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。