntary tears from men of the greatest re- serve and the most correct sense of propriety. The crowd does not create the feeling, nor even aUer its va- hire ; it only enables us to remark its operation 071 a greater scale. In these cases we have surely no time for reflection; and, indeed, the emotions of which we are conscious are such as no speculations about our o-wn interest could possibly excite. It is in situations of this kind that we most completely forget ourselves as individuals, and feel the most sensibly the existence NOT RESOLVABLE INTO SELF-LOVE. 121 o( those moral ties Jjy which Heaven has been pleased to bind manliiiid together. IV. T'lird Ar^iniirnt. T!ie ExpnUnirif of Virtue not ohvioiis to rominoa ExperUnce.] All hough philosophers h;ive shown that a sense of duty and an enlightened regard to our own happiness conspire in most instances to give tiie same direction to our conduct, so as to put it beyond a doubt that, even in this world, a virtuous life is true wisdom, yet this is a truth by no means ob- vious to the common sense of mankind, but deduced from an extensive view of human atlUirs, and an accu- rate investigation of the remote coiisrtji/riices of our different actions. Ir, is from experience and reflection, therefore, we learn the connection between virtue and happiness; and, consequently, the great lessons of mo- rality which are obvious to the capacity of all mankind could never have been suggested to them merely by a regard to their own interest. Indeed, this discovery which experience makes to us of the connection be- tween virtue and happiness, both in the case of indi- viduals and of political societies, furnishes one of the most pleasing subjects of speculation to the philosopher, as it places in a striking point of view the unity of de- sign which takes place in our constitution, and opens encouraging and deliglitful prospects with respect to the moral government of the Deity. It is a just and beautiful observation of Dr. Reid, that " although wise men have concluded that virtue is the only road to happiness, this conclusion is founded chiefly upon the natural respect men have for virtue, and the good and happiness that is intrinsic to it, and arises from the love of it. If we suppose a man al- together destitute of this principle, who considered virtue as onlv th« means to another end, there is no reason to think that he would ever take it to be the road to happiness, but would wander for ever seeking this object where it is not to be found." * * Essai/s on the Active Powers, Essay III. Part III. Chap. it. 11 122 - THE MORAL FACULTY This observation leads me to remark further, that the man who is most successful in the pursuit of hap- piness is not he who proposes it to himself as the great object of his pursuit. To do so, and to be con- tinually occupied with schemes on the subject, would fill the mind with anxious conjectures about futurity, and with perplexing calculations of the various chan- ces of good and evil. Whereas the man whose ruling principle of action is a sense of duty conducts himself in the business of life with boldness, consistency, and dignity, and finds himself rewarded with that happiness which so often eludes the pursuit of those who exert every faculty of the mind in order to attain it. Something very similar to this takes place with re- gard to nations. From the earliest accounts of man- kind, politicians have been employed in devising schemes of national aggrandizement, and have proceeded on the supposition that the prosperity of their own country could only be advanced by depressing all others around them. It has now been shown, with irresistible evi- dence, that those views were founded on mistake, and that the prosperity of a country is intimately connected with that of its neighbours, insomuch that the enlight- ened statesman, instead of embarrassing himself with the care of a machine whose parts have become too complicated for any human comprehension, finds his la- bor reduced to the simple business of observing the rules of justice and humanity. It is remarkable, that, long before the date of these profound speculations in poli- tics, for which we are indebted to INIr. Smith and to the French economists, Fenelon was led merely by the goodness of his heart, and by his speculative conviction of the intimate connection between virtue and happi- ness under the moral government of God, to recom- mend a free trade as an expedient measure in policy and to reprobate the mean ideas of national jealousy, as calculated to frustrate the very ends to which thev are supposed to be subservient. Indeed, I am inclined to think that, as in conducting the affairs of private life, " the integrity of the upright man " is his surest guide, NOT RESOLVABLE INTO SELF-LOVE. 123 SO, in managing the affairs of a great empire, a strong sense of justice, and an ardent zeal for the rights and for the happiness of mankind, will go further to form a great and suceet*sful statesman than the most perfect acquaintance with political details, unassisted by the direction of these inward monitors. An author, too, in our own country, of sound judg- ment, and of very accurate commercial information, and who was one of the first in England who turned the attention of the public to those liberal notions con- cerning trade which are now become so prevalent, ac- 'knowledges that it was by a train of reasoning a priori that he was led to his conclusions. " Can we suppose," says he, " that Divine Providence has really constituted the order of things in such a sort, as to make the rule of natural self-preservation inconsistent with the funda- mental principle of universal benevolence, and the do- ing as we would be done by ? For my own part, I must confess, I never could conceive that an all-wise, just, and benevolent Being would contrive one part of his plan to be so contradictorj^ to the other as here sup- posed, — that is, would lay us under one obligation as to morals, and another as to trade; or, in short, to make that to be our duty which is not, upon the whole, and generally speaking, (even without the considera- tion of a future state,) our interest likewise. " Therefore I concluded a priori that there ^ must be some flaw or other in the preceding arguments, plausi- ble as they seem, and great as they are on the foot of human authority. For though the appearance of things at first sight makes for this conclusion, 'that poor countries must inevitably carry away the trade from rich ones, and consequently impoverish them,' the fact itself cannot be so." * V. Fourth Argument. Moral Judgments in Children precede the Calculations of Prudence.] The same con- * Tucker's Four Tracts on Political and Commercial Subjects, Tract I. p. 20. 124 THE MORAL FACULTY. elusion is strongly confirmed by the early period of life at which our moral judgments make their appearance, long before children are able to form the general notion of happiness, and, indeed, in the very infancy of their reason. It is astonishing how powerfully a child of sensibility may be affected by any simple narration cal- culated to rouse the feelings of pity, of generosity, or of indignation, and how very early some minds formed in a happy mould are inspired with a consciousness of the dignity of their nature, and glow with the enthusi- asm of virtue. Dr. Beattie has beautifully painted these openings of the moral character in the description he gives of the effect produced on his young Edwin by the fine old ballad of The Babes in the Wood. " But when to horror his amazement rose, A gentler strain the beldame woulJ rehearse, — A tale of rural life, a tale of woes, The orphan babes and guardian uncle fierce. O, cruel ! will no pang of pity ]iierce That heart by lu.st of lucre seared to stone? For sure, if aught of virtue last, or verse, To latest times shall tender souls bemoan Those helpless orphan babe^by thy fell arts undone. " See where, with ben-ies smeared, with brambles torn, The babes now famished lay tliem down to die ; 'Midst the wild howl of darksome woods forlorn, Folded in one another's arms they lie, Nor friend, nor stranger, hears their dying cry. Tor from the town the man returns no more.' But thou who Heaven's just vengeance dar'st defy, This deed with fruitless tears shall soon deplore," When death lays waste thy house, and flames consume thy store. " A stifled smile of stern, vindictive jo;/ Brii/hlened one moment Edwin's siurting tear ; — ' But why sliould gold man's feeble mind decoy, And innocence thus die by doom severe? ' O Edwin ! while thy heart is yet sincere. The assaults of discontent and doubt repel; Diirk even at noontide is our mortal sphere, But let us hope. — to doubt is to rebel, — Let us exult in hope that all shall yet bk well."* • The Mnstrel, Book I Tor a more extended statement of the proofs of man's moral nature, see Upham's Dfental Philosophj, Vol. II. § 207' ei seq. Also, Lieher's Political Ethics, Book I. Chap. II. — Ed. HARTLEY. 125 Section IL examination of hartley's theory of the forma- t TION OF THE MORAL SENSE BY ASSOCIATION ALONE. I. This Theory eludes but in Part the foregoing Argu- ments.] The reasonings already stated seem to me to furnish a sufficient refutation of the selfish theory of morals, as it is explained by the greater number of the philosophers who have adopted it ; but, before kaving the subject, it is necessary for me to take notice of a doctrine fundamentally the same, though modified in such a manner as to elude some of the foregoing argu ments, — a doctrine which has been maintained of late by various English writers of note, and which I suspect is at present the prevailing system in that part of the island. According to this doctrine, we do, indeed, in many cases, approve or disapprove of particular actions, •without any reference to our own interest at the time ; but it is asserted that it was views of self-interest which originally created these moral sentiments, and led us to associate agreeable or disagreeable emotions with human conduct. The origin of the moral faculty, in the opinion of these theorists, is precisely analogous to that of aoarice, or of any of our other factitious principles of action. Money, it will not be disputed, is at first desired merely on account of its subservience to the gratification of our natural desires ; but, in pro- cess of time, the association of ideas leads us to regard it as a desirable thing in itself, without any reference to this subservience or utility, and in many cases it con- tinues to be coveted with an increasing passion, long after we have lost all relish for the enjoyments it ena- bles us to purchase. In the same manner, a particular action which was at first approved or disapproved of, merely on account of its supposed tendency with re- spect to our own interest, comes, in process of time, to be approved or disapproved of the moment it is men- tioned, and without any reflection on our part that we 11* 126 THE MORAL FACULTY. are able to recollect. Thus, without abandoning the old selfish principles, they contrive to evade the force of the arguments founded by Hutcheson and others on the instantaneousriess with which our moral judgments are commonly pronomiced. This, if I am not mista- ken, is the theory of Dr. Law, of Dr. Hartley, of Dr. Priestley, of Dr. Paley, and of Dr. Paley's great oracle in philosophy, the author of Tlie Light of Nature Pur- sued* I am ready to acknowledge that this refinement on the old selfish system gives it a degree of plausibility which it did not originally possess, and obviates one of the objections to it formerly stated. But it must be re- membered that this was not the onljj objection, and that there are several others which apply both to the old and new hypothesis with equal force. Among these arguments, what I would lay the principal stress on is the degree of experience and reflection necessary for discovering the tendency of virtue to promote our happiness, compared with the very early period of life when the moral sentiments display themselves in their full vigor. II. Palei/s Doctrine, that Moral Sentiments are gen- erated by Imitation, unsatisfactory.] In answer to this, it may perhaps be alleged, that, when once moral ideas have been formed by the process already described, they are caught by infants from their parents or pre- ceptors, by a sort of imitation, and without any reflec- tion on their part. " There is nothing," says Dr. Paley, " which children imitate, or apply more readily, than expressions of affection or aversion, of approbation, hatred, resentment, and the like ; and when these pas- sions and expressions are once connected, (which they * Hartley, though he horrawed the hint and general idea from others, was chiefly instrumental in giving form and currency to tliis tlicory, anij hence it commonly g-oes under his name. Ohsewiiliuns on Miin, Chap. IV. Sect. vi. It has found, perijaps, its ablest advocate in James Mill, Analysis of the Human Mind, Chap. XXIII. With both it is only part of a more general theory. — Ed. PALEY. 127 will soon be by the same association which unites words with their ideas,) the passion will follow the expression, and attach upon the object to which the child has been accustomed to apply the epithet. In a word, when almost every thing else is learned by imila- tion, can we wonder to find the same cause concerned in the generation of our moral sentiments ? " * The plausibility of this reasoning arises entirely from the address with which the author introduces indirecili/ a most important fact with respect to the human mind; a fact which, by engrossing the attention of the reader, is apt to prevent his perceiving, on a superficial view, its inapplicability to the point in dis- pute, or at least its insufficiency to establish in its full extent the conclusion which is deduced from it. That imitation and the association of ideas have a great in- fluence on our moral judgments and emotions, more particularly in our early years, every man must be sensible who has reflected at all on the subject; and it is a fact which deserves the serious consideration of all who have any concern in the education of youth. Bat does It therefore follow, that imitation and the association of ideas are sufficient to account for the origin of the power of moral perception, and for the origin of our notions of right and wrong ?f On the contrary, the tendency we hg,ve in the infancy of our reason to follow in our moral judgments the example of those whom we love and reverence, and the influ- ence of association, sometimes in guiding and some- times in misleading us in what we praise or blame, presuppose the existence of the power of moral judg- * Moral Philosophy, Book I. Chap. V. t Mr. Stewart has said in another connection, Philosophy of the Human Mind. First Part, Chap. V. Part ii. Sect. ii. : — " The association of ideas can never account for the origin of a new notion, or of a pleasure essentially different from all the others which we know. It may, indeed, enable us to conceive how a thing indifferent in itself may become a source of pleasure, by being connected in the inind with something else wliiih is naturally agreeable; but it presupposes., in every instance, the existence of those notions and those feelings which it is its province to combiuc." — Ed. 128 THE MORAL FACULTY. merit, and of the general notions of right and wrong. The power of these adventitious causes over the mind is so great, that there is perhaps no particular practice which we may not be trained to approve of or to con- demn ; but wherever this happens, the operation of these causes supposes us to be ahready in possession of some faculty by which we are capable of bestowing approbation or blame. It is worthy, too, of remark, that it is only with respect to particular practices that education is capable of misleading us ; for even when education perverts the judgment, it produces its effect by employing the instrumentality of our moral princi- ples. In many cases it will be found that it operates by combining a number of principles against one; by associating, for example, a number of worthy dispo- sitions and amiable affections 'with habits which, if divested of . such an alliance, would be regarded as mean and contemptible. To all ihis we may add, that our speculative judg- ments concerning truth and falsehood, as well as our judgments concerning right and loi'ong; are liable to be influenced by imitation and the association of ideas. Even in mathematics, when a pupil of a tender age enters first on the study of the elements, his judgment leans not a little on that of his teacher, and he feels his confidence in the truth of his conclusions sensibly confirmed by his faith in the superior understanding of those whom he looks up to with respect. It is only by degrees that he emancipates himself from this de- pendence, and comes at last to perceive thje irresistible force of demonstrative evidence; and yet it will not be inferred from this that the power of reasoning' is the result of imitation or of habit. The conclusion men- tioned above with respect to the power of moral judg- ment is equally erroneous. III. Paleifs Statement of the Question as to the Ex- istence of a Moral Sense.'] The looseness and sophis- try of Paley's reasonings on the subject of the moral faculty may be traced to the vague and indistinct con- PALEY. 129 ception he had formed of the point in question. In proof of this I shall transcribe his own words from his Principles of Moral ami Polilical Philosophy. It is neces.-^ary to premise, that he introduces his argument against ihe existence of a moral sense by quoting a story from Valerius Maximus, which I shall present to my readers in Dr. Paley's version. " The father of Caius Toranius had been proscribed by the Triumvirate. Caius Toranius,^coming over to the interests of that party, discovered to the oificers who were in pursuit of his father's life the place where he concealed himself, and gave them withal a descrip- tion by which they might distinguish his person when they found him. The old man, more anxious for the safety and fortunes of his son than about the little that might remain of his own life, began immediately to inquire of the officers who seized him, whether his son was well, — whether he had done his duty to the satis- faction of his generals. ' That son,' replied one of the officers, ' so dear to thy affections, betrayed thee to us ; by his information thou art apprehended and diest.' The officer with this struck a poniard to his heart, and the unhappy parent fell, not so much affected by his fate as by the means to which he owed it." " Now," says Dr. Paley, " the question is, whether, if this story were related to the wild boy caught some years ago in the woods of Hanover, or to a savage without experience and without instruction, cut off" in his infancy from all intercourse with his species, and consequently under no possible influence of example, authority, education, sympathy, or habit, — whether, I say, such a one would feel, upon the relation, any de- gree, of that sentiment of disapprobation of Toranius's conduct which we feel, or not. " They who maintain the existence of a moral sense, of innate maxims, of a natural conscience, that the love of virtue and hatred of vice are instinctive, or the per- ception of right and wrong intuitive, (all of which are only different ways of expressing the same opinion,) affirm that he would. 130 THE MORAL FACULTY. " They who deny the existence of a moral sense, &c., affirm that he would not. " And upon this issue is joined."* To those who are at all acquainted with the history of this dispute, it must appear evident that the question is here completely misstated; and that, in the whole of Dr. Paley's subsequent argument on the subject, he combats a phantom of his own imagination. The opinion which lie ascribes to his antagonists has been loudly and repeatedly disavowed by all the most emi- nent moralists who have disputed Locke's reasonings against innate practical principles; and is, indeed, so very obviously absurd, that it never could have been for a moment entertained by any person in his senses. Did it ever enter into the mind of the wildest the- orist to imagine that the sense of seeing would enable a man, brought up from the moment of his birth in utter darkness, to form a conception of light and col- ors .' But would it not be equally rash to conclude, from the extravagance of such a supposition, that the sense of seeing is, not an original part of the human frame ? The above quotation from Paley forces me to re- mark further, that, in combating the supposition of a moral sense, he has confounded together, as oiilj/ differ- ent ivaijs of expressing the same opinion, a variety of systems, which are regarded by all our best philoso- phers, not only as essentially distinct, but as in some measure opposed to each other. The system of Hutch- eson, for example, is identified with that of Cudworth, to which (as will afterwards appear) it stands in direct opposition. But although, in this instance, the author's logical discrimination does not appear to much advan- tage, the sweeping censure thus bestowed on so many of our most celebrated ethical theories has the merit of throwing a very strong light on that particular view of the subject which it is the aim of his reasonings to es- tablish in contradiction to them all.f * Moral Philosophy Book I. Cliap- V. t On tlio subject of Paleyj| illustration cited in the text, Dr. Whewcll DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 131 Section III. THE MORAL CONSTITUTION OF HUMAN NATURE NOT DIS- PROVED BY THE DIVERSITY IN MEn's MORAL JUDG- MENTS. I. How far and in ivhat Way our Moral Nature may be affected by Education.] In the preceding observa- tions I have endeavoured to prove that the moral facul- ty is an original principle of our constitution, which is remarks : — " To expect to obtain moral axioms by referring the question to a, jury of savages, or of men nearly approaching to savages in preju- dice, ignorance, or passion, would certainly be a very wild expectation; and I hope it ^vill not be considered a defect in any moral system to which we may be led, that it does not satisfy such an expectation as this. The notion, that an ap|)eal to such a jury is the way to test moral axioms, is something like Paley's proposal of bringing the narration of an atrocious crime before Peter, the wild boy, who was bred up, or rather grew up, lilce a wild beast ; and of doing tliis, in order to discern whether man has a nat- ural abhoiTcnce of crime. Paley himself points out the diiHcnlty which makes such an experiment impossible : — 'If,' he says, ' he could be made to understand the story.' But it is evident that he could not be made to understand the story, except by growing u]i as a man among men, and ceasim/ to be a loild boy. And. in like manner, we must say of a su]jposed promiseuous jui'v of men, by whom you would test our moral axioms. If tliese men are so savage, and ignorant, and passionate, as to have in them the attributes of men imfierfectly vnfolded, they cannot tell you what moral truths are evident to man as mart" And again : — " Trutiis maybe self-evident when we have made a cer- tain progress in thinking, which are not self-evident when we begin to think. And this may be, not because the truths tlms later discerned are depend- ent on the prerequisite trutlis by any logical tie, or can be inferred from them by argument; but because, by the train of tho%!rht by which we come to sec those earlier gleams of truth, the mind is unfolded and instruct- ed, so as to perceive the later and fuller light. Thi-; may he so, because in the process of thouglit thus previously gone through we have learnt to classify and distinguish the actions of men around us, or our own feelings and impulses within us. It may be that to groups and classes and rela- tions.of emotions and sentiments we have given names ; and that through these names language has exercised its power of aiding thought, and has enabled us to see wliat, without such aid, we could not see. In these wnys, and in others, moral truths may become evident to n-i. when we have made some little advance in the development of our moral nature, and in the )iowor of apprehending such truth : although, so long as we were half im- bruted by the absence of any calm and continued thought on such sub- jects, and by the scantiness of our acquaintance with those relations among men which are the materials for such thought, we were insensible to 132 THE MORAL FACULTY. not resolvable into any other principle or principles more general than itself; in particular, that it is not resolvable into self-love, or a prudential regard to our , own interest- In order, however, completely to estab- lish the existence of the moral faculty as an essential and universal part of human nature, it is necessary to examine with attention the objections which have been stated to this conclusion by some writers, who were either anxious to display -their ingenuity by accounting in a different manner for the origin of our moral ideas, or who wished to favor the cause of skepticismi by ex- the evidence which now seems so glaring. It requires a culture of the hu- mnn mind to make that evident which, nevertheless, is evident by the na- ture of the human mind. "And, in truth, we cannot help asking why we should go to savages for the genuine voice of human nature. Why should it be supposed tliat men are more properly men, because in them some of the most important attributes of humanity remain latent and undeveloped ? If cultured men see, as evident in morals, what savages do not see as evident, are not cul- tured men still men ? And all that they know and think, in addition to wliat savages know ahd think, did they not come to know it by the use of their human faculties ■? The early Romans called every slranyer an enemy ; every pererjriniis was hostis. The later Eomans filled the theatre with thunders of applause, when the })00t made the actor say,' ' Homo sum, liumani nihil a me alienum puto.^ Which of these two was the genuine voice of humanity ■? Was not the latter evidently the assent to the irresistible evidence of a moral truth 1 Was that earlier practical denial of this moral truth really the utteranec of a moral conviction 1 Was it not an utterance which came from man, not as the utterance of conviction, hut of uncontrolled fear and anger? not an articulate utterance in the name of humanity, but an inarticulate cry, bor- rowing part of its import from the ferine nature' of the nation ? It was a trace of the wolf 'g milk." — Lectures on Systematic ]\Joralitt/, Lect. II. pp. 34, 38. See also Lieber's Political Ethics, Book II. Chap. Ill , and Sedg- wick's Discourse on the Studies of the University^ pp. 57 et seq., and Aj>pen- di.K (E). "Peter the Wild Boy" made a great noise among scientific men in the early part of the last century. "Swift has immortalized him in his hu- morous production, It cannot rain, but it pours; or, London stmced with Bay- ilies. Linnojus gave him a niche in the Sijstema Naturw,. under*lhe de- nomination of .hivenis IJanoveranus ; Buffbn, De Paauw, and J. J. Rous- seau have extolled him as the true child of nataro, the genuine unsophisticated man Monboddo is still more cnthufiistic, declaring his appearance to be a much more important occurrence than the discovery of the planet Ura- nus." — Lawrence's Natural History of Man, Chap. II. He turned out to be an idiotic boy, who had been lost in the woods, or driven into them and abandoned, about a year before he was brought into such notice. - Ed. DIVERSITY IN ITS JtTDGMENTS. 133 plaining away the reality and immutability of moral distinctions. Among these objections, that which merits the most careful consideration, from the characters of those by whom it is maintained, is founded on the possibility of explaining the fact without increasing the number of original principles in our constitution. The rules of morality, it has been supposed, were, in the first in- stance, brought to light by the sagacity of philosophers and politicians ; and it is only in consequence of the influence of education that they appear to form an original part of the human frame. The diversity of opinions among different nations witb respect to the morality of particular actions has beei; jonsidered as a strong confirmation of this doctrine. But the power of education, although great, is con- fined within certain limits. It is, indeed, much more extensive than philosophers once believed, as sufficient- ly appears from those modern discoveries, with respect to the distant parts of the globe, which have so won- derfully enlarged our knowledge of human nature, and which show clearly that many sentiments and opinions, which had been formerly regarded as inseparable from the nature of man, are the results of accidental situa- tion. If our forefathers, however, went into one ex- treme on this point, we seem to be at present in no small danger of going into the opposite one, by con- sidering man as entirely a factitious being, that maybe moulded into any form by education and fashion. I have said that the power of education is confined within certain limits. The reason is obvious, for it is by cooperating with the natural principles of the mind that education produces its effects. Nay, this very susceptibility of education, which is acknowledged to belong universally to the race, presupposes the ex- istence of certain principles which are common to all mankind. The influence of education in diversifying the ap- pearances which the moral constitution of man exhib- its in different instances depends chiefly on that law of 12 - 13-1: THE MORAL FACULTY. our constitution which was formerly called the associa- tion of ideas ; and this law supposes, in every case, that there are opinions and feelings essential to the hu- man frame, by a combination with which external cir- cumstances lay hold of the mind, and adapt it to its accidental situation. What we daily see happen in the trifling article of dress may help us to conceive how the association of ideas operates in matters of more serious consequence. Fashion, it is well known, can reconcile us, in the course of a few weeks, to the most absurd and fantastical ornament ; but does it fol- low from this that fashion could create our ideas of beauty and elegance ? During the time we have seen this ornament worn, it has been confined, in. a great measure, to those whom we consider as models of taste, and has been gradually associated "with the im- pressions produced by the real elegance, of their appear- ance and manner. When it pleases by itself, the ef- fect is not to be ascribed to the thing considered ab- stractedly, nor to any change which our general notions of beauty have undergone, but to the impressions with which it has been generally connected, and which it naturally recalls to the mind. The case is nearly the same with our moral sentiments. A man of splendid virtues attracts some esteem also to his imperfections, and, if placed in a conspicuous situation, may corrupt the moral sentiments of the multitude in the same manner in which he may introduce an absurd or fantas- tical ornament by his whimsical taste in the articles of dress. The commanding influence of Cato's virtues seems to have produced somewhat of this effect on the minds of some of his admirers. He was accused, we are told, of intemperance in wine ; nor do his apolo- gists pretend altogether to deny the charge. " But," says one of them, " it would be much easier to prove that intemperance is a decent and respectable quality, than that Cato could be guilty of any vice." " Catoni ebrietas objecta est; et facilius efiiciet, quisquis obje- cerit, hoc crimen honestum, quam turpem Catonem." In general it may be remarked, that as education DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 135 may vary in particular cases the opinions of individu- als with respect to the objects of taste, without being able to create our notions of beauty or deformity, of grandeur or meanness, so education may vary our sentiments with respect to particular actions, but could not create our notions of right and wrong, of merit and demerit.* II. Diversity in, Men^s Moral Judgments.] With re- * It is observed by Condorcet in his Eloge on Euler, " That, if v-e except the coiiLinon mdxi.ms of morality, there is no one truth which can boast of liaving been so generally adopted, or tlirough such a succession of ai^es, as certain ridiculous and pernicious errors." The assertion, altbouyli not without some foundation in fait, is manifestly expressed by this author in terms too strong and unqualitied. I quote it here chiefly on account of the remarkable concession which it involves in favor of the fitndiniiental principles of rnorollty ; — a subject on which it has been generally alleged, by skeptical writers, that our opinions are more liable than on most others to be warped by the influence of education and fashion. [iSir James Mackintosh is a strenuous asserter of the general uniformity of men's moral judgments. " I do not speak of the theory of morals, but of the rule of life. First examine the fact, and see whether, from the earliest times, any improvement, or even any change, has been made in the practical rules of human conduct. Look at the code of Moses. I speak of it now as a mere human composition, without considering its sacred origin. Considering it merely in that light, it is the most ancient and the most curious memorial of the early history of mankind. More than three thousand years have elapsed since the composition of the I'en- tateucb ; and let any man, if he is able, tell me in what important res]->ccts the rule of life has varied since that distant period. Let the Institutes of Menu he explored with the same view ; we snail arrive at the same conclu- sion. Lot the books of false religion be opened ; it will he found that their moral system is, in all its grand features, the same. The impostors who composed them were compelled to pay this homage to tlie uniform moral sentiments of the world. Examine the codes of nations, tliose authentic depositories of the moral judgments of men ; you everywhere find the same rules prescribed, the same duties imposed : even the boldest of those ingenious skeptics who have attacked every other opinion has spared the sacred and immutable simplicity of the rules of life. In our common duties, Bayle and Hume agree with Bossuet and Barrow. Such as the rule wsis at the first dawn of history, such it continues till the present day. Ages roll over mankind ; mighty nations pass aivay like a shadow; virtue alone remains the same, immortal and unchangeable." — Memoirs, hy his Son, Vol. I. Chap. Ill p 120. Even should we think that the statement, as here made, needs further qualification, there can be no doubt that the common opinion errs still more on the other side. One reason why the points of difference in morals are thought to be more numerous than they really are is, tliat these alone are made the subject of frequent discussion ; and properly so, because it is only in this way that they can bo cleared up, and reconciled. — Ed.] 136 THE MORAL. FACULTY. spect to the historical facts which have been quoted as proofs that the moral judgments of mankind are entirely factitious, we may venture to assert in general, that none of them justify so very extravagant a con- clasion ; that a great part of them are the effects of misrepresentation ; and that others lead to a conclu- sion directly the reverse of what has been drawn from them. It would hardly be necessary, in the present times, to examine them seriously, were it not for the authority which, in the opiiuon of many, they still con- tinue to derive from the sanction of Mr. Locke. " Have there not been whole nations," says this eminent philosopher, " and those of the most civilized people, among whom the exposing their children, and leaving them in the fields to perish by want or "wild beasts, has been the practice, as little condemned or scrupled as the begetting them ? Do they not still, in some countries, put them into the same graves with their mothers, if they die in child-birth, or despatch them, if a pretended astrologer declares them to have unhappy stars ? And are there not places where, at a certain age, they kill or expose their parents without any remorse at all? Where, then, are our innate ideas of justice, piety, gratitude ; or where is that universal consent that assures us there are such inbred rules ? " * To this question of Locke's so satisfactory an answer has been given by various writers, that it would be superfluous to enlarge on the subject here. It is sufficient to refer, on the origin of infanticide, to Mr. Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments;^ and on the alleged impiety among some rude tribes of children towards their parents, to Charron Sur la Sagesse, :^ and to an excellent note of Dr. Seattle's in his Essay on Fable and Romance. The reasonings of the last two * Book I. Chap. HI. § 9. t Piu-t V. Chap. II. X liiv. II. Chap. VIII. ChaiTon's avgument is evidently pointed at cer- tain passages in Montaigne's Essays, in which that ingenious writer ha.s fallen into a train of thought very similar to that which is tlio groundwork of Locke's reasonings against innate practlml pr'mciides. DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 137 writers are strongly confirmed by Mr. Ellis, in his Voyaffe for the Discovery of a Northwest Passa<^e, and by Mr. Curtis (afterwards Sir Roger Curtis), in a paper containing Some Particulars vnth Respect to the Country of Labradore, published ia the Philosophical Transactions for the year 1773. In order to form a competent judgment on facts of this nature, it is necessary to attend to a variety of considerations which have been too frequently over- looked by philosophers; and, in particular, to make proper allowances for the three following: — 1. For the different situations in which mankind are placed, partly by the diversity in their physical circum- stances, and partly by the unequal degrees of civiliza- tion which they have attained. 2. For the diversity of their speculative opinions, arising from their unequal measures of knowledge or of capacity ; and, 3. For the different moral import of the same action under different systems of external behaviour. III. First Cause of Diversity in Men's Moral Juds;-- ments. Difference of Condition. (1.) As regards Prop- erty.] In a part of the globe where the soil and cli- mate are so favorable as to yield all the necessaries and many of the luxuries of life with little or no labor on the part of man, it may reasonably be expected that the ideas of men will be more loose concerning the rights of property than where nature has been less liberal in her gifts. As the right of property is found- ed, in the first instance, on the natural sentiment, that the laborer is entitled to the fruits of his own labor, it is not surprising that, where little or no labor is re- quired for the gratification of our desires, theft should be regarded as a very venial offence. There is here no contradiction in the moral judgments of mankind. Men feel there, with respect to those articles which we appropriate with the most anxious care, as we, in this part of the world, feel with respect to air, light, and 7valer. If a country could be found in which no in- 12* 138 THE MORAL FACULTY, justice was apprehended in depriving an individual of an enjoyment which he had provided for himself by a long course of persevering industry, the fact would be something to the purpose. But this, we may venture to say, has not yet been found to be the case in any quarter of the globe. That the circumstance I have mentioned is the true explanation of the prevalence of theft in the South Sea Islands, and of the venial light in which it is there regarded, appears plainly from the accounts of our most intelligent navigators. " There was another circumstance," says Captain Cook, speaking of the inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands, "in which the people perfectly resembled the other islanders we had visited. At first, on their enter- ing the ship, they endeavoured to steal every thing they came near, or rather to take it openly, as what we either should not resent, or not hinder." (January, 1778.) In another place, talking of the same people: — " These islanders," says he, " merited our best com- mendations in their commercial intercourse, never once attempting to cheat us, either ashore or alongside the ships. Some of them, indeed, as already mention- ed, at first betrayed a thievish disposition ; or rather, they thought that they had a right to every thing they could lay their hands on; but they soon laid aside a conduct which we convinced them they could not persevere in with impunity." In another part of the voyage, (April, 1778.) in which he gives an account of the American Indians near King George's Sound, he contrasts their notions on the subject of theft with those of the South Sea Islanders. " The inhabitants of the South Sea Islands, rather than be idle, would steal any thing they could lay their hands on, without ever considering whether it could be of use to them or no. The novelty of the object was with them a sufficient motive for endeav- ouring, by any indirect means, to get possession of it; which marked, that in such cases they were rather actuated by a childish curiosity than by a dishonest DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 139 disposition, regardless of the modes of supplying real wants. The inhabitants of Nootka, who invaded our property, have not such an apology. They were thieves in the strictest sense of the word ; for they pil- fered nothing from us but what they knew could be converted to the purposes of private utility, and had a real value, according to their estimation of things." He adds, that he had " abundant proof that stealing is much practised among themselves " ; — but it is evi- dent, from the manner in which he expresses himself, that theft was not here considered in the same venial or indifferent light as in those parts of the globe where the bounty of nature deprives exclusive property of al- most all its value.* In general it will be found, that the ideas of rude nations on the subject of properly are precise and de- cided, in proportion to the degree of labor to which they have been habituated in procuring the means of sub- sistence. Of one barbarous people, (the Greenlanders,) we are expressly told by a very authentic writer, (Crantz,) that their regard to property acquired by labor is not only strict, but approaches to superstition. " Not one of them," says he, " will appropriate to himself a sea-dog in which he finds one or more harpoons with untorn thongs ; nor even carry away drift wood, or other things thrown up by the sea, if they are covered loith a stone, because they consider this as an indication that they have already been appropriated by some other person." f * See, also, Anderson's B/nnarlcs, February, 1777, and December, 1777. t Hislorji of Greenland,, Vol I. p. 1 8 1 . The following passage of Voltaire is perhaps liable to the charge of over-refinement ; but it suftiiiently shows that he saw clearly the general principle on which the lax opinions of some nations on the subject of theft are to be explained. " On a beau nons dire, qu'.V Lacedimone, le larcin fetoit ordonne ; ce n'est la qu'un abus des mots. La mime chose que nous appellons larcin, n'etoit point commandoe a Lacedemone; mais dans une ville, oli tout ctoit en commim, la permission qu'on donnoii de prendre habilement ce que des particuliers s'approprioient eontrc la loi, etoit une manii're de punir I'esprit de propriete defendu chez ces peuples. Le lien ct le mien etoit un crime, dont ce que nous appcUons larcin etoit la punition." — Voltaire's Account of Newton's Discoveries. Some of his other remarks on Locke are very curious. 140 THE MORAL FACULTY. IV. (2.) As regards the Uses of Money.] Another very remarkable instance of an apparent diversity in the moral judgments of mankind occurs in the contra- dictory opinions entertained by different age,s and na- tions on the moral lawfulness of exacting interest for the use of money. Aristotle, in the first book of his Politics (6th chap.), speaking of the various ways of getting money, considers agriculture and the rearing of cattle as honorable and natural, because the earth itself, and all animals, are by nature fruitful ; " but to make money from money, which is barren and unfruitful," he pronounces " to be the worst of all modes of accumu- lation, and the utmost corruption of artificial degen- eracy. By commerce," he observes, " money is perverted from the purpose of exchange to that of gain. Still, however, this gain is obtained by the mutual transfer of different objects ; but usury, by transferring merely the same object from one hand to another, generates money from money ; and the interest thus generated is therefore called ' offspring,' as being precisely of the same nature, and of the same specific substance, with that from which it proceeds." * — Similar sentiments with respect to usury (under which title was compre- * Gillies's Translation. - The argument of Aristotle is so extremely ab- surd and puerile, that it could never have led this most acute and profound philosopher to the conclusion it is employed to support, but may he justly numbered among the instances in which speculative men iiavc exei-ted their ingenuity to defend, by sophistical reasonings, the established preju- dices of the times in which they lived, and in which the supposed evidenre of the inference has served, in their estimation, to comjjensate for the weakness of tlie premises. It is, however, worthy of remark, that the argument, such as it is, was manifestly suggested by the etymology of the word tukos (interest), from the verb TiKTa, pario, to breed or brm(j forth ; an etymology wliieh seems to imply that the principal generates the interest. The -nme idea, too, occurs in the scene between Antonio and Shylock, in th» Mer- c/iaiit of Venice : — " If thou wilt lend this money, lend it not As to thy friends ; (for when did friendship take A breed of ban-en meted from his friend?) But lend it rather to thine enciiiy, "Who, if he break, thou mayst with better face Exact the penalty.'' Act I. Scene III. DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 141 hended every premium, great or small, which was re- ceived by way of interest) occur in the Roman writers. " Concerning the arts," says Cicero, in his first book De Ojfidis, " and the means of acquiring wealth which are to be accounted liberal, and which mean, the fol- lowing are the sentiments usually entertained. In the first place, those means of gain are in the least credit which incur the hatred of mankind, as those of tax- gatherers and usurers." The same author (in the sec- ond book of the same work) mentions an anecdote of old Cato, who, being asked what he thought of lending money upon interest, answered, " What do you think of the crime of murder ? " In the code of the Jewish legislator, the regulations concerning loans imply manifestly, that to exact a pre- mium for the thing lent was an act of unkindness unsuit- able to the fraternal relation in which the Israelites stood to one "another. " Thou shalt not lend," it is said, " upon usury to thy brother : usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury. Unto a' stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury ; that the --Lord thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to, in the land whither thou goest to possess it." * In consequence of this prohibition in the Mosaic law, the primitive Christians, conceiving that they ought to look on all men, both Jews and Gentiles, as brethren, inferred, (partly, perhaps, from the prohibition given by Moses, and partly from the general prejudices then prev- alent against usury,) that it was agailist the Christian law to take interest from any man. And, accordingly, there is no crime against which the Fathers in their homilies declaim with more vehemence. The same ab- horrence of usury of every kind appears in the canon law, insomuch that the penalty by that law is excom- munication ; nor is the usurer allowed burial until he has made restitution of what he got by usury, or secu- rity is given that restitution shall be made after his * Deut. xxiii. 19, 20. 142 THE MORAL FACULTY. death. About the middle of the seventeenth century, we find the divines" of the Church of England very often preaching against all interest for the use of money, even that which the law allowed, as a gross immorality. And not much earlier it was the general opinion, both of divines and lawyer^, that, although law permitted a certain rate of interest to prevent greater evils, and in compliance with the general corruption of men, (as the law of Moses permitted polygamy, and authorized di- vorce for slight causes, among the Jews,) yet that the irules of morality did not sanction the taking any inter- est for money ; at least, that it was a very doubtful point whether they did. The same opinion was maintained in the English House of Comilions by some of the members who were lawyers, in the debate upon a bill brought in not much more than a hundred years ago. I need not remark how completely the sentiments of mankind are now changed upon the subject; insomuch that a moralist or divine would expose himself to ridi- cule if he should seriously think it worth his while to use arguments to prove the lawfulness of a practice which was formerly held in universal abhorrence. The consistency of this practice (in cases where the debtor is able to pay the interest) with the strictest morality appears to us so manifest and indisputable, that it would be thought equally absurd to argue for it as against it.* The diversity of judgments, however, on this particu- lar question, instead of proving a diversity in the moral * "A learned gentleman, indeed, of the Middle Temple, Mr. Plowdcn, (a lawyer, I believe, of the Roman Catholic persuasion,) who published, about thirty years ago, a Treatise upon the^Law of Usury and Annuities^ has employed no less than fifty-nine pages of his work in considering the law of usury in a spiritual view, in order to establish the following conclusion : — " That it is not sinful, but lawful, for a British subject to receive le^'al interest for the money he may lend, whether he receive it in annnal divi- dends from the public, or in interest from private individuals who may have borrowed it upon mortgage, bond, or otherwise." M. Necker, too, in the notes annexed to his E/of/e on Colbert, thought it necessary for him to offer an apology to the Church of Rome for the freedom with which ho ventured to write upon this critical subject. " Ce que je dis dc interct est sous un point de vue politique, et n'a point de rapport avec les respectables rnaximes de la religion sar ce point." DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 143 judgments of mankind, affords an illustration of the uniformity of their opinions concerning the fundamen- tal rules of moral duty. In a state where there is little or no commerce, the great motive for borrowing being necessity, the value of a loan cannot be ascertained by calculation, as it may be where money is borrowed for the purposes of trade. In such circumstances, therefore, every money- lender who accepts of interest will be regarded in the same odious light in which pawnbrokers are considered among ns; and the man "who putteth out his money to usury" will naturally be classed (as he is in the words of Scripture) with him who " taketh reward against the innocent." f These considerations, while they account for the origin of the opinions concerning- the practice of tak- ing interest for money among those nations of an- tiquity whose commercial transactions were few and Insignificant, will be sufficient, at the same time, to establish its reasonableness and equity in countries where money is most commonly borrowed for the pur- poses of commercial profit, and where, of consequence, the use of it has a fixed and determinate value, de- pending (like that of any commodity in general re- quest) on the circumstances of the market at the time. In such countries 6oZA parties are benefited by the trans- action, and even the state is a gainer in the end. The lenders of money are frequently widows and orphans, who subsist on the interest of their slender funds, while the borrowers as frequently belong to the most opulent class of the community, who wish to enlarge their capital and extend their trade ; and who, by doing so, are enabled to give further encouragement to in- dustry, and to supply labor and bread to the in- digent. The prejudices, therefore, against usury among the ancient philosophers were the natural result of the state of society which fell under their observation. t Ps. XV. 5. 144 THE MORAL FACULTY. The prohibition of usury among the Jews in their own mutual transactions, while they were permitted to take a premium for the money which they lent to strangers, was in perfect consistency with the other principles of their political code ; commerce being interdicted, as tending to an intercourse with idolaters, and ^mortga- ges prevented by the indefeasible right which every man had to his lands. V. (3.) Want of an Efficient Police.] I shall only mention one instance more to illustrate the effects of different states of society in modifying the moral judg- ments of mankind. It relates to the crime of assassina- tion, which we now justly consider as the most dreadful of any ; but which must necessarily have been viewed in a very different light when laws and magistrates were unknown, and when the only check, on injustice was the principle of resentment. As it is the nature "of this principle, not only to seek the punishment of the delinquent, but to prompt the injured person to inflict the punishment with his own hand, so in every country the criminal jurisdiction of the magistrate has been the last branch of his authority that was estab- lished. Where the police, therefore, is weak, murders must not only be more frequent, but are really less criminal, than in a society like ours, where the private rights of individuals are completely protected by law, and where there hardly occurs an instance, excepting in a case of self-defence, in which 'one man can be justified for shedding the blood of another. And even when, in a rude age, a murder is committed from un- justifiable motives of self-interest or jealousy, yet the frequency of the occurrence prevents the minds of men from revolting so strongly at the sight of blood as we do at present. It is on this very principle that Mr. Mitford accounts for the manners and ideas that prevailed in the heroic ages of Greece. But it is unnecessary, on this head, to appeal to the history -of early times, or of distant nations. In our own country of Scotland, about two centuries ago, DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 145 yvhat shocking murders were perpetrated, and seem- ingly without remorse, by men who were by no means wholly destitute of a sense of religion and morality ! Dr. Robertson remarks, that "Buchanan relates the murder of Cardinal Beatoun and of Rizzio without expressing those feelings which are natural to a man, or that indignation which became an historian. Knox, whose mind was fiercer and more unpolished, talks of the death of Beatoun and of the Duke of Guise, not only without censure, but with the utmost exultation. On the other hand, the Bishop of Ross mentions the assassination of the Earl of Murray with some degree of applause. Blackwood dwells on it with the most indecent triumph; and ascribes it directly to the hand of God. Lord Ruthven, the principal actor in the conspiracy against Rizzio, wrote an account of it some time before his own death ; and in all his long narra- tive there is not one expression of regret, or one symp- tom of compunction, for a crime no less dishonorable than barbarous. Morton, equally guilty of the same crime, entertained the same sentiments concerning it ; and in his last moments, neither he himself, nor the ministers who attended him, seem to have considered it as an action which called for repentance. Even then he talks of ' David's slaughter ' as coolly as if it had been an innocent or commendable deed." * The reflections of Dr. Robertson on these assassina- tions, which were formerly so common in this country, are candid and judicious. " In consequence of the limit- * History of Scotland, Book IV. The following lines, in which Sir David Lindsay reprobates the murder of his contemporary and enemy, Cardinal Beatoun. deserve to be added to the instances quoted by Dr. Robertson, as an illustration of the moral sentiments of our ancestors. Tliey are expressed with a miXreti which places in a strong light both the moral and religious principles of that age. " As for this Cardinal, I grant, He was a man we well might want; God will forgive it soon: But of a sooth, the truth to say, Altho' the loun be well away, The aet was foully done." 13 146 THE MORAL FACULTY. ed power of our princes, the administration of justice was extremely feeble and dilatory. An attempt to punish the crimes of a chieftainrpr even of his vassals, often excited rebellions and civil wars. To nobles haughty and independent, among whom the causes of discord were many and unavoidable ; who were quick in discerning an injury, and impatient to revenge it; who esteemed it infamous to submit to an enemy, and cowardly to forgive him ; who considered the right of punishing those who had injured them as a privilege of their order, and a mark of independency ; such slow proceedings were extremely unsatisfactory. The blood of their adversary was, in their opinion, the only thing that could wash away an affront. Where that was not shed, their revenge was disappointed ; their courage became suspected, and a stain was left on their honor. That vengeance which the impotent hand of the magis- trate could not inflict, their own could easily execute. Under a government so feeble, men assumed, as in a state of nature, the right of judging and redressing their own wrongs. And thus assassination, a crime of all others the most destructive to society, came not only to be allowed, but to be deemed honorable." In another passage he observes, that " mankind became thus habituated to blood,_not only in times of war, but of peace ; and from this, as well as other causes, con- tracted an amazing ferocity of temper and of manners." VI. Second Cause of Diversity in Men^s Moral Judg- ments. Difference in Speculative Opinions.] The second cause I mentioned of the apparent diversity among mankind in their moral judgments is the diversity in their speculative opinions. The manner in which this cause operates will appear obvious, if it be considered that nature, by the sugges- tions of our moral principles, only recommends to us particular ends, but leaves it to our reason to ascertain the most effectual means by which these ends are to be. attained. Thus nature, points out to us our own hap- piness, and also the happiness of our fellow-creatures, DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 147 as objects towards the attainment of which our best exertions ought to be directed ; but she has left us to exercise our reason, both in ascertaining what the con- stituents of happiness are, and how they may be most completely secured. Hence, according to the different points of view in which these subjects of con- sideration may appear to different understandings, there must of necessity be a diversity of judgments with respect to the morality of the same actions. One man, for example, believes that the happiness of soci- ety is most effectually consulted by an implicit obedi- ence in all ctLses to the will of the civil magistrate. Another, that the mischiefs to be apprehended from resistance and insurrection in cases of urgent necessity are ti-ifling when compared with those which may result to ourselves and our posterity from an establish- ed despotism. The former will of course be an advo- cate for the duty of passive obedience ; the latter for the rights and, in certain supposable cases, for the obligation of resistance. Both of these men, however, agree in the general principle, that it is our duty to promote to the utmost of our power the happiness of society; and they differ from each other only on a speculative question of expediency. Li like manner, there is a wide diversity between the moral systems of ancient and modern times on the subject of suicide. Both, however, agree in Ihis, that it is the duty of man to obey the will of his Creator, and to consult every intimation of it that his reason can discover, as the supi-eme law of his conduct. They differed only in their speculative doctrines concern- ing the interpretation of the will of God, as manifest- ed by the dispensations of his providence in the events of human life. The prejudices of the ancients on this subject were indeed founded in a very partial and erroneous view of circumstances (arising, however, not unnaturally, from the unsettled state of society in the ancient republics) ; but they only afford an additional instance of the numerous mistakes to which human reason is liable; not of a fluctuation in the judgments 148 THE MORAL FACULTY. of mankind concerning the fundamental rules of mor- al duty* VII. Tiiird Cause, of DiversUij in Meti^s Moral Tudg- vients. Different SijsLems of Behaoiour.] The differ- ent moral import, too, of the same material actio^i, un- der ditferent systems of external behaviour, deserves par- ticular attention, in forming an estimate of the moral sentiments of different ages and nations. This difference is chiefly owing to two causes : — First, to the different conceptions of happiness and mis- ery, — of what is to be desired and shunned, — which men are led to form in different states of society. Sec- ondly, to the effect of accident, which, as it leadsmen to speak different languages in different countries, so it leads them to express the same dispositions of the heart by different external observances. 1. Where the opinions of mankind vary concern- ing the external circumstances that constitute happi- ness, the external expressions of benevolence must vary of course. Thus, in the fact referred to by Locke con- cerning the Indians in the neighbourhood of Hudson's Bay, the wishes of the aged parent being different from what we are accustomed to observe in this part of the world, the marks of filial affection on the part of the child must vary also. " In some countries honor is associated with suffering, and it is reckoned a favor to be killed with circumstances of torture. Instances of this occur in the manners of some American nations, and in the pride which an Indian matron feels when placed on the funeral pile of her deceased husband." f In such cases an action may have to us all the external marks of extreme cruelty, while it proceeds' from a disposition generous and affectionate. * See Lieber's Political Ethics, Book I. Sect, xviii., where the conduct of the Thugs of India — a fanatical sect pursuing murder as a trade, and un- der the supposed sanction of religion — is reconciled with the moral con- stitution of human nature. — Ed. t Ferguson's Moral and Political Science, Part II. Chap. II. Sect iv. [For facts in confirmation of this doctrine, see Historical Jllustrations of tlie Passions, particularly Vol. I. Chap. lU. and IV.] DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 149 2. A difference in the moral import of the same ac- tion often arises from the same accidental causes which lead men, in different parts of the globe, to express the same ideas by different arbitrary signs. What happens in the trifling forms and ceremonies of behaviour may serve to illustrate the operation of the same causes on more important occasions. " In the general principles of urbanity, politeness, or civility, we may venture to assert that the opinions of all na- tions are agreed ; but in the expression of this disposi- tion, we meet with endless varieties. In Europe, it is the form of respect to uncover the head; in Japan, the corresponding form is said to be to uncover i\\e foot by dropping the slipper.* Persons unacquainted with any language but their own are apt to think the words they use natural and fixed expressions of things ; while the words of a different language they consider as mere jargon, or the result of caprice. In the same manner, forms of behaviour different from their own appear of- fensive and irrational, or a perverse substitution of ab- surd for reasonable manners. " Among the varieties of this sort, we find actions, gestures, and forms of expression, in their own nature indifferent, entered into the code of civil or religious duties, and enforced under the strongest sanctions of public censure or esteem; or under the strongest de- nunciations of the Divine indignation or favor. " Numberless ceremomes and observances in the ritu- al of different sects are to be accounted for on the same principles which produce the diversity of names or signs for the same thing in the vocabulary of different languages. Thus, the generality of Christians when they pray take off their hats; the Jews when they pray put them on. Such acts, how strongly soever they may affect the imaginations of the multitude, may just- * "Even here," Sir Josbua Reynolds ingeniously remarks, "we may perhaps observe a general idea running through all the varieties; to wit, the general idea of making the body less in token of respect, whether by bowing the body, kneeling, prostration, pulling off the upper part of the dress, or throwing aside the lower." 13' 150 THE MORAL FACULTY. ly be considered as part of the arbitrary language of particular countries ; implying no diversity whatever in the ideas or feelings of those among whom they are established." * As a further proof of the impossibility of judging of the general character of a people from their opinions' concerning the morality of particular actions, we may observe, that, in some of the writings of the ancient moralists, we meet with the most refined and sublime precepts blended promiscuously with dissuasives from the most shocking and detestable crimes ; in one sen- tence, perhaps, a precept which may be read with ad- vantage by the most enlightened of the present times ; and in the next, a dissuasive from some crime which no one now could be supposed to perpetrate who had not arrived at the last stage of depravity. I have dwelt very long on this subject, because, if it be painful to be staggered in our belief of the immuta- bility of moral distinctions by the first aspect of the history of mankind, it affords a tenfold pleasure to those who feel themselves interested in the cause of morality, when they find, on an accurate examination, that those facts on which skeptics have laid the great- est stress are not only consistent with the moral consti- tution of man, but result necessarily from this constitu- tion, diversified in its effects according to the different circumstances in which the individual is situated. To trace in this manner the essential principles of the hu- man frame, amidst the various disguises it borrows from accidental causes, is one of the most interesting employments of philosophical curiosity ; nor is there, perhaps, a more satisfactory gratification to a liberal mind, than when it recognizes, under the superstition, the ignorance, and the loathsome sensualities of sav- age life, the kindred features of humanity, and the in- delible vestiges of that Divine image after which man was originally formed. VIII. Locke's Connection with this Controversy.] The * See Tergusoa's Moral and Political Science, Part II. Chap. II. Seot. iv. DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 151 doctrines on this subject which I have hitherto been en- deavouring to refute, (how erroneous soever in their principles, and dangerous in their consequences,) have been maintained by some writers who certainly were not unfriendly in their views to the interests of virtue and of mankind. In proof of this, I need only men- tion the name of Mr. Locke, who, in the course of a long and honorable life, distinguished himself no less by the exemplary worth of his private character, and by his ardent zeal for civil and religious liberty, than by the depth and originality of his pliilosophical specu- lations. His errors, however, ought not, on these ac- counts, to be treated with reverence; but, on the con- trary, they require a more careful and severe examination, in consequence of the high authority they derive from his geniu^^ and his virtues. And accordingly, I have enlarged on such of his opinions as seemed to me fa- vorable to skeptical views concerning the foundation of morals, at much greater length than the ingenuity or plausibility of his reasonings in support of them may ajjpear to some to have merited. To these opinions of Locke Lord Shaftesbury has alluded, in various parts of his works, with a good deal of indignation; and particularly in the following pas- sage of [lis Advice to an Author. " One would imag- ine that our philosophical writers, who pretend to treat of morals, should far outdo our poets ill recommending virtue, and representing what is fair and amiable in hu- man actions. One would imagine, that, if they turned their eyes towards remote countries, (of Arhich they af- fect so much to speak,) they should search for that sim- plicity of manners, and innocence of behaviour, which has been often known among mere savages, ere they were corrupted' by our commerce, and, by sad example, instructed in all kinds of treachery and inhumanity. It would be of advantage to us to hear the cause of this strange corruption in ourselves, and be made to consid- er of our deviation from nature, and from that just purity of manners which might be expected, especially from a people so assisted and enlightened by religion. 153 THE MORAL FACULTY. For who would not naturally expect more justice, fidel- ity, temperance,~and honesty from Christians than from Mahometans or mere Pagans ? But so far are our mod- ern moralists from condemning any unnatural vices or corrupt manners, whether in our own or foreign climates, that they would have vice itself appear as natural as virtue ; and, from the worst examples, would represent to us, ' that all actions are naturally indifferent ; that they have no note or character of good or ill in them- selves, but are distinguished by mere fashion, law, or arbitrary decree.' Wonderful philosophy! raised from the dregs of an illiterate, mean kind, which was ever despised among the great ancients, and rejected by all men of action or sound erudition ; but, in these ages, imperfectly copied from the original, and, with much disadvantage, imitated and assumed in common, both by devout andindevout attempters in the moral kind. "* Besides these incidental remarks on Locke, which occur in different parts of Shaftesbury's writings, there is a letter of his addressed to a student at the universi- ty, which relates almost entirely to the opinion we have been considering, and contains some excellent observa- tions on the subject. In this letter Lord Shaftesbury observes, that " all those called free writers now-a-days have espoused those principles which Mr. Hobbes set afoot in this last age." " Mr. LOcke," he continues, " as much as I honor him on account of other writings (viz. on gov- ernment, policy, trade, coin, education, toleration, &c.), and as well as I knew him, and can answer for his sin- cerity, as a most zealous Christian and believer, did however go in the selfsame track, and is followed by the Tindals, and all the other ingenious free authors of our time. " It was Mr. Locke that struck the home blow ; for Mr. Hobbes's character and base, slavish principles of government took off the poison of his philosophy. It was Mr. Locke that struck at all fundamentals, threw * Part ni. Sect. iii. DIVERSITY IN ITS JUDGMENTS. 153 all order and virtue out of the world, and made the very ideas of these (which are the same with those of God) unnatural, and without foundation in our minds. Iiinule is a word he poorly plays upon ; the right word, though less used, is connatural. For what has birth, or progress of the foetus out of the womb, to do in this case? The question is not atjout the time the ideas entered, or the moment that one body came out of the other, but whether the constitution of man be such, that, being adult and gi-own up, at such or such a time, sooner or later, (no matter when,) the idea and sense of order, administration, and a God will not infallibly, inevitably, necessarily, sprin": vp in him ? " * In this last remark. Lord Shaftesbury appears to me to place the question concerning innate ideas upon the right and only philosophical footing, and to afford a key to all the confusion which runs through Locke's argument on the subject. The observations which fol- low are not less just and valuable ; but I must not in- dulge myself in any further extracts at present.f These passages of Shaftesbury, in some of which the warmth of his temper has betrayed him into ex- pressions disrespectful to Locke, have drawn on him a number of very severe animadversions, particularly from Warburton, in the preface to his Divine Legation * Letters to a Student at the University^ Let. YIII. t Notwithstanding, however, the countenance which Xocke's reasonings ap:;unst innate practical principles have the appearance of giving to the pliilo^ophy of Hobbes, I have not a doubt that the difference of opinion Ijetween hira and Lord Shaftesbury on this point was almost entirely ver- bal. Of this I have elsewhere produced ample proofs ; but the following passage will snflBce for my present purpose. " I would not be mistaken, as if, because I deny an innate law, I thought there were none but positive laws. There is a great deal of difference between an innate law and a lam of nature, between something imprinted on our minds in their very orisinal, and something that we, being ignorant of, may attain to the knowledge of, by the use and due application of our natural faculties. And I think they equally forsake the truth, who, running into the contrai-y extremes, either affirfn an innate law, or deny that there is a law knowahle by the liglit of nature, without the help of a positive revelation." — Locke's Essay concern- in(j Human IJ/ifh^rstandiini, Book I. Chap. III. § 13. [See, however, Cousin, Ilistoire de la Philosophiedu XVIII' Sifcle, Tom. II. Lei;on XX«. Or Professor Henry's translation of the same, Elements of -Psychology, Chap. V.] 154 THE MORAL FACULTY. of Moses. But although Shaftesbury's personal allu- sions to Locke cannot be justified, some allowance ought to be made for the indignation of a generous mind at a doctrine which (however well meant by the proposer) striltes at the very root of morality. In this instance, too, it is not improbable that the discussion of the general argument may have added to the asperity of his style, by reviving the memory of the private con- troversies which, it is presumable, had formerly been carried on between Locke and him on this important subject. It is well known that Shaftesbury was Locke's pupil, and also that their tempers and literary tastes were not suitable to each other. In this it is common- ly supposed that the former was to blame ; but, I pre- sume, not wholly. Dr. Warton tells us, that Mr. Locke affected to despise poetry, and that he depreciated the ancients ; " which circumstance," he adds, " as I am in- formed from undoubted authority, was the subject of perpetual discontent and dispute between him and his pupil. Lord Shaftesbury." * That Shaftesbury was not insensible to Locke's real merits appears sufficiently from a passage in the first of his Letters to a Student at the University. " However, I am not sorry that I lent you Locke's Essay, a book that may as well quali- fy men for business and the world as for the sciences and the university. No one has done more towards the recalling of philosophy from barbarity into use and practice of the world, and into the company of tlic better and politer sort, who might well be ashamed of it in its other dress. No one has opened a better and clearer way to reasoning." Section IV. LICENTIOUS SYSTEMS OP MOEALS. I. Character of the Systems so named.] The theo- ries concerning the origin of our moral ideas whi(ih we * Essay on the Genius and Writings of Pope, Sect. XII. LICENTIOUS' SYSTEMS. 155 are now to consider, although they agree in many re- spects with that of Locke and his followers, have yet proceeded from very different views and intentions. They also involve some principles that are peculiar to themselves, and which, therefore, render a separate ex- amination of them necessary for the complete illustra- tion of this fundamental article of ethics. They have been distinguished by Mr. Smith by the name of the Licentious Systems of Morals, — a name which certain- ly cannot be censured as too harsh, when applied to those which maintain that the motives of all men are fundamentally the same, and that what we commonly call virtue is mere hypocrisy. Among the licentious moralists of modern times, the most celebrated are the Due de la Rochefoucauld, au- thor of the Maxims and Moral Reflections, and Dr. jNIandeville, author of the Fable of the Bees. By the generality of our English philosophers, these two writ- ers are commonly coupled together as advocates for the same system, although their views and their char- acters were certainly extremely different. In the first editions of Mr. Smith's Theory of Moral SeiUimenls, he speaks of a licentious doctrine concerning morality, which, he says, " was first sketched by the delicate pen- cil of the Due de la Rochefoucauld, and was after- wards enforced by the coarse but powerful eloquence of Dr. Mandeville." In the last edition of that work the name of La Rochefoucauld is omitted, from IMr. Smith's deliberate conviction that it was unjust to his memory to class him with an author whose writings tend directly to confound all our ideas of moral distinc- tions. On this point I speak from personal knowledge, having been requested by Mr. Smith, when I happened to be at Paris some years before his death, to express to the late excellent and unfortunate Due de la Roche- foucauld his sincere regret for having introduced the name of his ancestor and that of Dr. Mandeville in the same sentence. II. La Rochefoucauld's Life and Personal Charac- 156 THE MORAL FACULTY. ter.] The Due de la Rochefoucauld, author of the Maxims, was born in 1613, and died in 1680. The early part of his education was neglected ; but the dis- advantages he labored under in consequence of this circumstance he in a great measure overcame by the force of his own talents. According to Madame de Maintenon, who knew him well, " he was possessed of a countenance prepossessing and interesting ; of man- ners graceful and dignified ; of ipuch genius, and little acquired knowledge." The same excellent judge adds of him, that " he was intriguing, accommodating, and cautious ; but that she had never known a friend more firm, more open, or whose counsels were of greater val- ue. He loved raillery ; and used to say, that personal bravery appeared to him nothing better than folly; and yet he himself was brave to an extreme. He preserved to the last the vivacity of his mind, which was always agreeable, though naturally serious." In the share which he took in the political transac- tions of his times, he discovered a facility to engage in intrigues, without much steadiness in the pursuit of his object. This, at least, is a remark made on him by the Cardinal de E.etz, who, in a portrait of him drawn with a masterly, though somewhat prejudiced hand, ascribes the apparent inconsistencies of his conduct to a nat- ural want of resolution. A later writer,* more favorable to his memory, has attempted to account for them, with much plausibility, by that superiority of penetra- tion, and that rigid integrity, which all his contempora- ries allow to have been distinguishing features in his character; and which, though not sufficient to keep him wholly disengaged from intrigues in a court where every thing was put in motion by the spirit of party, rendered him soon disgusted with the pretended patri- otism and the selfish politics of those with whom he acted. Accordingly, although he was induced by the force of early connections, and a natural facility of temper, to involve himself during a part of his life in * M. Suard, in his edition of the Maximes, which appeared in 1778. LA ROCHEFOUCAULD. 157 public affairs, and more particularly, to become a tool of the Duchess of Longueville in the cabals of the Fronde, his own taste seems to have attached him to a more private scene, where he could enjoy in freedom lhe society and friendship of a few chosen companions. Towards the end of his life he spent much of his time at the house of Madame de la Fayette, which appears, Irom. the letters of her friend, Madame de Sevigne, to have been, at that period, the resort of all persons dis- tinguished for wit and refinement. It was in the midst of this chosen society that he composed his Memoirs of the Regency of Anne of Austria, and also his Moral ileflections and Maxims. III. Influence of his Writings.] Of these two works, the former is written with much elegance, and with a great appearance of sincerity ; but the events which it records are uninteresting in the present age. Bayle, in his Dictionary, gives it the preference to the Commenta- ries of Caesar; but the judgment of the public has not been equally favorable. " The Memoirs of the Due de la Rochefoucauld," says Voltaire, in his account of the writers of the age of Louis XIV., "are read; but every one knows his Maxims by heart." In fact, it is almost entirely by these maxims (which, as Montesquieu observes, "have become the proverbs of men of wit") that the name of La Rochefoucauld is known ; and it must be confessed that few performances have acquired to their authors a higher or more general reputation. " One of the works," says Voltaire, " which contributed most to form the taste of the nation to a justness and precision of thought and expression, was the small col- lection of maxims by Francis, Due de la Rochefou- cauld. Although there is but one idea in the book, that self-love is the spring of all our actions, yet this idea is presented in so great a variety of forms as to be always amusing. When it fir.st appeared, it was read with avidity; and it contribtited, more than any other performance since the revival of letters, to accus- tom wi-iters to indulge themselves in an originality of 14 158 THE MORAL FACULTY. thought, and to improve the vivacity, precision, and -delicacy of French composition." * That the tendency of these maxims is, upon the whole, unfavorable to morality, and that they always leave a disagreeable impression on the mind, must, I think, be granted.! At the same time, it may be fairly questioned if the motives of the author have in gen- eral been well understood, either by his admirers or by his opponents. In affirming that self-love is the spring of all our actions, there is no good reason for suppos- ing that he meant to deny the reality of moral distinc- tions as a philosophical truth, — a supposition quite inconsistent with his own fine and deep remark, that hypocrisy is itself a hotnag-e which vice renders to virtue. He states it merely as a proposition, which, in the course of his experience as a man of the world, be had found very generally verified in the higher classes of society, and which he was induced to announce, with- out any qualification or restriction, in order to give more force and poignancy to his satire. In adopting this mode of writing, he has unconsciously conformed himself, like many other PVench authors, who have since followed his example, J to a suggestion which • Si&de de Louis XIV., Chap. XXXII. t Mr. Spence, in his Anecdotes of Men and Books, ascribes to Pope 8 remark on La Rochefoucauld which does no small honor to the poet's shrewdness and knowledge of human nature. I quote it in Spence's words. " As L'Esprit, La Rochefoucauld, and that sort of people, prove that all virtues are disguised vices, I would engage to prove alt vices to be disguised virtues. Neither, indeed, is true ; but this would he a more agreeable subject, and would overturn their whole scheme." — p. 11. J Thus it has often been said by French writers, that " no man is a hero to his valet de chambre "; and the maxim, when properly understood, has some foundation in truth. It probably was meant by its original author lo refer only to those petty circumstances of temper and behaviour which, without affecting the essentials of character, have a tendency to diminish, on a near approach, the theatrical effect of great men. It" has, however, been frequently quoted as implying that there are none whose virtues will bear a close exjimination ; in which acceptation, it is not more injurious to human nature than it is contrary to fact. How much more profound, as well as more pleasing, is the remark of Plutarch ! " Real virtue is inost loved where it is most nearly seen, and no j-espect which it commands from strangers can equal the never-ceasing admiration it excites in the daily iatetcourse of domestic life." — Vit. Periclis. It is indeed true, that LA ROCHEFOUCAULD. 159 Aristotle has stated with admirable depth and acute- ness in his Rhetoric. " Sentences or apothegms lend much aid to eloquence. One reason of this is, that they flatter the pride of the hearers, who are de- lighted when the speaker, making use of geheral lan- guage, touches upon opinions which they had before known to be true in part. Thus, a person who had the misfortune to live in a bad neighbourhood, or to have worthless children, would easily assent to the speaker who should affirm that notkinff is more vexa- tious than to have any neighbours ; nothing more irra- tional than to bring children into the world."* This observation of Aristotle, while it goes far -to account for the imposing and dazzling effect of these rhetorical exaggerations, ought to guard us against the common and popular error of mistaking them for the serious and profound generalizations of science. As- for La Rochefoucauld, we know, from the best authorities, that in private life he was a conspicuous example of all those moral qualities of which he seemed to deny the existence ; and that he exhibited, in this respect, a striking contrast to the Cardinal de Retz, who has pre- sumed to censure him for his want of faith in the real- ity of virtue. In reading La Rochefoucauld, it should never be for- gotten that it was within the vortex of a court he en- joyed his chief opportunities of studying the world, and that the narrow and exclusive circle in which he moved was not likely to afford him the most favorable specimens of human nature in general. Of the court of Louis XIV. in particular, we are told by a very nice and reflecting observer (Madame de la Fayette), that some men, who are admired by the world, appear to most advantage when viewed at a distance ; but, on the other liand, may it not be contended that many who are obiects of general odium would be found, if examined raore nearly, not to ho destitute of estimable and amiable qualities ? May we not even go further, and assert that the very worst of men have a mix- ture of good in their romposition, .and express a doubt whether human nature would gain or lose upon a thorough acquaintance with the conduct and motives of individuals ? . « Lib. II. Cap. XXTI. 160 THE MORAL. FACULTY. " ambition and gallantry were the soTtl, actuating alike both men and women. So many contending interests, so many different cabals, were constantly at work, and in all of those women bore so important a- part, that love was always mingled with business, and business with love. Nobody was tranquil or indif- ferent. Every one studied to advance himself by pleasing, serving, or raining others. Idleness and languor were unknown, and nothing was thought of but intrigues or pleasures." In the passage already quoted from Voltaire, he takes notice of the effect of La Rochefoucauld's max- ims in improving the style of French composition. We may add to this remark, that their effect has not been less sensible in vitiating the tone and character of French philosophy, by bringing into vogue those false and degrading representations of human nature and of human life which have prevailed in that country more or less for a century past. Mr. Addison, in one of the papers of the Taller, expresses his indignation , at this general bias among the French writers of his age. " It is impossible," he observes, " to read a passage in Plato, or Tdly, or a thousand other ancient moralists, without being a greater and better man for it. On the contrary, I could never read any of our modish French authors, or those of our own country who are the imitators and admirers of that nation, without being for some time out of humor with my- self, and at every thing about me. Their business is to depreciate human nature, and to consider it under the worst appearances ; they give mean interpretations and base motives to the worthiest of actions.. In short, they endeavour to make no distinction between man and man, or between the species of man and that of the brutes." IV. Mandeville's Wrilings and Moral System.] From the form in which La Rochefoucauld's maxims are pub- lished, it is impossible to attempt a particular examina- tion of them ; nor, indeed, do I apprehend that such MANDEVILLE. 161 an examination is necessary for any of the purposes •which I have at present in view. So far as their ten- dency is unfavorable to the reality of moral distinctions, it is the same with that of Mandeville's system ; and therefore the strictures I am now to offer on the latter writer may be applied with equal truth to the general conclusions which some have chosen to draw from the satirical observations of the former. Dr. Mandeville was born in Holland, where he re- ceived his education both in medicine and in philosophy. He made his first appearance in England about the be- ginning of the last century, and soon attracted very general attention by the vivacity and licentiousness of his publications. The work by which he is best known is a poem, first printed in 1714, with the title of The Grumbling Hive, or Knaves turned Honest; upon which he after- wards wrote Remarks, and published the whole at London in 1723, having for its title The Fable of the Bees : or Private Vices, Public Benefits. This book was presented by the grand jury of Middlesex the same year, and was severely animadverted on soon after by some very eminent writers, particularly by Dr. Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, and by Dr. Hutcheson of Glasgow in his various treatises on ethical subjects. To the Remarks on the Fable of the Bees, the au- thor has prefixed An Inquiry into the Origin of Moral Virtue; and it is to this inquiry that I propose to con- fine myself chiefly in the following strictures, as it exhibits his peculiar opinions concerning the principles of morals in a more systematical form than any of his other writings. In the course of the observations which I have to offer with respect to it, I shall perhaps be led to repeat one or two remarks which have been already suggested by the doctrines of Locke. But, for this repetition, I hope that the importance of the sub- ject will be a sufficient apology. The great object of Mandeville's inquiry into the origin of moral virtue is to show that all our moral sentiments are derived from education, and are the 14* 162 THE MORAL FACULTY. \ workmanship of politicians and lawgivers. " These," says he, " observing how selfish an animal man is, and how impossible, in consequence, it would be to retain numbers together in the same society without govern- ment, endeavoured to give his selfish principles a direc- tion useful to the public. For this purpose they have labored in all ages to convince him that it is better to restrain than to indulge his appetites, and to consult the public interest than his own. The engine they employed in' working upon him was flattery, which they addressed to vanity, one of the strongest principles of our nature. They contrasted man, with the lower animals, and magnified the advantages he possesses ov«r them. The human race they divided into two classes; the mean and contemptible, who, after the example of the brutes, gratify every animal propensity; and the generous and high-spirited, who, disdaining these low gratifications, bend their study to cultivate the nobler principles of our nature, and wage a con- tinual war with themselves to promote the happiness of others. In the case of men possessed of an extraor- dinary degree of pride and resolution, these representa- tions of politicians and moralists were able to effec- tuate a complete conquest of their natural appetites, and a complete contempt of their own visible interests; and even the feeble-minded and abject would be un- willing to rank themselves in the class to which they really belonged, and would strive to conceal their im- perfections from the world, by their forwardness to swell the cry in praise of self-denial and of public spirit. Such," says Mandeville, "was, or at least might have been, the manner after which savage man was broke; and what we call the moral virtues are merely the political offspring- which flattery begot vpon pride." I shall not insist on the absurdity of supposing that govermne7it is an invention of political wisdom, and not the natural result of man's constitution, and of the circumstances in which he is placed. This, however improbable, is one of the least absurdities of Man- MANDEVILLE. 163 deville's system. Its capital defect consists in supposing that the origin of our moral virtues may be accounted for from the power of education ; a fundamental error, which is common to the system of Mandeville and that -of Locive as commonly understood by his followers, and which I had formerly occasion to notice and refute. I shall not, therefore, enlarge upon it at present, but shall confine myself to those parts of Mandeville's philosophy which are peculiar to himself. V. His Erroneous Notions respecting' Vanity and Pride. \ It appears from the passage just quoted, that the engine which Mandeville supposes politicians to employ for the purpose of creating the artificial distinc- tion between virtue and vice is vanity or pride, which two words he uses as synonymous. He employs them, likewise, in a much more extensive sense than their common acceptatio"fi authorizes; to denote, not only an overweening conceit of our own character and attain- ments, or a weak and childish passion for the admira- tion of others, but that reasonable desire for the esteem of our fellow-creatures, which, so far from being a weakness, is a laudable and respectable principle. The desire of esteem and the dread of contempt are undoubtedly among the strongest principles of our nature ; tout in good minds they are only subsidiary to the desire of excellence, nay, they cannot be effectually gratified if they are the first springs of our actions. To be pleased with the applause of others, it is not suf- ficient to possess the appearance of good qualities; we rfiust possess the reality. A man of sense and delicacy is nevfcr more mortified than when he receives praise for qualities which he knows do not belong to him; and he is comforted, under the mistaken censures of the world, by the consciousness he does not deserve them. A desire of applause may, without detracting from our merit, mingle itself with the more worthy motives of our conduct; but if it is the sole motive, the attainment of the object will never communicate a lasting satisfaction. 164 THE MORAL FACULTY. " Falsus honor juvat, et mendax infamia terret, Quern, nisi mcndooum et mendaccm'? " * Vanity, in propriety of speech, denotes a weakness arising from a perversion of the desire of esleem. A. man is vain, who values himself on what is unworthy of regard, as the external distinctions of equipage or dress. He, too, is vain who wishes to pass in the world for what he really is not, and' boasts of qualities which he does not possess. We also give the name of vaniLy to that weakness which disposes a man to be pleased with flattery, and which leads him, not only to desire the esteem of others, but to place his happi- ness in public expressions of it. In every case, vanity denotes a weakness which is carefully to be distin- guished from the love of true glory. Mandeville uses the word to express every sentiment of regard that we feel for the good opinion of others ; and, wherever this regard can be suj^osed to have had any inflaence on our conduct, he concludes that vanity was our principle of action. From these observations, added to those formerly made on Locke, it follows, in the first place, that the whole of our moral sentiments cannot be accounted for from education. Secondly, that, by confounding to- gether vanity, and a reasonable regard to the esteem of our fellow-creatures, Mandeville has expressed the fun- damental proposition of his system in terms so vague and ambiguous as renders it impossible to form a distinct conception of his meaning. And, thirdly, that even this reasonable and laudable desire of esteem cannot be effectually gratified, if it be the sole prin- ciple of our conduct; and therefore cannot be the only source of our moral virtues. From the principle of vanity, Mandeville endeavours to account for all the instances of self-denial that have occurred in the world. But he is not satisfied with ex- * Hor., Ep. XVI. 39. "False praise can charm, unreal shame control. Whom, but a vicious or a sickly soul ? " MANDEVILLB. 165 plaining away in this manner the reality of moral distinctions. He endeavours to show that human life is nothing but a scene of hypocrisy, and that there is really little or none of that self-denial to be found that somernen lay claim to. In his theory of moral virtue he seems to allow that education may not only teach a man to check his appetites in order to procure the esteem of others, but that it may teach him to con- sider such a conquest over the lower principles of his nature as noble in itself, and as elevating him still farther than nature had done above the level of the brutes. " Those men," says he, " who have labored to establish societies endeavoured, in the first place, to insinuate themselves into the hearts of men by flattery, extolling the excellences of our nature above other ani- mals. They next began to instruct them in the notions of honor and shame, representing the one as the worst of all evils, and the other as the highest good to which mortals could aspire; — which being done, they laid before them how unbecoming it was the dignity of such sublime creatures to be solicitous about gratifying those appetites which they had in common with the brutes, and at the same time unmindful of those higher qualities that gave them the preeminence over all visible beings. They, indeed, confessed that these impalses of nature were very pressing; that it was troublesome to resist, and very ditficult wholly to subdue them. But this they only used as an argument to de- monstrate how glorious the conquest of them was on the one hand, and how scandalous on the other not to attempt it." These arguments, it is evident, are addressed to pride rather than to vanity ; and it is worthy of remark, that, though Mandeville never states the distinction between these two words, but, on the contrary, afli'cts to consider them as synonymous, he plainly was aware of the import of both, and sometimes uses the one, and sometimes the other, as best suits his purpose. Thus, in the following passage, if -the word vanity were substituted instead of pride, the impropriety could not 166 THE MORAl. FACULTY. escape the most careless reader. " Such men as, f'roiT no other motive but their love of goodness, perform f worthy action in silence, have, I confess, acquired mors refined notions of virtue than those I have hithurtc spoke of, yet even in these (with whom the world has never yet swarmed) we may discover no small symp toins of pride ; and the humblest man alive must con fess that the reward of a virtuous action, which is thf satisfaction that ensues upon it, consists in a certaii pleasure he procures to himself, by contemplating or his own worth ; which pleasure, together with th( occasion of it, are as certain signs of pride as looldnj pale and trembling at any imminent danger are th( symptoms of fear." From these passages, however, it is abundantly clear, that, in his theory of virtue, Mandeville admiti the possibility of self-denial being exercised merely fo: the private gratification of the pride of the individual without any regard to the opinions of other men. Bu in his commentary on the Fable of lite Bees, he goes much farther, and attempts to show that there is reallj no self-denial in the world, and that what we call e conquest is only a concealed indulgence of our passions To establish this point, he avails himself of the am^ biguity of language. The passion of sex he, in everj case, calls lust ; every thing which exceeds what is necessary for the support of life he calls luxury ; ant thus confounding the innocent and reasonable gratifi- cations of our passions with their vicious excesses, he pretends to show that there is really no virtue amons men. « There are some of our passions," says Mr Smith, "which have no other names. except those which mark the disagreeable and offensive degree The spectator is more apt to take notice of them in this degree than in any other. When they shock his own sentiments, when they give him some sort ol antipathy and uneasiness, he is necessarily obliged tc attend to them, and is from thence naturally "led tc give them a name. When they fall in with the nat- ural state of his own mind, he is very apt to overlook MANDEVILLE. 167 them altogether, and either gives them no name at all, or, jf he gives them any, it is one which marks rather the subjection and restraint of the passion than the degree which it is still allowed to subsist in after it is so sub- jected and restrained. Thus, the common names of the love of plea.svre and of the love of sex denote a vicious and offensive degree of those passions. The words temperance and chastity, on the other hand, seem to mark rather the restraint and subjection in which they are kept under, than the degree which they are still allowed to subsist in. When he can show, there- fore, that they still subsist in some degree, he imagines he has entirely demolished the reality of the virtues of temperance and chastity, and shown them to be mere impositions upon the inattention and simplicity of mankind. Those virtues, however, do not require an entire insensibility to the objects of the passions which they mean to govern. They only aim at restraining the violence of those passions so far as not to hurt the in- dividual, and neither to disturb nor offend society. " It is the great fallacy of Dr. Mandeville's book to represent every passion as wholltj vicious, which is so in any degree, and in any direction. It is thus that he treats every thing as vanity which has any reference either to what are, or what ought to be, the sentiments of others; and it is by means of this sophistry that he establishes his favorite conchision, that private vices are public benefits. If the love of magnificence, a taste for the elegant arts and improvements of human life, for whatever is agreeable in dress, furniture, or equipage, for architecture, statuary, painting, and music, is to be regarded as luxury, sensuality, and ostentation, even in those whose situation allows, without any inconven- iency, the indulgence of those passions, it is certain that luxury, sensuality, and ostentation are public benefits, since, without the qualities upon which he thinks proper to bestow such opprobrious names, the arts of refine- ment could never find employment, and must languish for want of encouragement. Some popular ascetic doctrines which had been current before his time, and 168 THE MORAL FACULTY. which placed virtue in the entire extirpation and an- nihilation of all our passions, were the real foundation of this licentious system. It was easy for Dr. Mande- ville to prove, first, that this entire conquest never ac- tually took place among men ; and, secondly, that, if it was to take place universally, it would be pernicious to society, by putting an end to all commerce and indus- ti-y, and, in a manner, to the whole business of human life. By the first of these propositions he seemed to prove that there was no real virtue, and that what pre- tended to be such was a mere cheat and imposition upon mankind ; and by the second, that private vices were public benefits, since without them no society could prosper or flourish." * VI. On the General Impression and Practical Ten- dency of such Speculations.] I shall not enter into a more particular examination. of Mandeville's doctrines. I cannot, however, leave the subject without observing, that the impression which the author's writings produce on the mind affords a sufficient refutation of his princi- ples. It was considered by Cicero as a strong pre- sumption against the system of Epicurus, that "it breathed nothing generous or noble," nihil nioffnificum, nihil generosum sapil ; and the same presumption will be found to apply, with tenfold force, to that theory which has been now under our discussion. If there be no real distinction between virtue and vice, — if the account given by Mandeville of the constitution of our nature be a just one, — why do his reasonings render us dissatisfied with our own characters, or inspire us with a detestation and contempt for mankind ? Why do we turn with pleasure from the dark and uncomfort- able prospects which he presents to us, to the delight- ful and elevating views of human nature which are ex- hibited in those philosophical systems which he attempts to explode ? It will be said, perhaps, that all this arises from pride or vanity. When we read Mandeville, we " Tlmry of Moral Sentiments, Part VII. Sect. U. Chap. IV. MANDBVILLE. 169 are ashamed of the species to which we belong ; while, on the contrary, our pride is gratified by those sublime but fallacious descriptions of disinterested virtue, with which Ihc v.'cakness or hypocrisy of some popular writ- ers has llatlered the moral enthusiasm of the multi- tude. But if Mandevillc's account of our natnre be just, whence is it that we come to have an idea of one class of qualities as more excellent and meritorious than an- other ? Why do we consider pride or vanity as a less worthy motive for our conduct than disinterested pa- triotism or friendship, or a determined adherence to what we believe to be our duty ? Why does human nature appear to us less amiable in his writings than in the writings of Addison? or whence the origin of those opposite sentiments which the very names of Addison tvnd of Mandeville inspire? We shall admit the fact with respect to the actual depravity of man to be as he states it; but does not the impression his system leaves on the mind demonstrate that we are at least formed with the love and admiration of moral excellence, and that virtue was intended to be the law of our conduct? The question concerning the actual attainments of man must not be confounded with the question concerning the reality of rnoral distinctions. If Mandeville is suc- cessful in establishing his doctrine on the first of these points, tiic^ dissatisfaction his conclusions leave on the mind is sufficient to overturn his doctrine witli respect to the latter. The remarlc of La Rochefoucauld, that " hypocrisy itself is a homage which vice renders to vir- tue," involves a satisfactory reply to all the arguments that have ever been drawn from the prevailing corrup- tioji of manliind against the moral constitution of hu- man jiature. It is the capital defect of this system to confound to- gether the two c[mstions I have just stated, and to sub- stitute a satire on vice and folly instead of a philosoph- ical account of those moral principles which form an essential part of our frame. That there is a great deal of truth mixed with the sophistry it contains, 1 am ready to acknowledge ; and if the author's remarks had been 15 170 THE MORAL FACULTY. thrown into the form of satires, many of them might have been useful to the world, by the light they throw on human character, and by the assistance which indi- viduals may derive from them in examining their own motives of action. Some apology might have been made, in this case, for the colorings which the author's facts have borrowed from his imagination. The object of the satirist is to reform ; and for this purpose it may sometimes be of use to exaggerate the prevailing vices and follies of the time, in order to contrast more strong- ly what mankind are with what they mig-ht and ovght to be. But the satirist who wishes well to his species, while he indulges his indignation against prevailing cor- ruptions, will recollect, that, if his censures are just, they presuppose the reality of moral distinctions ; and while he laments the depravity of the race, and chastises the follies and vices of individuals, he- will reverence moral- ity as the Divine law, and those essential principles of the human frame which bear the manifest signature of the Divine workmanship. To attempt to depreciate these can never' answer a good purpose. On the con- trary, it has a tendency to fill the minds of good men with a desponding skepticism, and to stifle every gener- ous and active exertion ; ,and if it does not actually in- crease the depravity of the world, it tends at least to strengthen the effrontery of vice, and to expose the wiser and better part of mankind to the impertinent raillery of fools and profligates.* * As the direct influence of the writings of La Roehefoneauld and Man- deville has passed away for the most part, I liave taken the lilierty slightly to abridge what was said of them in the text, in order to make room for some acconnt of a more distinguished moralist of the selfish school, Jeremy Bentham. What relates to Bentham himself is taken from Morell's Ifcio of Speculative PkUosophj in the Nineteenth Century, Chap. IV. ; what relates to his followers is taken from Mackintosh's Progress of Ethical Philosoplii/, Sect. VI. — Ed. BENTHAM. 171 Appendix to Chapter IL bentham and his followers. I. Bent/lam's Ethical Writings and Doctrines.] Jeremy Bentham was born in London, in the year 1748, and at a very early age became a graduate of the University of Oxford. Whilst there, he directed his attention to the study of law and the cognate branch of ethics, and during the last year of his stay in that city became an ardent admirer and investigator of the principle of utili- ty, chiefly from reading Dr. Priestley's Essay vpon Gov- ernment. In 1776 he published a Fragment on Govern- ment^ and in 1789 appeared his grand work, entitled Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. The moral system which Bentham advocated in this latter work, and which he expanded more and more during a long and laborious life, at length came fort^j, in the year 1834, in its most complete, and at the same time most popular form, as a posthumous production, edited by Dr. Bowring, under the title of Deontology ; or the Science of Morality. The principles advocated under the name of deontol- ogy nxay be easily explained. The whole system takes its rise from the consideration that man is capable of pleasures and pains, and that, from the calculation of these, all moral action proceeds. On this theory, good is a word synonymous with pleasure, evil synonymous with pain, and all happiness consists in the possession of the one, and the absence of the other. Give me, says the utilitarian teacher, give me the human sensi- bilities, — joy and grief, pain and pleasure, and I will create a moral world. Pleasure and pain, then, the basis of our moral nature, are to be estimated accord- ing to their magnitude and extent y magnitude, refen-ing to their intensity and duration ; extent, depending on the number of persons who are affected by them. It is in the proper balancing of these, asserts Bentham, that all morality consists, and beyond this the words virtue and vice are emptiness and folly. 172 THE MORAL FACULTY. Pleasure or pain, however, may arise from two sources ; it may arise from considerations affecting oiirsclves, or it may arise from the contemplation of others, the former being purely of a selfish nature, the latter being sympathetic. Hence originates a twofold division of virtue into prudence and effective benevo- lence, — both of them, however, alike having their ground in the pleasure we personally derive from their exercise. Prudence, again, is of two kinds, that which respects ourselves, which our author terms self-rea^ard- ing prudence ; and that which respects others, ■which he terms exlra-regarding prudence. Effective benevo- lence, also, is twofold, ;>osi^jVe and negative; the busi- ness of the former bemg to augment pleasure by volun- tary exertion, that of the latter being to do the same by abstaining from action. Virtue, says Bentham, when separated from the pursuit of happiness, is absolutely nothing ; and, accordingly, it is termed by him a ficti- tious entity. Inasmuch, also, as no one is supposed to have any motive for action different from the pursuit of pleasure or the avoidance of pain, we have the deonto- logical doctrine educed, that every motive is abstractedly good, and that evil has to do with nothing but our ac- tions or dispositions. In a word, Ave are to imagine,, that 'man has originally no moral sentiment w^hatever, that he has no idea of one thing being right and another wrong, that all actions are to him in this respect abso-. lutely alike, and that the conception of virtue, as well as the rules of morality, are all the product of experi- ence, teaching us what actions produce happiness, and what suffering. Such is the moral system which is aptly enough termed the greatest-happiness principle, and such the virtue which is correctly expressed as the art of maximizing ovr enjoijment. The style of the work from wliich I have made the above analysis is popular, witty, and somewhat amus- ing, but becomes at length tedious from repetition and tautology. It abounds in biting sarcasm against what is termed the dogmatism and '■'■ ipse-dixilism" of most other moralists ; but, what is remarkable, is itself at the same time one of the most striking instances of reiter- BENTHAM. - 173 ated assertion that is to be found among all the ethical writings of the present century.* * A few selections will best illustrate Bentham's light and irreverent tone. Thus in Part I. Cliap. II. : — " Tlie talisman of arrogance, indo- lenee, and ignorance is to be found in a single word, an autlioritalive im- postuie, which in these pages it will be frequently necessai-y to unveil. It is tlie word ought, — oiig/it or ought not, as circumstances maybe. In de- ciding ' You ought to do this, — You ought not to do it,' is not every ques- tion of morals set at rest? If the word he admissible at all, it 'ought' to be banished from the vocabulary of morals. There is anotlier \#rd which has a talismanic virtue, too, and which might be wielded to destroy many fatal and fallacious positions. ' You ought,' — ' You ought not,' says the dogmatist. ' Whg 1 ' retorts the inquirer, — ' Why % ' To say ' You ought ' is easy in the extreme. To stand the searching peneti-ation of a Why ? is not so easy. ' W}i]j ought W ' Because you ought,' is the not unfre- quent reply ; on which the Why ? comes back again with the added ad- vantage of having obtained a victory." A morality fj'om the vocabulary of which the word " ought" is to be banished ! It is hardly necessary to observe that the whole force of Bentham's " Why ■? " depends on his de- termination to accept no answer which is not satisfactory according to his theory of utilitarianism, — of course palpably illogical, as it begs the whole question. Again in Chapter III. : — " The summam bonum, — the sovereign good, — what \a it ? The philosopher's stone that converts all metals into gold, — the balm Hygeian that cures all manner of diseases. It is this thing, and that thing, and the other thing ; it is any thing but pleasure ; it is the Irish- man's apple-pie made of nothing but quinces." He then amuses himself by going a little more into detail with the various answers which philoso- phers and divines have made to the question proposed above. A single spe<:imen will suffice. " But we are still at sea, and another set cry out, ' The habit of virtue ' ; the habit of virtue is the summum bonnm : either this is the jewel itself, or the casket in which it is^found. Lie all your life long in your bed with the rheumatism in your loins, the stone in your blad- der, and the gout in your feet: have hut the habit of virtue, and you have the summum bonuin. Much good maij it do yoii." Once more, in Chapter IV. : — " The moral sense, say some, prompts to generosity; but does it determine what is generous? It prompts to justice ; but does it determine what is just ? It can decide no controversy ; it can reconcile no diifercnce. Introduce a modern partisan of the moral sense, and an ancient Greek, and ask each of them whether actions deemed blameless in ancient days, but respecting which opinions have now Under- gone great change, ought to be tolerated in a community. ' By no means,' says the modern ; 'as my moral sense abhors them, therefore they ought not.' ' But mine,' says the ancient, ' approves of them ; therefore they ought.' And there, if the modern keep his principles and his temper, the matter must end between them. Upon the ground of moral sense there is no going one jot further ; and the result is, that the actions in question are at once laudable and detestable. The modem, then, as probably he will keep neither his principles nor his temper, says to the ancient, ' Your moral sense is nothing to the purpose ; yours is corrupt, abominable, de- testable ; all nations cry out against you.' ' No such thing,' replies the ancient ; ' and if they did, it would be nothing to the purpose ; our business 15* 174 THE MORAL FACULTY. II. Objections to Bentliam's Si/stem.] In offering some remarks upon Bentbam's philosophy, we must state distinctly, that we leave entirely out of the ques- tion his valuable labors in the department of jurispru- dence, and rei'er simply to the principles of his moral theory. And here we would caution every ethical stu- dent against imagining, that he will find all the origi- nality which is claimed for the deontologist by himself and hisjfiore ardent admirers. To speak of Bentham's "having found out the true psychological law of om- nature, as Newton discovered that of the material uni- verse," is not only metaphysically false, but, even allow- ing its philosophical accuracy, is historicallij untrue. To say nothing of the Epicureans of ancient times, and more recently of Hobbes, we might ' point out many writers who have given far more than passing al- lusions to the very same doctrine as that for which Bentham is so highly extolled, although they may not have expanded it so fully, or applied it so extensively, as was done in the case before us.* The professed supporters of utility, again, such as Hume and Paley, proceeded virtually upon the very same principle; and even if we pass over these, yet still we might refer to was to inquire, not what people Ihiiilc, but what they ovght to Ihinlc.' There- upon the modern kicks the ancient, or spits in his face i or. if he is strong enough, throws him behind the fire. One can think of no other method, tliat is at once natural and consistent, of continuini; the debate." It was Mr. Bentham's pleasure to ]jcrsist in supposing that aJl his op- ponents, a few asi'eiics excepted, could be classed under the liead of be- lievers in a moral smse. A large proportion of them, as we shall soon see, hold that the moral faculty pertains to the rational, and tiot to the siiisillve, element in human nature That the moral fa<-ulty should make mistakes, and aftei-wards correct them, does not disprove its existence as a natural endowment of ninn, or its legitimate authority. If it did, we might dis- prove the existence and authority of the knowing or cognitive faculty in the same way; for that also makes mistakes, and afterwards corrects them. Because we say that children and savages have a conscience, we do not mean that they have one in the same stage of development, and conse- quently we do not mean that its decisions are as clear, or as coirect, as in the case of the properly educated. — Ed. * The only ditference between Epicurus or Hobbes on the one side, and Bentham on the other, is, that the former drew their principles at once from human nature metaphysically considered, — while the latter, gave no theory of man generally, but laid down his moral axioms as ultimate facts. '^ BEXTHAM. 175 Gay's Preface to Archbishop King On the Origin of Ei'il, to the writings of Priestley, to the Political Justice of Godwin, and to many of the French moralists, for il- lustrations of the very same theory, which Bentham only somewhat more perseveringly elaborated. The great- est-happiness principle is, in fact, utilitarianism in one of its many different phases ; and accordingly the ob- jections which we have already urged against that doc- trine apply with equal force to the one now before us. As the question, however, is of some importance, -we shrill specify a few other objections, which apply more directly to the utilitarian system, as held by the advo- cates of deontology ; and, 1. There is in these writers a perpetual habit of con- founding the cause of virtuous action with the effect. We have it reiterated again and again, as an unan- swerable argument, that there must be a selfish pleas- ure experienced whenever we act on virtuous principles: for, if our action terminates in ourselves, it must arise from the prospect of our own happiness and advantage; if, on the other hand, we act for the welfare of others, still, we are told, it is only for the satisfaction of our own impulses that wfe seek to benefit them. No\v, that there is pleasure attached to moral action, whether it be self-'seeidng or extra-seeking, we readily admit ; but this is far from giving us a proof that such action springs from any anticipation of the pleasure ive hope to obtain. It is a pleasure to a strong man to exercise his limbs; but this is no evidence that he cannot have any other motive than this for exercising them. To a man devoted to business, it is a pleasure to be perpetu- ally absorbed in it; but still his activity may have many other grounds of excitement besides that one. Prove as you may, that pleasure actually accompanies, and'even that we expect it to accompany, the practice of every virtue, the point is still far from being settled that there is no other spring of virtuous action in exist- ence. The Deity, assuredly, may have given us a moral law, may have engraved it on our own minds, and placed it far beyond all the chances of human cai- 176 THE MORAL FACULTY. culation ; and yet may have attached pleasure to the obedience of it as a mark of his approval, and as a re- ward for our fidelity. The mere fact, therefore, that we always look for happiness to accompany virtuous ac- tion, does not at all prove that happiness is the ground of its moral excellence. This is confirmed when we consider, 2. That, upon investigating the moral phenonena of our minds, we find a class of affections which rise in their real wortli just in proportion to their disinterested- ness. If personal pleasure were the ground of virtue, then every affection ought to be esteemed higher in the scale of morality in proportion as it tends more direct- ly to self as its object. Just the contrary is the case. The more our own individual interests are sacrificed in the pursuit of another's welfare, the higher rises the scale of virtue from which such conduct proceeds. If it be said that we sacrifice our own interests, because the pleasure of satisfying our benevolent feelings more than counterbalances the loss we sustain, we reply, that this only exhibits the vast strength of our purely disinterested affections, and affords no proof that, be- cause they give us pleasure in their exercise, therefore they must be selfish in their origin. Only show in one single instance that the direct end of an action is for the sake of another to the sacrifice of ourselves, and the fact that we have a moral satisfaction in its per- formance does not in the slightest degree shake its pure- ly unselfish character. 3. That there are certain fixed relations between man's moral sensibilities and outward actions is a fact resting upon the evidence of our consciousness; and it is to these eternal relations that we direct our inquiries, when we seek to lay the groundwork of a moral phi- losophy. Very different, however, is our employment when we are merely engaged in calculating for our fu- ture happiness, with pleasures and pains as our ciphers. What is a pleasure to one man is often a pain to another ; that which offers to me satisfaction presents, perhaps, a prospect of naught but misery to you ; so BENTHAM. 177 that moral relations, on this principle, must be as un- certain and variable as are the temperaments or idiosyn- crasies of individual minds. There needs to be, on the deontological system, a separate moral scale lor every man ; nay, we ought all to revise our own moral prin- ciples every year or two, to see whether that which was a pleasure to us some time ago may not now have be- come an object of dissatisfaction : whether, therefore, that which was virtue has not now become vice. Our reason, we contend, in opposition to this, forces us to form certain primary and fundamental moral judgments, just as much as it necessitates the existence of our pri- mary beliefs with regard to the external world, or to tbe fact of an exertion of power in the production of every effect, or to the axioms which lie at the foundation of all mathematical reasoning. It is just as' impossible for me practically to deny the obligation of justice, as it is to deny that the world exists, or that a whole is greater than a part. The one as well as the other rests upon the primary and undeniable facts of our own un- changeable consciousness, — facts which, though they may be disputed in theory, can never be denied in prac- tice. That a philosophical dreamer may run his head against the wall on the score of his idealism, we do not dispute ; nor do we doubt but that, in the case of mor- al obliquity, where the consequences of the folly are not so immediate, men may be iound to reject the fun- damental " axioms of moral obligation; but in the healthy understandings of the mass of mankind, the one judgment is just as plainly developed as the other. 4. There is a secret peLitio principii at the very foun- dation of all utilitarian reasoning like that of Bentham. Every man, it is affirmed, oiigliL to seek the greatest happiness of the greatest number, as the fundamental princi|)le of his actions in the world., But why ovglit he to do so? On what ground can it be shown, that I am bound to seek the welfare of myself or my fel- low-creatures, if there is no such thing as moral obli- gation ? If it pleases me more to inflict misery upon mankind, why am I not just as virtuous an agent in 178 THE MORAL FACULTY. doing so, as if I please myself by producing their hap- piness ? The greatest-happiness principle itself must, in fact, rest upon the pedestal of moral obligation, oth- erwise there is no means of enforcing it as the true principle of action, either in our social or our political relations. Take away that firm resting-place which is afforded by the notion of duty, and expressed in the word ought, and we may sink from one position down to another, without ever reaching a solid basis on which we may plant our feet, and lay the first stone of a mor- al superstructure. That this is really the case is half acknowledged by the followers of Bentham, who are now visibly shrinking from the extreme view he has ta- ken of utilitarianism, and seeking to include the idea of moral approbation, in order to give their doctrine some degree of strength and consistency. 5. Into the political conagriuences of this system we shall not allow ourselves I'c enter at any length. One thing, however, there is, of which we would remind those who hold up the excellence ^of Bentham's politi- cal writings as a proof of the soundness of his ethical system ; we mean the fact that Hobbes, with a logic equally, if not more severe, deduced from the very same fundamental principles the propriety of all gov- ernment being grounded on absolute despotism, as the form best suited to the wants of human nature. That Bentham was so successful on the subject of jurispru- dence arose, we consider, from his giving up the strict view of the selfish system with which he started, and following the dictates of common sense and of a be- nevolence which were more consonant with his own disposition than they were with his moral theory.* Moreover, there is a fundamental distinction between the principles of legislation and those of private moral- ity, which should never be lost sight of. The former principles suppose the existence of the latter, and must " Or rather, from his confounding the rule of general interest with that of personal- interest; bat this, as .Jouffroy has sliown, Introdaciion to Ethics^ Lecture XIV., involves the abandonment of the principle on which his system is founded. — Ed. BENTHAM. 179 proceed in strict accordance with them, whether it ap- pear a matter of policy to do so or not. The object of the jurist is, simply to take men with their moral feel- ings as they are, already fixed and determined, and so to direct their actions as to bring about the greatest welfare of the community. Morality says. Fiat justi- tia mat. cwluvi; jurisprudence points out in what loay justice is to be done, so as to tend to the happiness of the whole nation. The one gives the absolute rule of action, the other only directs the details for social pur- poses. Moral law is immediately from God ; political law, though springing from moral principles, is an adaptation of man; — the one is a code written upon the tablet of the human heart; the other, a code writ- ten in the statute-book of the empire, conformable, in- deed, to moral law, but compiled for social utility. To morality, as a science, the utilitarian ground is entirely destructive, altering its universal and necessary aspect; in politics, utility, directed by moral precept, must be a chief element in every enactment. Bentham, looking at the subject with the eye of a jurist, by degrees be- came blind to every thing but the utilitarian element, — an error which, while only partially dangerous in legis- lation, is to the moralist fatal and deceptive from the very first step. That Bentham was a great man, a courageous man, and in many respects a benevolent man, we believe all must be ready to admit; still, we cannot but think that he neither read enough to disabuse his mind of many a cherished notion, which a wider range of invesHga- tion would have exploded, nor ever cultivated enough that steady, reflective habit of mind which evolves truth from the observation of our inward consciousness, and reduces, by a close analysis, the admitted facts of human nature to their primary origin. With unexam- pled patience, he developed the influence of pleasure and pain upon human actions ; but a deeper philosophy would have pointed out, that these are but the accom- paniments of virtue, while the law and the imperative to its obedience come from a surer and a far more ex- alted source. . 180 THE MORAL FACULTY. III. General Objection to the Followers of Bentham.'] The followers of Mr. Bentham have carried to an un- usual extent the prevalent fault of the more modern advocates of utility, who have dwelt so exclusively oa the outward advantages of virtue as to have lost sight of the delight which is a part of virtuous feeling, and of the beneficial influence of good actions upon the frame of the mind. " Benevolence towards others," says Mr. Mill, " pro- duces a return of benevolence from them." * The fact is true, and ought to be stated. But how unimportant is it in comparison with that which is passed over in silence, — the pleasure of the afl'ection itself, which, if it could become lasting and intense, would convert the heart into a heaven ! No one who has ever felt kind- ness, if he could accurately recall his feelings, could hesitate about their infinite superiority. The cause of the general neglect of this consideration is, that it as only when a gratification is something distinct from a state of mind, that we can easily learn to consider it as a pleasure. Hence the great error respecting the affec- tions, where the inherent delight is not duly estimated, on account of that very peculiarity of being a part of a state of mind, which renders it unspeakably more valuable as independent of every thing without. The social affections are the only principles of human na- ture which have no direct pains. To have any of these desires is to be in a state of happiness. The malevo- lent passions have properly no pleasures ; for that at- tainment of their purpose which is improperly so called consists only in healing or assuaging the torture which * Analysis of the Human Mind, Chap. XXIIT. The .author of this work, James Mill, was born at Montrose, in Scotland, in 1773. and educated at Edinburgh, being destined for the church. He afterwards ch.mged his \ievvs, established himself in London in 1800, and soon became acquainted with Bentham. He published his Hhtory of Brit- ■ isli India in ISIS, which procured for him a place in the home establish- ment of the East India Compuny. He was also a large contributor to the ^iijtjiiriiient to the Enrijvlopu^dia liritaiinica, (aftenvards incorporated into the seventh edition of that work,) on subjects connected with politics and mor- als. Ho died at Kensington in 1836. John Stuart Mill, a living writer of eminence, is his sou. — Ei>. JAMES MILL. ISl envy, jealousy, and malice inflict on the malignant mind. It might with as much propriety be said that the toothache and the stone have pleasures, because their removal is followed by an agreeable feeling. These bodily disorders, indeed, are often cured by the process which removes the suffering; but the mental distempers of envy and revenge are nourished by every act of odious indulgence which for a moment suspends their pain. The same observation is appKcable to every virtuous disposition, though not so obviously as to the benevo- lent affections. That a brave man is, on the whole, far less exposed to danger than a coward, is not the . chief advantage of a courageous temper. Great dan- gers are rare; but the constant absence' of such pain- ful and mortifying sensations as those of fear, and the steady consciousness of superiority to what subdues ordinary men, are a perpetual source of inward enjoy- ment. No man who has ever been visited by a gleam of magnanimity can place any outward advantage of fortitude in comparison with the feeling of being al- ways able fearlessly to defend a righteous cause.* Even huniilily, in spite of first appearances, is a re- markable example. It has of late been unwarrantably used to signify that painful consciousness of inferiority which is the first stage of envy.f It is a term conse- crated in Christian ethics to dei\ote that disposition which, by inclining towards a modest estimate of our qualities, corrects the prevalent tendency of human na- ture to overvalue out merits and to overrate our claims. What can be a less doubtful or a much more consider- able blessing than this constant sedative, which soothes and composes the irritable passions of vanity and pride? • According to Cicero's definition of fortitude, " Virtus puc/nans p'o amiitute." The remains of the original sense of virtus, manhood, give a beauty and force to tliese expressions, wliicl! cannot be preserved in our lari'iuve. The G)ecli li/jerij and the German Tugend originally denoted streli(ith afterwards couraye, and at last virtue. But the hapj.y derivation of virtus from vir gives an energy to the phrase of Cicero, \Yliich illustrates the use of etymology in the hands of a skilful writer. t Ml-. Mill's Anali/sis of the Human Mmd, Chap. XXU. Sect. II. 16 182 THE MORAU, FACULTY. What is more conducive to lasting peace of mind than the consciousness of proficiency in that most deli- cate species of equity which, in the secret tribunal of conscience, labors to be impartial in the comparison of ourselves with others ? What can so perfectly as- sure us of the purity of our moral sense, as the habit of contemplating, not that excellence which we have reached, but that which is still to be pursued, — of not considering how far we may outrun others, but how far we are from the goal ? Those who have most inculcated the doctrine of utility have given another notable example of the very vulgar prejudice which treats the unseen as insignifi- cant. Tucker is the only one of them who occasion- ally considers that most important effect of human conduct which consists in its action on the frame of the mind, by fitting its faculties and sensibilities for their appointed purpose. A razor or a penknife would well enough cut cloth or meat; but if they were often so used, they would be entirely spoiled. The same sort of observation is much more strongly applicable to habitual dispositions, which, if they be spoiled, we have no certain means of replacing or mending. Whatever act, therefore, discomposes the moral machinery of mind, is more injurious to the welfare of the agent than most disasfers from without can be ; for the latter are commonly limited and temporary ; the evil of the former spreads through the whole of life. Health of mind, as well as of body, is not only productive in itself of a greater sum of enjoyment than arises from other sources, but is the only condition of our frame in which we are capable of receiving pleasure from without. Hence it appears how incredibly absurd it is to prefer, on grounds of calculation, a present in- terest to the preservation of those mental habits on which our well-being depends. When they are most moral, they may often prevent us from obtaining ad- vantages. It would be as absurd to desire to lower them for that reason, as it would be to weaken the body lest its strength should render it more liable to contagious dis- orders of rare occurrence. JAMES MILL. 183 It IS, on the other hand, impossible to combine the beneht of the general habit with the advantages of oc- casional deviation; for every such deviation either pro- duces remorse, or weakens the habit, and prepares the way for its gradual destruction. He who obtains a for- tune by the undetected forgery of a will, may indeed be honest in his other acts; but if he had such a scorn of fraud before as he must himself allow to be generally useful, he must sutler a severe punishment from con- trition ; and he will be haunted with the fears of one who has lost his own security for his good conduct. In all cases, if they be well examined, his loss by the dis- temper of his mental frame will outweigh the profits of his vice. By repeating the like observation on similar occa- sions, it will be manifest that the infirmity of recollec- tion, aggravated by the defects of language, gives an appearance of more selfishness to man than truly be- longs to his nature ; and that the effect of active agents upon the habitual state of mind, — one of the consid- erations to which the epithet " sentimental " has of late been applied in derision, — is really among the most serious and reasonable objects of moral philosophy. When the internal pleasures and pains w^hich accom- pany good and bad feelings, or rather form a part of them, and the internal advantages and disadvantages which folloiv good and bad actions, are sufficiently ■fconsidered, the comparative importance oi outward con- sequences will be more and more narrowed; so that the Stoical philosopher may be thought almost excusable for rejecting it altogether, were it not an indispensably necessEiry consideration for those in whom right habits of feeling are not sufficiently strong. They alone are happy, or even truly virtuous, who have little need of it. The later moralists who adopt the principle of utility have so misplaced it, that in their hands it has as gi-eat a tendency as any theoretical error can have to lessen the intrinsic pleasure of virtue, and to unfit our habit- ual feelings for being the most effectual inducements to good conduct. This is the natural tendency of a 18-J- THE MORAL FACULTY. discipline which brings utility too closely and frequent- ly into contact with action. By this habit, in its best state, an essentially weaker motive is gradually sub- stituted for others which must always be of more force. The frequent appeal to utility as the standard of action tends to introduce an uncertainty with respect to the conduct of other men, which would render all inter- course insupportable. It affords, also, so fair a disguise for seifish and malignant passions, as often to hide their nature from him who is their prey. Some taint of these mean and evil principles will at least creep in, and by their venom give an animation not its own to the cold desire of utility. The moralists who take an active part in those aHairs which often call out unamiable pas- sions, ought to guard with peculiar watchfulness against sdf-delusions. The sin that must most easily beset them is that of sliding from general to particular con- sequences, — that of trying single actions, instead of dispositions, habits, and rules, by the standard of utility, — that of authorizing too great a latitude for discretion and policy in moral conduct, — that of readily allowing excepti-ons to the most important rules, — that of too lenient a censure of the use of doubtful means when the end seems to them good, — and that of believing unphilosophically, as well as dangerously, that there can be any measure or scheme so useful to the world as the existence of men who would not do a base thing for any public advantage. It was said of Andrev/ ' Fletcher, " He would lose his life to serve his country, but would not do a base thing to save it." Let' those preachers of utility who suppose that such a man sac- rifices ends to means consider whether the scorn of base- ness be not akin to the contempt of danger, and whether a nation composed of such men would not be invinci- ble. But theoretical principles are counteracted by a thousand causes, which confine their mischief as well as circumscribe their benefits. Men are never so good or so bad as their opinions. All that can be with rea- son apprehended is, that they may always produce some part of their natural evil, and that the mischief will be ja.mes mill. 185 greatest among the many who seek excuses for these passions Anstippus found in the Socratic represenla- tion ot the union of virtue and happiness a pretext for sensuality ; and many Epicureans became voluptuaries in spite o( the example of their master, easily dropping by degrees the limitations by which he guarded his doctrines. In proportion as a man accustoms himself to be influenced by the utility of particular acts, with- out regard to rules, he approaches to the casuistry of the Jesuits and to the practical maxims of Ceesar Borgia. IV. Mr. MilVs Errors respecting' Government and Education.] Mr. Mill derives the whole theory of gov- ernment* from the single fact, that every man pursues his interest when he knows it ; which he assumes to be a sort of self-evident practical principle, if such a phrase be not contradictory. That a man's pursuing the in- terest of anotlier, or indeed any other object in nature,- is just as conceivable as that he should pursue his own interest, is a proposition which seems never to have oc- curred to this acute and ingenious writer. Nothing, however, can be more certain than its truth, if the term " interest " be employed in its proper sense of general well-being, which is the only acceptation in which it can serve the purpose of his arguments. If, indeed, the term be employed to denote the gratification of a predominant desire, his proposition is self-evident, but w^holly unserviceable in his argument ; for it is clear that individuals and multitudes often desire what they know to be most inconsistent with their general welfare. A nation, as much as an individual, and sometimes more, may not only mistake its interest, but, perceiving it clearly, may prefer the gratification of a strong pas- sion to it. 'The whole fabric of his political reasoning seems to be overthrown by this single observation ; and instead of attempting to explain the immense variety * Essay on Governwerit, in the Encyclbpcedta Bn'tnnnica, seventh edition. His contributions to that work have also been collected in an octavo vol- ume, and published separately. — Ed, 16* 1S6 THE MORAL FACULTY. of political facts by the simple principle of a contest of interests, we are reduced to the necessity of once more referring them to that variety of passions, habits, opin- ions, and prejudices, which we discover only by ex- perience. Mr. Mill's Essay on Education* affords another ex- ample of the inconvenience of leaping at once from the most general laws to a multiplicity of minute ap- pearances. Having assumed, or at least inferred from insufficient premises, that the intellectual and moral character is entirely formed by circumstances, he pro- ceeds, in the latter part of the essay, as if it were a necessary consequence of that doctrine, that we might easily afcquire the power of combining and directing circumstances in such a manner as to produce the best possible character. Without disputing for the present the theoretical proposition, let us consider what would be the reasonableness of similar expectations in a more easily intelligible case. The general theory of the winds is pretty well understood ; we know that they proceed from the rushing of air from those portions of the at- mosphere which are more condensed into those which are more rarefied ; but how great a chasm is there be- tween that simple law and the great variety of facts which experience teaches us respecting winds! The constant winds between the tropics are large and regu- lar enough to be in some measure capable of explana- tion ; but who can tell why, in variable climates, the wind blows to-day from the east, to-morrow from the west? Who can foretell what its shiftings and varia- tions are to be ? Who can account for a tempest on one day, and a .calm on another ? Even if we could foretell the irregular and infinite variations, how far might we not still be from the power of combining and guiding their causes? No man but the lunatic in the story of Rasselas ever dreamt that he could command the weather. The difficulty plainly consists in the multiplicity and minuteness of the circumstances which * In the Encyclopasdia Britannica, seventh edition. JAMES MILL. 187 act on the atmosphere. Are those which influence the formation of the human character likely to be less mi- nute and multiplied ? * * In reply to this criticism, and to other parts of the rolume from which it is taken, Mr. Mill puhlished anonymously, in 1835, an octavo volume, nnder the title of A Frarjmcnl on Mnrkintosh. On some points the defence is able and saccessful; but the effect of the whole is greatly impaired by t!ie vituperation, not to say scurrility, in which it abounds. After what has been said in the text, it is but justice to add, that the later followers or admirers of Benthain are not unable to see, or unwilling to ai-knowledge, his defects. A writer in the Wcslmin'ili'r Review, for July, 13.38, who begins by making the great hierophant of utilitariani.sm to be one of " the two great seminal minds of England in their age," expresses himself thus: — " Bentham's contem|it of all other schools of tliinkcrs, and his determination to create a philosophy wholly out of the m.aterials furnished by his own mind, and by minds like his own, were his first dis- qualifications as a philosopher. His second was the incompleteness of his own mind as a representative of universal human nature. In many of the most natural and strongest feelings of human nature he had no sympathy ; from many of its gravest experiences he was altogether cut off; and the faculty by which one mind understands a mind different from itself and thro'.vs itself into the feelings of that other mind, was denied him by his deficiency of imagination. . . , , , '• Bentham's knowledge of human nature is wholly empn-ical; and the empiricism of one who has had little experience He had neither in- ternal experience nor external ; the quiet, even tenor of his life and his healthiness of mind conspired to exclude him from both. He never knew prosperitv nor advcr-ity, passion nor satiety ; he never had even the ex- perience 'which sickness gives, -he lived from cluldhood to the n-e of ei-htv-flve in bovish health. He knew no dejection, no heaviness of heart. He never felt liife a sore and a weary burden He was a boy to tlie la.^u Self-consciousness, that demon of the men of gem us of our time, from AVordsworth to Byron, from Goethe to Chateaubriand, and to which t,„s ale owes most both of its cheerful and its mournful wisdon,, never wis awakened in him. How much of human nature slumbered in li.m he knpw not neither can we know. -, ■, p i 'tMs 'then, is our idea of Bentham. He wa. a'nan bo h of remarka- ble endowments for philosophy and of remarkable defieieneics for it , lit d bvond almost an v man f,5r dra.ving f;rom his fr';^^! ™",f ^^^'^^l , 'j S^rc^u^^iT!^— "nd^ii: hf -r^i^^^^ h'^;!:^ :^f:!n^rXta^^:^T:S^^^^ S-?^^|k«r^^^^r^ scale both of greatness and """"te'^^f^ nrobabh™"ien to Bentham." - this is the character which posterity will probablj assigu lu Ed. 188 MORAL PERCEPTIONS AND EMOTIONS. CHAPTER III. ANALYSIS OF OUR MORAL PERCEPTIONS AND EMOTIONS. I. Butler's Proofs of MarCs Moral Nature.] Before proceeding to this extensive and difficult subject, I shall quote a passage from Dr. Butler, in which he has com- bined together, and compressed into the compass of a few paragraphs, all the most important arguments in proof of the existence of the moral faculty which have been hitherto under our review. While this quotation serves as a summary of what has already been stated, it will, I hope, prepare us for entering on the following discussions with greater interest and a more enlightened curiosity. ~ " That which renders beings capable of moral gov- ernment is their having a moral nature, and moral fac- ulties of perception and of action. Brute creatures are impressed and actuated by various instincts and pro- pensities : so also are w^e. But, additional to this, we have a capacity for reflecting upon actions and charac- ters, and making them an object to our thought; and on doing this we naturally and unavoidably approve some actions, under the peculiar view of their being virtuous and of good desert, and disapprove others as vicious and of ill desert. That we have this moral ap- proving and disapproving faculty is certain from our ex- periencing it in ourselves, and recognizing it in each other. It appears from our exercising it unavoidably in the approbation and disapprobation even of feigned characters ; from the words right and wrong; odious and amiable, base and worthy, with many others of like sig- nification in all languages, applied to actions and char- acters ; from the many written systems of morals which suppose it, since it cannot be imagined that all these authors, throughout all these treatises, had absolutely no meaning at all to their words, or a meaning merely MORAL PERCEPTIONS AND EMOTIONS. 189 chimerical ; from our natural sense of gratitude, which miphes a d.stmction between merely bHng the'inst u- mentof good and intending it ; from the like distinc- xXh wIk""" '"'''■'' '''*'"'^" injury and mere harm, x^ Inch Hobbes says is peculiar to mankind, and between injury and just punishment, a distinction plainly natural, prior to the consideration of human laws. It is mani- est great part of common language and of common be- haviour over the world is formed upon supposition of such a moral faculty, whether called conscience, moral reason, moral sense, or Divine reason, — whether con- sidered as a perception of the understanding, or as a sentiment of the heart, or, which seems the truth, as in- cluding both. Nor is it at all doubtful, in the general, what course of action this faculty, or practical discerning power within us, approves, and what it disapproves. For, as much as it has been disputed wherein virtue con- sists, or whatever ground for doubt there may be about particulars, yet in general there is in reality a univer- sally acknowledged standard of it. It is that which all ages and all countries have made profession of in pub- lic, — it is that which every man you meet puts on the show of, — it is that which the primary and funda- mental laws of all civil constitutions over the face of the earth make it their business and endeavour to en- force the practice of upon mankind, namely, justice, veracity, and regard to common good." * Upon the various topics here suggested, a copious and instructive commentary might be written, but I think it better to leave them in the concise and impres- sive form in which they are proposed by the author. II. Theoretical and Practical Morals.] The science of ethics has been divided by modern writers into two parts ; the one comprehending the theory of morals, and the other its practical doctrines. The questions about which the former is employed are chiefly the two following. First, by what principle * Dissertation on the Nature of Virtue. 190 MORAL PERCEPTIONS AND EMOTIONS. 3f our constitution are we led to form the notion of Tioral distinctions, — whether by that faculty which oerceives the distinction between truth and falsehood n the other branches of human knowledge, or by a peculiar power of perception (called by some the moral sense) which is pleased with one set of qualities and iispleased with another ? Secondly, what is the proper object of moral approbation ? or, in other words, what is ;he common quality or qualities belonging to all the lifFerent modes of virtue ? Is it benevolence, or a ra- jonal self-love, or a disposition (resulting from the as- cendant of reason over passion) to act suitably to the lifferent relations in which we are placed? These two piestions seem to exhaust the whole theory of morals. The scope of the one- is to ascertain the origin of our noral ideas ; that of the other to refer the pljenoraena )f moral perception to their most simple and, general aws. The practical doctrines of morality comprehend all hose rules of conduct which profess to point out the )roper ends of human pursuit, and the most effectual neans of attaining them ; to which we may add, under he general title of adminicles, (if I may be allowed to )orrow a technical word of Lord Bacon's,) all those iterary compositions, whatever be their particular form, vhich have for their aim to fortify and animate our food dispositions by delineations of the beauty, of the iignity, or of the utility of virtue. I shall not inquire at present into the justness of this livision. I shall only observe that the words theory and ractice are not in this instance employed in their usual .cceptations. The theory of morals does not bear, for xample, the same relation to the practice of morals that he theory of geometry bears to practical geometry. In his last science all the practical rules are founded on heoretical principles previously established. But in the ormer science the practical rules are obvious to the apacities of all mankind, while the theoretical princi- iles form one of the most difficult subjects of discussion hat has ever exercised the ingenuity of metaphysicians. MORAL PERCEPTIOXS AND EMOTIONS. 191 vr^ntrf' ^°T^"' a complete acquaintance with the prauice of our duty does not presuppose any knowl- ^ lof t. /?*? '^T^ °^ "'°^^^^' ^'^^'* "°t therefore fol- owthat ialse theoretical notions upon this subject may not be attended with very pernicious consequences. vYy thing noble and elevated in human nature, on the side of the victim You excite all energetic sjjiriis against society and its artilicial laws. Thus the utility of punishment is itself grounded in its justice, instead of justice being grounded in its utili- ty. Punishment is the sanction of the law, and not its foundation. Mor- al order has its foundation not in punishment, hut punishment has its foun- dation in moral order. The idea of right and wrong is grounded only on itself, on reason which reveals it. It is the condition of the idea of merit and demerit which is the condition of the idea of reward and punishifient; and this latter is to the two former, but especially to the idea of right anti wrong, in the relation of the consequence to the principle." — Ed. MORAL OBLIGATION. 233 ulating our conduct, unless we are at pains to attend constaatly to the stafe of our own character, and to scrutinize with the most suspicions care the motives of our actions. Hence the importance of the precept so much recommended by the moralists of all ages, — " Know thyself." These observations may convince us still more of the truth of what I have elsewhere remarked with re- spect to sentimental reading, and of its total insufficien- cy for forming a virtuous character without many other precautions.* Where its effects are corrected by habits of business, and every instance of conduct is brovght home by the reader to himself, it may be a source of solid improvement; for although strong moral feelings do by no means alone constitute virtue, yet they add to the satisfaction we derive from the discharge of our duty, and they increase the interest we take in the prosperity of virtue in the world CHAPTER IV. OF MORAL OBLIGATION. I. Ground of Obligation.] According to some sys- tems, moral obligation is founded entirely on our belief that virtue is enjoined by the command of God. But how, it may be asked, does this belief impose an obli- gation ? Only one of two answers can be given. Either that there is a moral fitness that we should con- form our will to that of the Author and the Governor of the universe ; or that a rational self-love should in- duce us, from motives of prudence, to study every means of rendering ourselves acceptable to the Al- mighty Arbiter of happiness and misery. On the first supposition, we reason in a circle. We • PlUlosophy of the Human Mind, Part I. Chap. VIH. Sect. V. 20* 234 MORAL OBLIGATION. resolve our sense of moral obligation into our sense of religion, and the sense of religion into that of moral obligation. The other system, which makes virtue a mere matter of prudence, although not so obviously unsatisfactory, leads to consequences which sufficiently invalidate every argument in its favor. Among others, it leads us to conclude, — 1. That the disbelief of a future state ab- solves from all moral obligation, excepting in so far as we find virtue to be conducive to our present interest ; 2. That a being independently and completely happy cannot have any moral perceptions or any moral at- tributes. But, further, the notions of reward and punishment presuppose the notions of right and wrong. They are sanctions of virtue, or additional motives to the practice of it, but they suppose the existence of some previous obligation. In the last place, if moral obligation be constituted by a regard to our situation in another life, how shall the existence of a future state be proved, or even ren- dered probable," by the light of nature? or how shall we discover what conduct is acceptable to the Deity? The truth is, that the strongest presumption for such a state is deduced from our natural notions of right and wrong, of merit and demerit, and from a comparison between these and the general course of human affairs. It is absurd, therefore, to ask -loluj we are bound to practise virtue. The very notion of virtue implies the notion of obligation. Every being who is conscious of the distinction between right and wrong carries about with him a law which he is bound to observe, notwithstanding he may be in total ignorance of a future state. " What renders obnoxious to punish- rpent," as Dr. Butler has well remarked, " is not the foreknowledge of it, but merely the viojating a known obligation." Or (as Plato has expressed the same idea), TO }i£V op&bv vonQS eo'Ti ^aa-ikiKos* * Minos. " Bight itself is a royal law." MORAL OBLIGATION. 233 From what has been stated, it follows that the moral faculty, considered as an active power of the mind, differs essentially from all the others hitherto enumer- ated. The least violation of its authority fills us with remorse. On the contrary, the greater the sacrifices we make in obedience to its suggestions, the greater are our satisfaction and triumph. II. Butler on the Supremacy of Conscience.] The supreme authority of conscience, although beautifully described by many of the ancient moralists, was not sufficiently attended to by modern writers as a funda- mental principle in the science of ethics till the time of Dr. Butler. Too little stress is laid on it by Lord Shaftesbury ; and the omission is the chief defect in his system of morals. Shaftesbury's opinion, however, although he does not state it explicitly in his Inquiry, seems to have been precisely the same at bottom with that of Butler.* With respect to Dr. Buti^, I shall take this oppor- tunity of remarking, that in his sermons On Human Nature, in the Preface to his Sermons, and in a short Dissertation on Virtue annexed to his Analogy, he has, in my humble opinion, gone farther towards a just ex- planation of our moral constitution than any other mod- ern philosopher. Without aiming at the praise of nov- elty or of refinement, he has displayed singular penetra- tion and sagacity in availing himself of what was sound in former systems, and in supplying their defects. He is commonly considered as an uninteresting and obscure writer : but, for my own part, I never could perceive the slightest foundation for such a charge; though I am ready to grant that he pays little attention to the graces of composition, and that the construction of his sentences is frequently unskilful and unharraonious. As to the charge of obscurity, which he himself antici- pated from the nature of his subject, he has replied to it in the most satisfactory manner in the Preface al- * See his Advice to an Author, Part I. Sect. 11. 236 MORAL OBLIGATION. ready referred to. I think it proper to add, that I would by no means propose these sermons (which were originally preached before the learned Society of Lin- coln's Inn) as models for the pulpit. I consider them merely in the light of philosophical essays. In the same volume with them, however, are to be found some practical and characteristical discourses, which are pe- culiarly interesting and impressive, particularly the ser- mons On, Self-deceit, and On the Character of Balaam ; both of which evince an intimate acquaintance with the springs of human action, rarely found in union with speculative and philosophical powers of so high an order. The chief merit, at the same time, of JButler as an ethical writer, undoubtedly lies in what he has writ- ten on the supreme authority of conscience as the gov- erning principle of human conduct, — a doctrine which he has placed ih the strongest and happiest lights, and which, before his time, had been very little attended to by the moderns. It is sometimes alluded to by Lord Shaftesbury, but so very sjightly as almost to justify the censure which Butler bestows on this part of his writings. The scope of Butler's own reasonings may be easily conceived from the passage of Scripture which he has chosen as the groundwork of his argument: — "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by na- ture the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves." * " " Butler's writings," says Dr. Whewcll, " have been of the greatest value in preserving and restoring among us true views of morality ; but there are some expressions used by him, which, if not duly limited, may load his followers into mistakes. Thus, he sometimes speaks, not only of the anlhority, but of the supremaqj, of conscience. Now if by calling con- science supreme, it were meant that the principle so described is some- thing possessing sovereign and original authority over men's other springs of action, this principle would necessarily be the proper ground of rules of action; and all such rules must be derived ultimately from this principle. We should then, in order to frame rules of morality, or to decide any moral question, have to inquire how we con learn the decisions of conscience on such subiects. Conscience is our guide ; whore are we to learn what she says ^ Conscience, the law on the heart, is supreme over all laws ; how are we to read this law % Conscience is the test of right and wrong; but whose conscience'? for conscience belongs to a person. Butler's opponents MORAL OBLIGATION. 237 III. Other Authorities for the same Doctrine.] One of the clearest and most concise statements . of this doctrine that I have met with is in a sermon On the Nature and Obligation of Virtue, by Dr. Adams of Ox- ford; the justness of whose ideas on this subject make have constantly said, — ' You tell ns that conscience is the proper guide of action ; but whose conscience ? ours, or yours ? Our consciences point different ways ; — can both be right t And if not both, how are we to know which '! ' " These are familiar and popular arguments ; hut they appear to me to be decisive against all who ascribe to conscience a supremacy, in the proper scii-ic of the term ; — namely, a sovereign and ultimate auihority over all other principles of action, so that, when a decision is pronounced by con- science, there is no furllier reason to be rendered for it, nor any higher de- cision to be sought But I think it is very plain that this was not Butler's view, — that he did not thus* hold an original and independent faculty of conscience, whose decisions would form a permanent body of moral rules. I think that, with him, conscience was not a body of truths, but a process by which truth is to be obtained ; — a faculty, if you choose, but a faculty which must be trained and exercised in order to be used, — ■ which may be improved, instructed, and enlightened, — which may be blinded and perverted in individual men. Conscience is a faculty of man, as reason is a faculty; — a power l)y exercising which he may come to discern truths, not a repository of truths already collected in a vi^ible shape. -Conscience, indeed, is the reason^ employed about questions of right and wrong, and accompanied with the scvtiwents of a]>probation and condemnation which, by the nature of man, cling inextricably to bis ap- prehension of right and "wrong, 'ibis is the view that wc have been led to take of conscience. This is, as I conceive, Butler's view also. That hv con-.cicnce he does not mean any special indejiend^'nt faculty, distinct from the reason with its accompanying moral sentiments, is, I think, evident from the whole current of his language. He does not confine himself to the single term conscience, in his Jccount of the superior principle of our nature : on the contrary, he perpetually uses, for this term or with it, other terms, which give the same view of it which we have taken. He calls it 'reflection on conscience, an approbation of some principles or actions, and a disapprobation of others ' ; — and again, ' reflex approbation or dis- approbation.' All the phrases which he employs manifestly point at a principle or faculty, not by which we necessarily have, but by which we may (/(■/, a true knowledge of the course which we ought to take under any given circumstances. We are, to use another of his phrases, ' to act suit- ably to our whole nature, and especially to the higher and better part of our nature'; the constitntion of human nature being such that there is in it a higher and better part. This higher and better part tells us that in- justice is worse than pain ; but it does not tell us what acts are unju-t, except through the process of reflection. The notion of injustice is ncics- sai-ily the object of disapprobation to the conscience ; but to unfold this notion of injustice into detail, so as to see what special acts are included in it, — this is the office of the reflection, that is, of the reason." Lectures on Si/stematic Morality, Lecture VI. On the whole subject of conscience, see President Wayland's Elements of Moral Science, Book I. Chap. II. — Ed. 238 MORAL OBLIGATION. it the more surprising that his pupil and friend, Dr. Samuel. Johnson, should have erred So very widely from the truth. « Right" says he, " implies duty in its idea. To perceive an action to be right is to see a reason for doing it. in the action itself, abstracted from all othei considerations whatever; and this perception, this ac- knowledged rectitude in the action, is the very essence of obligation, that which commands the approbation and choice, and binds the conscience, of every rational human being." — « Nothing can bring us under an ob- ligation to do what appears to our moral judgment wrong. It may be supposed our interest to do this, but it cannot be supposed our duty. For, I ask, if some power, which we are unable to resist, should assume the command over us, and give us laws which are un- rigliteous and unjust, should we be under an obligation to obey him ? Should we not rather be obliged to shake off the yoke, and to resist such usurpation, if it were in our power ? However, then, we might be swayed by hope or fear, it is plain that we are under an obligation to right, which is antecedent, and in order and nature superior, to all other. Power may compel, interest may bribe, pleasure may persuade, but reason only can oblige. This is the only authority which ra- tional beings can own, and to which they owe obedi- ence." Dr. Clarke has expressed himself nearly to the same purpose. " The judgment and conscience of a man's own mind concerning the reasonableness and fitness of the thing is the truest and formallest obligation ; for whoever acts contrary to this sense and conscience of his own mind is ilecessarily self-condemned; and the greatest and strongest of all obligations is that which a man cannot break through without condemning him- self So far, therefore, as men are conscious of what is right and wrong, so far they are under an obligation to act accordingly." * * Discourse concerning the Unalterable OUigcuions of Natural Sdigion, Proposition I. 3. MORAL OBLIGATION. 239 I would not have quoted so many passages in illus- tration of a point which appears to myself so very obvious, if I had not been anxious to counteract the authority of some eminent writers who have lately espoused a very different system, by showing ho\v widely they have departed from the sound and phil- osophical views of their predecessors. I confess, too, I should have distrusted my own judgment, if, on a question so interesting to human h'appiness, and so open to examination, I had been led, by any theoretical refinements, to a conclusion which was not sanctioned by the concurrent sentiments of other impartial in- quirers. The fact, however, is, that, as this view of human nature is the most simple, so it is the most ancient, w^hich occurs in the history of moral science. It was the doctrine of the Pythagorean school, as ap- pears from a fragment of Theages, a Pythagorean writer, published in Gale's Opuscula Mythologica. It is also explained by Plato in some of his Dialogues, in v.rhich he compared the soul to a commonwealth, and reason to the council of state, which governs and directs the whole.* * " In Plato's Dialogues the question is repeatedly discussed, whether the rule of action for man be the pursuit of pleasure and gain, or the inter- nal hiirmonv of his nature. You will, many of you, recollect the lively and dramatic dialogue at the beginning of The Bepuhlic, in which the former of these opinions is asserted by one of the interlocutors, and the acute and decisive Scratic refutation wliich it encounters. Tou will recollect, too, the doctrine announced at the close of the fourth hook, as the result of the previous discussion. ' Virtue, then, as we are thus led to see, is a health and beauty and well-being of the soul. Vi<-e is a disease, and foulness, and infirmity.' And when the original question is, at this point of the argument, ag.ain asked, — whether it is better to be just or to be unjust, even if the injustice is to remain utiknoum by all and to meet no punishment, — the person to whom the argument is aildre,ssed, and who is, by this time, brought to a conviction of the truth of the doctrine which it is the object of the dialogue to fhculcate, says, ' Nay, Socrates, this question is now ridiculously superfluous.' And in the ninth book, the discu.ssion being really concluded, the speakers, playfully mimicking the practice of pronouncing, by the voice of a public crier, a solemn judgment upon the merit of a theatrical spectacle, agree to proclaim, — ' The son of Ari.-to gives his judgment that the most virtuous and just is also the most happy, and the wicked and unjust the most unhappy ' ; and further, ' that this is go, even if their deeds are hidden from all, men and gods. ' " — Whewell's Sys- tematic Morality, Lecture VI. 240 MORAL OBLIGATION. In the following passage from Cicero the same doc- trine is enforced in a manner peculiarly sublime and f-xprossive, or, as Lactantius says, pane divina voce. " Est quidem vera iex, recta ratio, naturas congrucns, diffusa in omnes, constans, sempiterna, quas vocet ad officium jubendo, vetando a fraude deterreat, quae tamen neque probos frustra jubet aut vetat, nee impro- bos jubendo aut vetando movet. Huic legi nee obro- gari fas est, neque derogari ex hac aliquid licet, neque tota abrogari potest. Nee vero aut per senatum aut per populum solvi hac lege possumus : neque est quEe- rendas explanator aut interpres ejus alius: nee erit alia Lex Romee, alia Athenis, alia nunc, alia posthac ; sed et omnes gentes, et omni tempore una lex et sempi- terna et immutabilis continebit ; unusque erit com- munis quasi magister et imperator omnium Deus. Ille legis hujus inventor, disceptator, lator. Cui qui non parebit, ipse se fugiet, ac, naturam hominis aspernatus, hoc ipso luet maximas pcenas, etiamsi csetera supplicia, quae pntantur, effugerit." * It is very justly observed by Mr. Smith (and I con- sider the remark as of the highest importance), that, " if the distinction pointed out in the foregoing quota- tions between the moral faculty and our other active powers be acknowledged, it is of the less consequence what particular theory we adopt concerning the origin of our moral ideas." And accordingly, though he resolves moral approbation ultimately into a. feeling of the mind, he nevertheless represents the supremacy of conscience * De Repvb:, Lib. III. 22. " There is a true law, a right reason, con- gruous to nature, pervading all minds, cojistant, eternal ; which calls to duty by its commands, and repels from wrong-doing by its prohibitions : and to the good does not command or forbid in vain, while the wicked are unmoved by its exhortations or its warnings. This law cannot be an- nulled, superseded, or ovenuled. No senate, no people, can loose us from it ; no jurist, no interpreter, can explain it away. It is not one law at Rome, another at Athens; one at pre-^ent, another at some future time; but one law, perpetual a:nd immutable, it extends to all nations and all times, the universal sovereign. Of this law the author and giver is God. Whoever disobeys it flies from himself, and by the wrong thus done to his own nature, even though he should escape every other form of punish- ment, incurs the heaviest penalty." MORAL OBLIGATION. ' 21 i as a principle which is equally essential to all the di:- ferent systems that have been proposed on the subjec',. '• Upon whatever we suppose our moral faculties to b-- founded," (I quote his own words,) "whether upon a certain moclilication of reason, upon an original instinct called a moral sense, or upon some other principle el our nature, it cannot be doubted that they are given ui for the direction of our conduct in .this life. They carry along with them the most evident badges of their authority, which denote that they were set up within us to be the supreme arbiters of all our actions ; to superintend all our senses, passions, and appetites; and to judge how far each of them was to be either indulg&d or restrained. Our moral faculties are by no means, as some have pretended, upon a level in this respect with the other faculties and appetites of our nature, endowed with no more right to restrain these last than these last are to restrain them. No other faculty or principle of action judges of any other. Love does not judge of resentment, nor resentment of love. Those two passions may be opposite to one another, but cannot, with any propriety, be said to approve or disapprove of one another. But it is the peculiar office of those faculties now under considera- tion to judge, to bestow censure or applause upon all the olher principles of our nature." " Since these, therefore," continues Mr. Smith, " were plainly intended to be the governing' principles of hu- man nature, the rules which they prescribe are to be regarded as the commands and laws of the Deity pro- mulgated by those vicegerents which he has thus set up within us. By acting according to their dictates we may be said, in some sense, to cooperate with the Deity, and to advance, as far as in our power, the plan of Providence. By acting otherwise, on the contrary, \ve seem to obstruct in some measure the scheme which the Author of Nature has established for the happiness and perfection of the world, and to declare ourselves in some measure the enemies df God. Hence we are naturally encouraged to hope for his extraordinary favor 21 242 MORAL, OBLIGATION. and reward in the one case, and to dread his vengeance and punishment in the other." * I have only to add further on this subject, at present, that the supreme authority of conscience is felt and tacitly acknowledged by the worst no less than by the best of men ; for even they who have thrown off all hypocrisy with the world are at pains to conceal their real character from their own eyes. No man ever, in a soliloquy or private meditation, avowed to himself that he was a villain ; nor do I believe that such a character as Joseph, in The School for Scandal, (who is introduced as reflecting coolly on his own knavery and baseness, without any uneasiness but what arises from the dread of detection,) ever existed in the world. Such men probably impose on themselves fully as much as they do upon others. Hence the various artifices of self- deceit which Butler has so well described in his dis- courses on that subject. It is said by St. Augustine, that at the delivery of that famous line of Terence, — " Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum pnto," — " I am a m^in, and feel an interest in all mankind," — the whole Roman theatre resounded with applause.-f We may venture to say that a similar sentiment, well pronounced by an actor, would at this day, in the most corrupt capital in Europe, be followed by a similar burst of sympathetic emotion. " Voyez h nos spectacles Quand on peint quclque trait de candeur, de bont6, Oil brille en tout son jour la tendre hQmanit6, Tous les ccEurs sont remplis d'unc volapt6 pure, Et c'cst la qu'on ontend le cri de la nature" t ' " On such occasions," as a late writer remarks, " though we may think meanly of the genius of the poet, it is impossible not to think, and to be happy in thinking, highly of the people; — the people whose * Th&iry of Moral Sentiments, Part III. Chap. V. t See a note on tlois liae in Coleman's translation Of Terence's S^f- Tonnentor. X Giesset, Le Michant. AUXILIARY PRINCIPLES. 243 opinions may often be folly, whose conduct may some- times be madness, but whose sentiments are almost always honorable and just ; — the people whom an author may delight with bombast, may amuse with tinsel, may divert with indecency, but whom he cannot mislead in principle, nor harden into inhumanity. It is only the mob in the side boxes, who, in the coldness of sell-interest, or the languor of outworn dissipation, can hear unmoved the sentiments of compassion, of gen- erosity, or of virtue." * CHAPTER V. OF CERTAIN PRINCIPLES WHICH COciPERATE WITH OUR MORAX POWERS IN THEIR INFLUENCE ON THE CONDUCT. In order to secure still more completely the good order of society, and to facilitate the acquisition of virtuous habits, nature has superadded to our moral constitution a variety of auxiliary principles, which sometimes give rise to a conduct agreeable to the rules of morality and highly useful to mankind, where the merit of the individual, considered as a moral agent, is inconsiderable. Hence some of them have been con- founded with our moral powers, or even supposed to be of themselves sufficient to account for the phe- nomena of moral perception, by authors whose views of human nature have not been sufficiently compre- hensive. The most important principles of this de- scription are, — 1st. A Regard to Character. 2d. Sym- pathy. 3d. The Sense of the Ridiculous. And 4th. Taste. The principle of Self-Love (which was treated of in a former section) cooperates very powerfully to the same purposes. * Mackenzie's Account of tJie German Theatre. Transactions of tho Koyal Society of Edinburgh, Vol. II. Part 11. p. 174. 244 AUXILIARY PEINCIPLES. Section I. OF DECENCY, OR A REGARD TO CHARACTER. Upon this subject I had formerly occasion to offer various remarks, in treating of the desire of esteem. But the view of it which I then took was extremely general, as I did not think it necessary for me to attend to the distinction between intellectual and moral quali- ties. There can be no doubt that a regard to the good opinion of our fellow-creatures has great influence in promoting our exertions to cultivate both the one and the other ; but what we are more particularly concerned to remark at present is the effept which this principle has in strengthening our virtuous habits, and in restrain- ing those passions which a sense of duty alone would not be sufficient to regulate. I have before observed, that the desire of esteem op- erates in children before they have a capacity of distin- guishing right from wrong; and that the former prin- ciple of action continues for a long time to be much more powerful than the latter. Hence it furnishes a most useful and effectual engine in the business of ed- ucation, more particularly by training us early to exer- tions of self-command and self-denial. It teaches us, for example, to restrain our appetites within those bounds which delicacy prescribes, and thus forms us to habits of moderation and temperance. And although our conduct, cannot be denominated virtuous so long as a regard to the opinion of others is our sole motive, yet the habits we thus acquire in infancy and childhood render it more easy for us to subject our passions to reason and conscience as we advance to maturity. The subject well deserves a more ample illustration; but at present it is sufficient to recall tnese remarks t?- the recollection of the reader. SYMPATHY. ADAM SMITH. 245 Section II. OF SYMPATHY. I. Nature and Functions of Sympathy.] That there is an exquisite pleasure annexed by the constitution of our nature to the sympathy or fellow-feeling of other men with our^oys and sorrows, and even with our opinions, tastes, and humors, is a fact obvious to vulgar observation. It is no less evident that we feel a dispo- sition to accommodate the state of our own minds to that of our companions, wherever we feel a benevolent affection towards them, and that this accommodating temper is in proportion to the strength of our affection. In such cases sympathy would appear to be grafted on benevolence ; and perhaps it might be found, on an accurate examination, that the greater part of the pleas- ure which sympathy yields is resolvable into that which arises from the exercise of kindness, and from the con- sciousness of being beloved. II. Adam SmilKs Theory.] The phenomena gener- ally referred to sympathy have appeared to Mr. Smith so important, and so curiously connected, that he has been led to attempt an explanation from this single principle of all the phenomena of moral perception. In this attempt, however, (not to mention the vague use which he occasionally makes of the term,) he has plainly been misled, like many eminent philosophers before him, by an excessive love of simplicity ; and has mistaken a very subordinate principle in our moral constitution (or rather a principle superadded to our moral constitution as an auxiliary to the sense of duty) lor that faculty which distinguishes right from wrong, and which (by what name soever we may choose to call it) recurs to us constantly in all our ethical disqui- sitions, as an ultimate fact in the nature of man. I shall take this opportunity of offering a few remarks on this most ingenious and beautiful theory, in the 21* 246 AUXILIARY PRINCIPLES. course of which I shall have occasion to state all that I think necessary to observe concerning the place which sympathy seems to me really to occupy in our moral constitution. In stating these remarks, I would be un- derstood to express myself with all the respect and ven- eration due to the talents and virtues of a writer, whose friendship I regard as one of the most fortunate inci- dents of my life, but, at the same time, with that en- tiro freedom which the importance of the subject de- mands, and which I know that his candid and liberal mind would have approved. In addition to the incidental strictures which I have already hazarded on Mr. Smith's theory, I have yet to state two objections of a more general nature, to which it appears to me to be obviously liable. But before I proceed to these objections, it is necessary for me to premise (which I shall- do in Mr. Smith's words) a re- mark which I have not hitherto had occasion to men- tion, and which may be justly regarded as one of the most characteristical principles of his system. " Wpre it possible," says he, "that a human creature could grow up to manhood in some solitary place, with- out any communication with his own species, he could no more think of his own character, of the propriety or demerit of his own sentiments and conduct, of the beauty or deformity of his own mind, than of the beau- ty or deformity of his own face. All these are objects which he cannot easily see, which naturally he does not look at, and with regard to which he is provided with no mirror which can present them to his view. Bring him into society, and he is immediately provided with the min-or which he wanted before. It is placed in the countenance and behaviour of those he lives with, which always mark when they enter into and when they dis- approve of his sentiments, and it is here that he first views the propriety and impropriety of his own passions, the beauty and deformity of his own mind." * * Than% author in pla- cing the perception of right and wrong in sentiment or feeling, ultimately and simply. Polybius, on the con- trary, maintains, with Aristotle, that these notions arise from reason or intellect operating on affection or appe- tite ; or, in other words, that the moral faculty is a compound, and may be resolved into two simpler prin- ciples of the mind." f Thrf only expression I object to in the preceding sentences is the phrase his author, which has the appear- ance of insinuating a charge of plagiarism against Mr. Smith ; — a charge which, I am confident, he did not deserve, and to which the above extract does not, in my opinion, afford any plausible color. It exhibits, indeed, an instance of a curious coincidence between two phi- losophers in their views of the same subjpct, and as such I have no doubt that Mr. Smith himself would have remarked it, had it occurred to his memory when he was writing his booif. Of such accidental coinci- dences between different minds, examples present them- selves every day to those who, after having drawn from their internal resources all the lights they could supply on a particular question, have the curiosity to compare their own conclusions with those of their pre- decessors. And it is extremely worthy of observation, that, in proportion as any conclusion approaches to the truth, the number of previous approximations to it may be reasonably expected to be multiplied. In the instance before us, however, the question about originality is of little or no moment, for the pe- • Lib. VI. Cap. VI., Hampton's translation. t Gillies's Aristot. Ethics, Book IlL Chap. IV., note. 22* 258 AUXILIARY PRINCIPLES. culiar merit, of Mr. Smith's work does not lie in his general principle, but in the skilful use he has made of it to give a systematical arrangement to the most im- portant discussions and doctrines of ethics. In this point of view, the Theory of Moral Sentiments may be justly regarded; as one of the most original efforts of the human mind in that branch of science to which it relates; and e^en if we were to suppose that it was first suggested to the author by a remark of which the world had been in possession for two thousand years before, this very circumstance would only reflect a stronger lustre on the novelty of his design, and on the invention and taste displayed in its execution. In the same work I have observed, that, " in studying the connection and filiation of successive theories, when we are at a loss in any instance for a Iftik to complete the continuity of philosophical speculation, it seems much more reasonable to search for it in the sys- tems of the immediately preceding period, and in the inquiries which then occupied the public attention, than in detached sentences, or accidental expressions glea ned from the relics of distant ages. It is thus only that we can hope to seize the precise point of view in which an author's subject first presented itself to his attention, and to account to our own satisfaction, from the par- ticular aspect under which he saw it, for the subsequent direction which was given to his curiosity. In follow- ing such a plan, our object is not to detect plagiarisms, which we suppose men of genius to have intenlionally concealed, but to fill up an apparent chasm in the his- tory of science, by laying hold of the thread which in- sensibly guided the mind from one station to another." Upon these principles, our attention is naturally direct- ed, on the present occasion, to the inquiries of Dr. But- ler, in preference to those of any other author, ancient or modern. At the time when Mr. Srnith began his literary career, Butler unquestionably stood highest among the ethical writers of England ; and his works appear to have produced a still deeper and more last- ing impression in Scotland than in the other part of the . SYMPATHY. ADAM SMITH. 259 island. Of the esteem in which tJiey were held by Lord Kames and Mr. Hume, satisiactory documents remain in their published letters; nor were his writings less likely to attract the notice of Mr. Smith, in conse- quence of the pointed and unanswerable objections which they contain to some of the favorite opinions o£ his predecessor. Dr. Hutcheson. VI. Butler's Views on this Subject.] The probability of this conjecture is confirmed by the obvious and easy transition which connects the theory of sympathy with Butler's train of thinking in his Sermon On Self-deceit. In order to free the mind from the influence of its arti- fices, experience gradually teaches us (as Butler has excellently shown), either to recollect the judgments we have formerly passed in similar circumstances on the conduct of others, or to state cases to ourselves, in which we and all our personal concerns are left entirely out of the question. Hence it was not an unnatural inference, on the first aspect of the fact^ that our only ideas of right and wrong, with respect to our own con- duct, are derived from our sentiments with respect to the conduct of others. This, accordingly (as we have already seen), is the distinguishing principle of Mr. Smith's theory. I have formerly referred to a note in Butler's fifth Sermon, in which he has exposed the futility of Hobbes's definition of pity. In the same note, it is re- marked further by the very acute and profound author, that Hobbes's premises, if admitted to be sound, so far from establishing his favorite doctrine concerning the selfish nature of man, would afford an additional illus- tration of the provision made in his constitution for the establishment and maintenance of the social' un- ion. " If there be really any such thing as the fiction or imagination of danger to ourselves from sight of the miseries of others, which Hobbes speaks of, and which he has absurdly mistaken for the whole of compassion. — if there be any thing of this sort common to man- kind distinct from the reflection of reason, it would be 260 AUXILIAEY PRINCIPLES. a most remarkable instance of what was farthest from his thoughts, namely, of a mutual sympathy between each particular of the species, — a fellow-feeling com- mon to mankind. It would not, indeed, be an instance of our substituting others for ourselves, but it would be an example of our substituting ourselves for others." To those who are at all acquainted with Mr. Smith's book, it is unnecessary for rae to observe how very pre- cisely Butler has here touched on the general fact which is assumed as the basis of the Theory of Moral Sen- timents. In various other parts of Butler's writings there are manifest anticipations of Mr. Smith's ethical specula- tions. In his Sermon, for example. On, Forgiveness of Injuries, he expresses himself thus : — " Without know- ing particulars, I take upon me to assure all persons who think they have received indignities or injurious treatment, that they may depend upon it, as in a man- ner certain, that the offence is not so great as they themselves imagine. "We are in such a peculiar situa- tion, with respect to injuries done to ourselves, that we can scarce any more see them as they really are than our eye can see itself If we could place ourselves at a due distance (that is, be really unprejudiced), we should frequently discern that to be in reality inadver- tence and mistake in our enemy, which we now fancy we see to be malice or scorn. From this proper point of view we should likewise, in all probability, see some- thing of these latter in ourselves, and most certainly a great deal of the former. Thus the indignity or inju- ry would almost infinitely lessen, and perhaps at last come out to be nothing at all. Self-lgve is a medium of a peculiar kind ; in these cases it magnifies every thing which is amiss in others, at the same time that it lessens every thing amiss in ourselves." The following passage in Butler's Sermon On Self- deceit is still more explicit. " It would very much pre- vent our being misled by this self-partiality, to reduce that practical rule of our Saviour — Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them RIDICULE. 261 — to our judgment or way of thinking. This rale, you see, consists of two parts. One is to substitute anoth- er for yourself when you take a survey of any part of your behaviour, or consider what is proper and fit and reasonable for you to do upon any occasion ; the other part is, that you substitute yourself in the room of another, — consider yourself as the person affected by such a behaviour, or towards whom such an action is done, and then you would not only see, but likewise feel, the reasonableness or unreasonableness of such an action or behaviour." * Section III. OF THE SENSE OF THE RIDICULOUS. I. Objects of Ridicule.] Another auxiliary principle to the moral faculty yet remains to be considered, — the sense of ridicule, and the anxiety which all men feel to avoid whatever is likely to render them the objects, of it. The subject is extremely curious and interest- ing ; but the time I have bestowed on the former article obliges me to confine myself to a very short explanation of the meaning of the word, and of the relation which the principle denoted by it hearts to our nobler motives of action. The natural and proper object of ridicule is those * The same idea is stated witli great clearness and conciseness by Hobhes. " There is an ea.sy rule to know upon a sudden, whether the action I be to do be against the law of nature or not. And it is but this, — That a man imaffine himself in the place of the parly with whom he hath to do, and reciprocallij him in his. AVhich is no more> but changing (as it were) of the scales ; for every man's passion weigheth heavy in his own scale, but not in the scale of his neighbour. And this rule is veiy well known and expressed in the old dictate, (luod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne feceris." — De Corjxyre Politico., Chap. IV. It is oi)served by Gibbon that this golden rule of doing as we would be done by is to he found in a moral treatise of Isocrates. — Decline and Fall of tli£ Roman Empire, Chap. LIV., note. [For other critical notices of Adam Smith's theory, see Brown's Fhilos- optiy of the Human Mind, Lect. LXXX. and LXXXI. Cousin, Philosophic Morale, Seconde Partie : Ecole Ecossaise, Lemons IV. - VI. Jouffroy's In- Iroduclion to Ethics, Lectures XVI. - XVIII.] 262 AUXILIARY PRINCIPLES. smaller improprieties in character and manners which do not rouse our feelings of moral indignation, or im- press us with a melancholy sense of human depravity. In the words of Aristotle, t6 yeXoiov, or the ridiculous, may be defined to be to ala-xos d'Mwov, the deformed ivith- out hurt or mischief, or (as he has explained his own meaning) " those smaller faults which are neither pain- ful nor pernicious, but unbesee?ning- " ; and " of which," he adds, " the proper correctioii is not reproach, but laughter." In stating this as a general principle with respect to the ridiculous, I would not be understood to assert that every thing which is ridiculous implies immorality, in the strict acceptation of that word. Ignorance, absurd- ity in reasoning, even a want of acquaintance with the established ceremonial of behaviour, often provoke our laughter with irresistible force. What is ridiculous, however, always implies some imperfection, and ex- poses the individual to whom it attaches to a species of contempt, of which (how good-humored soever) no man would choose to be the object. Perhaps, indeed, it might be found, on a more accu- rate analysis of this part of our constitution, that it is not, in such cases, merely the intellectual or physical de- fect which excites our ridicule, but the contrast between this and some moral impropriety or imperfection, which either conceals the defect from the individual himself, or induces him to attempt concealing it from others; and consequently, that the sentiment of ridicule always involves, more or less, a sentiment of moral disapproba- tion. One thing is certain, that intellectual and physi- cal imperfections never appear so ridiculous as when accompanied with affectation, hypocrisy, vanity, pride, or an obvious incongruity between the pretensions of an individual and the education he has received, or the station in which he was originally placed. ^ Upon this question, however, I shall not at present presume to decide. It is sufficient for my purpose, if it be granted that nothing is ridiculous but what falls short, some way or other, of our ideas of excellence ; RIDICULE. 263 or (as Cicero expresses it), " Locus et regio quasi ridi- culi, turpitudine et deformitate quadam continetur." * II. Final Cause of this Principle.] Hence, I think, may be traced a beautiful ^waZ cause in this part of our frame. For while it enlarges the fund of our enjoy- ment, by rendering the more trifling imperfections of our fellow-creatures a source of amusement to us, it ex- cites the exertions of every individual to correct those imperfections by w^hich the ridicule of others is lil^ely to be provoked. As our eagerness, too, to correct these imperfections may be presumed to be weak in propor- tion as we apprehend them to be, in a moral view, of trifling moment, we are so formed, that the painful feel- ings produced by ridicule are often more poignant than those arising from the consciousness of having rendered ourselves the objects of strong moral disapprobation. Even the consciousness of being hated by mankind is to the generality of men less intolerable than what the poet calls " The world's dread laugh, Which scarce the firm philosopher can scorn." It furnishes no objection to these observations, that the sense of ridicule is not always favorable to virtu- ous conduct ; and that it frequently tends very power- fully to mislead us from our duty. The same remark may be extended to the desire of esteem, and even to the moral faculty, — that they are liable to be perverted by education and fashion. But the great ends of our being are to be collected from the general scope of the principles of our constitution; not from the particular instances in which this scope is thwarted by adventi- tious circumstances ; and nothing surely can be more evident than this, that the three principles just men- tioned were all intended to cooperate together, and to lead to a conduct favorable to the improvement of the individual, and to the general interests of society. * De Oratore, Lib. II. 58. " The place and, as it were, province of ridi- cule are confined to baseness and deformity.'' 264 AUXILIARY PRINCIPLES. The sense of ridicule, in particular, although it has a manifest reference to such a scene of imperfection as we are placed in at present, is, on the whole, a most important auxiliary to our sense of duty, and well de- serves a careful examination in an analysis of the mor- al constitution of man. >It is one of the most striking characteristics of the human constitution, as distin- guished from that of the lower animals, and has an in- timate connection with the highest and noblest princi- ples' of our nature. As Milton has observed, — " Smiles from reason flow, To brutes denied " ; and it may be added, that they not only imply the power of reason, in the more limited acceptation of that word, as applicable to the perception of truth and false- hood, but the moral faculty, or that power by which we distinguish right from wrong. Indeed, they imply the power of reason (in both acceptations of the term) in a high state of cultivation. In the education of youth, there is nothing which re- quires more serious attention than the proper regulation of the sense of ridicule ; nor is there any instance in which the legislator has it more in his power to influ- ence national manners, than by watching over those public exhibitions which avail themselves of this prin- ciple of human nature, as a vehicle of entertainment to the multitude. Section IV." OF TASTE, considered IN ITS RELATION TO MORALS. I. Taste applicable to Morals.] From the explanation formerly given of the import of the phrases moral beau- ty and inoral deformity, it may be easily conceived in what manner the character and the conduct of our fel- low-creatures may become subservient to the gratifica- tion of taste. The use which the poet makes of this class of our intellectual pleasures is entirely analogous to the resources which he borrows from the charms of MORAL TASTE. 265 external nature. By skilful selections and combina- tions, characters more exalted and more pleasing may be drawn than have ever fallen under our observation; and a series of events may be exhibited in perfect con- sonance to our moral feelings. Rewards and punish- ments may be distributed by the poet with an exact regard to the merits of individuals ; and those irregu- larities in the distribution of happiness and misery, which furnish the subject of so many complaints in real life, may be corrected in the world created by his genius. Here, too, the poet borrows from nature the model after which he copies, not only as he accommo- dates his imaginary arrangements to his unperverted sense of justice, but as he accommodates them to the general lavjs by which the world is governed ; for" whatever exceptions* may occur in particular cases, there can be no more doubt about the fact, that virtue is the direct road to happiness, and vice to misery, than that, in the material world, blemishes and defects are lost amid prevailing beauty and order. The power of moral taste, like that which has for its object the beauty of material forms and the various productions of the fine arts, requires much exercise for its development and culture. The one species of taste, also, as well as the other, is susceptible of q. false re- finement, injurious to our own happiness, and to cur usefulness ,as members of society. II. Dangers incident to a false B,efinement of Moral Taste.] With this false refinement of taste is some- times connected the peculiar species of misanthropy which is grafted on a worthy and benevolent heart. When the standard of moral excellence we have been accustomed to dwell upon in imagination is greatly elevated above the common attainments of humanity, we are apt to become too difficult and fastidious (if I may use the expression) in our mural tu.eing nccessai*y to the discus- sion. Some retrenchments have been made in order to find room for the notes, which are intended to give some slight intimations of the present state of the controversy. — Ed. PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. 269 points of division between the followers of Omar and those of All ; and among the ancient Jews it was the subject of endless dispute between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. It is scarcely necessary for me to add, what violent controversies it has produced, and still continues to produce, in the Christian world. II. Explanation of Terms used in this Controversy.] As this controversy, like most others in metaphysics, has been involved in much unnecessary perplexity by the ambiguity of language, a few brief remarks on some equivocal terms connected with the question at issue may perhaps add something to the perspicuity and precision of the following reasonings. 1. The word volition is defined by Locke to be " an act of the mind, knowingly exerting that dominion it takes itself to have over any part of the man, by em- ploying it in, or withholding it from, any particular ac- tion." * Dr. Reid defines it, more briefly, to be " the ) determination of the mind to do or not to do something which we conceive to be in our power." He remarks, at the same time, that " this definition is not strictly logical, inasmuch as the determination of the mind is only another term for volition. But it ought to be ob- served, that the most simple acts of the mind do not admit of being logically defined. The only way to form a precise notion of them is to reflect attentively upon them as we feel them in ourselves. Without this reflection, no definition can enable us to reason about them with correctness." f 2. It is necessary to form a distinct notion of what is meant by the word volition, in order to understand the import of the word will; for this last word properly expresses that power of the mind of which volition is the act, and it is only by attending to what we experience, while we are conscious of the act, that we can under- stand any thing concerning the nature of the power. * Essay concerning Human Understanding, Book II. Chap. XXI. § 15. t Essays on the Active Poioert, Essay II. Chap. I. 23* * 270 FREE AGENCY. The word vnll, however, is not always used in this its proper acceptation, but is frequently substituted for volilion; as when I say that my hand moves in obedi- ence to my will. This, indeed, happens to the names of most of the powers of the mind, — that the same word is employed to express the power and the act. Thus imagination signifies both the power and the act of imagining ; abstraction signifies both the power and the act of abstracting ; and so in other instances. But although the word will may, without departing from the. usual forms of speech, be used indiscriminately for the power and the act, the word volition applies only to tlie latter ; and it would undoubtedly contribute to the distinctness of our reasonings to restrict the sig- nification of the word will entirely to the former. It is not necessary, I apprehend, to enlarge any more on the meaning of these terms. It is to be learned only from careful reflection on what passes in our own minds, and to multiply words upon the subject would only involve it in obscurity. 3. There is, however, a state of the mind perfectly dis- tinct both from the power and the act of willing, with which they have been frequently confounded, and of which it may therefore be proper to mention the char- acteristical marks. The state I refer to is properly called desire, the distinction between which and vnll was first clearly pointed out by Mr. Locke. "I find the will" says he, " often confounded with several of the affections, especially desire, and that by men who would not willingly be thought not to have had very distinct notions of things, and not to have writ very clearly about them." — "This," he justly adds, "has been no small occasion of obscurity and mistake in this matter, and therefore is, as much as may be, to be avoided." The substance of his remarks on the ap- propriate meaning of these two terms amounts to the two following propositions : — 1. That at the same moment a man may desire one thing and will another. 2. That at the same moment a man may have contrary desires, but cannot have contrary wills. The notions, PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. 271 therefore, which ought to be annexed to the words will and desire are essentially different. It will be proper, however, to state Mr. Locke's ob- servations in his own words,: — " He that shall turn his thoughts inwards upon what passes in his own mind when he wills, shall see that the will or power-of vo- lition is conversant about nothing but that particular determination of the mind whereby, barely by a thought, the mind endeavours to give rise, continuation, or stop to any action which it takes to be in its power. This, well considered, plainly shows, that the will is perfectly distinguished from desire, which, in the very same ac- tion, may have a quite contrary tendency from that which our wills set us upon. A man whom I cannot deny may oblige me to use persuasions to another, which, at the same time I am speaking, I may wish not to prevail on him. In this case, it is plain the will and desire run counter. I will the action that tends one way, whilst my desire tends another, and that the direct contrary. A man who, by a violent fit of gout in his limbs, finds a doziness in his head or a want of appetite in his stomach removed, desires to be eased too of the pain of his feet or hands (for wherever there is pain there is a desire to be rid of it) ; though yet, while he apprehends that the removal of the pain may translate the noxious humors to a more vital part, his loill is never determined to any one action that may serve to remove this pain. Whence it is evident that desiring and willing are two distinct acts of the mind; and, consequently, that the will, which is but the power of volition, is much more distinct from de- sire." * It is surprising how little this important passage has been attended to by Locke's successors. Dr. Johnson on this, as on every other occasion where logical precision of ideas is called for in a definition, is strangely indistinct and inconsistent. Will he defines to be " that power by which we desire and purpose " ; * Essay concerning Human Understanding, Book II. Chap. XXI. J 30. 272 FREE AGENCY. and he gives as its synonyme the scholastic word vellei- ty. Oh turning to the article velleity, we are told that " it is the school term used to signify the lowest degree of desire " ; in illustration of which Dr. South is quoted, according to whom "the wishing of a thing is not properly the willing it, but it is that which is called by the schools an imperfect velleily, and imports no more than an idle, inoperative complacency in and desire of the end, without any consideration of the means." 4. Instead of speaking (according to common phrase- ology) of the influence of motives on the will, it would be much more correct to speak of the influence of mo- tives on the agent. We are apt to forget what the will is, and to consider it as something inanimate and pas- sive, the state of which can be altered only by the ac- tion of some external cause. The habitual use of the metaphorical word motives, to denote the intentions or purposes which accompany our voluntary actions, or, in other words, the ends which we have in view in the exercise of the power intrusted to 'Us, has a strong ten- dency to confirm us in this error, by leading us to as- similate in fancy the volition of a mind to the motion of ,a body, and the circumstances which give rise to this volition to the vis motrix by which the motion is produced. It was probably in order to facilitate the reception of his favorite scheme of necessity that Hobbes was led to substitute, instead of the old division of our faculties into the powers of the understanding and those of the will, a new division of his own, in which the name of cognitive powers was given to the former, and that of motive powers to the latter. To familiarize the ears of superficial readers to this phraseology was of itself one great step towards securing their suffrages again^ the supposition of man's free agency. To say that the will is determined by motive powers, is to employ a language which virtually implies a recognition of the very point in dispute. Accordingly, Mr. Belshara is at pains to keep the metajjhorical origin of the word motive in the view of his readers, by prefixing to his PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. 273 argument in favor of the scheme of necessity the fol- lowing definition: — "Motive, in this discussion, is to be understood in its most extensive sense. It ex- presses whatever moves or influences the mind in its choice." * 5. According to Mr. Locke, the ideas of liberty and of power are very nearly the same. " Every one," he observes, " finds in himself a power to begin or forbear, continue or put an end to, several actions in himself. From the consideration of the extent of this power'of the mind over the actions of the man, which every one finds in himself, arise the ideas of liberty and necessi- ty." And a few sentences afterwards : — " The idea of liberty is the idea of a power in any agent to do or forbear any particular action, according to the deter- mination or thought of the mind, whereby either of them is preferred to the other. Where either of them is not in the power of the agent, to be produced by him according to his volition, there he is not at liberty, but under necessity." f That these definitions are not perfectly correct will appear hereafter. They approach, indeed, very nearly to the definitions of liberty and necessity given by Hobbes, Collins, and Edwards ; whereas Locke, in order to do justice to his own de- cided opinion on the subject, ought to have included also in his idea of liberty a power over the determi- nations ©f his will. It is owing in a great measure to this close connec- tion between the ideas of free will and of poioer, and to the pleasure with which the consciousness of -power is always accompanied, that we feel so painful a mor- tification in perusing those systems in which our free agency is called in question. Dr. Priestley himself, as well as his great oracle, Dr. Hartley, has acknowledged, that " he was not a ready convert to the doctrine of necessity, and that he gave up his liberty with great reluctance." \ But whence this reluctance to embrace * Elements of the Philosophy of the Mind, Cliap. IX. Sect. I. t Essay concerning Human Understandim/, Book II. Chap. XXI. §^ 7, 8. J Doctrine of Philosophical Necessity lUuslraled, Preface. 274 FREE AGENCY. a doctrine so " great and glorious," but from its repug- nance to the natural feelings and natural wishes of the human mind? Section II. . REVIEW OF THE ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. I. Concessions by the Advocates for Free Will] Be- fore proceeding to an examination of this question, I shall premise a few principles in which both parties are agreed, or which at least appear to me to be conces- sions which the advocates for free will may safely make to their antagonists without any injury to their general argument. 1. Every action is performed with some view, or, in other words, is performed from some motive. Dr. Reid, indeed, denies this with zeal, but I am doubtful if he has strengthened his cause by doing so;* for he con- fesses that the actions which are performed without motives are perfectly trifling and insignificant, and not such as lead to any general conclusion concerning the merit or demerit of moral agents. I should therefore rather be disposed to yield this point than to dispute a proposition not materially connected with the ques- tion at issue. One thing is clear and indisputable, that it is only in so far as a man acts from motives or in- tentions, that he is entitled to the character of a ra- tional being. 2. The merit of an action depends entirely on the motive from which it was performed. Dr. Reid re- marks, that some necessitarians have triumphed in this principle as the very hinge of the controversy, whereas the truth is, that no reasonable advocate for free will ever called it in question. II. General Statement of the Argument for Necessity.] So far, I think, we are justified in going. The great • Essays on the yictive Powers, Essay IVj Chap. IV. ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 275 question is, Hoio do motives influence or determine the ■will ? In answer to this question the necessitarians reason as follows : — Every change in our nature, we are told, implies the operation of a cause ; and this maxim, it is pretended, holds not only with respect to inanimate matter, but with respect to the changes which take place in the state of a mind. Every volition, therefore, must have bee^i produced by a motive with which it is as necessa- rily connected as any other effect with its cause; and when different motives are presented to the mind at the same time, the will yields to the strongest, as necessa- rily as a body urged by two contrary forces moves in the direction of that which is most powerful. The foregoing argument goes to prove, that all hu- man actions are as necessarily produced by rnotives as the going of a clock is necessarily produced by the weights, and that no human action could have been otherwise than it really was. Nay, it applies also in full force to the Deity, and indeed to all intelligent be- ings whatever; for it is not founded on any thing pe- culiar to the human mind, but on the impossibiliiy of free agency ; and, of consequence, it leads to this gen- eral conclusion, that no event in the universe could have happened otherwise than it did. Accordingly, Dr. Clarke has been at much pains to prove that the Deity must be a free agent, and therefore that free agency is .not impossible ; from which he in- fers that there must be some flaw in the reasonings just stated to prove that man is a necessary agent* If this reasoning of Clarke's be admitted as conclusive, where is the absurdity, I would ask, of supposing that God may have been pleased to place man in a state of moral discipline, by imparting to him a freedom of choice between good and evil, in like manner as he has imparted to him various other faculties and powers essentially different from any thing we observe in the lower animals ? Is not the contrary assertion a pre- * Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God, Prop. XII. 276 FREE AGENCY. sumptuous attempt to set limits to the Divine Omnip- otence ? Among the various forms which religious enthusiasm assumes, there is a certain prostration of the mind, which, under the specious disguise of a deep humility, aims at exalting the Divine perfections by annihilat- ing all the powers which belong to human nature. " Nothing is more usual for fervent devotion," says Sir James Mackintosh, in speaking of some theories cur- rent among the Hindoos, " than to dwell so long and so warmly on the meanness and worthlessness of created things, and on the all-sufficiency of the Su- preme Being, that it slides insensibly from comparative to absolute language, and, in the eagerness of its zeal to magnify the Deity, seems to annihilate every thing else." This excellent observation may serve to account for the zeal displayed by many devout men in favor of the scheme of necessity. " We have nothing," they fre- quently and justly remind us, " but what we have re- ceived." But the question here is simply a matter of fact, whether we have or have not received from God the gift of free will ; and the only argument, it must be remembered, which they have yet been able to ad- vance for the negative proposition is, that this gift was impossible even for the power of God ; — an argument, we may remark, which not only annihilates the power of man, but annihilates that of God also, and subjects him, as well as all his creatures, to the control of causes which he is unable to resist. So completely does this scheme defeat the pious views in which it has some- times originated. . I say sometimes ; for this very argument against the liberty of the will is employed by Spinoza, according to whom the free agency of man involves the absurd sup- position of an imjierium in imperio in the universe.* Voltaire, too, — who in his latter days, abandoning those principles for which he had before, when in the • rracioi.PoKt., Cap. n. Sect. yi. ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 277 full vigor of his faculties, so zealously and 'eloquently contended, seems to have become a convert to the scheme of fatalism, — has on one occasion had re- course to an argument against man's free agency simi- lar in substance to what is advanced by Spinoza in the passage now referred to. " En etf'et, il seroit bien sin- g-ulier que toute la nature, tous les astres obeissent a des loix eternelles, et qu'il y eut un petit animal haut de cinq pieds, qui en mepris de ces lois put agir ton- jours comme il lui plairoit au seul gre de son caprice." * "Singular!" exclaims Dr. Beattie, after quoting the preceding sentence ; " ay, singular indeed, — but not a whit more singular than that this same animal of five feet should perceive, and think, and read, and write, and speak ; attributes which no astronomer of my ac- quaintance has ever supposed to belong to the planets, notwithstanding their brilliant appearance and stupen- dous magnitude." f The reply is quite as good as the argument is entitled to.^ * Le PhUosophe Ignorant, XIII. " Indeed, it would be very singular that all nature, all tlie planets, should obey eternal laws, and that there should be a little animal, five feet high, who, in contempt of these laws, could act as he pleased, solely according to his caprice." t Essay on Truth, Part II. Chap. II. Sect. III. i In reply to the general argument for necessity founded on the theory of causation, I copy a few paragraphs from Tappan's Review of EdwanU^s Inqairij into the Freedom of the Will. — " Let us look at the connection of cause and phenomena a little more particularly. What is causr. ? It is that which is the ground of the possible and actual existence of phenom- ena. How is cause known ? By the phenomena. Is cause visible ? Is'o ; whatever is seen is phenomenal. We observe phenomena, and by the li\:v of our intelligence we assign them to cause. But how do we conceive of cati5c as producing phenomena? By a nisits, an effort, or energy. Is this nisus itself a phenomenon ? It is when it is observed. Is it always ob- served ? It is not The nisiis of gravitation we do not observe ; we ob- serve merely the facts of gravitation. The nisus of heat to consume we do not observe ; we observe merely the facts of combustion. Wliero, then, do we observe this nisus ? Only in will. Rrally, volition is the ui-ius or effort of that cause which we call will. When I wish to do any tiling, I make an effort, a nisus, to do it ; I make an effort to raise mv arm. and I raise it. This effort is simply the volition. I make an effort to- lift a wciirht with my hand ; this effort is siinplv the volition to lift it, and im- mediately antecedent to this effort I recognize only my will, or really only myself. This effort, this nisas, this volition, — whatever we call it, — is in the will itself, and it becomes a phenomenon to us because we are causes that know ourselves. Every nisus, or effort, or volition, which we may make, 24 278 FREE AGENCY. IIL Hobbes's Scheme of Necessity.] According to the view of the subject that has now been taken, we are led to conclude that man possesses a power over the determinations of his will; — and this is precisely the scheme of what is com morily called /ree will, in op- position to that of necessity. But this power over the determinations of the will has been represented by some philosophers as an absurd- ity and impossibility. Liberty, we are told, consists only in a power to act as we will; and it is impossible to conceive in any being a greater liberty than this. Hence it follows, that liberty does not extend to the delerminations of the will, but only to the actions conse- quent upon its determinations. To say that we have is ia oar conscionsness : causes which are Tiot self-conscious, of course, do not reveal this nisas to themselves ; and they cannot reveal it to us be- cause it is in the very bosom of the cause itself. What we observe in re- lation to all causes not ourselves, whether they be self-conscious or not, is not the nisus, but the sequents of the nisus. Thus in men we do not ob- serve the volition or nisus in ttieir wills, but the phenomena which form the sequents of the nisus. And in physical causes, we do not observe the ni- sus of these causes, but only the phenomena which form the sequents of this TOsus. But when each one comes to himself, it is different. He pen- etrates himself, — knows himself. He is himself the cause; he himself makes the nisus, and is conscious of it; and this nisus to him becomes an effect, a. phenomenon, — the first phenomenon by which he reveals himself, but a phenomenon by which he reveals himself only to himself. It is by the sequents of this nisus, the efiFects produced in the external visible world, that he reveals himself to others." — pp. 190- 192. That our particular volitions are the effects of the general power of willing, and not of external motives, is plain enough. But the determina- tion of the general power of willing to put forth this or that particnlai- vo- lition, — is not this the effect of some cause ? and if so, of what cause ? Lei us hear Mr. Tappan again : — " Does the objector allege, as a palpa- ble absurdity, that there is, after all, nothing to account for the particular determination? I answer, that the particular determination is accounted for in the very quality or attribute of the cause. In the case of a physiral cause, the particular determination is accounted for in the quality of the cause, which quality is to be necessarily correlated to the object. In the case of will, the particular determination is acceunted for in the quality of the cause, which quality is to have the power to make the particular deter- mination without being necessarily correlated to the object. A physical cause is a cause fixed, determined, and necessitated. Tlie will is a cause contingent and free. A physical cause is a cause insti'umental of a first cause; — the will is first cause itself The Infinite Will is the first cause inhabiting eternity; filling immensity, and unlimited in its energy. The human will is first cause appearing in time, confined to place, and finite in its energy ; biil it is the same in kind, because made in the likeness of the ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 279 ower to will such an action, is to say that we may- ill it if we will. This supposes the will to be deter- lined by a prior will; and for the same reason, that ^ill must be determined by a will prior to it, and so on 1 an infinite series of wills, which is absurd. To act •eely, therefore, can mean nothing more than to act oluntarily ; and this is all the liberty that can be con- eived in man or in any other being. Agreeably to this reasoning, Hobbes defines a free gent to be " he that can do if he will and forbear if he inll." The same definition has been adopted by Leib- litz, by Collins, by Gravesande, by Edwards, by Bori- let, and by all later necessitarians. Dr. Priestley ascribes this peculiar notion of free will Hobbes as its author;* but it is in fact of much ifinile Will. As first cause it is self-mmed ; it makes its nisus of-itself, nd of itself it forbears to make it ; and within the sphere of its activity, [id in relation to its objects, it has the power of selecting, by a mere arbi- ary act, any particular object. It is a cause all whose acts, as well as ny particular act, considered as phenomenun demanding a cause, are ac- Duntcd for in itself alone." — pp. 222, 22.'!. " Acts of the will may be conceived of as analogous to intuitive or rst truths. First trut/is require no demonstration; they admit of none; icy form the basis of all demonstration. Acts of the will are frst move- 'enis of primary causes, and as such neither require nor admit of ajiUad^-nt luses, to explain their action. Will is the source and basis of all other luse. It explains all other cause, but in itself admits of no explanation. t presents the primaiy and all-comprehending fact of power. In God, 'ill is infinite, primary cause, and uncreated : in man it is finite, primary luse, constituted by God's creative act, but not necessitated ; for if neces- tated it would not be will, — it would not be power after the likeness of le Divine power ; it would be mere physical or secondary cause, and com- rchended in the chain of natural antecedents and sequents." — p. 228. Joofl'roy says in reference to this point : — " The law, that every motive 1 material bodies is proportioned to the moving force which produced it, ipposes a fact; namely, the inertia of matter. To apply this law to the ilation which subsists between the resolutions of my will, and the mo- ves which act upon it, is to suppose that my being, — that I, myself, n not a cause ; for a cause is something which produces an act by its own •oper power. That which is inert is not a cause ; it may receive and an'smit an impulse, but it cannot originate it. Are we, or are we not, a '.use ? Have we, or have we not, a power in ourselves of producing certain •ts ? It would seem necessaiy for us to decide this question, before we m rightly apply the law of external phenomena to internal operations."— itrodiu^ion to Ethics, I/CCturc IV. — Ed. • ■' The doctrine of philosophical necessity is in reality a modem thins- ; It older, I believe, than Mr. Hobbes. Of the Calvinists, I believe Mr. jnathan Edwards to be the first. Others have followed his steps, espe- 280 FREE AGENCY. older date, even among modern metaphysicians, coin- ciding exactly with the doctrine of those scholastic divines who contended for the liberty of spontaneity, in opposition to the liberty of indifference. It is, howev- er, to Hobbes that the partisans of this opinion are indebted for the happiest and most popular illustration of it that has yet been given. " I conceive," says he, " liberty to be rightly defined, the absence 'of all the im- pediments to action that are not contained in the nature and intrinsical quality of ilie agent. As, for example, the water is said to descend freely, or to have liberty to descend by the channel of the river, because .there is no impediment that way ; but not across, because the banks are impediments. And though water cannot as- cend, yet men never say it wants the liberty to ascend, but the faculty or power, because the impediment is in the nature of the water, and intrinsical. So also we say, he that is tied wants the liberty to go, because the impediment is not in him, but in his bands ; whereas we say not so of him who is sick or lame, because the im- pediment is in himself." | in order to judge how far the reasoning of Hobbes is in this instance satisfactory, it is necessary to attend to the various significations of the word liberty ; for the sense in which Hobbes has defined it is only one of its acceptations, and by no means the sense in which it ought to be employed in this controversy. 1. Liberty is opposed to confinement of the body by superior force, as when a person is shut up in a prison. It is in this sense that Hobbes uses the word ; for he tells us that liberty consists only in a power to act as cially Mr. Toplady. But the inconsistency of his scheme with what is properly Calvinism appears hy his dropping several of the essential parts of that system, and his silence with respect "to others. And when the doc- trine of necessity shall he tlioroufihly understood and well considered by Calvlnist*!, it will be found to militate against almost all thoir peculiar ten- ets." — Philosophical AWassify [lluslrnted, Sect XIII. t See his treatise Of Liberti/ and Necessity under this head, My Opinion about Liberty and Necessity. Also, Questions concerning Liberty, Necessity, and Cliance clearly stated' and debated between Dr. Bramltall and Thomas Hobbes. ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 281 ve will. And if the word had no other acceptation, he objection now stated would be a valid one ; for as he will cannot be confined by any external force, neither ;an w^e with propriety ascribe to the will that species of iberty which is opposed to such confinement.* 2. Liberty is opposed to the restraints on human ;onduct arising from law and government: as when ve say, that, by entering into a political society, a man jives up part of his natural liberty. In this sense lib- !rty undoubtedly extends to the determinations of the vill; and the very obligations which are opposed to it jroceed on the supposition that the will is free. The ;stablishment of law does not abridge this freedom, )u.t, on the contrary, it takes for granted that we have * " This is called the liberty from co-action or viol-enr^, the liberty of spon- ineity, — spontaneity, to cKOvtriov. In the present question, this species of iberry ought to be thrown altogether out of account : it is admitted by all larties ; is common erjnally to brutes and men ; is not a peculiar quality f the rail ; and is, ia fact, essential to it, for the will cannot possibly be orced. The greatest spontaneity is, in fact, the greatest necessity. 'J'hus, a lungry horse, who turns of necessity to food, is said, on this definition of iberty, to do so with freedom, because he does so spontaneously; and, in general, the desire of happiness, wliich is the most necessary tendency, rill, on this application of the term, be the most free. " I may observe, that, among others, the definition of liberty given by he celebrated advocate of moral freedom, Dr. Samuel Clarke, is in reality inly that of the liberty of spontaneity, inz. : — ' The power of self-motion ir action, which, in all animate agents, is spontaneity, is, in moral or ra- ional agents, what we properly call liberty.' f'ifth Rqily to Zjeibnitz, 4 1 - 20, and First Answer to the Gentleman of CamJjriiige. This self-motion, .bsolutely considered, is itself necessary To live is to act, and as nan is not free to live or not to live, so neither, absolutely speaking, is he ree to act or not to act. As he lives, he is necessarily determined to act r energize, — to think and will; and all the liberty to which he can prc- end is to choose between this mode of action and that. In scholastic inguage, man cannot have the liberty of exercise, though he may have the berty of specification. The root of his freedom is thus necessity. Nay, we annot concefve otherwise even of the Deity. As we must think him as ecessarily existent, and necessarily living, so we must think hira as neces- iirily active. Such are the conditions of human thought. It is thus suf- ciently manifest that Dr. Clarke's inference of the fact of moral liberty, •om the conditions of self-activity, is incompetent. And when he says. The true definition of liberty is the power to act' he should have recollected lat this power is, on his own hypothesis, absolutely yataZ, if it cannot but ct. See his Rernarls on Collins, pp. 15, 20, 27." I copy the above from two notes of Sir W. Hamilton, in his edition of teid's iVin-ks. On the Active Powers, Essay IV. Chap. I. and II. — Ed. 24* 2S2 FREE AGENCY. it in our power to obey or to transgress ; proposing to us, on the one hand, the motives of duty and of interest, and setting before us, on the other, the consequences of wilfurtransgression. 3. Liberty is opposed to necessity ; and it is in this sense the word is employed, when we say that man is a free and accountable being, and that the connection between motives and actions is not a necessary con- nection, like that between cause and effect. This species of liberty has been called by some moral lib- erty. That there is nothing inconceivable in this idea ap- pears, I hope, sufKciently from what has been already said. And indeed it is so far from being a metaphysi- cal refinement or subtilty, that the common sense of mankind pronounces men to be accountable for their conduct only in so far as they are understood to be morally free. Whence is it that we consider the pain of the rack as an alleviation of the falsehoods extorted from the criminal? Plainly because the motives pre- sented to him are supposed to be such as no ordinary degree of self-command is able to resist. And if we were only satisfied that these motives were perfectly irresistible, we would not ascribe to him any guilt at all. As an additional confirmation of Hobbes's doctrine, it has been urged that human laws require no more to constitute a crime but that it be voluntary ; and hence it has been inferred, that the criminality consists in the determination of the wUl, whether that determination be free or necessary. The case just referred to affords a sufficient refutation of this argument. The confession of the criminal is surely voluntary, in the strict acceptation of that term ; and yet we consider his guilt as alleviated in the same proportion in which we suppose his moral liberty to be abridged. It is true that in most cases human laws require no more to constitute a crime than that it be voluntary ; because, in general, motives are placed beyond the cog- ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 283 nizance of earthly tribunals. But, in a morale view, merit and demerit suppose not only actions to be vol- untary, but the agent to be possessed of moral liberty; And even earthly tribunals judge on the same princi- ple, wherever it can be made to appear that the person accused vi'as deprived of the power of self-government by insanity, or by some accidental paroxysm of passion. I shall mention, in this connection, only one other argument in favor of the scheme of necessity ; and I have reserved for it the last place, as it has been pro- posed with all the confidence of mathematical demon- stration by a writer of no less note than Mr. Belsham. It is in the form of a reductio ad absurduni ; and its more immediate object is to expose to ridicule the con- sequences which necessarily flow from the doctrine of free will. The argument is this : — " According to the hypothe- sis of free will, the essence of virtue and vice consists in liberty ; for example, benevolence without liberty is no virtue : malignity without liberty is no vice. Both are equally in a neutral state. Add a portion of lib- erty to both, benevolence instantly becomes an eminent virtue, and malignity an odious vice. That is, if to EQUALS YOU ADD EQUALS, THE WHOLES WILL BE UN- EQUAL ; than which nothing can be more absurd." * On this reasoning, to which it would be unjust to deny the merit of complete originality, I have no com- ment to offer. I have quoted it chiefly as a specimen of the logical and mathematical skill of the present advocates for the doctrine of philosophical necessity. In this point of view, it forms an amusing contrast to the lofty pretensions of a sect which prides itself, not only on its superiority to vulgar prejudices, but on its sagacity in detecting a fraud so successfully practised on the rest of mankind by the Author of their moral constiiution. * IV. Argument of Leibnitz for Necessity.] It is well * Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, Chap. IX. Sect. V. 284 FREE AGENCY. known to all who have any acquaintance with the history of modern philosophy, that one of the funda- mental principles of the Leibnitzian system is, that " nothing exists without a svfficient reason why it should be so, and not otherwise." Of this principle the fol- lowing succinct account is given by Leibnitz himself, in his controversial correspondence with Dr. Clarke: — " Th^ great foundation of mathematics is the principle of contradiction or identity ; that is, that a proposition cannot be true and false at the same time. But in order to proceed from mathematics to natural philoso- phy, another principle is requisite (as I have observed in my Theodicy), I mean the principle of the svfficient reason; or, in other words, that nothing happens with- out a reason why it should be so rather than otherwise. And accordingly, Archimedes was obliged, in his book De jEquilibrio, to take for granted, that, if there be a balance in which every thing is alike on both sides, and if equal weights are hung on the two ends of that bal- ance, the w^hole will be at rest. It is because no reason can be given why one side should weigh down rather than the other. Now by this single principle of the sufficient reason may be demonstrated the being of a God, and all the other parts of metaphysics or natural theology; and even in some measure those physical truths that are independent upon mathematics, such as the dynamical principles, or the principles of force." * Some of the inferences deduced by Leibnitz from this almost gratuitous assumption are so paradoxical, that one cannot help wondering he was not staggered about its certainty. Not only was he led to conclude that the mind is necessarily determined in all its elec- tions by the greatest apparent good, insomuch that it would be impossible for it to make a choice between two things perfectly alike ; but he had the boldness to extend this 'conclusion to the Deity, and to assert, that * Collection of Papers which passed between Mr. Leibnitz and Dr. Clarke, Leibnitz's 8ccond Paper. For ii full statement of Leibnitz's views oa this and Idndred questions, see his Essais de Thiodicie. ARGUMENT FOH NECESSITY. 285 two things perfectly alike could not have been pvo- duced even by Divine power. It was upon this grourfd that he rejected a vacuum, because all the parts of it would be perfectly like to each other ; and that he also rejected the supposition of atoms, or similar particles of matter, and ascribed to each particle a monad, or active principle, by which it is discriminated from every other particle. The application of his principle, how- ever, on which he evidently valued himself the most, was that to which I have already alluded, — the de- monstrative evidence with which he conceived it to establish the impossibility of free agency, not only in man, but in any other intelligent being. Let us examine, therefore, Leibnitz's principle as ap- plicable to the determinations of the will, and consider what it implies, and how far it is agreeable to fact. And for this purpose it is necessary to attend to the various senses in which it may be understood. 1. When it is said, that for every voluntary action thfre must have been a sufficient reason, the proposi- tion may be understood merely to imply, that every such action must have had a cause. And we may re- mark by the way, that this is the only interpretation of which the proposition admits, if the word reason be used in the same sense in which alone Leibnitz's max- im is applicable to inanimate matter. But in this sense of the proposition it does not at all affect the question about liberty and necessity ; for it only implies that the action is an effect, which either proceeded from the free will of the agent (in which case he may justly be said to be the cause of the effect), or which did not proceed from his free will (in which case it must ulti- mately be referred to some other cause). 2. The principle of the sufficient reason, when ap- plied to our voluntary actions, may be understood to imply, that the will is necessarily determined by the greatest apparent good. As this proposition is not pe- culiar to the system of Leibnitz, it may be proper to state it more fully. The circumstances of our external situation, it has 286 FREE AGENCY. been said, and the state of our appetites, desires, &e., at any particular time, evidently do not depend on us. Suppose, then, that I am under the influence of" any two active principles which urge me in different direc- tions, and that I deliberate which of them I am to obey. The conclusion my understanding forms on this subject does not depend on me, and this conclusion necessarily determines my will ; for it is impossible for a man not to do what appears to him to be, on the whole, the best and most eligible thing at the moment.. My will, there- fore, in every case, depends as little on myself as the conclusion of my understanding when I give my assent to a mathematical demonstration. The flaw of this reasoning, I apprehend, lies in that step in which it is affirmed that the will is necessarily determined by what appears to us to be best and most eligible at the moment; — and the only circumstance which gives the proposition the smallest degree of plau- sibility is the ambiguity of the language in which it is stated. For it may either imply that our volitions are necessarily agreeable to what we will at the time ; in which case we only assert an identical proposition : or that the will is necessarily determined by what appears to us to be morally best and really most eligible at the time ; in which case we assert what is contrary to fact. 3. The meaning of the proposition now under con- sideration may be understood to be this, — that for every action there must be a motive. I have already said that in this sense I am disposed to admit the maxim. Dr. Beid, indeed, has very con- fidently maintained the negative ; but I do not think (as I formerly observed), that by doing so h* has strengthened his cause ; for he confesses that the ac- tions which are performed without motives are per- fectly trifling and insignificant : nay, he acknowledges that the merit of an action depends entirely on the mo- tive from which it is performed. Bat although we grant this general proposition, it certainly does not follow from it that man is a neces- sary agent. The question is not concerning the injla' ARGTJMENT FOR NECESSITY. 2S7 ence of motives, but concerning the nature of that in- fluence. The advocates for necessity represent it as the influence of a cause in producing its effect. Tlie advocates for liberty acknowledge that the motive is the occasion of acting, or the reason for acting ; but contend that it is so far from being the efficient cause of it, that it supposes the elliciency to exist elsewhere, namely, in the mind of the agent. Between these two opinions there is an essential distinction. The one represents man merely as a passive instrument. Ac- cording to the other, he is really an agent, and the sole author of his own actions. He acts, indeed, from mo- tives, but he has the power of choice among different ones. When he acts from a particular motive, it is not because this motive is stronger than others, but because he loilled to act in this way. Indeed, it may be ques- tioned if the word strength conveys any idea when ap- plied to motives. It is obviously an analogical or met- aphorical expression, borrowed from a class of phe- nomena essentially different.* ' * " It is the strongest motive, say they, which determines the will. What is this strongest motive, I ask, and how do you measure the com- parative force of motives t Is that the strongest motive, according to your idea, which determines the volition? If this is so, you" are arguing in a circle; and instead of showing that it is the strongest motive which de- cides the will, yon are merely saying that, as the determination of the will is in conformity with such or such a motive, therefore this motive is strongest. " But, if we cannot judge from effect, we most iind some common measure by which to decide. Lot us inquire, then, what this measure can 1)C. " Of two impulses, manifestly unequal, it would be easy to determine the stronger ; a vehement desire is distinguishable in our consciousness from one not so. And thus, merely from their vivacity and fervor, we may often recognize the stronger from the weaker passion. There i.s, theii, if you choose to say so, a common measure between different im- pulses of our sensitive nature, which are peculiarly distinguished, as eniv- iions. On the other hand, of different courses of conduct which reason and self-interest bring into contrast, I may see that one is much more ad- vantageous than another. There is, then, if you please, a means of conr- paring together different suggestions of self-interest : tlie suggestion which promises the most for my interest should have the most power over me. In the same way, among different duties which may present themselves to my judgment, there may be one which appears more obligatory than an- other ; fbr there are duties of different degrees of importance, and in many cases I most sacrifice the less to the greater. I perceive, then, that, strictly 288 FRKE AGENCY. V. Scheme of Necessity advocated by Collins and Ed- wards.] The ablest defenders of free will have con- tended that the doctrine of necessity, when pushed to its logical consequences, must ultimately terminate in Spinozism. It seems to have been the great aim of Collins to vindicate his favorite scheme from this re- proach, and to retaliate upon the partisans of free will the charge of favoring atheism and immorality. In proof of this, I have only to quote the account given by the author himself, of the plan of his work. " Too much care cannot be taken to prevent being misunderstood and prejudged in handling questions of such nice speculation as those of liberty and necessity ; and therefore, though I might in justice expect to be read before any judgment be passed on me, I think it proper to premise the following observations : — speaking, there is a possibility of comparing togetlier tlie relative force of different motives originating from duty, and of different motives suggested by self-interest, or, finally, of different desires striving within me at a given moment, But between a desire on the one hand, and a conception of in- terest or of duty on the other, where. I ask, can you find a standard of com- parison 1 If 1 assume passion as the measure, then, evidently, passion will appear the stronger motive ; but if, on the other hand, I assume interest or dntij as the measure, then desire becomes nothing, and duty or interest all in all. It depends, then, wlioUy upon the measure of comparison which I adopt, whether this or the other motive is strongest ; which proves that there is no common measure of comparison to be applied at all times to these different kinds of motives, when we would estimate their relative foi-ce. " Thus, in trath, in almost every case, to say that we yield to the strong- est motive is to say what has no meaning ; for in most cases it is impossi- ble to determine the strongest motive. If I wilt to be pnident, I follow the motive of self-interest; if I will to be virtuous, I follow the motive of duty J if I will to be neither prudent nor virtuous, I follow passion; and in proportion as I yield to passion, to enlightened interest, or to duty, does the merit of my conduct vary. And here is a marvel for the advocate of necessity, and something whicJi, in the sincerity of his conviction, he should ponder well. I, who am not free, — who, whatever resolution I have taken, have yet been fatally determined to take it by tlie strongest motive, — I feel that I am responsible for this resolution; and others, too, icpunl me as responsible; so that, according as I have been impelled to thi.; or that act, (h) I believe myself to have merit or dfanerit, and pass untence on mvself as reasonable or unreasonable, pnident or foolish ; and, in a word, ajjplv to myself, though I have yielded necessarily to the 6tronf;cst motive, certain expressions and names, all implying most decisively and i'oreibly that I was free to yield or resist, to take at my option tliis or that course, and, consequently, that this so-called strongest motive did not, after all, de- termine the act." — Jouffroy's Introduction to Ethics, Leet. IV. ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 289 " First, though I deny liberty in a certain meaning of that word, yet I contend for liberty, as it signifies a power in man to do as he wills or pleases. " Secondly, when I affirm necessity, I contend only for moral necessity, meaning thereby that man, who is an intelligent and sensible being, is determined by his reason and his senses ; and I deny man to be subject to such necessity as is in clocks, watches, and such oth- er beings, which, for want of sensation and intelligence, are subject to an absolute, physical, or mechanical neces- sity. " Thirdly, I have undertaken to show that the notions I advance are so far from being inconsistent with, that they are the sole foundations of, morality and laws, and of rewards and punishments in society; and that the notions I explode are subversive of them." * In the prosecution of his argument on this question, Collins endeavours to show that man is a necessary agent: — 1. From experience. By ea:;/»er«e«ce he means our own consciousness that we are necessary agents. 2. From the impossibility of liberty. 3. From the consideration of the Divine prescience. 4. From the nature and use of rewards and punishments. And, 5. From the nature of morality. In this view of the subject, and indeed in the very selection of his premises, it is remarkable how com- pletely Collins has anticipated Dr. Jonathan Edwards, the most celebrated and indisputably the ablest cham- pion, in later times, of the sclieme of necessity. The coincidence is so perfect, that the outline given by the former of the plan of his work might have served with equal propriety as a preface to that of the latter. From the above-mentioned summary of the argument, and still more from the whole tenor of the Philosophical In- quiry, it is evident that Collins (one of the most obnox- ious writers of his day to divines of all denominations) was not less solicitous than his successor, Edwards, to reconcile his metaphysical notions with man's account- * Philosophical Inquiry concerning Human Liberty^ Preface. 2-5 290 FREE AGENCY. ableness and moral agency. The remarks, according- ly, of Clarke upon Colli ns's work are equally applicable to that of Edwards. It is to be regretted that they seem never to have fallen into the hands of this very acute and candid reasoner.* As for Collins, it is a re- * Remarks upon a Book entitled A Philosophical Inquiry concerning Human Liberty. Voltsiire, who in all probability never read either Clarke or Col- lins, has said that the former replied \o the latter only by theological rea- sonings ; — " Clarke n'a rcpondu :\ Collins qu'en th6ologien." (Quest snr fEncyc, Art. Liberti.) Nothing can be more remote from the truth. The argument of Clarke is wholly metaphysical., whereas his antagonist in vari- ous instances has attempted, though an avowed deist, to wrest to his own purposes the words of Scripture. []?or a full and elaborate answer to Edwards, see Mr. . Tappan's Review, from which a long quotation has already been given, directed against one of his leading positions. We give another, on tlie distinction, so much in- sisted on by Edwards, and essential, indeed, to his scheme, between worul and natural inability. "Man, they say. is morally unable to do good, and naturally able lo do good, and therefore he can justly be made the subject of command, ap- peal, rebuke, and exhortation. Natural inability, as defined by this system, lies in the connection between the volition, considered as an antecedent, and the effect required . Thus I am naturally unable to walk, when, al- though I make the volition, my limbs, through weakness or disease, do not obey. Any defect in the powers or instrumentalities dependent for activity upon volition, or any impediment which volition cannot surmount, consti- tutes natural inability. According to this system, I am not held responsi- ble for any thing which, through natural inability, cannot be accomplished, although the volition is made. But let us suppose that there is no defect in the powers or instrumentalities dependent for activity upon volition, and no imi)ediment which volition cannot surmount, so that there need be only a volition in order to have the etfeot, and then the natural ability is complete : — I will to walk, and I walk. Now it is affirmed that a man is fairly responsible for the doing of any thing, and can be fairly urged to do it, when, as in this case, all that is necessary for the doing of it is a vo- lition, although there may be a moral inability to the volition itself -^ " Nothing, it seems to me, can bo more absurd than this distinction. If it be granted to be absurd to urge men to do right when they are conceived to be totally unable to do right, it is equally so when they are conceived to have only a natural ability to do right ; because this natural ability is of no avail without a corresponding moral ability. If the volition take place, there is, indeed, nothing to prevent the action ; nay, ' the very willing is the doing of it' : but then the volition, as an effect, cannot take place without a cause j and to acknowledge a moral inability is nothing less than to ac- knowledge that there is no cause to produce the required volition. The inability, under both representations, is & total inability. In the utter im- possibility of a right volition is the utter impossibility of any good deed. \yhen we have denied liberty in denying y, self-determining power, these definitions, in order to make out a guasi liberty and ability, are nothing but ingenious folly and plausible deception. '■ Yon tell the man, indeed, that he can if he mil ; and when ho replies, ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 291 markable circumstance, that he attempted no reply to this tract of Clarke's, although he lived twelve years af- ter its publication. The reasonings contained in it, to- gether with those on the same subject in his correspon- dence with Leibnitz, and in his Demonstration of the Being- and Attributes of God, form, in my humble opin- that on your principles the required volition is impossible, you refer him to the common notions of manlvind. According to these, yon say, a man is i:>;uilty when he forbears to do right, since nothing is wanting to right-doing but a volition, and guilty when he does wrong, because he wills to do wroni;. According to these common notions, too, a man may fairly be persuaded to do right, when nothing is wanting but a will to do right. But do we find this distinction of natural and moral ahiliti/ in the common notions of men 1 When nothing is required to the performance of a deed but a volition, do men conceive of any inability whatever ? Do they not feel tliat the volition has a metaphysical possibility, as well as that the sequent: of the volition has a physical possibility'? " — pp. 161 - 165. We copy the foUoiving passage from Blakey's History of the Philosophy of Mind, Vol. IV. p. 515, as giving one of the latest European estimates of Dr. Edwards's merits as a philosopher : — "Dr. Edwards had a peculiar- ly constituted mind; — a mind capable of jjursuing, with incomparable steadiness and clearness, the longest and most intricate chain of reasoning; but a mind, withal, by no means endowed with the loftiest powers of logi- cal comprehension. He saw every link in a chain of reasoning with a mi- croscopic eve, which, when its focal power was chaffged, made every tiling at a distance appear hazy, clouded, and ill-defined. He could do one thing as no other man has ever been able to do it ;-he could reason from given or assumed premises with perspicuity, neatness, and power, and with an al- most superhuman ease and correctness ; but he could not embrace a phil- osophical system as a whole, and show its manifold bearings and rela- tions to other branches of knowledge. He was an acute, but not a great, philosopher. His was a vivid and piercing li^^ht, hut its illuminating rays, at a certain distance, became limited and scattered, and gave to all sur- rounding objects a disturbed and confused appearance. His ratiocination is so perfect of its kind, that it assumes the appearance of mechanism ; and wo feel a sort of secret dislike to have all the pegs and wires of an argument so minutely and obtrusively placed before us. Edwards has, in fact, been denominated a 'reasoning machine'; and the epithet is by no means misapplied or extravagant. But as a machine can only do its work one way, and we cannot humor it, or make its power more pliable, so in like manner do we find the intellectual mechanism of Edwards unyielding and unmanageable, except in its own peculiar fashion." With an inconsistency by no means uncommon, Blakey, in his notice of Collins, quotes with approbation what Stewart says above of Collins as anticipating Edwards in every thing, and afterwards, in his notice of Ed- wards, s.ays of the latter, that " he has stated and illustrated the principle of necessary connection in a manner altogether different from the way in which Collins, Priestley, Hume, and others have argued it." See, also, an Essay on the Genius and Writings of Edwards, prefixed to the London edition of his works, 1834. by H. Rogers ; and I. Taylor's In- troduction to his edition of Edwards On the. Will] 292 FREE AGENCY. ion, the most important, as well as powerful, of all his nnetaphysical arguments. The adversaries with whom he had to contend were botli of them eminently distin- guished by ingenuity and subtilty, and he seems to have put forth to the utmost his logical strength, in con- tending with such antagonists. "The liberty or moral agency of man," says his friend, Dr. Hoadly, " was a darling point to him. He excelled always, and showed a superiority to all, whenever it came into private dis- course or public debate. But he never more excelled than when he was pressed -with the strength Leib- nitz was master of; which made him exert all his tal- ents to set it once again in a clear light, to guard it against the evil of metaphysical obscurities, and to give the finishing stroke to a sulDJect which must ever be the foundation of morality in man, and is the ground of the accountableness of intelligent creatures for all their actions." To the arguments of Collins against man's free agen- cy some of his followers have added the inconsistency of this doctrine *vith the known effects of education (under which phrase they comprehend also the moral efl'ects of all the external circumstances in which men are involuntarily placed) in forming the characters of individuals. The plausibility of this argument (on which so much stress has been laid by Priestley and others), aris- es entirely from the mixture of truth which it involves; or, to ex^press myself more correctly, from the evidence and importance of the fact on which it proceeds, when that fact is stated with due limitations. That the influence of education, in this comprehen- sive sense of the word, was greatly underrated by our ancestors is now universally acknowledged, and it is to Locke's writings, more than to any other single cause, that the change in public opinion on this head is to be ascribed. On various occasions he has expressed him- self very strongly with respect to the extent of this in- fluence, and has more than once intimated his belief, that the great majority of men continue through life ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 293 what early education has made them. In making use, however, of this strong language, his object (as is evi- dent from the opinions which he has avowed in other parts of his works) was only to arrest the attention of his readers to the practical "lessons he was anxious to inculcate ; and not to state a metaphysical fact, which was to be literally and rigorously interpreted in the controversy about liberty and necessity. The only sound and useful moral to be drawn from the spirit of his observation is the duty of gratitude to Heaven for all the blessings, in respect of education and of exter- nal situation, which have fallen to our own lot; the im- possibility of ascertaining the involuntary misfortunes by which the seeming demerits of others may have been in part occasioned, and in the same proportion di- minished ; and the consequent obligation upon our- selves to think as charitably as possible of their con- duct under the most unfavorable appearances. The truth of all this I conceive to be implied in these words of Scripture, — "To whom much is given, of them much will be required " ; and, if possible, still more ex- plicitly and impressively in the Parable of the Talents. Is not the use which has been made by necessitari- ans of Locke's Treatise on Education, and other books of a similar tendency, only one instance more of that disposition, so common among metaphysical sciolists, to conceal from the world their incapacity to add to the stock of useful knowledge, by appropriating to them- iselves the conclusions of their wiser and more sober predecessors, under the startling and imposing disguise of universal maxims, admitting neither of exception uor restriction ? It is thus that Locke's judicious and refined remarks on the association of ideas have been exaggerated to such an extreme by Hartley and Priest- ley, as to bring among cautious inquirers some degree of discredit on one of the most important doctrines of modern philosophy. Or, to take another case still more in point, it is thus that Locke's reflections on the effects of education in modifying the intellectual faculties, and (where skilfully conducted) in supplying their original 25* 294 FREE AGENCY. defects, have been distorted into the puerile paradox of Helvetius, that the mental capacities of the whole hu- man race are the same at the moment of birth. It is sufficient for me here to throw out these hints, which will be found to apply equally to a large proportion of other theories started by modern metaphysicians. VI. Ground taken by later Advocates of Necessity.] It is needless to say, that neither Leibnitz nor Collins admitted the fairness of the inferences which Clarke conceived to follow from the scheme of necessity. But almost every page in the subsequent history of this con- troversy may be regarded as an additional illustration of the soundness of Clarke's reasonings, and of the sa- gacity with which he anticipated the fatal errors likely to ensue from trfe system which he opposed. A very learned and pious disciple of Leibnitz, who made his first appearance as an author about thirty years after the death of his master, exclaims, — " Thus the same chain embraces the physical and moral worlds, binds the past to the present, the present to the future, the future to eternity. " That wisdom which has ordained the existence of this chain has doubtless willed that of every link of which it is composed. A Caligula is one of those links, and this link is of iron. A Marcus Aurelius is another link, and this link is of gold. Botli are neces- sary parts of one whole, which could not but exist. Shall God, then, be angry at tlie sight of the iron link ? What absurdity ! God esteems this link at its proper value: he sees it in its cause, and he approves this cause, for it is good. God beholds moral monsters as he beholds physical monsters. Happy is the link of gold ! Still more happy if be know that he is only for- tunate. [Heureux le chainon d'or ! Plus AewrewaJ en- core, s'il salt qu'il n'est qp! heureux.] He has attained the highest degree of moral perfection, and is neverthe- less without pride, knowing that what he is is the ne- cessary result of the place which he must occupy in the chain. ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 295 " The Gospel is the allegorical exposition of this sys- tem ; the simile of the potter is its summary^' * 111 what essential respect does this system differ from that of Spinoza ? Is it not even more dangerous in its practical tendency, in consequence oi the high strain of mystical devotion by which it is exalted ? This objection, however, does not apply to the quo- tations which follow. They exhibit, without any col- oring of imagination or of enthusiasm, the scheme of necessity pushed to the remotest and most alarming conclusions which it appeared to Clarke to involve ; and, as they express the serious and avowed creed of two of our contemporaries (both of them men of dis- tinguished talents), may be regarded as a proof that the zeal displayed by Clarke against the metaphysical principles which led ultimately to such results was not so unfounded as some worthy and able inquirers have supposed. " All that is must be," says the Baron de Grimm, ad- dressing himself to the Duke of Saxe Gotha, — "%11 that is must be, even because it is ; this is the only sound philosophy ; as long as we do not know this uni- verse a priori (as they say in the schools), all is ne- cessity. Liberty is a word without meaning, as you will see in the letter of M. Diderot." The following passage is extracted from Diderot's letter here referred to. " I am nc«v, my dear friend, going to quit the tone of a preacher, to take, if I can, that of a philosopher. Ex- amine it narrowly, and you will see that the word lib- crlji is a word devoid of meaning; that there are not, and that there cannot be, free beings; that we are only what accords with the general order, with our organi- zation, our education, and the chain of events. These dispose of us invincibly. We can no more conceive of a being acting without a motive, than we can of one of the arms of a balance acting without a weight. The motive is always exterior and foreign, fastened upon us * Bonnet, Principes Phihsophiques, Part VIII. Chap. VII. 296 .FREE AGENCY. by some cause distinct from ourselves. What deceives us is the prodigious variety of our actions, joined to thte habit, which we catch at our birth, of confounding the voluntary and the free. We have been so often praised and blam^, and have so often praised and blamed others, that we contract an inveterate prejudice of believing that we and they will and acl freely. But 'if there is no liberty, there is no action that merits either praise or blame ; neither vice nor virtue ; nothing that ought either to be rewarded or punished. What, then, is the distinction among men ? The doing of good and the doing of ill ! The doer of ill is one who must be destroyed or punished. The doer of good is lucky, not virtuous. But though neither the doer of good nor of ill be free, man is nevertheless a being to be modi- fied ; it is for this reason the doer of ill should be de- stroyed upon the scaffold. From thence the good effects of education, of pleasure, of grief, of grandeur, of pov- erty, &c. ; from thence a philosophy full of pity, strong- ly attached to the good, nor more angry with the wicked than with the whirlwind which fills one's eyes with dust. Strictly speaking, there is but one sort of causes, that is, physical causes. There is but one sort of necessity, which is the same for all beings. This is what recon- ciles me to human kind ; it is for this reason I exhort you to philanthropy. Adopt these principles if you think them good, or show me that they are bad. If you adopt them they will reconcile you, iocr, with oth- ers and with yourself; you wiU neither be pleased nor angry with youi'self for being what you are. Reproach others for nothing, and repent of nothing; this is the first step to wisdom.- Besides this, all is prejudice and false philosophy." * Substantially the same doctrines have been recently introduced into this country, and I have no doubt with good intentions, by a very different class of philoso- phers, the greater part of whom have labored hard to * Qnrespondance Litteraire, PhSosophique et Critique, Tom. 11. pp. 56, 60, et seq. ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 297 dispute the connection between the premises and some of the conclusions. Not so Mr. Belsham. " Remorse," says he, " is the exquisitely painful feeling which arises from the belief, that, in circumstances precisely the same, we might have chosen and acted diflt'rentjy. This /o//a6'iow4' feeling is superseded by the doctrine of necessity." And again, — " The doctrine of philosoph- ical necessity supersedes remorse, so far as remorse is founded upon the belief, that, in the same previous cir- cumstances, it was possible to have acted otherwise." In another part of Mr. Belsham's work the following observation occurs : — " Remorse supposes free will. It arises from forgetfulness of the precise state of mind when the action was performed. It is of little or no use in moral discipline. In a degree it is even penii-, cious." As to our moral sentiments concerning the conduct and character of our fellow-creatures, Mr. Bel- sham is of opinion that the doctrine of necessity con- ciliates good-will to men. " By teaching us to look up to God as the prime agent, and the proper cavse of every tJiing that happens, and to regard men as nothing more than instruments which he employs for accomplishing his good pleasure, it tends to suppress all resentment, malice, and revenge ; while it induces us to regard our worst enemies with compassion rather than with hatred, and to return good for evil." * From these extracts it appears that Mr. Belshara is not only himself convinced of the truth of the doctrine of necessity, considered as a philosophical dogma, but that he conceives it would b^ for the advantage of the world if all mankind were to become converts to his way of thinking. In this respect his system is certain- ly much more of a piece than that of Lord Kames, who, although he adopts zealously the doctrine of ne- cessity, and represents the argument in support of it as • Elements of tlie Pliilosoph/ of tlie Mind, pp. 284, 307. 316, 406. " The doctrine of necessity," says l3r. Hartley, "has a tendency to abate all re- sentment aj^ainst men. Since all they do a^^ainst us is by the appointment of God, it is rcbullion against him to be oiTcndcd with them." Observa- tions on Man, Part I., Conclusion. 298 FREE AGENCY. demonstrative, yet candidly acknowledges that our nat- ural feelings are adverse to that doctrine; and even goes so lar as to say, that, without such a feeling, the business of society could not be carried on. In this dilemma he attempts to reconcile the two opinions, by the supposition of a deceitful sense of liberty. We are so formed as to believe that we are free agents, when in truth we are mere machines, acting only so far as we are acted upon. Perhaps no opinion on the subject of necessity was ever offered to the public which excited more general opposition than this hypothesis of a deceitful sense; and yet, if the argument for necessity be admitted, I do not see any other supposition which can possibly reconcile the conclusions of our reason with the feel- ings of which every man is conscious.- Not that I would insinuate any apology for a doctrine, the ab- surdity of which is not only obvious, but ludicrous, in- asmuch as it involves the supposition that the Deity intended that his creatures should believe themselves to be free agents ; and that, while the great mass of mankind were thus deceived to their own advantage, a few minds of a superior order had the metaphysical sagacity to detect the imposition. Nor is this all. If the doctrine of necessity be just, it must one day or an- other become the universal and popular creed of man- kind, as every doctrine which is true, and more espe- cially every doctrine which is supported by demonstra- tive evidence, may be expected to become in the prog- ress of human reason. What will then become of the great concerns of human life ? Will man, as he im- proves in knowledge, be unfitted for the ends of his being, and exhibit an inconsistency between his reason- ing faculties and his active principles, contrary to the invariable analogy of that systematical and harmonious design which is everywhere else so conspicuous in the works of nature ? * * Tliis argument is voiy ably and forcibly stated in a small pamphlet on liberty and necessity, by the late learned and ingenious Mr. Dawson, of Scdborgh. ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY. 299 Lord Kames, who was a most sincere inquirer after truth, abandoned, in the last edition of his Essays on MoralUij and Natural Religion, the doctrine of a de- ceitful sense of liberty ; and in so doing gave a rare ex- ample of candor and fairness as a reasoner. But I am very doubtful if the alterations which he made in his scheme did not impair the merits which in its original concoction it possessed in point of consistency. The first edition of this work appeared when the author was in the full vigor of his faculties ; the last, when he was approaching to fourscore.* • One of the ablest of the living asserters of necessity, John Stuart Mill, ai'knowledges, and endeavours to correct, the fatalistic implications and tendencies of that doctrine, as generally received. We will give his own words : — " Though the doctrine of necessity, as stated by most who hold it. is very remote from fatalism, it is probable that most necessarians are fatal- ists, more or less, in their feelings. A fatalist believes, or half believes (for nobody is a consistent fatalist), not only that whatever is about to happen will be the infallible result of the causes which produce it (which is the true necessarian doctrine), but moreover that there is no use in struggling against it; that it will happen, however we may strive to pre- vent it. Now, a necessarian, believing that our actions follow from our characters, and that our characters follow from our organization, our edu- cation, and our circumstances, is apt to be, with more or less of conscious- ness on his part, a fatalist as to his own actions, and to believe that his nature is such, or that his education and circumstances have so moulded his character, that nothing can now prevent him from feeling and acting in a particular way, or at least that no effort of his own can hinder it. In the words of the sect [Robert Owen and his followers] which in our own day has so perseveringly inculcated, and so perversely misunderstood, this great doctrine, his character is formed for him, and not % him ; there- fore his wishing that it had been formed differently is of no use, — he has no power to alter it. But this is a grand error. He ha.s, to a certain ex- tent, a power to alter his character. Its being, in the ultimate resort, formed for him, is not inconsistent with its being, in part, formed iy him as one of the inlermediate agents His character is formed by his circum- stances (including among the.se his particular organization); but his own desire to mould it in a particular way is one of those circumstances, and bv no means one of the least influential We cannot, indeed, directly will to be different from what we are. But did those who are supposed to have formed our characters directly will that we should be what we are ■? Their will had no direct power except over their own actions. They made us what they did make us. by willing, not the end, but the requisite means; and we, when our habits 'are not too inveterate, can, by similarly willing the requLsite means, make ourselves different. If they could place us un- der the influence of certain circumstances, we, in like manner, can place otuselves under the influence of other circumstances. We are exactly 300 FREE AGENCY. Section III. IS THE EVIDENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN FAVOR Or THE SCHEME OF FREEWILL, OR OF THAT OF NECESSITY? I. The Appeal to Consciousness.] It has been lately said, by a very ingenious and acute writer, that, '' in the as capable of making our own character, if we will, as others are of mak- ing it for us. " ' Yes,' answers the Owenite, ' but these words, " if we will," surrender the whole point: since the will to alter our own character is given us, not by any efforts of ours, but by circumstances which we cannot help ; it comes to us either from external causes, or not at all.' Most true; if tlie Owenite stops here, he is in a position from which nothing can expel him. Our character is formed by us, as well as for us ; hut the wish which in- duces us to attempt to form it is formed for us. And how? Not in gen- eral, by our organization or education, but by our experience, — experi- ence of the painful consequences of the character we previously had ; or by some strong feeling of admiration or aspiration, accidentally aroused. But to think that we have no power, and to think tliat we shall not vse our power unless we have a motive, are very different things, and have a very diiferent effect upon the mind. A person who docs not wish to alter his character cannot be the person who is supposed to feel discouraged or par- alyzed by thinking himself unable to do it. The depressing eifect of the fatalist doctrine can only be felt where there is a wish to do what that doctrine represents as impossible. It is of no consequence what we think forms our character when wc have no desire of our own about forming it ; but it is of great consequence that we should not be prevented from form- ing such a desire Ijy thinking the attainment impracticable, and that, if we have the desire, we should know that the work is not so irrevocably done as to lie incapable of being altered '•The sulijeet will never be generally understood, until that objectionable term [necessity] is dropped. 'J'he free-will doctrine, by keeping in viev ])rcciscly that portion oi^ the trutli which the word necessity puts out of sight, — namely, the power of the mind to cooperate in (he formation of its own character, — has given to its adhei'ents a jiractical feeling much nearer to the truth than has generally, 1 believe, existed in the minds of necessarians. 'J'he latter may have had a stronger sense of the impor- tance of what human beings ean^lo to shape the characicrs of one another ; but the free-will doctrine has, I believe, fostered, especially in the _\oungcr of its supporters, a much stronger spirit of self-eulturc." — Si/slem of Logic, Book VI. Chap. II. § 3. The concessions contained in the last paragraph, considered as'coniing from a thorough-going necessitarian, are imporlant. The modification in the understanding of the doctrine here proposed removes sinne of the purely psycbologii-al objections to it, but does not touch the moral objec- tions. The doctrine is still as irreconcilable as ev^r with any intelligiblo acceptation of human accountability, or the moral government of -God. And besides, when Mr. Mill asserts that " the feeling of moral freedom EVIDENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS. 301 controversy concerning liberty and necessity, the oyili/ question at issue between the disputants related to a matter of fact, on which they both appealed to the evi- dence of consciousness; namely, whether, all previous circumstances being the same, the choice of man be not also at all -times the same." * If the author of this observation had contented him- self with saying that this question concerning the mat- ter of fact, as ascertained by the evidence of conscious- ness, ovg-ht to have been considered as the on/i/ point at issue between the contending parties, I should most readily have subscribed to his proposition. Indeed, I have expressed myself very nearly to the same purpose in a former work.f But if it is to be understood as an historical statement of the manner in which the con- troversy has always, or even most frequently, been car- ried on, I must beg leave to dissent from it very ^videly. How many arguments against the freedom of the will have been in all ages drawn from the prescience of the Deity ! How many still continue to be drawn by very eminent divines from the doctrines of predestination and of eternal decrees ! Has not Mr. Locke himself acknowledged the impression which the former of these considerations made on his mind? " I own," says he, " freely to you the weakness of my understanding ; that though it be unquestionable that there is omnipotence and omniscience in God our Maker, and though I can- not have a clearer perception of anij thing than that I am free, yet I cannot make freedom in man consistent with omnipotence and omniscience in God, though I am as fully persuaded of both as of any truth I most firmly assent to ; and therefore I have long since given olTthe consideration of that question, resolving all into this which we are conscious of" is nothing but a "feeling of our being able to modify onr o^vn character if we wish^'' he asserts what the advocates of free will will not admit to be true If what we do depends on our wisliin,' to do it, and our wishing to do it does not depend on ourselves, then noth- ing ilc|)onds on ourselves, — except to be the willing and active instruments of destiny. — Ed. * Ediiiburrjh Review, Vol. XXVII. p. 226. [By Sir James Mackintosh.] t Philosophy of the Human Mind, Part 11. Chap. I. Sect. IL 26 302 FREE AGENCY. short conclusion, that if it be possible for God to make a free agent, then man is free, though I see not the way of it." A still more recent exception to the general assertion, which has given occasion to this section, occurs in Lord Kames's hypothesis of a deceitful sensQ of liberty, no- ticed above, as maintained in the first edition of his Essays on Morality and Natural Religion. Here, upon the faith of some subtile metaphysical reasonings, the very ingenious author adopts the scheme of necessity in direct opposition to the evidence which he candidly confesses that consciousness aftbrds of our free agency. Even the latest advocates for necessity, Priestley and Belsham, as well as their predecessor, Collins himself, while they appealed (in the very words of the learned critic) to the evidence of consciousness in proof of the fact, that, all previous circumstances being the same., the choice of man is also at all times the same, yet thought it worth their while to strengthen this conclusion by calling to their aid the theological doctrines already mentioned. I cannot, therefore, see with what color of plausibility it can be said that " this matter of fact has been the only question at issue between the disputants." It may, however, be regarded as one great step gained in this controversy, if it may henceforth be assumed as a principle agreed on by both parties, that this is the only question which can be philosophically stated on the subject, and that all arguments drawn from the at- tributes of the Deity are entirely foreign to the discus- sion. I shall accordingly devote this section to an ex- amination of the fact, agreeably to the representation of it given by our modern necessitarians. In what I h^ve hitherto said upon the subject, I have proceeded on the supposition, that the doctrine of free will is consistent with the common feelings and belief of mankind. That '' all our actions do now, in expe- rience, seem to us to be//-ee, exactly in the same man- ner as they would do upon the supposition of our being really free agents," is remarked by Clarke in his reply to Collins. " And consequently," he adds, " though EVIDENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS. 803 this alone does not amount to a strict demonstration of our being free, yet it leaves on the other side of the question nothing but a bare jwssibilUij of our being so framed by the Author of nature, as to be unavoidably deceived in this matter by every experience and every action we perform. The case is exactly the same," continues Dr. Clarke, " as in that notable question, whether the world exists or no. There is no demonstra- tion of it from experience. There always remains a hare possibility that the Supreme Being may have so framed my mind as that I shall always necessarily be deceived in every one of my perceptions, as in a dream, though possibly there be no material ivorld, nor any other creature whatsoever existing besides myself. Of this, I say, there always remains a bare possibiliti/, and yet no man in his senses argues from thence that expe- rience is no proof to us of the existence of thing's."* * Remarks, p. 19. Cousin maintains liberty on the authority of consciousness. A free action is defined by him to be one " performed with the consciousness of power not to do it." He then proceeds to analyze a free action in order to ascertain precisely in what part it is free. According to him, the total action is resolvable into three elements, perfectly distinct: — '• 1 . The intellectual- element, which is composed of the knowledge of the motives for and against, of deliberation, of preference, of choice. 2. The volmitary clement, which consists in. an internal act, namely, the resolution, the deter- mination to do it. 3. The physical clement, or external action. ■' The question now to be decided is. precisely in which of these three elements liberty is to be found, — that is, the power of doing with the con- sciousness of being able not to do. Does this power of doing, while con- scious of the power not to do, belong to the first element, the infellcitual element of the free action? It does not; for it is not at the will of a man to judge that such or such a motive is preferable to another; we are not master of our preferences ; we judge in this respect according to our in- tellectual nature, which has its necessary laws, without having the con- sciousness of being able to judge otherwise, and even with the conscious- ness of not bciflg able to judge otherwise, than we do. It is not, then, in this element that we are to look for liberty. Still less is h in the third element, in the physical action ; for this action supposes an external world, an organization corresponding to it, and, in this organization, a muscular svstem sound and suitable, without which the physical action would he im- possible. When we accomplish it. we are conscious of acting, but under the condition of a theatre of which we have not the disposal, and of instruments of which we have bnt an imperfect disposal, which we can neither replace if thcv escape us, — and they may doso every moment, — nor repair if they areout of order or unfaithful, as is often the case, and which are subject to laws peculiar to themselves, over which we have no power, and which we 304 FREE AGENCY. II. Consciousness vainly denied to be in Favor of Lib- erty.] But this appeal to consciousness in proof of free agency proceeds altogether (according to some late writers) on a partial and superficial view of the sub- ject; the evidence of consciousness, when all circum- stances are taken into the account and duly weighed, being decidedly in favor of the scheme of necessity. Dr. Hartley was, I believe, one of the first (if not the first) who denied that our consciousness is in favor of our free agency. " It is true," he observes, " that a man by internal feeling may prove his own free will, if by free will be meant the power of doing what a man wills or desires ; or of resisting the motives of sensuality, ambition, &c., that is, free will in the popu' lar and practical sense. Every person may easily rec' oll'ect instances where he has done these several things but these are entirely foreign to the present question To prove that a man has free will in the sense oppo site to mechanism, he ought to feel that he can do dif- ferent things while the motives remain precisely the same. And here, I apprehend, the internal feelings are entirely against free will, where the motives are of a scarcely even know. Whence it follows, that we do not act here with the ■ consciousness of being able to do the contrary of what we do. Liberty, then, is no more to be found in the third than in the ,first element. It cun then only be in the second ; and there in fact we find it. " Nejjliwt the first and third elements, the judgment and the physical action, and let the second element, the wiUing, subsist by itself; analysis discovers in this single element two terms, namely, a special act of willing, and the power of willing, which is within us, and to which we refer the spe- cial act. That act is an effect in relation to the power of willing, which is its cause ; and this cause, in order to produce its effect, has need of no other theatre, and no other instrument, than itself. It produces it directly, with- out any thing intermediate, and without condition ; continues and consum- mates, or suspends and modifies ; creates it, or annihilates it entirely ; and at the moment it exerts itself in any special act, we are conscious that it might exert itself in a special act totally contrary, without any obstacle, without being thereby exhausted : so that, after having changed its arts a hundred times, the faculty remains integi-ally the same, inexhaustible and identical, amidst the perpetual variety of its applications, being always able to do what it does not do, and able not to do what it does. Hero, then, in all its plentitudo, is the characteristic of liberty." — Professor Henry's translation. Elements of Psychology, Chap. X. p. 319. See, also, Tappan's Doctrine of lite Will determined by an Appeal to Consciousness. — Eb. EVIDENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS. 305 sufficient magnitude to be evident : where they are not, nothing can be proved." * Mr. Belsham has enlarged still more fully on this subject. " When men," says he, " who have been guilty of a crime review the action in calmer moments, when the strength of passion has subsided, and the contrary motives appear in all their force, and perhaps magnified by the evil consequences of their vice and folly, they are ready to think that they might at the time have thought and acted as they now think and act ; but this is a fallacious feeling, and arises from their not placing themselves in circumstances exactly similar." We are elsewhere told by Mr. Belsham, " that the popular opinion, that in many cases it was in the power of the agent to have chosen differently, the pre- vious circumstances remaining exactly the same, arises cither from a mistake of the question, from ^fargelful- ness of the motives by which our choice was determined, or from the extreme difficulty of placing ourselves iu imagination in circumstances exactly similar to those in which the election was made." And still more ex- plicitly and concisely in the following aphorism : — '• The pretended consciousness of free will amounts to nothing more than forgetfulness of the motive." f To the same purpose Dr. Priestley has expressed himself. " A man, when he reproaches himself for ^.nj particular action in his past conduct, may fancy that, if he was in the same situation again, he would have acted dif- ferently. But this is a mere deception; and if he ex- amines himself strictlij, and takes in all circumstances, hd may be satisfied that, with the sa7rie inward dispo- sition of mind, and with precisely the same views of things that he had then, and exclusive of all others that he has acquired by reflection since, he could not have acted otherwise than he did." J * Observations on Man, Part I., Conclusion. t ICinnenls, pp. 278, 279, 306. t Illustrations of Philosophical Necessity, p. 99. The very same view of the subject has been lately taken bv Laplace, in his Essai Phihsophiiiue sur Us Probabilitis. " L'axiome connu sous le 26* 306 FREE AGENCY. If these statements be accurately examined, they will be found to resolve entirely into this identical propo- sition, that the will of the criminal, being supposed to remain in the same state as when the crime was com- mitted, he could not have willed and acted otherwise. This proposition, it is obvious, does not at all touch the cardinal point in question, which is simply this : whether, all other circumstances remaining the same, the criminal had it not in his power to abstain from willing the commission of the crime. The vagueness of Priestley's language upon this occasion must not be pverlooked ; the words inward disposition of mind ad- mitting of a variety of different meanings, and in this instance being plainly intended to include the act of the will, as well as every thing else connected with the criminal action. In the {Receding strictures, I have been partly antici- pated by the following very acute remarks of Dr. Magee on the definitions of volition and o{ philosophical liberty, prefixed to Mr. Belsham's discussion of the doctrines now under our consideration. According to Mr. Bel- sham, " Volition is that state of mind which is imme- diately previous to actions which are called voluntary." " Natural liberty, or, as it is more properly called, phil- osophical liberty, or liberty of choice, is the power of doing an action or its contrary, all the previous circum- stances remaining the same." * — "Nowhere," says Dr. Magee, " is the point of free will at once decided ; for volition itself being included among the previous cir- cumstances, it is a manifest contradiction to suppose 1 he ' power of doing an action or its contrary, all the nom de prindpe de la raison suffisante s'6tend aux actions ra&ma que Ton jufce indifferentes. La volonte la plus libre ne pent sans un motif diter- minant lour donner naissance ; car si, toutes les circonStances de deux po- sitions etant exactement semblables, elle agissait dans I'une et s'abstennit d'ajrir dans I'autre, son choix scrait un effet sans cause ; oUe serait alora, dit'iLeil)nitz, le hasard aveugle des epicuricns. L'opinion contrairo est uno illusion de I'espvit qui perdant de vue les raisons fugitives du choix de la volonte dans les choses indifFferentes, se persuade quelle s'est deteiminee d'elle-ra^mo et sans motifs." — Under the head, l)e la Prdbahiliti. * Ekments, p. 227. EVIDENCE OP CONSCIOUSNESS. 307 previous circumstances remaining the same ' ; since that supposes the power to act voluntarily against a volition. After this," Dr. Magee justly and pertinently adds, " Mr. Belsham might surely have spared himself the trouble of the ninety-two pages which follow." * And why have recourse, with Belsham and Priestley, in this argument, to the indistinct and imperfect recol- lection of the criminal at a subsequent period, with re- spect to the state of his feelings while he was perpe- trating the crime ? "Why not maife a direct appeal to his consciousness at the very moment when he was doing the deed? Will any person of candor deny^^ that, in the very act of transgressing an acknowledged duty, he is impressed with a conviction, as complete as that of his own existence, that his will is free, and that he is abusing, contrary to the suggestions of rea- son and conscience, his moral liberty ?f Sometimes, indeed, when we are under the influence of a violent appetite or passion, our judgment is apt to see things in a false light; and hence a wise man learns to distrust his own opinion when he is thus cir- cumstanced, and to act, not according to his present judgment, but according to those general maxims of propriety of which his reason had previously approved in his cooler hours. All this, however, evidently .pro- ceeds on the supposition of his free agency ; and, so far from implying any belief on his part of fatalism or of moral necessity, evinces in a manner peculiarly strik- ing and satisfactory, the power which he feels himself to possess, not only over the present, but over the fiitiire determinations of his will. In some other instances, it happens that I believe bond fide an action to be right, at the moment I perform it, and afterwards discover that I judged improperly ; — perhaps from want of suf- ficient information, or from a careless and partial view * Discourses and Dissertations on the Scriptural Doctrines of Atonement and Sacrijice, Appendix, Vol. II p. 180, note. t " The free will of man," says Bolingbroke, " which no one can deny- that he has, without lying, or renouncing his intuitive knowledge." — Frag- ments, No. XLII. ' 308 FREE AGENCY. of the subject. In such a case, I may undoubtedly regret as a misfortune what has happened. 1 may blame myself for my carelessness in not having ac- quired the proper information before I acted ; but I cannot consider myself as criminal in acting at that moment according to the views which I then enter- tained. On the contrary, if I had acted in opposition to these views, although my conduct might have been agreeable to the dictates of a more enlightened under- standing than my own, yet, with respect to myself, the action would have been wrongj , If the doctrine of necessity were just, what possible foundation could there be for the distinction we always make between an accidental hurt and an intended in- jury, when received from another ? or for the different sentiments of regret and of remorse that we experience, according as the misfortunes we suffer are the conse- quences of our own misconduct or not 1 What an al- leviation of our sufferings when we are satisfied that we cannot consider ourselves as the authors of them! and what a cruel aggravation of our miseries, when we can trace them to something in which we have been obviously to blame ! * * Sir W. Ilamilton accepts the fact of'moral liberty on the evidence of consciousness ; still he finds insuperable difficulties in conceiving of its pos- sibility. In a note on Dr. Rcid's definition of the liberty of a moral agent, he says : — " Moral liberty does not merely consist in the power of doing what we will, but in the power of willing what we will. For a power over the determinations of our will supposes an act of will that our will should determine so and so ; for we can only freely exert power through a rational determination or volition. But then question upon question remains, and this ad infinitum. Have we a power (a will) over such anterior will ? and until this question be definitively answered, which it never can be, we must be unalile to conceive the po.isibiliti/ of the fact of liberty. But, though incon- ceivable, this fact is not therefore /a/se. For there are many contradic- tories (and of contradictories, one must, and one only can, be truel, of which we are equally unable to conceive the possibility of either. The philoso- phy, therefore, which I profess, annihilates the theoretical problem, — How is the scheme of liberty, or the scheme of necessity, to be rendered com- prehensible ^ — by showing that both schemes are equally inconceivable ; but it establishes liberty practically as a fact, by showing that it is either itself an inimediate datum, or is involved in an immediate datum of con- sciousness. . Again he says : — "To conceive a free act is to conceive an act whien, buing a cause, is not in itself an effect; in other words, to conceive an ab- THE THEORY AS INFLUENCING PRACTICE. 309 Section IV. OF THE SCHEMES OF FREE WILL, AND OF NECESSITY, CONSIDERED AS IiNFLUEXCIXG PRACTICE. I. Tendency of the Scheme of Necessity to Pantheism and Atheism.] Collins, in his inquiry concerning hu- solute commencement. But is such liy ns conceivable'?" According to lijm, in 6rdcr to be a free agent it is not enough that a person is the cause of the determination of his own will : lie must not be " determined to tliat determination." " But is the person," be asks, " an original undetermined cau.ie of the determination of his will ? If he be not, then he is not a free :i;_'-ent, and the scheme of necessity is admitted. If he be, in the first place, it is impossible to conceive the possibility of this ; and, in the second, if the fii't. though inconceivable, be allowed, it is impossible to see how a cavse vndilf^-niined by any motive can be a rational, moral, and accountable cause. There is no conceivable medium between ya/a//sni and casuism; and the contradictory schemes of libeity and necessity themselves arc inconceiva- ble. For as we cannot compass in thought an undetermined cause, — an abso- lute commencement, — the fundamental hypothesis of the one j so we can as little think an injinite series of determined causes, • — of relative commencenn^its, ■ — the fundamental hypothesis of the other. The champions of the oppo- site doctrines are thus at once resistless in assault, and impotent in defence. Each is hewn down, and appears to die under the home-thrusts of his ad- versary ; but each again recovers life from tlie very death of his antago- nist, and, to borrow a simile, both are like the heroes in Valhalla, rc.idy in a moment to amuse themselves anew in the bloodless and interminable conflict. '• The doctrine of moral liberty cannot be made conceivable, for we can only conceive the determined and the relative. As already stated, all that can be done is to show, — 1st. That, for \\ie fact of liberty, we have, im- mediately or mediately, the evidence of consciousness ; and, 2d. That there are, among the phenomena of mind, many facts which we must admit as actual, but of whose possibility we are wholly unable to form a notion. I may merely observe, that tlie fact of motion can be shown to be impossible, on grounds not less strong than those on which it is attempted to disprove the fact of liberty ; to say nothing of many contradictories, neither of which can he tliought, but one of which must, on the laws of contradiction and excluded middle, necessarily be. This philosophy — the Philosophy oj the Conditioned — has not, however, either in itself, or in relation to its con>.c- qiiences, as yet been developed." — Hamilton's edition of Eeid's AVorks, Essays on the Active Powers, Essay IV. Chap. I. Kant comes to substantially the same conclusions. In his CnVi'c of Pure Reo'on, under the headof ''the antinomy of pure reason" in his '■ Transcendental Dialectic,' he treats of liberty and necessity as consti- tuting one of the " contradictions of transcendental ideas," both the " thesis " and the " antithesis " being demonstrable. Aftenvards, in his Critic of Practical Reason, he maintains the fact of liberty as a corollary of the /act of moral obligation. — Ed. 310 ' FREE AGENCY. man liberty, after endeavouring to show that ^^ liberty can only be grounded on the ' absurd principles of Ep- icurean atheism,' " observes, that " the Epicurean athe- ists, who were the most popular and most numerous sect of the atheists of antiquity, were the great assert- ers of liberty ; * as, on the other side, the Stoics, who were the most popular and numerous sect among the religionists of antiquity, were the great asserters oi fate and necessity. The case was also the same among the Jews as among the heathens.f The Sadducees, who were esteemed an irreligious and atheistical sect, main- tained the liberty of man. But the Pharisees, who were a religious sect, ascribed all things to fate or to God's appointment ; and it was the first article of their creed, that Fate and God do all,; and consequently, they could not assert a true liberty, when they asserted a liberty together with this fatality and necessity of all things." J • In proof of this assertion, that the ancient Epicureans were arlvo- cates for man's free agency, Collins refers to Lucretius, Lib. II v. 251; e( seq. But it is to be observed that the liberty here ascribed to the will is nothing more than the liberty of spontaneit)/, which is conceded to it by Collins, and indeed by all necessitarians, without exception, since the time of Hobbes. Lucretius, indeed, speaks of this liberty as an exception to universal fatalism ; but he nevertheless considers it as a necessary effect of some cause, to which he gives the name of cUnamen, so as to render man as completely a piece of passive mechanism as he was supposed to be by Collins and Hobbes. The reason, too, which he gives for this is, that, if the case were otherwise, there would be an effect witliout a cause. — Ibid., v. 284. t With respect to the opinions of the Sa/ieno7nena, simple attributes of that one and absolute substance, but attributes which are coeternal with their substance : for as phenomena cannot e.xist without a subject, the imperfect without the per- fect, the finite without the infinite, and man and nature suppose God ; so, likewise, the substance cannot exist without phenomena, the perfect with- out the imperfect, the infinite without the finite, and God on his part sup- poses man and nature. The error of his system lies in the predominance of the relation of phenomenon to being, of attribute to substance, over the relation of effect to cause. When man has been represented, not as a cause voluntary and free, but as necessary and uncontrollable desire, and as an imperfect and finite thought, God, or the supreme pattern of human- ity, can be only a substance, and not a cause, — a being perfect, infinite, necessary, — the immutable suistance of the universe, and not its producing and creating cause. In Cartesianism, the notion of substance figures more 312 FREE AGENCY. II. Moral and Political Tendencies of the Scheme oj Necessity.] In Bernier's Ab'rigi de la Philosophie de Gassendi, there are some very judicious observations on the practical tendency of the scheme of necessity ; — a subject on which his opinion is entitled to great weight, not only from his long residence among the fol- lowers of Mahomet, but from those prepossessions in favor of this scheme which he may be presumed to have imbibed from his education under Gassendi. I shall quote a few of his concluding reflections. conspicuously than that of cause ; and this notion of substance, become altogether predominant, constilutos Spinozism.' — Histoire de la Philoso- phie du XVIIl" Slide, Tome, I. p. 465. " The preponderance of tlic notion of substance and atdibute over that of cause and effect, wliicli Cousin here pronounces the vice of Spinoza's system, is indeed the vice of every system wliich contains the do;;ma of tlie necessary determination of will. The fii'st consequence i.s panthei.'im ; the second, atheism. I will endeavour to explain. When self dctermimi- tion is denied to will, and it is resolved into mere desire, necessitated in all its acts from its preconstitutcd correlation with objects, then will really ceas- es to be a cause. It becomes an instrument of antecedent ]iowcr. hut is no power in itself, creative or productive. The reasoning employed in refer- ence to the human will applies in all its force to the Divine will, as has been already abundantly sliown. The Divine will therefore ceases to be a cause, and becomes a mere instrument of antecedent power. This antece- dent power is the infinite and necessary wisdom : but infinite and necessary wisdom is eternal and unchangeable ; what it is now, it always was ; what tendencies or energies it has now, it always had ; and therefore, whatever volitions it now necessarily produces, it always necessarily produced. If we conceive a volition to have been, in one direction, the immediate and necessary antecedent of creation ; and, in another, the immediate and ne- cessary sequent of infinite and eternal wisdom ; then this volition mvst have always existed, and consequently creation, as the necessary, effect of this vo- lition, mvst have always existed. The eternal and infinite wisdom thus he- comes the substance, becau.sc this is existence in itself, no antecedent being conceivable; and creation, that is to say, wan and witnre. imperfect and finite, participating only of existence, and not being existence in them- selves, are not substances, huX phenomena. But what is the relation of the phenomena to the substance'! Not that of effect to cause ; — this relation slides entirely out of view, the moment will ceases to be a cause. It is the relation simply of phenomena to being, con.sidered as the neecssiiiy and inseparable manifestations of being; the relation of attributes to substaiiie, considered as the necessary and inseparable properties of substance. Wo cannot conceive of substance without attributes or phenomena, nor of at- tributes or phenomena without substance: they are, therefore, eoeternal in this relation. 117iO, then, is God 1 Substance and its attributes ; being and its phenomena. In other words, the universe, as made up of substance anil attributes, is God. This is pantheism ; and it is the first and legiti- mate consequence of a necessitated will. THE THEORY AS INFLUENCING PRACTICE. 313 " De tout ceci jugez si j'ai sujet de croire cette doc- trine si pernicieuse a la societe humaine. Certaine- tnent u. cousiderer que ce soiit principalement les Ma- hometans qui s'en trouvent infectees, et que c'est prin- cipalement encore parmi elles presentement qu'elle est fomentee et entretenue, je douterois presque que ce fut I'invention de quelques uns de ces tyrans d'Asie, comme auroit peut-etre un Mahomet, un Tamerlane, un Baja- zet, ou quelqu'un de ces autres fieaux du monde qui pour assouvir leur ambition demandoit des soldats qui " The second consequence is atheism. In the denial of will as a cause per se, — in resolving all its volitions into the necessary phenomena of the eternal substance, — we destroy personality : we have nothing remaining hiit the universe. Now we may call the universe God: but with equal proprie- ty we call God tfie universe. This distinction of personality, this merging of God into necessary substance and attributes, is all that we mean by atheism. The conception is really the same, whether we name it fate, pan- theism, or atheism. " The arguments of many atheists might be refen-ed to, to illustrate the connection between necessity and atheism. I shall here refer, however, to only one individual, remarkable both for his poetic genius and metaphysi- cal acumen. I mean the late Percy Bysshe Shelley. He openly and uu- blushingly professed atheism. In his Queen Mab we find this line : ' There is no God.' In a note upon this line, he remarks. — ' This negation must be understood solely to affect a creative Deity. The hypothesis of a per- vading spirit, coetemal with the universe, remains unshaken.' This last hy- pothesis is pantheism. Pantheism is really the negation of a creative De- ity, — the identity, or at least necessary and eternal coexistence, of God and the universe. Shelley has expressed this clearly in another passage : — ' Spirit of nature ! all-sufficing power. Necessity I thou motlier of the world I ' " In a note upon this passage, Shelley has argued the doctrine of the necessary determination of will by motive with an acuteness and power scarcely inferior to Collins or Edwards. He makes, indeed, a different application of the doctrine, but a perfectly legitimate one. Collins and Edwards, and the whole race of necessitarian theologians, evidently toil under insurmountable difficulties, while attempting to base "religion upon this doctrine, and effect their escape only under a fog of subtilties. But Shelley, in d-iring to be perfectly consistent, is perfectly clear. He fear- lessly proceeds from necessity to pantheism, and thence to atheism and the destruction of all moral distinctions. ' We are taught,' he remarks, ' by the doi'trine of necessity, that there is neither good nor evil in the universe, othci-wisc than as the^events to which we apply these epithets have relation to our own peculiar mode of being. Still less than with the hypothesis of a God, will the doctrine of necessity accord with the belief of a future state of punishment.'" — Tstppan's Review of Edwards, pp. 139, 145. For an exposition of Spinoza's theory, see Jouffroy's Introduction to Ethics, Tiect VI. and VII. — Ed. 27 314 FREE AGENCY. 6tant entetes de predestination, s'abandonassent brutale- ment k tout, et se precipitassent meme volontiers, aux occasions, la tete la premiere dans le foss6 d'une ville assiegee pour servir du pont au reste de I'arnii'e. Je s^ais bien qu'on pourroit peut-etre dire que cette opin- ion est mal prise et mal entendue par les Mahometans ; mais quoi qu'il en soit, que doit on raisonablement pen- ser d'une doctrine qui pent si aisement etre mal-prise et qui pent, soit par erreur ou autrement, avoir si etranges suites ? " * The scheme of free will is not liable to any such ob- jection, inasmuch as it seems quite impossible for the most ingenious sophistry to pervert it to any pernicious purpose. Indeed, its great object is to reconcile with the conclusions of our reason those moral feelings which are so essential, both to our own happiness and to the interests of society, that they have been regarded by some of the most acute as well as candid partisans of necessity as merciful illusions of the imagination, by which man is blinded to the melancholy fact of his real condition : " Nervis alienis mobile lignum ! " There is good reason to believe that the practical consequences produced by the scheme of necessity at the time of the Reformation alarmed the minds of some very able men by whom it was at first adopted. * Tome VIII. p. 536 et seq. " Judge from what has been said whether I have not reason to think tliis doctrine pernicious to society. Indeed, when I consider that it is principally the Mahometans who are infected with it, that it is principally by them that it is still fomented and kept up, I almost suspect it to have been the invention of one of tho-ie Asiatic despots, of a Mahomet, a Tamerlane, a Bajazet, or some other scoiirge of the world, who, in order to glut his ambition, required soldiers besot- ted by a belief in predestination, and therefore ready to abandon them- selves brutally to every thing, — to precipitate themselves headlong, if ne- cessary, into the trenches of a besieged city to serve as a bridge for the rest oiF the army. Many will say, I am aware, that this doctrine is mis- taken and misunderstood by the Mahometans ; but, however this may be, what opinion can we reasonably entertain of a tenet which is so liable to be misapprehended, and is followed, either through mistake or otherwise, by such strange consequences 1 " For a less unfavorable view of the practical tendency of a belief in ne- cessitv, see an article by Sir James Mackintosh, in the Edinburgh Review. Vol. XXVII. p. 180. — Ed. THE THEORY AS INFLUENCING PRACTICE. 315 " The Germans," says Dr. Burnet, " saw the ill effects of the doctrine of decrees. Luther changed his mind about it, and Melancthon wrote openly against it ; and since that time the whole stream of the Lutheran churches has run the other way. But still Calvin and Bucer w^ere both for maintaining the doctrine ; only they warned the people not to think much about them, since they were secrets that men could not penetrate into. Hooper and many other good writers did often exhort the people from entering into these curiosities ; and a caveat to the same purpose was put into the article about predestination." * " Concerning the disputants themselves," says Dr. Jortin, " we may safely affirm, that the defenders of the liberty of man, and of the conditional decrees of God, have been, beyond all comparison, the more learned, ju- dicious, and moderate men; and that severity and op- pression have appeared most on the other side." f Priestley has somewhere very justly remarked, that there are some men so happily born that no speculative theories are likely to mislead them from their duty; and of the truth of his observation I sincerely believe that his own private life afforded a very striking exam- ple. Little stress, therefore, is to be laid on individual cases as arguments for or against the practical tenden- cy of any philosophical dogma. The case, however, is very different with respect to observations made on so great a scale as those above quoted from Bernier and Burnet Let me add, that the practical influence of the scheme of necessity ought not to be judged of from the lives of its speculative partisans, but from those of persons who have been educated from their early years in the belief of it. In this point of view, it might be interesting to trace the history of the im- mediate descendants of some of the most zealous ad- vocates for necessity. If the principles which they have advanced be just, particularly those they have laid * Burnet on the Reformation, Part II. p. 113- f Six Dissertations, Diss. I. p. 4. 316 . FREE AGENCY. down on the influence of education, the moral charac- ters of their pupils should, or rather must, be exemplary in no common degree. Section V. ON THE ARGUMENT FOR NECESSITY DRAWN FROM THE PRESCIENCE OF THE DEITY. I. The Argument stated and answered.] In reviewing the arguments that have been advanced on the oppo- site sides of this question, I have hitherto taken no no- tice of those which the necessitarians have founded on the prescience of the Deity, because I do not think them fairly applicable to the subject ; inasmuch as 1 hey draw an •inference from what is altogether placed be- yond the reach of our faculties, against a fact for which every man has the evidence of his own consciousness. Some of the advocates, however, for liberty have ven- tured to meet their adversaries even on this ground; in particular, Dr. Clarke, in his Demonstration of the Be- ing and Attributes of God, and Dr. Reid, in his Essays on the Active Poioers of Man. Both of these writers have attempted to show, with much ingenuity and sub- tilty of reasoning, that, even although we should admit the prescience of God in the fullest extent in which it has ever been ascribed to him, it does not lead to any conclusion inconsistent with man's free agency. On their speculations on this point I have no commentary to offer. The argument for necessity, drawn from the Divine prescience, is much insisted on both by Collins and Ed- wards ; more especially by the latter, who, after insist- ing at great length on " God's certain foreknowledge of the volitions of moral agents," undertakes to show that "this /ore/(;«0M;/e6^e infers a necessity of volition as much as an absolute decree." Mr. Belsham, on this as on other occasions, rises above his predecessors in the boldness of his assertions. "The principal argument in, favor of moral necessity, PRESCIENCE OF THE DEITY. 317 and the insurmountable objection against the existence of philosophical liberty in any degree, or under any re- strictions whatever, arises fnom the prescience of God. Liberty and prescience stand in direct hostility to each other. A philosopher, to be consistent, must give up one or the other." " Upon the whole, the advocates for philosophical liberty are reduced to the dilemma, either of denying the foreknowledge of God, and thus robbing- the Deity of one of his most glorious attributes, or of admitting that God is the author of evil, in the same sense, and in the same degrees, in which this doc- trine is charged upon the necessarians."* On this argument I shall make but one remark, that, if it be conclusive, it only serves to identify still more the creed of the necessitarians with that of Spinoza. For if God certainly foresees all the future volitions of his creatures, he must, for the same reason, foresee all his own future volitions ; and if this foreknowledge in- fers a necessity of volition in the one case, how is it possible to avoid the same inference in the other ? Mr. Belsham seems to have been not unaware of this infer- ence ; but shows no disposition, on account of it, to shrink from his principles. " It is always to be remem- bered that the prescience of an agent necessarily in- cludes predestination, though that of a spectator may not. It is nonsense to say that a being does not mean to bring an event to pass which he foresees to be the certain and inevitable consequence of his own previ- ous voluntary action." f I have already mentioned the attempt of Clarke and others to show that no valid argument against the scheme of free will can be deduced from the prescience of God, even supposing that prescience to extend to all the actions of voluntary beings. On this point I must decUne offering any opinion of my own, because I con- ceive it as placed far beyond the reach of our faculties. It is sufficient for my purpose to observe, that, if it could be demonstrated (which, in my opinion, has not * Elements, pp. 293, 302. t Elements, p. 307. 27* 318 FREE AGENCY. yet been done) that th,e prescience of the volitions of moral agents is incompatible with the free agency of man, the logical inference would be, not in favor of the scheme of necessity, but that there are some events the foreknowledge of which implies an impossibility. Shall we venture to affirm that it exceeds the power of God to permit such a train of contingent events to take place, as his own foreknowledge shall not extend to ? Does not such a proposition detract from the omnipo- tence of God, in the same proportion in which it aims to exalt his omniscience ? * * The strength of Edwards's argutnGnt to prove that " no future event can be certainly foreknown, whose existence is contingent, and without all necessity," may be summed up in the fallowing syllogism : — It is impossible for a thing to be certainly known to any intellect with- out evidence. A contingent future event is withont evidence. Therefore, a contingent future event is a thing impossible to be certainly known. Mr. Tappan says : — "I dispute both premises. That which is known hy evidence or proof \s mediate knowledge; — that is, we know it through something which is immediate, standing between the faculty of knowledge and the object of knowledge in question. That which is known intuitive- ly is known witl^ut proof; and this is immediate knowledge. In this way all axioms or first truths, and aU facts of the senses, are known. Indeed, evidence itself implies immediate knowledge, for the evidence by which any thing is known is itself immediate knowledge. To a Being, therefore, whose knowledge fills duration, future and past events may be as immedi- ately known as present events. Indeed, can we conceive of God otherwise than as immediatclij knowint] all things ? An Infinite and Eternal Intelli- gence cannot he thought of under relations of time and space, or as arriv- ing at knowledge through media of proof or demonstration. So much for the first premise. The second is efpially untenable: — 'A contingent fu- ture event i.s without evidence.' We grant with Edwards that it is not self-evident, implying by that the evidence arising from ^the necessity of its nature,^ as, for example, 2X2^4. What is self-evident [from being im- mediately perceived^ does not require any [other] evidence or proof, but is known immediately ; and a future contingent event may be self-evident [in this sense] as a fact lying before the Divine mind reaching into futurity, although it cannot be self-evident from ' the necessity of its nature.' " — Review of Edirards, p. 256. The following remarks on the same subject are from Dr. Copleston's Incfainj into the Doctrines of Necessity and Predestination, p. 45, note. " Ed- wards, in his work on the Freedom of the Will, dwells much upon the dis- tinction between making the event necessary, and provim) it to be necessary. 'Whether prescience,' he Bays, ' be the thing that mate the event necessary or no, it alters not the case. Infallible foreknowledge may p-ove the ne- cessity of the event foreknown, and yet not be the thing that causes the ne- PRESCIENCE OF THE DEITY. 319 11. Source of the General Prevalence of Fatalism amonff Unenlightened Nations.] It is a circumstance not a little curious in the history of the human mind, that, while men have been in all ages impressed with this irresistible conviction of their own free agency, they have nevertheless had a proneness, not only to ad- mit the prescience of God in its fullest extent, but to suppose that there is a fatal and irresistible destiny attending every individual. Traces of this opinion occur in every country of the world of whiclj we have received any account. We meet with it among the sages of Greece, and among the ignorant and unenlight- ened natives of St. Kilda. The following Arabian tale, which I quote from the late Mr. Harris, will place the import of the doctrine I now allude to in a more strik- ing light than I could possibly do by any philosophical comment. " The Arabians tell us," says this author, " that as Solomon (whom they supposed a magician from his su- perior wisdom) was one day walking with a person in Palestine, his companion said to him with horror, ' What hideous spectre is that which approaches us? I don't like his visage. Send me, I pray thee, to the remotest mountain of India.' Solomon complied, cessity.' Part IT. Sect. XII. But infallible foreknowledge, while it re- mains foreknowledge, proves nothing. When the being which possesses this foreknowledge declnres that a thing will come to pass, that declaration indeed proves, or is a certain ground of- assurance to us, that it wilt come to pass. Even then it does not p^ove the event to be necessary. " If, however, the question be regarded as merely logical, namely, wheth- er the very term foreknowledge does not imply a necessity in the thing fore- known, it must be decided by the established use of words. That such is not the received definition of the term may, I believe, be with confidence asserted ; and the confusion, whenever it does prevail, seems to arise from the following cause. We may be unable to conceive how a thing not necessary in its nature can be foreknown ; for our foreknowledge is in gen- eral limited by that circumstance, and is more or less perfect in proportion to the fixed or necessary nature of the things we contemplate, with which nature we become acquainted by experience, and are thus able to antici- pate a gi'cat variety of events ; but to subject the knowledge of God to any such limitation is surely absurd and unphilosophical, as well as impi- ous ; and, therefore, to mix up the idea of God's foreknowledge with any quality in the nature of the things foreknown is even less excusable thaa to be guilty of that confusion when speaking of ourselves." — Ed. 320 FREE AGENCY. and the very moment he was sent off the spectre ar- rived, ' Solomon,' said the spectre, ' how came that fellow here ? I was to have fetched him from the re- motest mountain of India.' Solomon answered, ' An- gel of Death, thou wilt find him there.' " * The general prevalence of fatalism among unenlight- ened nations is the obvious effect of the insidious les- sons inculcated by their religions instructors. The chief expedient employed by the pHesthood in all rude countries for subjecting the minds of the people is to impress them with a belief that it is possible, by the study of auguries, of omens, or of judicial astrology, to gratify that misguided curiosity which disposes blind mortals anxiously to tear asunder the merciful veil drawn by Providence over futurity. " "Wherever super- stition," says Dr. Rqbertson, " is so established as to form a regular system, this desire of penetrating into the secrets of futurity is connected with it. Divination becomes a religious act ; and priests, as the ministers of Heaven, pretend to deliver its oracles to man> They are the only soothsayers, augurs, and magicians who possess the sacred and important art of disclosing what is hid from other eyes." f III. No Dogma sufficient to efface the Consciousness of Moral Liberty.] Between this creed and that of an inevitable fate or destiny the connection is necessary " Philosophical Inquiries, Part III. Chap. VII. The following remark of M. Ancillon upon the difference between the Mahometan doctrine of destiny, and that which prevailed upon tlie same subject among the ancient Greek.?, appears to me just and important. " II y a unc grande diffiircnco entre le destin des Oriontaux, surtout depuis que Mahomet a fait, d'uno doctrine g6ncralemont repandue avant Ini, un article de foi, ct le I'olytho- isme Grec. Le Grec lutte contro Ic destin, et tout en succombant sous sa force, il fait prouvo de libortfi : le Maliomctan se rcsigno en aveugic nvant rivonemcnt; lors mCme qu'il agit, il agit en homme ii qui Taction no ser- vira de ricn. Le premier murmure contre ce pouvoir, et le supporto avcc impatience; le second s'on fclicito parce qu'il di.spense do I'activite. Los Grecs plai;oicnt la force avcugle dans le destin ; et la pensee qui lui resistc, ct qui le combat, dans I'homme ; chez les Mahometans la force avcugle est dans riiommc ; cette force n'est qu'une force passive, ct la pensee est dans le destin." — Essais Philoso]ihiqmi, Tome I. pp. 150, 151. t History of America, Book IV. PRESCIENCE OF THE DEITY. 321 and obvious ; and hence in every false religion the scheme of fatalism may be expected to form, not only an essential, but the fundamental article. The inconsid- erable influence which this theological dogma (a dog- ma, too, peculiarly calculated to atfect and even to over- whelm the imagination) has always had in stifling the sentiment of remorse on the commission of a crime, aflbrds a demonstrative proof of the impotence of such scholastic reSnements, when opposed to the feelings of nature, on a question concerning which these feelings form the only tribunal to which a legitimate appeal can be made. That a criminal, in order to alleviate the pang of remorse, may have sometimes sought for relief in this doctrine, is far from being improbable ; but no man ever acted on this belief in the common concerns of human life; and, indeed, some of its most zealous partisans have acknow^ledged (particularly Lord Karnes), that, were it to prevail universally as a practical princi- ple, the business of the world could not possibly go on. In the ancient Stoical system (as I have already ob- served), the doctrine of fatalism and that of man's free agency were both admitted as fundamental articles of belief. " By fate," says Mrs. Carter, " the Stoics seem to have understood a series of events appointed by the immutable councils of God, or that law of his provi- dence by which he governs the world. It is evident by their writings that they meant it in no sense which interferes with the liberty of human actions." Of the truth of this remark the most satisfactory evidence is afforded by the very first sentence of the Enchiridion of Epictetus, in which it is explicitly stated, that " opinion, pursuit, desire, and aversion, and, in one word, what- ever are our own actions, are in our own power." * * That the doctrine of fatah'sm, however, led some of the Stoics to very impious and alarming consequences, appears from the following words, which liUcan puts into the mouth of Cato, " Summum Brute nefas civilia bella fatcmnr, Sed quo fata trahunt, virtus secura sequetur; Crimen erit superis et mefeclsse nocentem." Phar. XL 254. See, also, Lib. VII. 657. — Copleston, Prcelect. Acad., p. 277. 322 FREE AGENOY. Such, too, is the philosophy of Virgil: — " Stat sua cuique dies, breve et irreparabile tompuB 0niriil)us eit vitaj ; sod famani extendere factis Hoc virtutis opus." * The doctrine, however, of fatalism, and of an inevi- table destiny, must not be confounded with that of the Divine prescience, between which and the freedom of human actions some of our profoundest philosophers, as I have already observed (particularly Clarke and Reid), have labored to show that there is no inconsis- tency ; while other writers of no less eminence have ap- prehended that there is no absurdity in supposing that the Deity may, for wise purposes, have chosen to open a source of contingency in the voluntary actions of his creatures, to which no prescience can possibly extend. Whatever opinion we may adopt on this point, the conclusions formerly stated concerning man's free agen- cy remain unshaken. Our own free will we know by our consciousness ; and we can have no evidence for any other truth so irresistible as this. On the other hand, it would unquestionably be rash and impious in us, from the fact of our own free will, to deny that our actions may be foreseen by the Deity, or to measure the Divine attributes by a standard borrowed from our im- perfect faculties. The conclusion of St. Augustine on this subject is equally pious and philosophical. " Where- fore we are nowise reduced to the necessity, either by admitting the prescience of God, to deny the freedom of the human will, or by admitting the freedom of the will to hazard the impious assertion, that the prescience * jEneid., Lib. X. 467. " To all that breathe is fixed the appointed date ; Life is but short, and cireumscribed by fate : 'T is virtue's work by fame to stretch the span, Whose scanty limit bounds the days of man." The notions of Virgil, however, on this point, as is well observed by Servius, do not seem to have been quite consistent. How are the follow- ing lines, which he applies to Dido, to be reconciled with the above pas- sage 1 " Kam quia nee fato, meritH nee morte peribat ; Sed misera ante diem." — Idem, Lib. IV. 695. PRESCIENCE OF THE DEITY. 323 of God does not extend to all future contingencies : but, on the contrary, we are disposed to embrace both doctrines, and with sincerity to bear testimony to their truth, — the one that our faith may be sound, the other that our lives may be good." * * The following passage in one of Cray's letters has a sufficient connec- tion with what is said above to justify me in jfiving it a place here. In- deed, were the connection much sli{j;liter and less obvious than it is, little apology would be necessary for relieving the attention of the reader by quoting any thing relating to so important a subject from such a pen. '• I am as sorry as you seem to be, that our acquaintance harped so much on the subject of materialism when I saw him with you in town, becau.se it was plain to which side of the long-debated question he inclined. That we are, indeed, mechanical and dependent beings. 1 need no other proof than my own feelings ; and from the same feelings I Icarn with equal con- viction, that we arc not merely such. That there is a power within which struggles against the force and bias of that mechanism, commands its mo- tion, and by frequent practice reduces it to that ready obedience we call habit; and all this in conformity to a preconceived opinion (no mattir whether right or wrong), — to that least material of all agents, a tliovylit. I have known many in his case, who, while they thought they were con- quering an old prejudice, did not perceive that they were under the influ- ence of one far more dangerous, — - one that furnishes us with a ready apolotry for all our worst actions, and opens to us a full license fur doing whatever we plea.se ; and yet these very people were not at all the more indulgent to other men (as they naturally should have been) ; their indig- nation at such as oflFended them, their desire of revenge on any body that hurt them, was nothing mitigated. In short, they wished to be persuaded of that opinion for the sake of its convenience, but were not so in their hearts ; and they would have been glad (as they ought in common pru- dence) that nobody else should think the same, for fear of the mischief that might ensue to themselves. His French author I never saw, but have read fifty in the same strain, and shall read no more. / can be wretched enoiic/h willumt tliein." — Works, by Mason, Letter XXXI. I shall avail myself of this note to remark, that, on the subject of free will, though Locke has thrown out many iniportant observations, he is on the whole more indistinct, undecided, and inconsistent than might have been expected from his powerful mind, when directed to bo important a question. This was probably owing to his own strong feelings in favor of man's moral liberty, combined with the deep impression left on his philo- sophical creed by the writings of Hobbes, and by the habits of intimacy and friendship in which he lived with the acutest and ablest of all neces sitarians, Anthony Collins. That Locke conceived him.self to be an ad\'o- cate for free will appears indisputably from many expressions in his chap- ter On Power ; and yet in that very chapter he has made various conces- sions to his adversaries, in which he seems to yield all that was contended for by Hobbes and Collins ; and accordingly, he is ranked, with some ap- pearance of truth, by Priestley, with those who, while they opposed verbal- ly the scheme of necessity, have adopted it substantially, without being aware of their mistake. [To the multitude of works cited or referred to in this chapter may be 324 FREE AGENCY. added the following : — Crombie's Essay on Philosophical Necessity ; Bray's Philosophy of Necessity ; Coga.n's Ethical Questions, Question IV.; Sir T. C. Morgan's Sketclies of the Philosophy of Morals, Chap. II. ; Bailey's Es- says on the Pursuit of Truth, ^c, Essay III. ] Gregory's Essay in Defence of Philosophical Liberty ; Bockshammer On the Freedom of the Hainan Will; Charma, Essai sur les Bases et les Developpements de la Moraliti, Part. I. Sect. I., II.; Damiron, Psychologic, Liv. 1. Sect. II Cliap. Ill ; Ballantyne's Examiiiation of the Human Mind, Chap. Ill ; Gibon, Covrs de Philosophie, Part. I. Chap. XIII. ; Blakey's Essay showing tlte Intimate Con- nection between our Notions of Moral Good and Evil and our Conceptions of the Freedom of the Divine and Human Wills ; Harvey's Eramination of l/ie Pelagian and Arminian Theory of Moral Agency ; Day's Inquiry respecting the Self-determining Power of tlie Will ; Day's ExamiruUion of President Edwards's Inquiry on tile Freedom of the WiU.] BOOK III. OF THE VARIOUS BRANCHES OF OUR BVTY. The different theories which have been proposed con- cerning the nature and essence of virtue have arisen chiefly from attempts to trace all the branches of our duty to one principle of action; — such as a rational self-love, benevolence, justice, or a disposition to obey the will of God. In order to avoid those partial views of the subject which naturally take their rise from an undue love of system, the following inquiries proceed on an arrange- ment which has, in all ages, recommended itself to the good sense of mankind. This arrangement is founded on the different objects to which our duties relate. 1st. The Deity. 2d. Our Fellow- Creatures. And, 3d. Ourselves. CHAPTER I. OF THE. DUTIES WHICH RESPECT THE DEITY. I. The Duty of Religious Consideration.] It is scarcely possible to conceive a man capable of reflec- tion, who has not, at times, proposed to himself the following questions: — Whence am I? and whence the innumerable tribes of plants and of animals which I see, in constant succession, rising into existence? Wlience the beautiful fabric of this universe ? and by what wise and powerful Being were the principles of my constitution so wonderfully adapted to the various objects around me ? To whom am I indebted for the 23 326 DUTIES TO GOD. distinguished rank which I hold in the creation, and for the numberless blessings which have fallen to my lot? And what return shall I make for this profusion of goodness ? The only return I can make is by ac- com.modating my conduct to the will of my Creator, and by fulfilling, as far as I am able, the purposes of my being. But how are these purposes to be discovered? The analogy of the lower animals gives me here no infor- mation. They, too, as well as I, are endowed with va- rious instincts and appetites; but their nature, on the whole, exhibits a striking contrast to mine. They are impelled. by a blind determination towards their proper objects, and seem to obey the law of their nature in yielding to every principle which excites them to ac- tion. In my own species alone the case is different. Every individual chooses for himself the ends of his pursuit, and chooses the means which he is to employ for attaining them. Are all these elections equally good? and is there no law prescribed to man? I feel the reverse. I am able to distinguish what is right from what is wrong; what is honorable and becoming from what is unworthy and base ; what is laudable and meritorious from what is shameful and criminal. Here, then, are plain indications of the conduct I oiig-ht to pursue. There is a law prescribed to man as well as to the brutes. The only difference is, that it depends on my own will whethej I obey or disobey it. And shall I alone counteract the intentions of. my Maker, by abusing that freedom of choice which he has been pleased to bestow on me, by raising me to the rank of a rational and moral being ? This is surely the language of nature; and which could not fail to occur to every man capable of serious thought, were not the understanding and the moral feelings in some instances miserably perverted by relig- ious and political prejudices, and in others by the false refinements of metaphysical theories. How callous must be that heart which does not echo back the reflections which Milton puts into the mouth of our first parent ? DUTIES TO GOD. 327 " Thou sun, said I, fair light. And thou, enlightened earth, so fresh and gay, Ye hills and dales, ye rivet's, woods, and plains, And ye that live and move, fair creatures, tell. Tell, if you saw, how came I thus, liow here ; Not of myself; by some great maker then, In goodness, as in power, preeminent ; Tell me how I may know him, how adore. From wliom I have, that thus I move and live, And feel that I am happier than I know." II. The Duty of Piety.] If the Deity be possessed of infinite moral excellence, we must feel towards him, in an infinite degree, all those affections of love, grati- tude, and confidence, which are excited by the imper- fect worth ■we observe among our fellow-creatures. Now it is only by conceiving all that is benevolent and amiable in man raised to the highest perfection, that we can form some faint notion of the Divine nature. To cultivate, therefore, an h^itual love and reverence of the Supreme Being may be justly considered as the first great branch of morality ; nor is the virtue of that roan complete, or even consistent with itself, in whose mind those sentiments of piety are wanting. Piety seems to be considered by Mr. Smith as found- ed in some degree on those principles of our nature which connect us with our fellow-creatures. The de- jection of mind which accompanies a state of complete solitude; the disposition we have to impart to others our thoughts and feelings ; the desire we have of other intelligent and moral natures to sympathize with our own, — all lead us, in the progress of reason and of moral perception, to establish gradually a mental inter- course wth the Invisible Witness and Judge of our conduct. An habitual sense of the Divine presence comes at last to be formed. In every object or event that we see, we trace the hand of the Almighty, and in the suggestions of reason and conscience we listen to his inspirations. In this intercourse of the heart with God, (an intercourse which enlivens and gladdens the most desolate scenes, and which dignifies the duties of the meanest station,) the supreme felicity of our jia- ture is to be found ; and till it is firmly established, 328 DUTIES TO GOD. there remains a void in every breast which nothing earthly can supply ; — a consideration which proves that religion has a foundation in the original principles of our constitution, while it affords us a presage of that immortal happiness which Providence has destined to be the reward of virtue.* III. Religion necessary as a Support to Public and Private Virtue.] Although religion can with no pro- priety be considered as the sole foundation of morality, yet, when we are convinced that God is infinitely good, and that he is the friend and protector of virtue, this belief affords the most powerful inducements to the practice of every branch of our duty. It leads us to consider conscience as the vicegerent of God, and to attend to its suggestions as to the commands of that Being from whom we ha^w-eceived our existence, and the great object of whose government is to promote the happiness and the perfection of his whole creation. These considerations not only are addressed to our gratitude, but awaken in the mind a sentiment of uni- versal benevolence, and make us feel a relation to every part of the universe. In doing our duty, we conceive ourselves as fellow-workers with the Deity, and as will- ing instruments in his hands for promoting the benev- olent purposes of his administration. This is that sub- lime sentiment of piety and benevolence which we meet with so often in the writings of the ancient Stoics. " Shall any one say," observes Antoninus, " ' O be- loved city of Cecrops! ' and wilt not thou say, ' O be- loved city of God ' ? » In this manner it appears that a sense 6f religion is favorable to the practice of virtue in two respects ; first, by leading us to consider every act of duty as an ex- pression of gratitude to God ; and, secondly, as leading us to regard ourselves as parts of that universal system * For a farther consideration o^ this important subject, see Butler's two Sermens Upon Piety, or the Love of God. Also, his Analogy, Part II. Chap. I. — Ed. DUTIES TO GOD. 329 of which he is the Author and Governor. There is another respect in which it is calculated to influence our conduct very powerfully, as it is addressed to our hopes and/ears. In this 'view religion is a species of authoritative Imo, enforced by the most awful sanctions, and of which it is impossible for us, by any art, to elude the penalties. In the case of the lower orders of men, who are incapable of abstract speculation, and whose moral feelings cannot be supposed to have re- ceived much cultivation, it is chiefly this view of re- ligion, as addressed to their hopes and fears, that se- cures a faithful discharge of their duties as members of society. In vain would the civil rnagistrate attempt to preserve the order of society by annexing the penalty of death to heinous offences, if men in general appre- hended that there was nothing to be feared beyond the grave. And it is of importance to remark, that this ob- servation applies with peculiar force to the lower orders, who have commonly much less attachment to life than their superiors. Of this truth, all wise legislators, both ancient and modern, have been aware, and have seen the necessity of maintaining a sense of religion among their fellow-citizens, as the most powerful of all sup- ports to the political order. " Ut aliqua in vita formido improbis esset posita, apud inferose jusmodi quaedam illi antiqui supplicia impiis constituta esse voluerunt; quod videlicet intelligebant his remotis, non esse mor- tem ipsam pertimescendam." * They, on the other * Cic. Catil. IV. " For it was on this account that the ancients invented those infernal punishments of the dead, to keep the wicked under some awe in this life, who, without them, would have no dread of death itself." With these views, it is not surprising that some of the wisest of the heathen writers should have expressed themselves so very stronp:ly con- cerning the guilt incurred by those who, by exposing to ridicule the fabu- lous mythology which formed the popular creed among their contempora- ries, endangered the authority of those moral principles which were iden- tified with it in the vulgar belief. There is good reason for thinking that the secret communicated to the initiated in the Eleusinian mysteries was the uniti) of God; a truth too sublime to be disclosed at once to the unin- formed niultitudo, as it struck at the root of all those fables which were incorporated with their habits of thinking and feeling on tlie most impor- tant subjects. On this supposition we have a satisfaotoiy explanation of a 28* 330 DUTIES TO GOD. hand, who have labored to loosen the bands of society, have found it necessary to begin with perverting or de- stroying the natural sentiments of the mind with respect to a future retribution. In ages when the religious prinr-iples of the multitude were too firmly riveted to be entirely eradicated, they have inculcated theological dogmas subversive of moral distinctions, as in the case of the antinomian teachers during our own civil wars. Jn other and more recent instances, they have avow- edly attempted to establish a system of atheism. So true is the old observation, that the extremes of super- stition and of infidelity unite in their tendency, and so completely verified are now the apprehensions which were expressed eighty years ago by Bishop Butler, that the spirit of irreligion (which, in his time, was begin- ning to grow fashionable among the higher ranks.) might produce some time or other political disorders similar to those which arose from religious fanaticism in the preceding century. " Is there no danger that all this may raise somewhat like the levelling spirit upon atheistical principles, which, in the last age, prevailed upon enthusiastic ones, — not to speak of the possi- bility that different sorts of people may unite in it upon these contrary principles?" * A prediction by a later writer of genius and discern- ment, and one well acquainted with the principles and manners of the world, is not unworthy of attention in the present times, in which we have seen it very re- markably verified in numberless instances. " I shall say nothing at present of the lower ranks of mankind. Though they have not yet got into the fashion of noted passage in Horace, between which and the preceding lines it seems not easy at first to trace any connection. Est et fideli tuta silenfio Merces. Vetabo, qui Cereris sacrum Vulgarit arcana;, sub isdem Sit trabibus, fragilemve mecum Solvat phaselum. Carm. Lib. III. Ode n. * Sermon preached before the Souse of Lords, January 30, 1740. DUTIES TO GOD. 331 laughing at religion, and treating it with scorn and contempt, and I believe are too serious a set of crea- tures ever to come into it, yet we are not to imagine but that the contempt it is held in by those whose ex- amples they are too apt to imitate will in time utterly shake their principles, and render them, if not as pro- fane, at least as corrupt, as their betters. When this event happens, and we begin to feel the effects of it in our dealingst with them, those .who have done the mis- chief will find the necessity at last of turning religious in their own defence, and (for want of a better princi- ple) to set an example of piety and good morals for their own interest and convenience." * Nor is it merely in restraining men from grosser out- rages, that a sense of religion operates as a compulsory law. Without a secret impression (of which it is im- possible that the human mind can divest itself), that there is at all times an invisible witness of our thoughts, it is probable that the virtue of the best men would of- ten yield to temptation. Even amidst the darkness of the heathen world, Xenophon had recourse to this im- pression to account for the inflexible integrity of Soc- rates, when he sat as one of the judges in the celebrat- ed trial of the naval commanders. " Having taken," says Xenophon, " as was customary, the senatorial oath, by which he bound himself to act in all things conform- ably to the laws, and arriving in his turn to be presi- dent of the assembly of the people, he boldly refused to give his suffrage to the iniquitous sentence which con- demned the nine captains, being neither intimidated by the menaces of the great, nor the fury of the people, but steadily preferring the sanctity of an oath to the safety of his person. For he was persuaded the gods watched over the affairs of men, in a way altogether different from what the vulgar imagined ; for while these limited their knowledge to some particulars only, Socrates, on the contrary, extended it to all, firmly persuaded that they are everywhere present, and that * Sterne's Sermons. 332 DUTIES TO GOD. every word, every action, nay, even our most retired de- ■ liberations, were open to their view."* In the last place, a sense of religion, where it is sin- cere, will necessarily be attended with a complete res- ignation of our own will to that of the Deity, as it teaches us to regard every event, even the most af- flicting, as calculated to promote beneficent purposes, which we are unable to comprehend, and to promote, finally, the perfection and happiness of our own nature. This is the best, and, indeed, the only rational founda- tion of fortitude. Nay, it may be safely affirmed (as Socrates long ago observed in the Phcedo of Plato), that whoever founds his fortitude on any thing else is only valiant through fear. In other words, he exposes himself to danger, merely from a regard to the opinion of others, and, of consequence, wants that internal prin- ciple of heroism which can alone arm the mind with patience under those misfortunes which it is condemned to bear in solitude, or under sorrows which prudence conceals from the public eye. But to the man who be- lieves that every thing is ordered for the best, and that his existence and happiness are in the hands of a Being who watches over him with the care of a parent, the difficulties and dangers of life only serve to call forth the latent powers of the soul, by reminding him of the prize for which he combats, and of that beneficent Providence by which the conflict was appointed. Safe in the hands of one disposing Power, Or in the natal or the mortal hour. IV. Religion the First and Chief Branch of Moral Duti/.] The view which I have given of religion, as forming the first and chief branch of moral duty, and as contributing in its turn most powerfully to promote the practice of every virtue, is equally consonant to the spirit of the Sacred Writings, and to the most obvious dictates of reason and conscience ; and accordingly it is sanctioned by the authority of all those philosophers * Memm: Lib. I. Cap. I. DUTIES TO GOD. 333 of antiquity who devoted their talents to the improve- ment and happiness of mankind. " It should never be thought," says Plato in one of his Dialogues, " that there is any branch of human virtue of greater impor- tance than piety towards the Deity." The chief article of the unwritten laiv mentioned by Socrates is, " th-at the gods ought to be worshipped." " This," he says, " is acl?nowledged everywhere, and received by all men as the first command." * And to the same purpose Cicero, in the first book of his Offices, places in the first rank of duties those we owe to the immortal gods. " In ipsa communitate sunt gradus officiorum ex qui- bus, quid cuique prsestet, intelligi possit : ut prima Diis immortalibus ; secunda, patriae; tertia, parentibus, de- inceps gradatim reliquis debeantur." f The elevation of mind which some of the most illus- trious characters of antiquity derived from their relig- ious principles, however imperfect and erroneous, and the weight which these principles gave them in their public and political capacity, are remarked by many ancient writers ; and such, I apprehend, will always be found to be the case when the personal importance of the individual rests on the basis of public opinion. " But he," says Plutarch, " who was most conversant with Pericles, and most contributed to give him a gi-and- eur of mind, and to make his high spirit for governing the popular assemblies more weighty and authorita- tive, — in a word, who exalted his ideas, and raised, at the same time, the dignity of his demeanour, — the person who did this was Anaxagoras the Clazomenian, whom the people of that age reverenced as the first who made mind or intellect (in opposition to chance) a principle in the formation and government of the uni- verse." J * Xen. Mentor. Lib. IV. Cap. IV. t Lib. I. Cap. ult. " In society itself our duties are of different degrees, in which the proper order of preference is readily understood : — first of all, our duties to the immortal gods; secondly, to our country; thirdly, to our parents, and, after them, to other men in their several gradations." I Vit. Peric. 334 DUTIES TO GOD. The extraordinary respect which the Romans, during their period of greatest glory, entertained for religion, (false as their own system was in its mythological foundations, and erroneous in many of its practical tendencies,) has been often taken notice of as one of the principal sources of their private and public virtues. " The Spaniards," says Cicero, " exceed us in numbers ; the Gauls in the glory of war ; but we surpass all na- tions in that wisdom by which we have learned that all things are governed and directed by the immortal gods." * In the latter periods of their history, this reverence for religion, together with the other virtues which gave them the empire of the world, was in a great measure lost; and we continually find their orators and histo- rians drawing a melancholy contrast between the de- generacy of their manners and those of their ancestors. In the account which Livy has given of the consulate of Q,. Cincinnatus, he mentions an attempt which the tribunes made to persuade the people that they were not bound by their military oath to follow the consul to the field, because they had taken that oath when he •was a private man. But, however agreeable this doc- trine might be to their inclinations, and however strong- ly recommended to them by the sanction of their own popular magistrates, we find that their reverence for the religion of an oath led them to treat the doctrine as nothing better than a cavil. Livy's reflection on this occasion is remarkable." " Nondum heec, quae nunc tenet seculum, negligentia Deum venerat: nee interpretando sibi quisque jusjurandum leges aptas faciebat, sed suos potius mores ad ea accommodabat." f * Orat de ffarusp. Respon , Cap. IX. t Lib. III. Cap. XX. " Bat that di.'sregard of the gods, which prevails in the present age, had not then taken place ; nor did every one, by his own interpretations, acoonimodate oaths and .the laws to his particular views, but rather adapted his practice to them." DUTIES TO OUR FELLOW-MEN. 335 CHAPTER II. OF THE DUTIES WHICH RESPECT OUR FELLOW- CREATURES. Under this title it is not proposed to give a complete enumeration of our social duties, but only to point out some of the most important, chiefly with a view to show the imperfections of those systems of morals which attempt to resolve the whole of virtue into one particular principle. Among these, that which resolves virtue into benevolence is undoubtedly the most amia- ble ; but even this system will appear, from the follow- ing remarks, not only to be inconsistent with truth, but to lead to dangerous consequences. Section I. OF benevolence. I. Hutcheson resolves all Virtue into Benevolence.'] Benevolence is so important a branch of virtue, that it has been supposed by some moralists to constitute the whole of it. According to these writers, good-will to mankind is the only immediate object of moral appro- bation ; and the obligation of all our other moral duties arises entirely from their apprehended tendency to pro- mote the happiness of society. Among the most eminent partisans of this system in modern times, Mr. Smith mentions particularly Dr. Ralph Cudworth, Dr. Henry More, and Mr. John Smith of Cambridge ; " but of all its patrons," he observes, " ancient or modern. Dr. Francis Hutcheson was un- doubtedly beyond all comparison the most acute, the most distinct, the most philosophical, and, what is of the greatest consequence of all, the soberest and most judicious." * * Theory of Moral Sentiments, Part VII. Sect. II. Chap. III. 336 DUTIES TO OUR FELLOW-MEN. In favor of this system, Mr. Smith acknowledges that there are many appearances in human nature which at first sight seem strongly to support it ; and of some of these appearances Dr. Hutcheson avails himself with much aeuteness and plausibility. First, whenever, in any action supposed to proceed from benevolent affec- tions, some other motive^is discovered, our sense of the merit of this action is just so far diminished as this motive is believed to have influenced it. Secondly, when those actions, on the contrary, which are com- monly supposed to proceed from a selfish motive are discovered to have arisen from a benevolent one, it generally enhances our sense of their merit. Lastly, it was urged by Dr. Hutcheson, that, in all casuistical disputes concerning the rectitude of conduct, the ulti- mate appeal is uniformly made to utility. In the later debates, for example, about passive obedience and the right of resistance, the sole point in controversy among men of sense was, whether universal submission would probably be attended with greater evils than temporary insurrection when privileges were invaded. "Whether what, upon the whole, tended most to the happiness of mankind was not also morally good, was never once made a question. Since benevolence, therefore, was the only motive which could bestow upon any action the character of virtue, the greater the benevolence which was evidenced by any action, the greater the praise which must be- long to it. In directing all our actions to promote the greatest possible good, — in submitting alUnferior affections to the desire of the general happiness of mankind, — in regarding one's self as but one of the many, whose prosperity was to be pursued no further than it was consistent with, or conducive to, that of the whole, — consisted the perfection of virtue. Dr. Hutcheson held, further, that self-love was a prin- ciple which could never be virtuous in any degree or in anj direction. This maxim he carried so far as to assert, that even a regard to the pleasure of self- BENEVOLENCE. 337 approbation, to the comfortable applauses of our own consciences, diminishes the merit of a benevolent ac- tion. " In the common judgments of mankind, how- ever," says Mr. Smith, "this regard to the approbation of our own minds is so far from being considered as what can in any respect diminish the virtue of any ac- tion, that it is rather looked tipon as tlie sole motive which deserves the appellation of virtuous." Of the truth and correctness of these principles Dr. Hutcheson was so fully convinced, that, in conformity to them, he has offered some algebraical formulas for computing mathematically the morality of actions. Of this very extraordinary attempt, the following axioms, which he premises to his formulas, may serve as a sufficient specimen. 1. The moral importance of any agent, or the quan- tity of public good produced by him, is in a compound ratio of his benevolence and abilities, or M (moment of good) = B X A. 2. In like manner, the moment of private good or interest produced by any person to himself is in a compound ratio of his self-love and ability, or I=S X A. 3. When, in comparing the virtue of two agents, the abilities are equal, the moment of public good pro- duced by them in like circumstances is as the benevo- lence, or M=B X 1. 4. When benevolence in two agents is equal, and other circumstances ahke, the moment of public good is as the abilities, or M= A x 1- 5. The virtue, then, of agents, or their benevolence, is always directly as the moment of good produced in like circumstances, and inversely as their abilities, or B = ^.* II. Objections to this Theory.] As Dr. Hutcheson's example in the use of these formulas has not been Ibl- * Hutcheson's Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue, Treatise II. Sect. III. 29 338 DUTIES TO OUR FELLOW-MEN. lowed by any of his successors, it is unnecessary to employ any arguments to expose the absurdity of this unsuccessful innovation in the usual language of ethics* It is of more consequence to direct our attention to the substance of the doctrine which it was the great object of the ingenious author to es- tablish. And, in the first place, the necessary and obvious consequences to which this account of virtue leads seem to furnish a satisfactory proof of its unsoundness. For if the merit of an action depends on no other cir- cumstance than the quantity of good intended by the agent, then the rectitude of an action can in no case be influenced by the mutual relations of the parties ; — a conclusion contradicted by the universal judgment of mankind in favor of the paramount obligation of various other duties. It is sufficient to mention the obligations of gratitude, of veracity, and of justice.f Unless we admit these duties to be immediate 1 1/ obliga- tory, we must admit the maxim, that a good end may sanctify any means necessary for its attainment; or, in other words, that it would be lawful for us to dis- pense with the obligations of veracity and justice when- ever, by doing so, we had a prospect of promoting any of the essential-interests of society. With respect to this maxim, I would only ask. Is it probable, a priori, that the wise and beneficent Author of the universe should have left the conduct of such a fallible and short-sighted creature as man to be regu-. lated by no other principle than the private opinion of each individual with respect to the expediency of his actions ? Or, in other words, by the conjectures which the individual might form on the good or evil resulting, on the whole, from an endless train of future contin- • Dr. Hntcheson's attempt to introduce the language of mathematica into morals gave occasion to a valmilile Essni) on Quaniiti/. by the late Dr. ■Rciil. This essay may be found in the Philosophical Transactions of th.e- Royal Society of London for the year 1748. [It is reprinted in Sir W. Hamilton's edition of Dr. Reid's Works.l t See Butler's Essai/ on the Nature of \ irtue, at the end of his Analogy. BENEVOLENCE. 339 geiicies ? Were this the case, the opinions of mankind concerning the rules of morality would be as various as their judgments concerning the probable issue of the most doubtful and difficult determination in politics. Numberless cases might be fancied, in which a person would not only claim merit to himself, but actually pos- sess it, in consequence of actions which are generally regarded with indignation and abhorrence. Even men of the soundest judgment and most penetrating sagaci- ty might frequently be led to the perpetration of enor- mities, if they had no other standard of right and wrong but what they derived from their own uncertain aaiieipations of futurity. And when we consider how small the number of such men is, ill comparison with those Avhose understandings are perverted by the prej- udices of education, and by their own selfish passions, it is easy to see what a scene of anarchy the world would become. Surely, if the Deity intended the hap- piness of his creatures, he would not build the order (I may say the existence) of society on so precarious a foundation. And here it deserves particularly to be mentioned, tli;it one of the arguments commonly pro- duced in support of the scheme is drawn from the benevolence of God. Benevolence, we are told, in- duced the Deity to call the universe into existence, and benevolence is the great law of his government; and as virtue in man must consist in conformity to the will of God, in imitating his moral perfections to the utmost cri' our power, it is concluded that virtue and benevo- lence are the same. But the premises here lead to a conclusion directly opposite ; for if the happiness of mankind be the great end for which they are brought into being, it is presumable that the rules of their con- duct are of such a nature as to be obvious to the capacities of all men of sincere and well-disposed minds. Accordingly, we find, (and the fact is in a peculiar degree worthy of attention,) that, while the theory of ethics involves some of the most abstruse questions which have ever employed the human facul- ties, the moral judgments and moral feelings of the 340 DUTIES TO OUR FELLOW-MEN. most distant ages and nations, with respect to all the most essential duties of life, are one and the same.* The reasonableness of the foregoing conclusion will be much confirmed, if we consider how much the hap- 'piness of mankind is often left to depend on the will of one or of a few individuals. The best men, in such circumstances, when invested ^vith absolute power, might be rendered curses to the world by sanguine plans of beneficence ; and the ambitious and designing would be supplied with specious pretences to justify the most cruel and tyrannical measures. In truth, it is this very plea of benevolent intention which has been em- ployed to palliate, or rather to sanctify, the conduct of the greatest scourges of the human race. It is this very plea which, in former times, lighted up the fires of the Inquisition, and which, in our own age, has fur- nished a pretence for outrages against all the principles of justice and all the feelings of humanity .f It may perhaps be urged, that the principle of be- nevolence, or a regard to utility, would lead to an in- variable adherence to the rules of veracity, gratitude, and justice, because in this way more good is produced on the whole than could be obtained by any occasional deviations from them ; that it is this idea of utility which first leads us to approve of these virtues ; and that afterwards habit, or the association of ideas, makes us observe their rules without thinking of con- sequences. But is not this to adopt that mode of rea- soning which Hutcheson censures so severely in the selfish philosophers ? According to them, we labor to promote the public prosperity, because we believe our own to be intimately connected with it. They ac- knowledge, at the same time, that we often make a * " Si quid roctissimum sit quajrimns, perspicuum est. Si quid maxiine expediat, obscurum ." — Cic. Ep. ad Fam., I V. 2. t See the remarks on Paley's sclieme of morals in Gisborne's Prinri/iles of Moral Phihsophi/, wliere these arguments are urged with great force. fThey are replied to by Wainewright, in his Vindication of Dr Paleii's Theorij of Morals, Chap. II.] •' BENEVOLENCE. 341 real sacrifice of private to public advantage, and that we often exert ourselves in the public service without once thinking of our own interest. But all this they explain by habits and asso.ciations, which operate in this case as they do in the case of the miser, who, although his attachment to money was originally founded on the consideration of its uses, yet contin- ues to accumulate wealth without once thinking of the ends to which it is subservient, and indeed long after he is able to enjoy those comforts which it can purchase. Now, as I have said, the fallaciousness of this mode of reasoning has been pointed out by Dr. Hutcheson with great clearness and force; and the arguments he employs against it may with great justice be turned against himself. In general, the safest rule we can follow in our inquiries concerning the principles of human conduct is to acquiesce, in the first instance, in the plain and obvious appearance of facts ; and if these conclusions are inaccurate, to correct them grad- ually, in proportion as a more attentive examination of our subject discovers to us the prejudices which education and accidental associations have blended with the truth. It is at least a presumption in favor of any system concerning the mind, that it falls in with the natural apprehensions of mankind in all countries and ages; — and I believe it will commonly be found that these are the systems which, in the progress of human reason, are justified by the most profound and enlightened philosophy. I state this observation with the greater confidence, as it coincides with the follow- ing admirable remark of Mr. Hume, ^ — an author who had certainly no interest in inculcating such a doctrine, as he seems to have paid very little attention to it in the course of his own speculations. " The case is not the same in moral philosophy as in physics. Many an hypothesis in nature, contrary to first appearances, has been found, on more accurate scrutiny, solid and satisfactory. Instances of this kind are so frequent, that a judicious as well as witty phi 29* 342 DUTIES TO OUR FELLOW-MEN. losopher * has ventured to afBrm, if there be more than one way in which a phenomenon may be produced^ that there is a general presumption for its arising from the causes which are the least obvious and familiar. But the presumption always lies on the other side in all inquiries concerning the origin of our passions, and of the internal operations df the human mind. The simplest and most obvious cause which can there be assigned for any phenomenon is probably the true one. When a philosopher, in the explication of his system, is obliged to have recourse to some very intricate and refined reflections, and to suppose them essential to the production of any passion or emotion, we have reason to be extremely on our guard against so fallacious an hypothesis. The affections are not susceptible of any impression from the refinements of reason or imagina- tion ; and it is always found, that a vigofous exertion of the latter faculty necessarily, from the limited ca- pacity of the human mind, destroys all activity in the former. Our predominant motive or interest is indeed frequently concealed from ourselyes when it is mingled and confounded with other motives, which the mind, from vanity and self-conceit, is desirous of supposing more prevalent ; but there is no instance that a con- cealment of this nature has ever arisen from the ab- struseness and intricacy of the motive. A man that has lost a friend and patron may flatter himself that all his grief arises from generous sentiments, without any mixture of narrow or interested considerations ; but a man that grieves for a valuable friend who needed his patronage and protection, how can we suppose that his passionate tenderness arises from some metaphysi- cal regards to a self-interest which has no foundation in reality ? We may as well imagine that minute wheels and springs, like those of a watch, give motiou to a wagon, as account for the origin of passion from such abstruse reflections." f • Fontenelle. t Inquiry concerning the Principles o/Mirals, Appendix II. BENEVOLENCE. 3i3 III. The same Objections applicable to the Doctrine of TJlillty, as held bij Hume, Godwin, and Palei/.] The re- marks which I have now made with respect to Dr. Hatcheson's philosophy are applicable, with some slight alterations, to a considerable variety of moral systems which have been offered to the world under very diffin- ent forms, but which agree with him and with each oth- er in deriving the practical rules of virtuous conduct from considerations of utility. All of these systems are but modifications of the old doctrine which resolves the whole of virtue into benevolence. This theory of utility (which is of a very ancient date, and which in modern times has derived much ce- lebrity from the genius of Mr. Hame) has been revived more recently by Mr. Godwin, and by the late Dr. Pa- ley. Widely as these two writers differ in the source whence they derive their rule of conduct, and the sanc- tions by which they enforce its observance, they are per- fectly agreed about its paramount authority over every other principle of action. " Whatever is expedient," says Dr. Paley, " is rig-ht. It is the utility of any mor- al rule alone which constitutes the obligation of it." * " But then it must be expedient on the luhole, at the long run, in all its effects, collateral and remote, as well as those which are immediate and direct, as it is obvi- ous that, in computing consequences, it makes no dif- ference in what way or at what distance they ensue." f * Principles of floral and Political PliilosojAij. Book II. Chap. VI. t Iliid. Chap. VIII. In anotlier part of this work, Book VI. Chap. XII., Dr Paley explicitly asserts that eitenj moral rule is liable to be su- pi;i-eded in partiealar cases on the ground of expediency. "Moral Phi- lo-ophy cannot pronounce that any rule of morality is so rigid as to bend to no exceptions ; nor, on the other hand, can she comprise these excep- tions within any previous description. She confesses that the obli;^atioia of every law depends upon its ultimate utility; that, this utility having a finite and determinate value, situations may be feigned, and consequently m:iv possibly arise, in which the general tendency is outweighed by the enormity of the particular mischief." In such an event, ultimate utility would render it as much an act of duty to break the rule as it is on other occasions to observe it. * [.Some have contended that Paley's critertljn of right is not liable to the same objections with that of other selfish systems, because he does not make it turn on a calculation of the probable consequences of the particu' lar action in hand, bat on what is called " the doctrine of general consa- 344 DUTIES TO OUR FELLOW-MEN. Mr. Godwin has nowhere expressed himself on this fundamental question of practical ethics in terms more decided and unqualified. Ot this theory of utility, so strongly recommended to some by the powerful talents of Hume, and toothers by the well-merited popularity of Paley, the niost satis- factory of all refutations is to be found in the work of Mr. Godwin. It is unnecessary to inquire how far the practical lessons he has inculcated are logically inferred from his fundamental principle ; for although I appre- quences." " The general consequence of any action may be estimated," he says, " by asking, what woijJd be the consequence if the same sort of ac- tions were generaUif permitted." — Moral Philosophy. Boolt II. Chap. VIII. But to this Coleridge, in The Friend, Vol 11. Essay XI., replies: — 1. " Here, as in all other calculations, the result depends on that faculty of the soul in the degrees of wliii'h men most vary from each other, and which is itself most affected by accidental advantages or disadvantages of education, natural talent, and acquired knowledge, — the faculty, I mean, of foresight and systematic comprehension. But surely morality, which is of equal importance to all men, ouj(ht to be grounded, if possible, in that part of our nature which in all men may and ought to be the same : in the conscience and the common sense." ■" 2. " This criterion confounds morality with law ; and when the author adds, that in all probability the Divine justice will be regulated in the final judgment by a similar rule, he draws away the attention from the will, that is, from the inward motives and impulses which constitute the es- sence of moralitij, to the outward act, and thus changes the virtue command- ed by the Gospel into the mere legality which was to be enlivened by it. One of the most persuasive, if not one of the strongest, arguments for a future state rests on the belief, that, although by the necessity of things our outward and temporal welfare must be regulated by our outward actions, which alone can be the pbjects and guides of human law, there mujt yet needs come a juster and more a|)propriate sentence hereafter, in which our intentions will be considered, and our happiness and misery made to accord with the grounds of our artions. Our fellow.creatures can only judge what we are by what we do ; but in the eye of our Maker what we do is of no worth, except as it flows from whiit we orp." 3. " The criterion is also nugatory. The individual is to imagine what the general consequences wuuM be. all other things remaining the same, if all men were to act as he is about to act. I scarcely need remind the read- er what a source of self-delu.-^ion and sophistry is here opened to a mind in a state of temptation. Will it not say toi, itself, 'I know that all men will not act so; and the immediate good consequences, which I shall ob- tain, are real, while the had consequences are imaginary and improbable' ? When the foundations of morality have once been laid in the outward con- sequences, it will be in vain to recall to the mind what the consequences would he wore all men to reason in the same way ; for the very excuse of this mind to itself is, that neither its action nor its reasoning Is likely to have any consequences at all, its immediate object excepted." BENEVOLENCE. 345 hend much might be objected to these, even on his own hypothesis, yet if such be the conclusions to which, in the judgment of so acute a reasoner, it appeared to lead with demonstrative evidence, nothing further is requisite to illustrate the practical tendency of a sys- tem which, absolving meniVomthe obligations imposed on them with so commanding an authority by the mor- al constitution of human nature, abandons every indi- vidual to the guidance of his own narrow views con- cerning the complicated interests of political society. 4. " But suppose the minij in its sanest state. How can it possibly form a notion of tlie nature of an action considered as indetinitely multiplied, unless it has previously a distinct notion of the nature of the single action itself which is the multiplicand ? If I conceive a crown multiplied a hun- dredfold, the simple crown enables me to understand what a hundred crowns are ; but how can the notion handnd teach me what a crown is I " 5. "I confess myself unable to divine any possible use, or even meaning, in this doctrine of general consequences, unless it lie that in all our ac- tions we are bound to consider the effect of our example, and to guard as much as possible against the hazard of their being misunderstood. 1 will not slaughter a lamb, or drown a litter of kittens, in the presence of my child of four years old, because the child cannot understand my action, but will understand that Ms father has inflicted pain, and taken away life from beings that had never offended him. AH this is true, and no man in Ills senses ever thought otherwise. But methiuks it is strange to state that a5 a criterion of morality which is no more than an accessory aggra- vation of an action bad in its own nature, or a ground of caution as to the mode and time in which we are to do or suspend what is in itself good and innocent." 6. " 'IMie duty of setting a good example is no doubt a most important dutv ; but the example is good or bad, necessar}' or iinneces>ary, accord- ing a,s the action may be which has a chance of being imitated. I once knew a small, but (in outward circumstances at least) respectable congre- gation, four fifths of whom professed that they went to church eniirelij for the example's sake ; in other words, to cheat each other and act a common lie ! These rational Christians had not considered that example may in- crease the good or evil of an action, but can never consliiiite either." 7. "To the objection, that the doctrine of general consequences was stated as the criterion of the action, not of the agent, I miglit answer, that the author himself had in some measure justified me in not noticing this di>tinction, by holding forth the probability, that the Supreme Judjic will proceed by the same rule. The agent may then safely be included in the action, if both here and hereafter the action only and its general conse- quences will be attended to. But my main ground of justificalion is, that the distinction itself is merely logical, — not real and vital. The cliaracier of the agent is determined by his view of the action ; and that system of morality is alone true and suited to human nature, which unites the inten- tion and the motive, the warmth and the light, in one and the same act of miud."] 346 DUTIES TO OUR FELLOW-MEN. Among the practical consequences which Dr. Paley deduces i'rom the same principle, there are some which to my mind are not less revolting than those of Mr. Godwin. Such, for example, is the- argument by which he controverts the received maxim of criminal jurisprudence, that it is belter for ten guitty persons to escape than for one innocent man to svffer. But on this subject I need not enlarge. The sophistry, and, I am sorry to add, the reckless inhumanity displayed in this part of Paley's work, have been triumphantly exposed by that great and good man. Sir Samuel RomilJy ; — a man whom, long before his talents and worth were known to the public, I admired and loved, and whose memory I shall never cease to revere.* * Observations on tfie Criminal Law of England. See, in particular, Note I). [For some account of the writings and influence of Godwin, see tlie tliirty-sixtli Lecture of Professor Smyth, On the French Revolution, He bo- piiis his notice hy observing, with reference to the time of the first French Revolution, — "I would wish to afford you some general notion of the sort of mental intoxication which then prevailed among those who should have been the guides and instructors of mankind. And looking round for this purpose, I shall select from the rest, as a memorable specimen of the whole, the once celebrated work of Mr. Godwin. The influence of the work I can mvself remember. In any ordinary state of the world, it must have fallen lifeless from the press: highly metaphysical, continually run- ninj into general abstractions, into disquisitions never ending, still begin- ning, -nothing was ever less fitted to attract a reader than the repulsive lii'j'iiri/ conrernini] Political Justice : and if the state had not been out of joint, moit assuredly scarce a reader would have been found. Some years af cr. when the success of the work had been established. Mr. Burke was asked whether he had seen it. ' Wliy, yes, I have seen it,' was the answer, 'and a mighty stupid-looking hook it is.' No two words could better have descTiberl it. The late cxrclleni Sir Samuel liomilly, who hail then leisure to read eveiy thing, told a friend who had never heard of it. that tlicre had jii~t ap]icarcd a book by far the mo-;t absnrd that had ever come within his knoivledgc ; this was the work of Godwin. Mrs. Barbauld, also, who at length by the progress of its doctrines was compelled to look at if, de- clared that what was good in the hook was chiefly taken fi'oni Hume ; that it was • borrowed sense and original nonsense.' The vvork, however, pros- pered ; this ' original nonsense' was then in great request, and at a high preTiiium. Mr. Godwin had his admirers, ha offer, therefore, will consist of little more than some obvious and necessary consequences from principles which have been already stated. The various duties which have been considered all agree with each other in one common quality, that of being obligatory on rational and voluntary agents ; and they are all enjoined by the same authority, — the au- thority of conscience. These duties, therefore, are but different articles of one law, which is properly expressed by the word virtue. As all the virtues are enjoined by the same authority, (the authority of conscience,) the man whose ruling principle of action is a sense of duty will observe all the different virtues with the same reverence and the same zeal. He who lives in the habitual neglect of any DEFINITION OF VIRTUE. 425 one of them shows plainly, that, where his conduct happens to coincide with what the rules of morality prescribe, it is owing merely to an accidental agreement between his duty and his inclination ; and that he is not actuated by that motive which can alone render our conduct meritorious. It is justly said, therefore, that to live in the habitual practice of any one vice is to throw off our allegiance to conscience and to our Maker, as decidedly as if we had violated all the rules which duty prescribes ; and it is in this sense, I presume, that we ought to interpret that passage of the sacred writings in which it is said, " Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." * The word virtue, however, (as I shall have occasion to remark more particularly in the next section,) is ap- plied, not only to express a particular course of exter- nal conduct, but to express a particular species or de- scription of human character. When so applied, it seems properly to denote a habit of mind, as distinguished from occasional acts of duty. It was formerly said, that the characters of men receive their denominations of covetous, voluptuous, ambitious, &c,, from the particu- lar active principle which prevailingly influences the conduct. A man, accordingly, whose ruling or habitual principle of action is a sense of duty, or a regard to what is right, may be properly denominated virtuous. Agreeably to this view of the subject, the ancient Py- thagoreans defined virtue to be "E^cs toC S^ovtos,^ the habit of duty, — the oldest definition of virtue of which we have any account, and one of the most unexceptionable which is yet to be found in any system of philosophy,. This account of virtue coincides very nearly with what I conceive to be Dr. Reid's, from some passages in his Essays on the Active Powers of the Human Mind. Virtue he seems to consider as consisting " in a fixed purpose or resolution to act according to our sense of duty." " We consider the moral virtues as inherent " James ii. 10. t Gale's Opmada MySidogka, p. 690. 36* 426 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. in the mind of a good man, even where there is no op- portunity of exercising them. And what is it in the mind which we can call the virtue of justice when it is not exercised ? It can be nothing but a fixed purpose or^deterraination to act according to the rules of justice when there is opportunity." With all this I perfectly agree. It is. the fixed pur- pose to do what is rig'fit, which evidently constitutes what we call a virtuous disposition. But it appears to me that virtue, considered as an attribute of character, is more properly defined by the habit which, the fixed purpose gradually forms, than by the fixed purpose it- self. It is from the external habit alone that other men can judge of the purpose ; and it is from the uniformi- ty and spontaneity of his habit that the individual him- self must judge how far his purposes are sincere and steady. These observations lead to an explanation of what has at first sight the appearance of paradox in the ethical doctrines of Aristotle, that where there is self-denial there is no virtue. That the merit of particular actions is increased by the self-denial with which they are ac- companied cannot be disputed ; but it is only when we are learning' the practice of our duties that this self- denial is exercised (for the practice of morality, as well as of every thing else, is facilitated by repeated acts) ; and therefore, if the word virtue be employed to express that habit of mind which it is the great object of a good man to confirm, it will follow, that, in proportion as he approaches to it, his efforts of self-denial must diminish, and that all occasion for them would cease if his end were completely attained. The definition of virtue given by Aristotle, as con- sisting in " right practical habits, voluntary in their ori- gin," is well illustrated by what Plutarch has told us of the means by which he acquired the mastery over his irascible passions. " I have always approved," says he, " of the engagements and vows imposed on them- selves from motives of religion, by certain philosophers, to abstain from wine, or from some other favorite in- DEFINITION OF VIRTUE. 427 dulgence, for the space of a year. I have also approved of the determination taken by others not to deviate from the truth, even in the lightest conversation, during a particular period. Comparing ray own mind with theirs, and conscious that I yielded to none of them in reverence for God, I tasked myself, in the first instance, not to give way to anger upon any occasion for several days. I afterwards extended this resolution to a month or longer; and having thus tnade a trial of what I could do, I have learned at length never to speak but with gentleness, and so carefully to watch over my temper as never to purchase the short and unprofitable gratification of venting my resentment at the expense of a lasting and humiliating remorse."* I must not dismiss this topic without recommending, not merely to the perusal, but to the diligent study, of all who have a taste for moral inquiries, Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, in which he has examined, with far greater accuracy than any other author of antiquity, the nature of habits considered in their relation to our moral constitution. The whole treatise is indeed of great value, and, with the exception of a few passages, almost justifies the warm and unqualified eulogium pronounced upon it by a learned divine (Dr. Rennel) before the University of Cambridge; in which he goes so far as to assert, that " it affords not only the most perfect specimen of scientific morality, but exhibits also the powers of the most compact and best constructed system which the human intellect ever produced upon, any subject; enlivening occasionally great severity of method, and strict precision of terms, by the sublimest, though soberest, splendor of diction." f * Be Ira. t We have several English translations of this work ; one by Dr. Gillies ; another by Thomas Taylor; another, the best, by E. W. Browne, in Bohn's Classical library. — Ed. 428 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. CHAPTER II. ON AN AMBIGUITY IN THE WORDS EIGHT AND "WRONG, VIRTUE AND VICE. The epithets right and wrong, virtuous and vicious, are applied sometimes to external actions, and some- times to the intentions of the agent. A similar ambi- guity may be remarked in the corresponding words in other languages. This ambiguity is owing to various causes, which it is not necessary at present to trace. Among other cir- cumstances, it is owing to the association of ideas, which, as it leads us to connect notions of elegance or of mearuiess with many arbitrary expressions in lan- guage, so it often leads us to connect notions of right and wrong with external actions, considered abstractly from the motives which- produced them. It is owing (at least in part) to this, that a man who has been in- voluntarily the author of any calamity to another can hg.rdly by any reasoning banish his feelings of remorse ; and, on the other hand, however wicked our purposes may have been, if by any accident we have hpen pre- vented from carrying them into execution, we are apt to consider ourselves as far less culpable than if we had perpetrated _the primes that we had intended. It is much in thp same manner that we think it less crimi- nal to mislead others by hints, or looks, or actions, than by a verbal lie; and, in general, that we think our guilt diminished if we can only contrive to accompUsh our ends without employing those external signs, or those external means, with which we have been accustomed to associate the notions of guilt and infamy. Shak- speare has painted with philosophical accuracy this nat- ural subterfuge of a vicious mind, in which the sense of duty still retains some authority, in one of the ex- quisite scenes between King John and Hubert: — "Hadst thou but shook thy head, or made a pause, When I spake darkly what I purposed ; ABSOLUTE AND RELATIVE RIGHT. 429 As bid me tell my tale in express words ; JJeep shame Imil struck me dumb, made mo break off, And those thy fears might have wrought fears in me. ^ut thou didst understand me by my signs, And didst in sig7is ayain parley with sin." As this twofold application of the words right and wrong- to the intentions of the mind, and to external actions, has a tendency, in the common business of Jiie, to affect our opinions concerning the merits of in- dividuals, so it has misled the theoretical speculations of some very eminent philosophers in their inquiries concerning the principles of morals. It was to obviate the confusion of ideas arising from this ambiguity of language that the distinction between absolute and rel- ative rectitude was introduced into ethics ; and as the distinction is equally just and important, it. will be proper to explain it particularly, and to point out its application to one or two of the questions which have been perplexed by that vagueness of expression which it is our object at present to correct. An action may be said to be absolutely right, when it is in every respect suitable to the circumstances in which the agent is placed ; or,"in other words, when it is such as, with perfectly ^good intentions, under the guidance of an enlightened and well-informed under- standing, he would have performed. An action may be said to be relatively right, when the intentions of the agent are sincerely good, whether his conduct be suitable to his circumstances or not. According to these definitions, an action may be right in one sense and wrong in another; — an ambi- guity in language, which, how obvious soever, has not always been attended to by the writers on morals. It is the relative rectitude of an action which deter- mines the moral desert of the agent; but it is its abso- lute rectitude which determines its utility to his world- ly interests, and to the welfare of society. And it is only so far as aosolute and relative rectitude coincide, that utility can be affirmed to be a quality of virtue. A strong sense of duty will indeed induce us to avail 430 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. ourselves of all the talents we possess, and of all the information within our reach, to act agreeably to the rules of absolute rectitude. And if we fail in doing so, our negligence is criminal. " Crimes committed through ignorance," as Aristotle has very judiciously observed, " are only excusable when the ignorance is involunta- ry; for when the cause of it lies in ourselves, it is then justly punishable. The ignorance of those laws which all may know if they will does not excuse the breach of them; and neglect is not pardonable where atten- tion ought to be bestowed. But perhaps we are inca- pable of attention. This, however, is our own fault, since the incapacity has been contracted by our contin- ual carelessness, as the evils of injustice and intemper- ance are contracted by the daily commission of iniqui- ty and the daily indulgence in voluptuousness. For such as our actions are, such must our habits be- come." * Notwithstanding, however, the truth and the impor- tance of this doctrine, the general principle already stat- ed remains incontrovertible, that in every particular in- stance our duty consists in doing what appears to us to be rip^ht at the time ; and if, while we, follow this rule, we should incur any blame, our demerit does not arise from acting according to an erroneous judgment, but from our previous misemployment of the means we possessed for correcting the errors to which our judg- ment is liable.f From these principles it follows, that actions, al- though materially right, are not meritorious with re- spect to the agent, unless perfornied from a sense of duty. Aristotle inculcates this doctrine in many parts of his Ethics. \ To the same purpose, also. Lord Shaftesbury : — "In this case alone it is we call any creature worthy or virtuous, when it can attain to the * Aristotle's Ethics, by Gillies, p. 305. t A distinction similar to that now made between absolute and relative rectitude was expressed among the schoolmen by the phrases material and foTTHdt VlVtUS- t See Ethic. Nic., Lib. IV. Cap. I. ; Lib. VL Cap. V. OFFICE OF REASON. 431 speculation or sense of what is morally good or ill, ad- mirable or blamable, right or wrong. For though we may vulgarly call an ill horse vicious, yet we never say of *a good one, nor of any mere changeling or idiot, though never so good-natured, that he is loorthy or vir- tuous. So that if a creature be generous, kind, con- stant, and compassionate, yet if he cannot reflect on what he himself does or sees others do, so as to take notice of what is worthy and honest, and make that notice or conception of worth and honesty to be an ob- ject of his affection, he has not the character of being virtuous, for thus, and no otherwise, he is capable of having a sense of right or wrong." * CHAPTER III. OF THE OFFICE AND USE OF REASON IN THE PRAC- TICE OF MORALITY. I FORMERLY observed, that a strong sense of duty, while it leads us to cultivate with care our good dispo- sitions, will induce us to avail ourselves of all the means in our power for the wise regulation of our ex- ternal conduct. The occasions on which it is neces- sary for us to employ our reason in this way are chiefly the three following : — 1. When we have ground for suspecting that our moral judgments and feelings may have been warped and perverted by the prejudices of education. * Inquiry concerning Virtue, Book I. Part II. Sect. III. Dr. Price, in his Review, Chap. VIII., has made a number of jadicioas ohser\ations on this subject ; and Dr. Reid, in his Essays on the Active Powers, has a par- ticular chapter allotted to the consideration of this very question, " Wheth- er an action deserving moral approbation must he done with the belief of its being morally good ? " in which the doctrine he endeavours to establish is precisely the same with that which has been now stated. Compare Hume's Treatise of Human Nature, Book III. Part II. Sect. I., where this conclusion is disputed. 432 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. I formerly showed that the moral faculty is an origi- nal principle of the human constitution, and not the result (as Mandeville and others suppose) of habits superinduced by systems of education planned by poli- ticians and divines. The moral faculty, indeed, like the faculty of reason, (which forms the most essential of its elements,) requires care and cultivation for its devel- opment ; and, like reason, it has a gradual progress, both in the case of individuals and of societies. But it does not follow from' this that the former is a ficti- tious principle, any more than the-latter, with respect to the origin of which I do not know that any doubts have been suggested by the greatest skeptics. Although, however, the moral faculty is an original part of the human frame, and although the great laws of morality are engraven on every heart, it is not in this way that the greater part of mankind arrive at their first knowledge of them. The infant mind is formed by the care of our early instructors, and for a long time thinks and acts in consequence of the con- fidence it reposes in their superior judgment. All this is undoubtedly agreeable to the design of Nature ; and, indeed, if the case were otherwise, the business of the world could not possibly go on ; for nothing can be plainer than this, that the multitude, (at least as socie- ty is actually constituted,) condemned as they are to laborious employments inconsistent with the cultiva- tion of their mental faculties, are wholly incapable of forming their own opinions on the most important questions which can occupy the human mind. It is evident, at the same time, that, as no system of educa- tion can be perfect, many prejudices must mingle with the most important and best ascertained truths ; and as the truths and the prejudices are both acquired from the same source, the incontrovertible evidence of the one serves, in the progress of human reason, to support and confirm the other. Hence the suspicious and jealous eye with which we ought to regard all those principles which we have at first adopted without due examina- tion, — a duty doubly incumbent on those whose opin- OFFICE OF REASON. 433 ions are likely, from their rank and situation in society, to influence those of the multitude, and whose errors may eventually be instrumental in impairing the mor- als and the happiness of generations yet unborn. 2. A second instance in which the exercise of reason may be requisite for an enlightened discharge of our duty occurs in those cases where there appears to be an interference between different duties, and where of course it seems to be necessary to sacrifice one duty to another. * In the course of the foregoing speculations, I have frequently taken notice of the coincidence of all our virtuous principles of action in pointing out to us the same line of conduct ; and of the systematical consist- ency and harmony which they have a tendency to pro- duce in the moral character. Notwithstanding, how- ever, this general -and indisputable fact, it must be owned that cases sometimes occur in which they seem at first view to interfere with each other, and in which, of consequence, the exact path of duty is not altogeth- er so obvious as it commonly is. Thus, every man feels it incumbent on him to have a constant regard to t/ie welfare of society, and also to his own happiness. On the whole, these two interests will be found, by the most superficial inquirer, to be inseparably connected ; but, at the same time, it cannot be denied that cases may be fancied in which it seems necessary to make a sacrifice of the one to the other. In such cases, when the public happiness is very great, and the private comparatively inconsiderable, there is no room for hesitation ; but the former may be easily conceived to be diminished, and the latter to be increased, to such an amount as to render the exact projKiety of conduct very doubtful ; more especially when it is considered, that, cceleris paribus, a certain degree of preference to ourselves is not only justifiable, but morally riffht. In like manner, the attachments of nature or of friendship, or the obligations of gratitude, of veracity, or of justice, may interfere with private or public good ; and it may not be easy to say, whether 37 434 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. all of these obligations may not sometimes be super- seded by paramount considerations of utility. At least, these are points on which moralists have been arguing for some thousands of years, without having yet come to a determination in which all parties are agreed. It is much in the same manner that the different founda- tions of property may give rise to different claims ; and it may be exceedingly difficult to determine, among a variety of titles, which of them is entitled to a prefer- ence over the others. " The oonsideration of these nice and puzzling ques- tions in the science of ethics has given rise in modern times to a particular department of it, distinguished by the title of casuistry. 3. When the ends at which our duty prompts us to aim are to be accomplished by means which require choice and deliberation. Even if the whole of virtue consisted in following steadily one principle of action, still reason would be necessary to direct us to the means. The truth is, na- ture only recommends certain ends, leaving to ourselves the selection of the most efficient means by which these ends may be obtained. Thus all moralists, whatever may be their particular system, agree in this, that it is one of the chief branches of our duty to promote to the utmost of our power the happiness of that society of which we are members ; but the most ardent zeal for the attainment of this object can be of no avail, unless reason be employed both in ascertaining what are the real constituents of social and political happi- ness, and by what means this liappiness may be most effectually advanced and secured. It is owing to the last of these considerations that the study of happiness, both private and public, becomes an important part of the science of ethics. Indeed, without this study, the best, dispositions of the heart, whether relating to ourselves or to others, may be in a great measure useless. The subject of happiness, so far as relates to the indi- vidual, has been already considered. The great extent OFFICE OF REASON. 435 and difficulty of those inquiries which have for their object to ascertain what constitutes the happiness of a community, and by what means it may be most effect- ually promoted, wiake it necessary to separate them from the other questions of ethics, and to form them into a distinct branch of the science. It is not, however, in this respect alone that politics is connected with the other branches of moral philosophy. The provisions which Nature has ma"de for the intellec- tual and moral progress 6f the species all suppose the existence of the political union; and the particular form which this union happens in the case of any com- munity to assume, determines many of the most im- portant circumstances in the character of the ])eople, and many of those opinions and habits which affect the happiness of private life. These observations, which represent politics as a branch of moral philosophy, have been sanctioned by the opinions of all those authors, both in ancient and modern times, by whom either the one or the other has been cultivated with much success. Among the for- mer it is sufficient to mention the names of Plato and Aristotle, both of whom, but more especially the latter, have left us works on the general principles of policy and government, which may be read with the highest advantage at the present day. As to Socrates, his studies seem to have been chiefly directed to inculcate the duties of private life ; and yet, in the beautiful enu- meration which Xenophon has given of his favorite pursuits, the science of politics is expressly mentioned as an important branch of the philosophy of human na- ture. " As for himself, man, and what related to man, were the only subjects on which he chose to employ himself. To this purpose, all his inquiries and conver- sations turned on what was pious, what impious ; what honorable, what base ; what just, what unjust ; what wisdom, wliat folly ; what courage, what coward- ice; what a state or political community; what the character of a statesman or a politician ; what a govern- ment of men, what the character of one equal to such 436 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. a government. It was on these and other matters of the same kind that he used to discourse, in which sub- jects those who were knowing he used to esteem men of honor and goodness, and those who were ignorant, to be no better than the basest of slaves." * APPENDIX TO BOOK IV. Since the publication of Mr. Stewart's work, two theories on the nature of virtue have appeared and at- tracted considerable notice in England and this coun- try; one by Sir James Mackintosh, and the other by Jouffroy. A succinct account of each will be given in this Appendix.-}- Section I. SIR fAMES mackintosh's THEORY OF MORALS. I. His Distinction between the Theory of Moral Sen- timents and the Criterion of Morality.] Mackintosh has, with great propriety, insisted upon the importance of a distinction of two parts of moral philosophy which * Memar., Lib. I. Cap. I. [By reason, ia this chapter, we are to understand the discursive reason, or reasoning. We 1iave seen that Mr. Stewart, after Price, is disposed to re- fer the oriyin of moral distinctions to the intuitive reason. — Ed.] t The first is taken from Dr. Whewell's Preface to bis edition of Mack- intosh's Dissertation on the Progress of Ethical Philosophy ; the second from Jonffroy himself, mostly from tlie twenty-ninth and thirtieth Lectures of his Cours de Droit Naturd, being pait of the third volume, published since his death, and not yet translated into English. His criticism of other the- ories is taken from the twenty-second Lecture. The object of this work does not lead me to notice German speculations on ethics not yet naturalized amongst us. Those who wish to pursue the study in that direction must read Kant, Grundlegimg znr Metaphg^lc der Bitten ; and Critik der jrraktischen Vemunfi. ( Most of Kant's ethical writ- ings have been translated into English by J. W. Semple, under the title of The Metaph/sic of Ethics.) Schleiermacher, Entwurf eines Sj/steins der Sittenlehre. Hegel, Grmdlifiien der Philosophie des Becks. — Ed. SIR JAMES mackintosh's THEORY. 437 are often confounded ; — the theory of moral sentiments, and the criterion, of morality. The question of the in- dependent existence and character of the moral faculty- belongs to the former division of the subject; the con- struction of our system of ethics flows from the latter. There is no necessary collision between doctrines on these two points. We may hold that morality is an original quality of actions, and may still form our rules of morality by tracing the consequences of actions. This distinction has often been neglected. Those who hold that utility constitutes morality often call up- on the advocates of a moral sense to show how the as- sertion of such a faculty leads us to distinguish right from wrong, or how it can supersede the criterion of general utility. To this it may be replied, that the ex- istence of a moral conscience in man is an important truth, but that this truth alone cannot be expected to replace all the principles and deductions by which a sound system of philosophical ethics is to be produced; that the construction of such a system is undoubtedly a difficult problem, but that we shall inevitably obtain an erroneous solution of the problem, if we do not take into our account the operation of the moral facul- ty. The criterion of utility cannot safely be applied without acknowledging the independent value of mo- rality, any more than the moral faculty can always decide well without the consideration of consequences. For among the most important results of actions, we must include their effect upon the moral habits and feelings of men; and must consider these effects as claiming attention for their own sake. The promotion of human virtue must be our aim, as well as the aug- mentation of human happiness. We cannot by any analvsis exclude the former of these ends ; happiness depends on the exercise of the virtuous affections, far more clearly than virtue depends on the pursuit of happiness. The most wise and moderate of the utili- tarian moralists do, accordingly, apply their method in this manner. Thus Paley, in estimating the guilt of corrupting a person to the commission of one offence, 37* 438 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. states it as one ground of condemnation, that such se- duction is the destruction of the person's moral princi- ple.* And it appears, at present, to be generally al- lowed, that the utilitarian doctrine cannot be applied without considering the effect on the moral feelings of men as among the important consequences of action. " It often happens," it is said, " that an essential part of the morality or immorality of an action, or a rule of action, consists in its influence on the agent's own mind." " Many actions, moreover, produce effects on the characters of other persons besides the agents." The effects here spoken of are, in fact, effects on the moral habits of thought; and thus the existence of the moral attributes of the mind, as original and indepen- dent objects of the attention of the ethical philosopher, is presupposed in this mode of applying the utilitarian scheme. If, indeed, we take such good and bad consequences into the account, —if, among the useful effects of ac- tions, we conceive the most useful to be the improve- ment of man's moral character, — if we frame our rules so that they shall conduce as much as possible to virtu- ous feeling as well as to beneficial action, to purity of heart as well as to rectitude of conduct, — if we aim at man's general well-being, and not merely at his gratifica- tion, — I know not what moralist would object to a crite- rion of morality so drawn from consequences, or would deny thai the promotion of human happiness, and that of human virtue, require the same practical rules. Mack- intosh would undoubtedly have assented ta this ; for he not only allows the universal coincidence of virtue with utility in the largest sense, but founds his recom- mendation of the highest forms of virtue on the advan- tage of virtuous habits and feelings, both to the pos- sessor and to the community ; as when he speaks of the trite example of Regulus, of the character of An- drew Fletcher, and of the virtue of courage.f If we « Moral Philosophy, Book IH. Part III. Chap. III. t See the extract from him on the followers of Bentham in this vol- SIR JAMES mackintosh's THEORY. 439 could take into due account the whole value of right principles, and the whole happiness produced by vir- tuous feelings, we could commit no practical error in making the advantageous consequences of actions the measure of their morality. Bat this can happen only by considering moral good as a primary object, valuable for its own sake ; not by supposing that virtue is aimed at, as subservient to some other purpose of more genuine utility: and no sagacity or fairness in estimating useful consequences can stand as a substitute for the love of right itself. It is true that honesty is the best policy ; but he who is honest only out of policy does not come up even to the vulgar notion of a virtuous man. If a man were tempted by the opportunity of gaining a large estate through a safe but fraudulent proceeding, the utilitarian doctrine would seem to recommend him to weigh both sides well, though it would direct him in conclusion to decide in favor of probity ; but the common judgment of mankind would hardly deem him honest if he hesitated at all. And in like manner in regard to other temptations, the safety of virtue ap- pears to consist so little in tracing all possible conse- quences, that it has been held that to deliberate is to be lost, and that the only secure protection is that purity of mind which will not look at the prospect of sensual pleasure when it forms one side of the account. We cannot help saying, with Cicero, " Hebc nonne est turpe dubitare philosophos, quae ne rustici quidem dubitent?"* ' Indeed, it appears to be acknowledged by the ad- vocates of the rule of utility, that it is not safe to apply the principle separately in each particular case. Mr. Bentham has urged, with great beauty of expres- sion,! the propriety of framing general rules, and con- forming our practice invariably to these, so as to avoid the temptations of our frailty and passion in particular • De Off., Lib. III. 19. " Is it not base for philosophers to doubt where even peasants do not hesitate ? " t Deontology, Part II. Chap. I. 440 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. instances. If a reverence for general maxims of mo- rality, and a constant reference to tiie common precepts of virtue^ talje the place, in the utilitarian's mind, of the direct application of his principle, there will rfemain little difl'erence between him and the believer in origi- nal moral distinctions; for the practical rules of the two will rarely differ, and in both systems the rules will be the moral guides of thought and conduct. But though the two schools agree so far, there still will be found a deficiency on the part of the consistent utilitarian. A persuasion that moral good is some- thing different from, and superior to, mere pleasure, is requisite to give to our preference of it that tone of enthusiasm and affection which belongs to virtuous feeling. To approve a rule as right, is different Yrom liking it as profitable; to admire an act of virtuous self-devotion as we are capable of admiring, is a feel- ing so different from the apprehension of any useful- ness the act may have, that the comparison of the two things is altogether incongruous. The moral faculty converts our perception of the quality of actions into an affection of the strongest kind ; nor can we be sat- isfied with any account of our mbral sentiments which excludes this feature in the process. Thus, as we hold the affections to be motives of an order superior to the desires which have reference to ourselves only, we maintain the moral faculty, the conscience, the affec- tion towards duty, to be a principle of action of an order superior both to the desires and to the other affec- tions. Without the acknowledgment of this subor- dination, the language and feelings of men when they compare the claims of personal pleasure, of social af- fection, and of duty, are altogether unintelligible and absurd. II. He refers the Fhrmation of our Active Principles to the Association of Ideas.] I proceed to notice an- other principle which enters into Mackintosh's philoso- phy, and, which, in the \yay in which he holds it, con- stitutes one of his leading peculiarities. He assents, SIR JAMES mackintosh's THEORY. 441 in a great measure, to the explanation suggested by Hume and Smith, -but more fully developed by Hartley, of the formation of our passions and affections, and even of our sentiments of virtue and Uuty, by means of the association of ideas. 1. But into this view, as usually understood, he in- troduces several modifications ; and, in particular, he asserts that the effect of such " association " may be something very different from the mere juxtaposition of the component elements. Thus he says that the result may be so entirely a single sentiment, that " the originally separate feelings can no longer be disjoined " ; and, moreover, that " the compound may have proper- ties not to be found in any of its component parts " ; as constantly happens, he observes, in material com- pounds. It is clear that this view of the effect of the " asso- ciation of ideas " may give results very different from those often founded upon that doctrine. If we say that gratitude, or compassion, or patriotism, are only certain trains of pleasurable associations, we are gen- erally understood to assert that we can again resolve those feelings into the constituent and associated ele- ments ; and that by so doing we may hope to reason upon them most philosophically and exactly. But Mackintosh's mode of considering these and other emo- tions would allow of neither of these inferences. He supposes " association " to be employed in the educa- tion rather than in the creation of our moral senti- ments ; in awakening affections rather than in con- necting notions. 2. The ideas or the feelings which are concerned in this process are said to be associated ; but this is, he de- clares, a very inadequate ^0x6 to express the " complete combination and fusion " which occur. This associa- tion presupposes laws and powers of the mind itself, according to which the conjunction produces its results. The celebrated comparison of the mind to a sheet of white paper is not just, except we consider that there may be in the paper itself many circumstances which 442 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. affect the jiature of the writing. A recent writer, how- ever, appears to me to have supplied us with a mucli more apt and beautiful comparison. Man's soul at first, says Professor Sedgwick, is one unvaried blank, till it has received the impressions of external experi- ence. " Yet has this blank," he adds, " been already- touched by a celestial hand; and, when plunged in the colors which surround it, it takes not its tinge from ac- cident, but design, and comes out covered with a glori- ous pattern." * This modern image of the mind as a prepared blank is well adapted to occupy a permanent place in opposition to the ancient sheet of white paper. 3. Not only the word association, but also the word ideas, in the Lockian expression, appears to Mackintosh to be unsuited to its purpose, since an association takes place " of thoughts with emotions, as well as with each other." Our author has indeed shown great solicitude to bring into clear view that part of our nature which he here distinguishes from thought; — "that other part of it, hitherto without any adequate name, which feels, and desires, and loves, and hopes, and wills." After balancing the various terms which may be used to ex- press the aggregate of such feelings, he inclines finally to call it the emotive part of man. Thus the " association of ideas," according to Mack- intosh, would more properly be termed the composition of ideas and, emotions. In his view of the composite, as losing all trace of apparent composition, the author was, in some measure, following Hartley, though he justly claims the credit of seeing more distinctly than his predecessors the important truth, that the com- pound may have properties not found in any of its component parts. 4. Mackintosh maintains that this is by no means a modification of the selfish system ; for the " affections and the moral sentiments, though educed by associa- tion, only become what they are when they lose all trace of self-regard." " If the affections be acquired, * Discourse on the Studies of the University, p. 54. SIR JAMES mackintosh's THEORY. 443 they are justly called natural; and if their origin be personal, their nature may and does become disinter- ested" , /\ III. His Theory of Conscience.'] But we must now consider another peculiarity of Mackintosh's system : I speak of what he names his theory of conscience. 1. The agreeable or painful sentiment, naturally at- tendmg certain emotions, is transferred, by association of ideas, to the volitions and acts which they produce ; and thus, iii the end, these volitions and acts become the immediate objects of our love or repugnance. Ac- cording to Mackintosh's theory, the moral faculty con- sists of this class of secondary desires and affections which have dispositions and volitions for their sole ob- ject. This description of .our moral sentiments will, he conceives, explain their peculiar character and attri- butes. He expresses the relation which he wishes to ascribe, by saying that the moral sentiments are in contact with the will ; or, as he further elucidates this, " they may and do stand between any other practical principle and its object, while it is absolutely impossible that any other shall intercept their connection with the will." The conscience requires virtuous acts and dis- positions to action ; and by such requisition it can check and control any desires of external objects ; but no desire of any outward gratification can prevent the conscience from demanding a virtuous direction of the will; and this mental relation explains and justifies. Mackintosh conceives, that attribution of supremacy and command to the conscience on which moral writers have often insisted.* * In his remarks on Butler he says : — " The truth seems to he, that the moral sentiments, in their mature state, are a class of feMiijs which have no other objert hut fhf luentid disjtosltions leadiiu] to voliinliiry action^ and the vol' uutarif iicthns which fiow fi'om thfsc disfionitions. We are pleased with some dispo-iiiions and ai'tions, ami ili^pleaseil with others, in ourselres and our fillows. We desire to cultivate the dispositions, and to perform t!ie ac- tions, which we contemplate with satisfaction. These olijects, like all those of human appetite or desire, are sought for their own sake. The peculiarity of these desires is, that their gratification requires the use of no 444 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. 2. Thns conscience consists in, or rather results from, the composition of all those sentiments of which the final object is a state of the will, intimately and insep- arably blended, and held in a perfect state of solution ; and the conscience being thus represented as analogous to the desires, it implies, in the same way as other desires, a sense of what is grateful, and a faculty of dwelling, in thought, on the gratification so obtained. 3. But if, in order further to develop this theory, it be asked what states of the will are thus agreeable to means. Nothing (unless it be a volition) is interposed between the desires and the voluntary act. It is impossible, therefore, that these passions should undergo any change by transfer from the end to the means, as is the case with other practical principles. On the other hand, as soon as they are fixed on these ends, they cannot regard any further object. When another passion prevails over them, the end of the moral faculty is con verted into a means of gratification. But volitions and actions are not themselves the end, or last object in view, of any other desire or aver- sion. Nothing stands between the moral sentiments and their object. They are. as it were, in contact with the will. It is this sort of mental position, if the expression may be pardoned, that explains, or seems to explain, those characteristic properties which tnie philosophers ascribe to them, and which all reflecting men feel to belong to them. Being the only desires, aversions, sentiments, or emotions which regard dispositions and actions, they necesaarity extend to the whole character and conduct. Among motives to actfon, they alone are justly considered as universal. They may and do stand between any other practical principle and its ob- ject ; while it is absolutely impossible that another shall intercept theit connection with the will. Be it observed, that, though many passions prevail over them, no other can act beyond its own appointed and limited sphere ; and that the prevalence itself, leaving the natural order undis- turbed in any other part of the mind, is perceived to be a di.sorder. wlien seen in another man, and felt to be so by the mind disordered, when the disorder subsides. Conscience may forbid the will to contribute to the gratification of a desire. No desire ever forbids will to obey conscience. " This result of the peculiar relation of conscience to the will justifies those metaphorical expressions which ascribe to it authority and the right of universal command. It is immutable ; for, by the law which regulates all feelings, it must rest on action, which is its object, and beyond which- it cannot look; and as it employs no means, it never can be transferred to nearer objects, in the way in which he who first desires an object, as a means of gratification, may come to seek it as his end Another remarkable pe- culiarity is bestowed on the moral feelings by the nature of their oliject. As the objects of all other desires are outward , the satisfaction of them may be frustrated by outward causes. Thejnoral sentiments may always be gratified, because voluntary actions and moral dispositions spring from within. No external circumstance affects them. Hence their independence. As the moral sentiment needs no means, and the desire is instantaneously followed by the volition, it seems to be cither that which first suggests the SIR JAMES mackintosh's THEORY. 445 the conscience, or, in other words, what, according to this system, is the general character of the dispositions and actions which we consider good and right, Mack- intosh's answer would be, that the conscience, being educated and awakened by certain processes of asso- ciation, is thus composed of various elements, and finds good under various forms; — that the beneficial voli- tions are delightful, and that, therefore, they strongly attract those affections which regard the will, and thus give rise to some of the elements of conscience;* — relation between command and obedience^ or at least that which affords the simplest instance of it. It is therefore with the most ripjorous precision that authority and universality are ascribed to them. Their only unfor- tunate property is their too frequent weakness ; but it is apparent that it is from that circumstance alone th.it their failure arises. Thus considered, the language of Butler concerning conscience, that, " had it strengtii as it has right, it would govern the world," which may seem to be only an effu- sion of generous feeling, proves to be a just statement-of the nature and action of the highest of human faculties. The union of universality, im- mutability, and independence with direct action on the will, which dis- tinguishes the moral sense from every other part of our practical nature, renders it scarcely metaphorical language to ascribe to it unbounded sov- ereignty and avrfiil authority over the whole of the world within, — shows that attributes, well denoted' by terms significant of command and control, are, in fact, inseparable from it, or rather constitute its very essence, — justifies those ancient moralists who represent it as alone securing, if not forming, the moral liberty of man ; and finally, when I'eligion rises from its roots in virtuous feeling, it clothes conscience witli the sublime charac- ter of representing the Divine purity and majesty in the human soul. Its title is not impaired by any number of defeats ; for every defeat necessarily disposes ^the disinterested and dispassionate by-stander to wish that its force were strengthened : and though it may be doubted whether, consist- ently with the present constitution of human nature, it could be so invigo- rated as to be the only motive to action, yet every such by-stander rejoices at all accessions to its force, and would own that man becomes happier, more excellent, more estimable, more venerable, in proportion as con- science acquires a power of banishing malevolent passions, of strongly curbing all the private appetites, of influencing and guiding the benevo- lent affections themselves." * To illustrate this more fully, we cite what he says in his "General Remarks " ; " When the social affections arc thus formed, they are nat- urally followed in every instanro by the will to do whatever can .promote their" objert. Compassion excites a voluntary determination to do what- ever relieves the person pitied. The like process must occur in every ctse of gratitude, conerosity, and affection. Nothing so uniformly follows the kind disposition as the act of will, because it is the only means by which the benevolent desire can be gratified. The result of what Brown justly calls ' a finer analysis ' shows the mental contiguity of the affection to the volition to be much' closer than appears on a coarser examination of 38 446 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. that our anger against those who disappoint our wish for the happiness of others, when in like manner de- tached from persons and transferred to dispositions, becomes a sense of justice, another element of con- science; — that courage, energy, decision, when tamed by the society of the affections, and considered as dis- positions only, become magnanimity, and gratify the moral sense ; — and that even those habits which main- ly affect our own good, as temperance, prudence, when they become disposition and not calculation, are, for like reasons, added to the constituents of conscience. 4. Thus the view of the nature of conscience here presented explains how it is that the private desires and the social affections alike fall under the authority of the moral faculty. The explanation of this com- munity of rule in sentiments of so widely different nature. Mackintosh considers a strong confirmation of the justice of his opinion. IV.' Inferences deduced from this Theory.] Without pronouncing a judgment on the truth of this theory, I this part of our nature. No wonder, then, that the strongest association, the most active power of reciprocal snggestion, should subsist between them. As all the aifections are delightful, so the voliiions, voluntary acts whicli are the onl}' means of their gratitication. become agreeable olijccts of contemplation to the mind. The habitual disposition to perform them is felt in ourselves, and observed in others, with satisfaction. As those feel- ings become more lively, the absence of them may be viewed in ourselves with a pain, in others with an alienatioti, capable of indefinite increase. They become entirely independent sentiments; still, however, receiving constant supplies of nourishment from their parent atfections, which, in well-balanced minds, reciprocally strengthen each other; unlike the un- kind passions, which are constantly engaged in the most angry conflicts of civil war. In this state, we desire to experience tiiese benejicent voli- tions^ to cultivate a disposition towards them, and to do every correspond- ent voluntary act. They are for their own sake tlie objects of desire. They thus constitute a large portion of those emotions, desires, and affec- tions, which regard certain dispositions of the mind and determinations of the will as their sole and ultimate end. 'J'hese are what are called the moral sense, the moral sentiments, or best, though most simply, by iho ancient name of Conscience ; which has the merit, in our language, of be- ing applied to no other purpose, which peculiarly marks the strong work- in;!: of these feelings on conduct, and which, from its solemn and sacrej chariicter, is well adapted to denote the venerable authority of the highest principle of human nature." SIR JAMES mackintosh's THEORY. 447 hope I have faithfully represented the author's meaning. But he draws from the theory certain infererifces, of which I may say a few words. 1. Mackintosh, as we have seen, maintains that, though the moral faculty is formed or educed by inter- course with the external world, it is a law of our na- ture ; yet he allows that what this law prescribes agrees with Ihe rule, rightly understood, of bringing forth the greatest happiness. He was, therefore, naturally called upon to account for this coincidence. If moral ap- proval be a different sentiment from the estimation of general happiness, why does the moral sense of man invariably approve that which increases- the happiness of his species ? If this theory account for this phe- nomenon, such a circumstance will, he conceives, be a strong argument in its favor. He replies to this inquiry, that all the separate ob- jects which conscience approves, the social affections, the decisions of justice, the maxims of enlightened pru- dence, tend to the happiness of some part of the species, and that thus the general rules of conscience must agree with the rules of the general happiness. All the acts which the moral faculty sanctions promote the welfare of some part of mankind, and all that reason has to do is to add up the items of the account. All the principles of which conscience is composed con- verge towards the happiness of man ; and therefore this may be taken as its central point. And thus the coincidence just noticed is not accidental, but is a ne- cessary consequence of the theory. I will add,^as a corollary to what Mackintosh has said, that a system of ethics, rightly constructed on the principle of promoting, in the greatest degree, the hap- piness of mankind, will coincide, in most of its rules of action, with a system founded on the supreme au- thority of conscience ; but that, in order to apply safely and well the eudemonist principle, we must recollect that happiness consists rather in habits of the mind than in outward gratifications," and is to be sought rather by forming moral dispositions than by prescrib- 448 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. ing acts. In Paley's Moral Philosophy, we have a work framed*on the eudemoiiist basis, which has for some time possessed considerable authority in this coiixitry, and has probably in no small degree influenced men's reasonings on such subjects in recent times. Without examining here how far Paley has always applied his principle under due conditions, and traced his conse- quences with a sufficiently enlarged survey, we may observe that there prevails through the work a tone of practical sagacity, good sensCj and good feeling, which neutralizes most of its theoretical defects. 2. Some other bearings of Mackintosh's theory may be noticed, and especially the view it offers of the re- lation of religion and morality. This agrees nearly with the doctrine of Butler, and many English divines, that conscience is one of the ways in which the com- mands of God are conveyed to us. " The complete- ness and rigor acquired by conscience, when all its dic- tates are revered as the commands of a perfectly good and wise Being, are so obvious, that they cannot be questioned by any reasonable man, however wide his incredulity may be. It is thus that conscience can add the warmth of an affection to the inflexibility of princi- ple and habit." Not only are we bound to accept all the precepts for the moral government of the will, dis- closed either by revelation or by reason, as undeniable rules for our feelings and actions; but the relations be- tween man and his Makei; which religion teaches us tend to make this a work of love, no less than of duty, and bestow on that improvement of our inward nature to which conscience is constantly urging us an aspect of hope and joy, which human morality, without such aid, can hardly assume, and seldom long retain. 3. I will only refer to one other consequence of this theory of conscience of Mackintosh ; — the view it ap- pears to him to supply of the celebrated question of free will. Since conscience contemplates those dispo- sitions only which depend on the will, it excludes all consideration of the cause in which the will originated : hence the voluntary dispositions appear as the first link jouffroy's theory. 449 of the chain ; and, in the eye of conscience, will is the independent cause of action. Keason, on the other '■and, must consider occurrences as bound together by the connection of cause and effect, and thus sees only the strength of the necessitarian system. Thus, while speculation appears to show that our actions are neces- sary, practice convinces us that they are free. The ad- vocates of necessity and of free will look at the ques- tion from different points of view; — that of the un- derstanding and that of the conscience. But the con- scientious view, being strengthened by the moral sym- pathy of mankind, is by far the most generally and strongly entertained. Section II. jouffroy's theory of morals. I. His Criticism of other Theories.] Observation at- tests, and reason conceives, that every human action must have a motive and an end. In .seeking to deter- mine what are the distinct ends of human action, we find that they may be reduced to three: first, the pecu- liar object of some one natural desire; secondly, the complete satisfaction of our whole nature, or the pleas- ure which accompanies this satisfaction ; thirdly, that which is good in itjself. We find, also, that all the dis- tinct motives of human action may be reduced to three, which correspond to these three ends: first, some natu- ral instinct; secondly, a desire of secondary formation, which we call self-love, or the desire of happiness; thirdly, obligation. From these arise three simple forms of determination, not to speak of those mixed forms which result from the different possible combina- tions of these three ends and motives. This being premised, we apply the name of good to the following things : — 1. The objects of the different instincts of our na- ture, -= such as food, riches, power, glory, esteem, friend- ship, — each of which we call good. Good, in this first 38* 450 NATURE AND ESSENCE OF VIRTUE. acceptation, signifies whatever is fitted to satisfy some desire ; so that there are as many varieties of good as there are desires. 2. The greatest satisfaction' of our nature ; which is, in other words, either its greatest good or its greatest happiness, according as we consider its satisfaction in itself, or the consequence of this, which is pleasure. Here, the word good represents no longer the object of a desire and its satisfaction, but the greatest satisfac- tion of all our desires. Different persons may under- stand this good in their own way, but each has the idea of such a good. 3. Good in itself. By g-ooof, in this last acceptation, we mean, not that UHti:IUUIiUEWULUkhmliM^^^