First，toavoidconfusion，wemustremarkthatLoveisnotmerelyadesiretodogoodtotheobjectbeloved，althoughitalwaysinvolvessuchadesire。Itisprimarilyapleasurableemotion，whichseemstodependuponacertainsenseofunionwithanotherperson，anditincludes，besidesthebenevolentimpulse，adesireofthesocietyofthebeloved:andthiselementmaypredominateovertheformer，andevenconflictwithit，sothatthetrueinterestsofthebelovedmaybesacrificed。
Inthiscasewecalltheaffectionselfish，anddonotpraiseitatall，butratherblame。IfnowweaskwhetherintenseLoveforanindividual，consideredmerelyasabenevolentimpulse，isinitselfamoralexcellence，itisdifficulttoextractaverydefiniteanswerfromCommonSense:butIthinkitinclinesonthewholetothenegative。Wearenodoubtgenerallyinclinedtoadmireanykindofconspicuously`altruistic’conductandanyformofintenselove，howeverrestrictedinitsscope；yetithardlyseemsthatthesusceptibilitytosuchindividualisedbenevolentemotionsisexactlyregardedasanessentialelementofmoralPerfection，whichweoughttostriveafterandcultivatelikeothermoralexcellences；weseem，infact，todoubtwhethersucheffortisdesirableinthiscase，atleastbeyondthepointuptowhichsuchaffectionisthoughttoberequiredfortheperformanceofrecognisedduties。Again，wethinkitnaturalanddesirablethat——asgenerallyspeakingeachpersonfeelsstrongaffectionforonlyafewindividuals，——inhiseffortstopromotedirectlythewell-beingofothersheshould，toagreatextent，followthepromptingsofsuchrestrictedaffection:butwearehardlypreparedtorecommendthatheshouldrenderservicestospecialindividualsbeyondwhatheisboundtorender，andsuchasarethenaturalexpressionofaneagerandoverflowingaffection，withouthavinganysuchaffectiontoexpress:although，aswasbeforesaid，incertainintimaterelationswedonotapproveofthelimitsofdutybeingtooexactlymeasured。
Onthewhole，then，Iconcludethat——whilewepraiseandadmireenthusiasticBenevolenceandPatriotism，andaretouchedandcharmedbythespontaneouslavishoutflowofGratitude，Friendship，andthedomesticaffections——stillwhatchieflyconcernsusasmoralists，underthepresenthead，istheascertainmentoftherightrulesofdistributionofservicesandkindacts，insofarasweconsidertherenderingofthesetobemorallyobligatory。ForprovidedamanfulfilsthesedutiesandobservestheotherrecognisedrulesofmoralityCommonSenseisnotpreparedtosayhowfaritisrightorgoodthatheshouldsacrificeanyothernobleandworthyaim——suchasthecultivationofknowledgeoranyofthefinearts——totheclaimsofphilanthropyorpersonalaffection:
thereseemtobenogenerallyaccepted``intuitional’’principlesfordeterminingsuchachoiceofalternatives。[3]
Whatthenarethedutiesthatweowetoourfellow-men-sofarastheydonotseemtocomeundertheheadofJusticemoreproperlythanBenevolence？Perhapsthemereenumerationofthemisnotdifficult。Weshouldallagreethateachofusisboundtoshowkindnesstohisparentsandspouseandchildren，andtootherkinsmeninalessdegree:andtothosewhohaverenderedservicestohim，andanyotherswhomhemayhaveadmittedtohisintimacyandcalledfriends:andtoneighboursandtofellow-countrymenmorethanothers:andperhapswemaysaytothoseofourownracemorethantoblackoryellowmen，andgenerallytohumanbeingsinproportiontotheiraffinitytoourselves。Andtoourcountryasacorporatewholewebelieveourselvestoowethegreatestsacrificeswhenoccasioncallsbutinalowerstageofcivilisationthisdebtisthoughttobeduerathertoone’skingorchief:andasimilarobligationseemstoberecognised，thoughlessdefinitelyandinalessdegree，asregardsminorcorporationsofwhichwearemembers。Andtoallmenwithwhomwemaybebroughtintorelationweareheldtooweslightservices，andsuchasmayberenderedwithoutinconvenience:butthosewhoareindistressorurgentneedhaveaclaimonusforspecialkindness。Thesearegenerallyrecognisedclaims:butwefindconsiderabledifficultyanddivergence，whenweattempttodeterminemorepreciselytheirextentandrelativeobligation:andthedivergencebecomesindefinitelygreaterwhenwecomparethecustomsandcommonopinionsnowexistingamongourselvesinrespectofsuchclaims，withthoseofotheragesandcountries。Forexample，inearlieragesofsocietyapeculiarsacrednesswasattachedtothetieofhospitality，andclaimsarisingoutofitwereconsideredpeculiarlystringent:butthishaschangedashospitalityintheprogressofcivilisationhasbecomealuxuryratherthananecessary，andwedonotthinkthatweowemuchtoamanbecausewehaveaskedhimtodinner。
Oragainwemaytakeaninstancewherethealterationisperhapsactuallygoingon——theclaimsofkindredinrespectofbequest。Weshouldnowcommonlythinkthatamanoughtusuallytoleavehispropertytohischildren:butthatifhehasnochildrenwethinkhemaydowhathelikeswithit，unlessanyofhisbrothersorsistersareinpoverty，inwhichcasecompassionseemstoblendwithandinvigoratetheevanescentclaimofconsanguinity。
Butinanagenotlongpastachildlessmanwasheldtobemorallyboundtoleavehismoneytohiscollateralrelatives:andthuswearenaturallyledtoconjecturethatinthenotdistantfuture，anysimilarobligationtochildren——unlesstheyareinwantorunlesstheireducationisnotcompleted——mayhavevanishedoutofmen’sminds。Asimilarchangemightbetracedinthecommonlyrecogniseddutyofchildrentoparents。
Itmayhoweverbeurgedthatthisvariationofcustomisnoobstacletothedefinitionofduty，becausewemaylaydownthatthecustomsofanysocietyoughttobeobeyedsolongastheyareestablished，justasthelawsought，althoughbothcustomsandlawsmaybechangedfromtimetotime。Andnodoubtitisgenerallyexpedienttoconformtoestablishedcustoms:still，onreflection，weseethatitcannotbelaiddownasanabsoluteduty。ForthecasesofCustomandLawarenotsimilar:asineveryprogressivecommunitythereisaregularandsettledmodeofabrogatinglawsthatarefoundbad:butcustomscannotbethusformallyabolished，andweonlygetridofthemthroughtherefusalofprivateindividualstoobeythem；andthereforeitmustbesometimesrighttodothis，ifsomecustomsarevexatiousandpernicious，aswefrequentlyjudgethoseofantiqueandaliencommunitiestobe。Andifwesaythatcustomsshouldgenerallybeobeyed，butthattheymaybedisobeyedwhentheyreachacertaindegreeofinexpediency，ourmethodseemstoresolveitselfintoUtilitarianism:forwecannotreasonablyrestthegeneralobligationupononeprinciple，anddetermineitslimitsandexceptionsbyanother。
Ifthedutiesaboveenumeratedcanbereferredtoindependentandself-evidentprinciples，thelimitsofeachmustbeimplicitlygivenintheintuitionthatrevealstheprinciple。
Inorderthentoascertainhowfarwepossesssuchprinciples，letusexamineinmoredetailwhatCommonSenseseemstoaffirminrespectoftheseduties。Theyseemtorangethemselvesunderfourheads。Thereare1dutiesarisingoutofcomparativelypermanentrelationshipsnotvoluntarilychosen，suchasKindredandinmostcasesCitizenshipandNeighbourhood:2thoseofsimilarrelationshipsvoluntarilycontracted，suchasFriendship:3thosethatspringfromspecialservicesreceived，orDutiesofGratitude:and4thosethatseemduetospecialneed，orDutiesofPity。Thisclassificationis，Ithink，convenientfordiscussion:butIcannotprofessthatitclearlyandcompletelyavoidscrossdivisions；since，forexample，theprincipleofGratitudeisoftenappealedtoassupplyingtherationaleforthedutiesowedbychildrentoparents。Here，however，wecomeuponamaterialdisagreementanddifficultyindeterminingthemaximofthisspeciesofduty。Itwouldbeagreedthatchildrenowetotheirparentsrespectandkindnessgenerally，andassistanceincaseofinfirmityoranyspecialneed:butitseemsdoubtfulhowfarthisisheldbyCommonSensetobedueonaccountoftherelationshipalone，oronaccountofservicesrenderedduringinfancy，andhowfaritisduetocruelorneglectfulparents。Mostperhapswouldsay，hereandinothercases，thatmerenearnessofbloodconstitutedacertainclaim:
buttheywouldfindithardtoagreeuponitsexactforce。[1]
But，apartfromthis，thereseemsgreatdifferenceofopinionastowhatisduefromchildrentoparentswhohaveperformedtheirduty；as，forexample，howfarobedienceisduefromachildwhoisnolongerinitsparents’guardianshipordependentonthemforsupport:——whethere。g。asonoradaughterisboundnottoopposeaparent’swishesinmarryingorchoosingaprofession。Practicallywefindthatparentalcontrolisgreaterinthecaseofpersonswhocanenrichtheirchildrenbytestament:stillwecanhardlytakethisintoconsiderationindeterminingtheidealoffilialduty:fortothis，whateveritmaybe，thechildisthoughttobeabsolutelybound，andnotasaquidproquoinanticipationoffuturebenefits:andmanywouldholdthataparenthadnomoralrighttodisinheritachild，exceptasapenaltyforatransgressionofduty。
Andthisleadstowhatwemayconvenientlyexaminenext，thedutyofparentstochildren。Thistoowemightpartlyclassifyunderadifferenthead，viz。thatofdutiesarisingoutofspecialneeds:
fornodoubtchildrenarenaturallyobjectsofcompassion，onaccountoftheirhelplessness，toothersbesidestheirparents。Butonthelattertheyhaveaclaimofadifferentkind，springingfromtheuniversallyrecogniseddutyofnotcausingpainoranyharmtootherhumanbeings，directlyorindirectly，exceptinthewayofdeservedpunishment:fortheparent，beingthecauseofthechild’sexistinginahelplesscondition，wouldbeindirectlythecauseofthesufferinganddeaththatwouldresulttoitifneglected。
Stillthisdoesnotseemanadequateexplanationofparentalduty，asrecognisedbyCommonSense。Forwecommonlyblameaparentwholeaveshischildrenentirelytothecareofothers，evenifhemakesampleprovisionfortheirbeingnourishedandtraineduptothetimeatwhichtheycansupportthemselvesbytheirownlabour。Wethinkthatheowesthemaffectionasfarasthiscanbesaidtobeadutyandthetenderandwatchfulcarethatnaturallyspringsfromaffection:and，ifhecanaffordit，somewhatmorethanthenecessaryminimumoffood，clothing，andeducation。Stillitdoesnotseemclearhowfarbeyondthisheisboundtogo。Itiseasytosaybroadlythatheoughttopromotehischildren’shappinessbyallmeansinhispower:
andnodoubtitisnaturalforagoodparenttofindhisownbesthappinessinhischildren’s，andwearedisposedtoblameanyonewhomarkedlyprefershisowninteresttotheirs:stillitseemsunreasonablethatheshouldpurchaseasmallincreaseoftheirhappinessbyagreatsacrificeofhisown:andmoreoverthereareotherworthyandnobleendswhichmayanddocomeintocompetitionwiththis。Totakeinstancesofactualoccurrence:
oneparentisledtogiveupsomeimportantandvaluableworkwhichperhapsnooneelsecanorwilldo，inordertoleavehischildrenalittlemorewealth:anotherbringsthemtothevergeofstarvationinordertoperfectaninventionorprosecutescientificresearches。Weseemtocondemneitherextreme:yetwhatclearandacceptedprinciplecanbestatedfordeterminingthetruemean？Again，aswehaveseen，somethinkthataparenthasnorighttobequeathhisinheritanceawayfromhischildren，unlesstheyhavebeenundutiful:andinsomestatesthisisevenforbiddenbylaw。Others，however，holdthatchildrenassuchhavenoclaimstotheirparents’wealth:
butonlyifthereisatacitunderstandingthattheywillsucceedtoit，or，atanyrate，iftheyhavebeenrearedinsuchhabitsoflifeandsocialrelationsaswillrenderitdifficultandpainfulforthemtolivewithoutinheritedwealth。
Itwouldbetedioustogoindetailthroughallthedegreesofconsanguinity，asitisclearthatourconceptionofthemutualdutiesofkinsmenbecomesvaguerasthekinshipbecomesmoreremote。
Amongchildrenofthesameparents，broughtuptogether，affectionofmoreorlessstrengthgrowsupsonaturallyandcommonly，thatweregardthosewhofeelnoaffectionfortheirbrothersandsisterswithacertainaversionandmoralcontempt，assomewhatinhuman:andwethinkthatinanycasetheservicesandkindactswhichnaturallyspringfromaffectionoughttoberenderedtosomeextentbuttheextentseemsquiteundefined。Andeventowardsremoterkinsmenwethinkthatacertainflowofkindlyfeelingwillattendtherepresentationofconsanguinityinmenofgooddispositions。
Someindeedstillthinkthatcousinshaveamoralrighttoaman’sinheritanceindefaultofnearerheirs，andtoassistanceinanyneed:butitseemsequallycommontoholdthattheycanatmostclaimtobeselectedceterisparibusastherecipientsofbounty，andthatanunpromisingcousinshouldnotbepreferredtoapromisingstranger。