as,indeed,wehaveaccepteditwithregardtoallthedeeperflowandfinerexpressionoffeelingeveninthedomesticrelations:foritseemedpedanticandfutiletoprescriberulesforthis,oreventhoughwenaturallyadmireandpraiseanynotungracefulexhibitionofintenseandgenuineaffectiontodelineateanidealofexcellenceforalltoaimat。Still,thereseemedtobeanimportantsphereofstrictduty——howeverhardtodefine——intherelationsofchildrentoparents,etc。,andeveninthecaseoffriendshipitseemscontrarytocommonsensetorecognisenosuchsphere;asitnotunfrequentlyoccurstoustojudgethatonefriendhasbehavedwronglytoanother,andtospeakasiftherewereaclearlycognisablecodeofbehaviourinsuchrelations。
Perhaps,however,wemaysaythatallclearcasesofwrongconducttowardsfriendscomeunderthegeneralformulaofbreachofunderstanding。Friendsnotunfrequentlymakedefinitepromisesofservice,butweneednotconsiderthese,astheirviolationisprohibitedbyadifferentandclearermoralrule。Butfurther,asallloveisunderstoodtoincludeadesireforthehappinessofitsobject,theprofessionoffriendshipseemstobindonetoseekthishappinesstoanextentproportionatetosuchprofession。Nowcommonbenevolencecf。ante,§;5prescribesatleastthatweshouldrendertoothermensuchservicesaswecanrenderwithoutanysacrifice,orwithasacrificesotriflingastobequiteoutofproportiontotheservicerendered。Andsincetheprofessionoffriendshipthoughthetermisusedtoincludeaffectionsofvariousdegreemustimplyagreaterinterestinone’sfriend’shappinessthaninthatofmeningeneral,itmustannounceawillingnesstomakemoreorlessconsiderablesacrificesforhim,ifoccasionoffers。Ifthenwedeclinetomakesuchsacrifices,wedowrongbyfailingtofulfilnaturalandlegitimateexpectations。SofarthereseemsnosourceofdifficultyexcepttheindefinitenessinevitablyarisingfromthewiderangeofmeaningscoveredbythetermFriendship。Butfurtherquestionsariseinconsequenceofthechangesoffeelingtowhichhumannatureisliable:first,whetheritisourdutytoresistsuchchangesasmuchaswecan;andsecondly,whetherifthiseffortfails,andlovediminishesordeparts,weoughtstilltomaintainadispositiontorenderservicescorrespondingtoourpastaffection。Andonthesepointstheredoesnotseemtobeagreementamongmoralandrefinedpersons。For,ontheonehand,itisnaturaltoustoadmirefidelityinfriendshipandstabilityofaffections,andwecommonlyregardtheseasmostimportantexcellencesofcharacter:andsoitseemsstrangeifwearenottoaimattheseasatallotherexcellences,asnonemorenaturallystirustoimitation。Andhencemanywouldbepreparedtolaydownthatweoughtnottowithdrawaffectiononcegiven,unlessthefriendbehavesill:whilesomewouldsaythateveninthiscaseweoughtnottobreakthefriendshipunlessthecrimeisverygreat。Yet,ontheotherhand,wefeelthatsuchaffectionasisproducedbydeliberateeffortofwillisbutapoorsubstituteforthatwhichspringsspontaneously,andmostrefinedpersonswouldrejectsuchaboon:while,again,toconcealthechangeoffeelingseemsinsincereandhypocritical。
Butasforservices,arefinedpersonwouldnotacceptsuchfromaformerfriendwhonolongerloveshim:unlessinextremeneed,whenanykindoftieis,asitwere,invigoratedbythealreadystrongclaimwhichcommonhumanitygiveseachmanuponallothers。Perhaps,therefore,therecannotbeadutytooffersuchservicesinanycase,whentheneedisnotextreme。Thoughthisinferenceisnotquiteclear:forinrelationsofaffectionweoftenpraiseonepartyforofferingwhatweratherblametheotherforaccepting。Butitseemsthatdelicatequestionsofthiskindaremorenaturallyreferredtocanonsofgoodtasteandrefinedfeelingthanofmoralityproper:oratleastonlyincludedinthescopeofmoralityinsofaraswehaveageneraldutytocultivategoodtasteandrefinementoffeeling,likeotherexcellences。
Onthewhole,then,wemaysaythatthechiefdifficultiesindeterminingthemoralobligationsoffriendshiparise1fromtheindefinitenessofthetacitunderstandingimpliedintherelation,and2fromthedisagreementwhichwefindastotheextenttowhichFidelityisapositiveduty。Itmaybeobservedthatthelatterdifficultyisespeciallyprominentinrespectofthoseintimaciesbetweenpersonsofdifferentsexwhichprecedeandpreparethewayformarriage。
1passnowtothethirdhead,Gratitude。
Ithasbeenalreadyobservedthattheobligationofchildrentoparentsissometimesbaseduponthis:andinotheraffectionaterelationshipsitcommonlyblendswithandmuchstrengthenstheclaimsthatarethoughttoariseoutoftherelationsthemselves;thoughnoneofthedutiesthatwehavediscussedseemreferableentirelytogratitude。Butwheregratitudeisdue,theobligationisespeciallyclearandsimple。Indeedthedutyofrequitingbenefitsseemstoberecognisedwherevermoralityextends;
andIntuitionistshavejustlypointedtothisrecognitionasaninstanceofatrulyuniversalintuition。Still,thoughthegeneralforceoftheobligationisnotopentodoubtexceptofthesweepingandabstractkindwithwhichwehavenotheretodeal,itsnatureandextentarebynomeansequallyclear。
Inthefirstplace,itmaybeaskedwhetherweareonlyboundtorepayservices,orwhetherweowethespecialaffectioncalledGratitude;whichseemsgenerallytocombinekindlyfeelingandeagernesstorequitewithsomesortofemotionalrecognitionofsuperiority,asthegiverofbenefitsisinapositionofsuperioritytothereceiver。Ontheonehandweseemtothinkthat,insofarasanyaffectioncanpossiblybeaduty,kindlyfeelingtowardsbenefactorsmustbesuch:andyettopersonsofacertaintemperamentthisfeelingisoftenpeculiarlyhardtoattain,owingtotheirdislikeofthepositionofinferiority;andthisagainweconsiderarightfeelingtoacertainextent,andcallit`independence’
or`properpride’;butthisfeelingandtheeffusionofgratitudedonoteasilymix,andthemoralistfindsitdifficulttorecommendapropercombinationofthetwo。Perhapsitmakesagreatdifferencewhethertheservicebelovinglydone:asinthiscaseitseemsinhumanthatthereshouldbenoresponseofaffection:whereasifthebenefitbecoldlygiven,themererecognitionoftheobligationandsettleddispositiontorepayitseemtosuffice。And`independence’alonewouldpromptamantorepaythebenefitinordertoescapefromtheburdenofobligation。Butitseemsdoubtfulwhetherinanycasewearemorallysatisfiedwiththisasthesolemotive。
Itispartlythisimpatienceofobligationwhichmakesamandesirousofgivingasrequitalmorethanbehasreceived;forotherwisehisbenefactorhasstillthesuperiorityofhavingtakentheinitiative。Butalsotheworthiermotiveofaffectionurgesusinthesamedirection:andhere,asinotheraffectionateservices,wedonotliketooexactameasureofduty;acertainexcessfallingshortofextravaganceseemstobewhatweadmireandpraise。Insofar,however,asconflictofclaimsmakesitneedfultobeexact,wethinkperhapsthatanequalreturniswhatthedutyofgratituderequires,orratherwillingnesstomakesuchareturn,ifitberequired,andifitisinourpowertomakeitwithoutneglectingpriorclaims。Forwedonotthinkitobligatorytorequiteservicesinallcases,evenifitbeinourpowertodoso,ifthebenefactorappeartobesufficientlysuppliedwiththemeansofhappiness:
butifheeitherdemanditorobviouslystandinneedofit,wethinkitungratefulnottomakeanequalreturn。Butwhenwetrytodefinethisnotionof`equalreturn’,obscurityanddivergencebegin。Forapartfromthedifficultyofcomparingdifferentkindsofserviceswherewecannotmakerepaymentinkind。Equalityhastwodistinctmeanings,accordingasweconsidertheeffortmadebythebenefactor,ortheservicerenderedtothebenefited。Nowperhapsifeitherofthesebegreat,thegratitudeisnaturallystrong:fortheapprehensionofgreatearnestnessinanothertoserveustendstodrawfromusaproportionateresponseofaffection:
andanygreatpleasureorrelieffrompainnaturallyproducesacorrespondingemotionofthankfulnesstothemanwhohasvoluntarilycausedthis,eventhoughhiseffortmayhavebeenslight。Andhenceithasbeensuggested,thatinproportioningtheduesofgratitudeweoughttotakewhicheverofthetwoconsiderationswillgivethehighestestimate。ButthisdoesnotseeminaccordancewithCommonSense:forthebenefitmaybealtogetherunacceptable,anditishardtobindustorepayinfulleverywell-meantblunderingefforttoserveus;thoughwefeelvaguelythatsomereturnshouldbemadeevenforthis。Andthoughitismoreplausibletosaythatweoughttorequiteanacceptedservicewithoutweighingtheamountofourbenefactor’ssacrifice,stillwhenwetakeextremecasestheruleseemsnottobevalid:e。g……ifapoormanseesarichonedrowningandpullshimoutofthewater,wedonotthinkthatthelatterisboundtogiveasarewardwhatbewouldhavebeenwillingtogiveforhislife。
Still,weshouldthinkhimniggardlyifheonlygavehispreserverhalf-a-crown:
whichmight,however,beprofuserepaymentforthecostoftheexertion。
Somethingbetweenthetwoseemstosuitourmoraltaste:butIfindnoclearacceptedprincipleuponwhichtheamountcanbedecided。
ThelastclaimtobeconsideredisthatofSpecialNeed。Thishasbeensubstantiallystatedalready,ininvestigatingtheobligationofGeneralBenevolenceorCommonHumanity。Foritwassaidthatweowetoallmensuchservicesaswecanrenderbyasacrificeoreffortsmallincomparisonwiththeservice:andhence,inproportionastheneedsofothermenpresentthemselvesasurgent,werecognisethedutyofrelievingthemoutofoursuperfluity。ButIhavethoughtitrighttonoticethedutyseparately,becausewearecommonlypromptedtofulfilitbythespecificemotionofPityorCompassion。Here,again,thereseemsadoubthowfaritisgoodtofosterandencouragethisemotion——asdistinctfromthepracticalhabitofrenderingpromptaidandsuccourindistress,wheneversuchsuccourisjudgedtoberight。Ontheonehand,theemotionalimpulsetendstomaketheactionofrelievingneednotonlyeasiertotheagent,butmoregracefulandpleasing:ontheotherhand,itisgenerallyrecognisedthatmistakenpityismorelikelytoleadusastraythan——e。g——mistakengratitude:asitismoreliabletointerferedangerouslywiththeinflictionofpenaltiesrequiredforthemaintenanceofsocialorderorwiththeoperationofmotivestoindustryandthrift,necessaryforeconomicwell-being。
Andwhen——toguardagainstthelast-mentioneddanger——wetrytodefinetheexternaldutyofrelievingwant,wefindourselvesfacetofacewithwhatisnomereproblemofthecloset,butaseriouspracticalperplexitytomostmoralpersonsatthepresentday。Formanyaskwhetheritisnotourdutytorefrainfromallsuperfluousindulgences,untilwehaveremovedthemiseryandwantthatexistaroundus,asfarastheyareremovablebymoney。AndinansweringthisquestionCommonSenseseemstobeinevitablyledtoaconsiderationoftheeconomicconsequencesofattempting——eitherbytaxationandpublicexpenditure,orbythevoluntarygiftsofprivatepersons——toprovideasufficientincomeforallneedymembersofthecommunity;andisthusgraduallybroughttosubstitutefortheIntuitionalmethodofdealingwithproblemsofthiskindadifferentprocedure,havingatleastmuchaffinitywiththeUtilitarianmethod。
Inconclusion,then,wemustadmitthatwhilewefindanumberofbroadandmoreorlessindefiniterulesunhesitatinglylaiddownbyCommonSenseinthisdepartmentofduty,itisdifficultorimpossibletoextractfromthem,sofarastheyarecommonlyaccepted,anyclearandpreciseprinciplesfordeterminingtheextentofthedutyinanycase。Andyet,aswesaw,suchparticularprinciplesofdistributionoftheservicestowhichgood-willpromptsseemtoberequiredfortheperfectionofpracticenolessthanfortheoreticalcompleteness;insofarasthedutieswhichwehavebeenconsideringareliabletocomeintoapparentconflictwitheachotherandwithotherprescriptionsofthemoralcode。
Inreplyitmayperhapsbecontendedthatifweareseekingexactnessinthedeterminationofduty,wehavebegunbyexaminingthewrongnotion:that,inshort,weoughttohaveexaminedJusticeratherthanBenevolence。Itmaybeadmittedthatwecannotfindasmuchexactnessaswesometimespracticallyneed,bymerelyconsideringthecommonconceptionsofthedutiestowhichmenarepromptedbynaturalaffections;butitmaystillbemaintainedthatweshallatanyratefindsuchexactnessadequatelyprovidedforundertheheadofJustice。ThiscontentionIwillproceedtoexamineinthenextchapter。
{Note。}