Thelastsentencesuggestsonemoreexplanation,which,forclearness’sake,itseemsdesirabletomake:anexplanation,however,ratheroftheplanandpurposeofthepresenttreatisethanofthenatureandboundariesofthesubjectofEthicsasgenerallyunderstood。
Thereareseveralrecognisedwaysoftreatingthissubject,noneofwhichIhavethoughtitdesirabletoadopt。Wemaystartwithexistingsystems,andeitherstudythemhistorically,tracingthechangesinthoughtthroughthecenturies,orcompareandclassifythemaccordingtorelationsofresemblance,orcriticisetheirinternalcoherence。
Orwemayseektoaddtothenumberofthesesystems:andclaimaftersomanyunsuccessfuleffortstohaveatlastattainedtheonetruetheoryofthesubject,bywhichallothersmaybetested。Thepresentbookcontainsneithertheexpositionofasystemnoranaturalorcriticalhistoryofsystems。IhaveattemptedtodefineandunfoldnotoneMethodofEthics,butseveral:atthesametimethesearenotherestudiedhistorically,asmethodsthathaveactuallybeenusedorproposedfortheregulationofpractice;butratherasalternativesbetweenwhich——sofarastheycannotbereconciled——thehumanmindseemstomenecessarilyforcedtochoose,whenitattemptstoframeacompletesynthesisofpracticalmaximsandtoactinaperfectlyconsistentmanner。Thus,theymightperhapsbecallednaturalmethodsrationalised;becausemencommonlyseemtoguidethemselvesbyamixtureofdifferentmethods,moreorlessdisguisedunderambiguitiesoflanguage。Theimpulsesorprinciplesfromwhichthedifferentmethodstaketheirrise,thedifferentclaimsofdifferentendstoberational,areadmitted,tosomeextent,byallminds:andasalongwiththeseclaimsisfelttheneedofharmonisingthem——sinceitis,aswassaid,apostulateofthePracticalReason,thattwoconflictingrulesofactioncannotbothbereasonable——theresultisordinarilyeitheraconfusedblending,oraforcedandprematurereconciliation,ofdifferentprinciplesandmethods。
Norhavethesystemsframedbyprofessedmoralistsbeenfreefromsimilardefects。Thewritershaveusuallyproceededtosynthesiswithoutadequateanalysis;thepracticaldemandfortheformerbeingmoreurgentlyfeltthanthetheoreticalneedofthelatter。ForhereasinotherpointsthedevelopmentofthetheoryofEthicswouldseemtobesomewhatimpededbythepreponderanceofpracticalconsiderations;andperhapsamorecompletedetachmentofthetheoreticalstudyofrightconductfromitspracticalapplicationistobedesiredforthesakeevenofthelatteritself:sinceatreatmentwhichisacompoundbetweenthescientificandthehortatoryisapttomissboththeresultsthatitwouldcombine;themixtureisbewilderingtothebrainandnotstimulatingtotheheart。Soagain,Iaminclinedtothinkthathere,asinothersciences,itwouldbeanadvantagetodrawasdistinctalineaspossiblebetweentheknownandtheunknown;astheclearindicationofanunsolvedproblemisatanyrateasteptoitssolution。
Inethicaltreatises,however,therehasbeenacontinualtendencytoignoreandkeepoutofsightthedifficultiesofthesubject;eitherunconsciously,fromalatentconvictionthatthequestionswhichthewritercannotanswersatisfactorilymustbequestionswhichoughtnottobeasked;orconsciously,thathemaynotshaketheswayofmoralityoverthemindsofhisreaders。
Thislastwell-meantprecautionfrequentlydefeatsitself:thedifficultiesthusconcealedinexpositionareliabletoreappearincontroversy:andthen,theyappearnotcarefullylimited,butmagnifiedforpolemicalpurposes。
Thuswegetontheonehandvagueandhazyreconciliation,ontheotherlooseandrandomexaggerationofdiscrepancies;andneitherprocessiseffectivetodispelthe,originalvaguenessandambiguitywhichlurksinthefundamentalnotionsofourcommonpracticalreasonings。ToeliminateorreducethisindefinitenessandconfusionisthesoleimmediateendthatIhaveproposedtomyselfinthepresentwork。Inorderbettertoexecutethistask,Ihaverefrainedfromexpresslyattemptinganysuchcompleteandfinalsolutionofthechiefethicaldifficultiesandcontroversiesaswouldconvertthisexpositionofvariousmethodsintothedevelopmentofaharmonioussystem。AtthesametimeIhopetoaffordaidtowardstheconstructionofsuchasystem;becauseitseemseasiertojudgeofthemutualrelationsandconflictingclaimsofdifferentmodesofthought,afteranimpartialandrigorousinvestigationoftheconclusionstowhichtheylogicallylead。Itisnotuncommontofindinreflectingonpracticalprinciples,that——howeverunhesitatinglytheyseemtocommandourassentatfirstsight,andhoweverfamiliarandapparentlyclearthenotionsofwhichtheyarecomposed——neverthelesswhenwehavecarefullyexaminedtheconsequencesofadoptingthemtheywearachangedandsomewhatdubiousaspect。Thetruthseemstobethatmostofthepracticalprinciplesthathavebeenseriouslyputforwardaremoreorlesssatisfactorytothecommonsenseofmankind,solongastheyhavethefieldtothemselves。Theyallfindaresponseinournature:theirfundamentalassumptionsareallsuchaswearedisposedtoaccept,andsuchaswefindtogoverntoacertainextentourhabitualconduct。WhenIamasked,``Doyounotconsideritultimatelyreasonabletoseekpleasureandavoidpainforyourself?’’``Haveyounotamoralsense?’’``Doyounotintuitivelypronouncesomeactionstoberightandotherswrong?’’``Doyounotacknowledgethegeneralhappinesstobeaparamountend?’’Ianswer`yes’toallthesequestions。MydifficultybeginswhenIhavetochoosebetweenthedifferentprinciplesorinferencesdrawnfromthem。Weadmitthenecessity,whentheyconflict,ofmakingthischoice,andthatitisirrationaltoletsometimesoneprincipleprevailandsometimesanother;butthenecessityisapainfulone。Wecannotbuthopethatallmethodsmayultimatelycoincide:andatanyrate,beforemakingourelectionwemayreasonablywishtohavethecompletestpossibleknowledgeofeach。
Myobject,then,inthepresentwork,istoexpoundasclearlyandasfullyasmylimitswillallowthedifferentmethodsofEthicsthatIfindimplicitinourcommonmoralreasoning;topointouttheirmutualrelations;andwheretheyseemtoconflict,todefinetheissueasmuchaspossible。InthecourseofthisendeavourIamledtodiscusstheconsiderationswhichshould,inmyopinion,bedecisiveindeterminingtheadoptionofethicalfirstprinciples:butitisnotmyprimaryaimtoestablishsuchprinciples;nor,again,isitmyprimaryaimtosupplyasetofpracticaldirectionsforconduct。Ihavewishedtokeepthereader’sattentionthroughoutdirectedtotheprocessesratherthantheresultsofethicalthought:andhavethereforeneverstatedasmyownanypositivepracticalconclusionsunlessbywayofillustration:
andhaveneverventuredtodecidedogmaticallyanycontrovertedpoints,exceptwherethecontroversyseemedtoarisefromwantofprecisionorclearnessinthedefinitionofprinciples,orwantofconsistencyinreasoning。
InthelastchapterIhavespokenofEthicsandPoliticsasbeingbothPracticalStudies,includinginthescopeoftheirinvestigationsomewhatthatliesoutsidethesphereofpositivesciences——viz。
thedeterminationofendstobesought,orrulestobeunconditionallyobeyed。Beforeproceedingfurther,itwouldseemdesirabletodetermineinoutlinethemutualrelationsofthesecognatestudies,regardedfromthepointofviewofEthics。
AsIhavedefinedthem,Ethicsaimsatdeterminingwhatoughttobedonebyindividuals,whilePoliticsaimsatdeterminingwhatthegovernmentofastateorpoliticalsocietyoughttodoandhowitoughttobeconstituted,——includingunderthelatterheadallquestionsastothecontrolovergovernmentthatshouldbeexercisedbythegoverned。
AtfirstsightitmayseemthatPolitics,soconceived,mustbeabranchofEthics。Foralltheactionsofgovernmentareactionsofindividuals,aloneorincombination,andsoarealltheactionsofthosewho,obeying,influencing,orperhapsoccasionallyresistinggovernment,maintainandfromtimetotimemodifytheconstitutionoftheirstate:
anditwouldseemthatifproperlyperformedsuchactionsmustbedeterminedonethicalprinciplesorbecapableofjustificationbysuchprinciples。
Butthisargumentisnotdecisive;forbysimilarreasoningEthicswouldhavetocomprehendallarts,liberalandindustrial。E。g。itisamainpartofthemoraldutyofasea-captainandhissubordinatestonavigatetheirshipproperly;butwedonottakeEthicstoincludeastudyoftherulesofnavigation。Itmayberepliedthateverymanisnotasailor,but——atleastinacountryunderpopulargovernment——everycitizenhasimportantpoliticalduties,whichheoughttoperformaccordingtoknowledge,sopfaraspossible;but,similarly,itisanimportantpartofeveryadult’smoraldutytotakecareofhishealth,anditisproverbialthat``everymanatfortyisafoolorhisownphysician’’;yetwedonotconsiderEthicstoincludetheartofmedicine。
ThespeciallyimportantconnexionbetweenEthicsandPoliticsarisesinadifferentway。Itisthebusinessofgovernment,bylayingdownandenforcinglaws,toregulatetheoutwardconductofthegoverned,notinonedepartmentonly,butinalltheirsocialrelations,sofarassuchconductisapropersubjectforcoerciverules。Andnotonlyoughtthisregulationtobeinharmonywithmorality——forobviouslypeopleoughtnottobecompelledtodowhattheyoughtnottodo——butfurther,toanimportantextenttheLawofaman’sstatewillproperlydeterminethedetailsofhismoralduty,evenbeyondthesphereoflegalenforcement。Thuswecommonlyregarditasanindividual’smoralduty,undertheheadofJustice,to``giveeverymanhisown’’,evenwhen——throughsomeaccident——theotherpartyhasnotthepoweroflegallyenforcinghisright;butstill,inconsideringwhatistheother’s``own’’,weassumehimgenerallytobeguidedbythelawofhisstate;ifthatwerechanged,hismoraldutywouldchangewithit。Similarly,themutualmoraldutiesofhusbandsandwives,andofchildrenandparents,willvaryindetailwiththevariationsintheirlegalrelations。
ButwhenwelookcloserattherelationthusconstitutedbetweenEthicsandPolitics,weseethatadistinctionhastobetakenbetweenactualorPositiveLawandIdealLaworLawasitoughttobe。
ItisforthelatterthatPoliticalTheorylaysdownprinciples;butitisPositive,notIdeal,Lawthatprimarilydeterminesrightconductforanindividualhereandnow,inthemannerjustexemplified。NodoubtifPositiveandIdealLawappeartometodivergeverywidely——ife。g。
Iamconvincedbypoliticaltheorythatafundamentalchangeinthelawofpropertyisdesirable——thisconvictionislikelytoinfluencemyviewofmymoraldutyundertheexistinglaw;buttheextentofthisinfluenceisvagueanduncertain。SupposeIamaslave-ownerinasocietyinwhichslaveryisestablished,andbecomeconvincedthatprivatepropertyinhumanbeingsshouldbeabolishedbylaw:itdoesnotthereforefollowthatI
shallregarditasmymoraldutytosetfreemyslavesatonce。Imaythinkimmediategeneralabolitionofslaverynotonlyhopeless,buteveninexpedientfortheslavesthemselves,whorequireagradualeducationforfreedom:
sothatitisbetterforthepresenttoaimatlegalchangesthatwouldcutofftheworstevilsofslavery,andmeanwhiletosetanexampleofhumaneandconsideratetreatmentofbondsmen。Similarreasoningsmightbeappliedtotheabolitionofprivatepropertyintheinstrumentsofproduction,orinappointmentstooffices,civilorecclesiastical。Speakinggenerally,theextenttowhichpoliticalidealsoughttoinfluencemoraldutywouldseemtodependpartlyontheapparentremotenessornearnessoftheprospectofrealisingtheideal,partlyonitsimperativeness,ortheexpediencyofimmediaterealisation:andtheforceattachedtoboththeseconsiderationsislikelytovarywiththepoliticalmethodadopted;sothatitbelongstoPoliticsratherthanEthicstodeterminethemmoreprecisely。
Tosumup:wehavetodistinguishclearlybetweentwoquestions:1howfarthedeterminationofrightconductforanindividualhereandnowoughttobeinfluencedbyPositiveLaws,andothercommandsofGovernmentasactuallyestablished;and2howfaritoughttobeinfluencedbyPoliticalTheory,astothefunctionsandstructureofGovernmentasitoughttobe。Asregardstheformer,itclearlybelongstoEthicstodeterminethegroundsandlimitsofobediencetoGovernment;
andalsothegeneralconceptionofpoliticalduty,sofarasitgoesbeyondmereobedience-withduerecognitionofthelargevariationsduetothevaryingpoliticalconditionsofdifferentstates。A``goodcitizen’’intheUnitedStateswillreasonablyformaconceptionofhisactualpoliticaldutywidelydivergentfromthatreasonablyformedbyagoodcitizeninRussia。AndthiswillbetheprimarybusinessofEthicssofarasitdealswiththepoliticalsideoflife。Thediscussionofpoliticalidealswillonlycomewithinitspurviewinamoreindefiniteandindirectway,sofarassuchidealscannotbuthavesomeinfluenceonthedeterminationofpoliticaldutyunderexistingconditions。