ThedutyofTruth-speakingissometimestakenasastrikinginstanceofamoralrulenotrestingonaUtilitarianbasis。
Butacarefulstudyofthequalificationswithwhichthecommonopinionofmankindactuallyinculcatesthisdutyseemstoleadustoanoppositeresult:fornotonlyisthegeneralutilityoftruth-speakingsomanifestastoneednoproof，butwhereverthisutilityseemstobeabsent，oroutweighedbyparticularbadconsequences，wefindthatCommonSenseatleasthesitatestoenforcetherule。Forexample，ifamanbepursuingcriminalends，itisprimafacieinjurioustothecommunitythatheshouldbeaidedinhispursuitbybeingabletorelyontheassertionsofothers。Here，then，deceptionisprimafacielegitimateasaprotectionagainstcrime:thoughwhenweconsiderthebadeffectsonhabit，andthroughexample，ofevenasingleactofunveracity，thecaseisseentobe，onUtilitarianprinciples，doubtful:andthisisjusttheviewofCommonSense。Again，thoughitisgenerallyaman’sinteresttoknowthetruth，thereareexceptionalcasesinwhichitisinjurioustohim——aswhenaninvalidhearsbadnews——andhere，too，CommonSenseisdisposedtosuspendtherule。Again，wefounditdifficulttodefineexactlywhereinVeracityconsists；forwemayeitherrequiretruthinthespokenwords，orintheinferenceswhichthespeakerforeseeswillbedrawnfromthem，orinboth。PerfectCandour，nodoubt，wouldrequireitinboth:butinthevariouscircumstanceswherethisseemsinexpedient，weoftenfindCommonSenseatleasthalf-willingtodispensewithoneorotherpartofthedoubleobligation。Thuswefoundarespectableschoolofthinkersmaintainingthatareligioustruthmayproperlybecommunicatedbymeansofahistoricalfiction:and，ontheotherhand，theunsuitabilityofperfectfranknesstoourexistingsocialrelationsisrecognisedinthecommonrulesofpoliteness，whichimposeonusnotunfrequentlythenecessityofsuppressingtruthsandsuggestingfalsehoods。IwouldnotsaythatinanyofthesecasesCommonSensepronouncesquitedecidedlyinfavourofunveracity:butthenneitherisUtilitarianismdecided，astheutilityofmaintainingageneralhabitoftruth-speakingissogreat，thatitisnoteasytoproveittobeclearlyoutweighedbyevenstrongspecialreasonsforviolatingtherule。
YetitmaybeworthwhiletopointouthowthedifferentviewsastothelegitimacyofMalevolentimpulses，outofwhichwefoundithardtoframeaconsistentdoctrineforCommonSense，exactlycorrespondtodifferentforecastsoftheconsequencesofgratifyingsuchimpulses。Primafacie，thedesiretoinjureanyoneinparticularisinconsistentwithadeliberatepurposeofbenefitingasmuchaspossiblepeopleingeneral；accordingly，wefindthatwhatImaycallSuperficialCommonSensepassesasweepingcondemnationonsuchdesires。Butastudyoftheactualfactsofsocietyshowsthatresentmentplaysanimportantpartinthatrepressionofinjurieswhichisnecessarytosocialwellbeing；
accordingly，thereflectivemoralistshrinksfromexcludingitaltogether。
Itisevident，however，thatpersonalill-willisaverydangerousmeanstothegeneralhappiness:foritsdirectendistheexactoppositeofhappiness；
andthoughtherealisationofthisendmayincertaincasesbetheleastoftwoevils，stilltheimpulseifencouragedislikelytoprompttotheinflictionofpainbeyondthelimitsofjustpunishment，andtohaveaninjuriousreactiononthecharacteroftheangryperson。Accordingly，themoralistisdisposedtoprescribethatindignationbedirectedalwaysagainstacts，andnotagainstpersons；andifindignationsorestrictedwouldbeefficientinrepressinginjuries，thiswouldseemtobethestateofmindmostconducivetothegeneralhappiness。Butitisdoubtfulwhetheraveragehumannatureiscapableofmaintainingthisdistinction，andwhether，ifitcouldbemaintained，themorerefinedaversionwouldbyitselfbesufficientlyefficacious:accordingly，CommonSensehesitatestocondemnpersonalill-willagainstwrong-doers——evenifitincludesadesireofmalevolentsatisfaction。
Finally，itiseasytoshowthatTemperance，Self-control，andwhatarecalledtheSelf-regardingvirtuesgenerally，are`useful’
totheindividualwhopossessesthem:andifitisnotquiteclear，intheviewofCommonSense，towhatendthatregulationandgovernmentofappetitesandpassions，whichmoralistshavesomuchinculcatedandadmired，istobedirected；atleastthereseemsnoobstacleinthewayofourdefiningthisendasHappiness。AndevenintheasceticextremeofSelf-control，whichhassometimesledtotherepudiationofsensualpleasuresasradicallybad，wemaytraceanunconsciousUtilitarianism。Fortheasceticcondemnationhasalwaysbeenchieflydirectedagainstthosepleasures，inrespectofwhichmenareespeciallyliabletocommitexcessesdangeroustohealth；
andfreeindulgenceinwhich，evenwhenitkeepsclearofinjurytohealth，isthoughttointerferewiththedevelopmentofotherfacultiesandsusceptibilitieswhichareimportantsourcesofhappiness。
Anapparentexceptiontothisstatementmayseemtobeconstitutedinthecaseofthesexualappetite，bytheregulationprescribedunderthenotionofPurityorChastity。Andthereisnodoubtthatunderthisheadwefindcondemned，withspecialvehemenceandseverity，actsofwhichtheimmediateeffectispleasurenotobviouslyoutweighedbysubsequentpain。Butacloserexaminationofthisexceptiontransformsitintoanimportantcontributiontothepresentargument:asitshowsaspeciallycomplexanddelicatecorrespondencebetweenmoralsentimentsandsocialutilities。
Inthefirstplace，thepeculiarintensityanddelicacyofthemoralsentimentsthatgoverntherelationsofthesexesarethoroughlyjustifiedbythevastimportancetosocietyoftheendtowhichtheyareobviouslyameans，——themaintenance，namely，ofthepermanentunionswhichareheldtobenecessaryfortheproperrearingandtrainingofchildren。Hencethefirstandfundamentalruleinthisdepartmentisthatwhichdirectlysecuresconjugalfidelity:andtheutilitariangroundsforprotectingmarriageindirectly，bycondemningallextra-nuptialintercourseofthesexes，areobvious:fortoremovethemoralcensurethatrestsonsuchintercoursewouldseriouslydiminishmen’smotivesforincurringtherestraintsandburdenswhichmarriageentails；andtheyouthofbothsexeswouldformhabitsoffeelingandconducttendingtounfitthemformarriage；
and，ifsuchintercoursewerefertile，itwouldbeattendedwiththatimperfectcareofthesucceedinggeneration，whichitseemstheobjectofpermanentunionstoprevent；whileifitweresterile，thefutureofthehumanracewould，asfaraswecansee，bestillmoreprofoundlyimperilled。
But，further，itisonlyonUtilitarianprinciplesthatwecanaccountfortheanomalousdifferencewhichthemoralityofCommonSensehasalwaysmadebetweenthetwosexesasregardsthesimpleoffenceofunchastity。Fortheoffenceiscommonlymoredeliberateintheman，whohastheadditionalguiltofsolicitingandpersuadingthewoman；
inthelatter，again，itisfarmoreoftenpromptedbysomemotivethatwerankbiaberthanmerelust:sothat，accordingtotheordinarycanonsofintuitionalmorality，itoughttobemoreseverelycondemnedintheman。Theactualinversionofthisresultcanonlybejustifiedbytakingintoaccountthegreaterinterestthatsocietyhasinmaintainingahighstandardoffemalechastity。Forthedegradationofthisstandardmuststrikeattherootoffamilylife，byimpairingmen’ssecurityintheexerciseoftheirparentalaffections:butthereisnocorrespondingconsequenceofmaleuuchastity，whichmaythereforeprevailtoaconsiderableextentwithoutimperillingtheveryexistenceofthefamily，thoughitimpairsitswellbeing。
Atthesametime，thecondemnationofunchastityinmenbythecommonmoralsenseofChristiancountriesatthepresentday，issufficientlyclearandexplicit:thoughwerecognisetheexistenceofalaxercode——themorality，asitiscalled，of`theworld’——whichtreatsitasindifferent，orveryvenial。Buttheverydifferencebetweenthetwocodesgivesakindofsupporttothepresentargument；asitcorrespondstoeasilyexplaineddifferencesofinsightintotheconsequencesofmaintainingcertainmoralsanctions。Forpartly，itisthoughtby`menoftheworld’
thatmencannotpracticallyberestrainedfromsexualindulgence，atleastattheperiodoflifewhenthepassionsarestrongest:andhencethatitisexpedienttotoleratesuchkindanddegreeofillicitsexualintercourseasisnotdirectlydangeroustothewellbeingoffamilies。Partly，again，itismaintainedbysome，inbolderantagonismtoCommonSense，thattheexistenceofacertainlimitedamountofsuchintercoursewithaspecialclassofwomen，carefullyseparated，asatpresent，fromtherestofsociety
isscarcelyarealevil，andmayevenbeapositivegaininrespectofgeneralhappiness；forcontinenceisperhapssomewhatdangeroustohealth，andinanycaseinvolvesalossofpleasureconsiderableinintensity；
whileatthesametimethemaintenanceofasnumerousapopulationasisdesirableinanoldsocietydoesnotrequirethatmorethanacertainproportionofthewomenineachgenerationshouldbecomemothersoffamilies；andifsomeofthesurplusmakeittheirprofessiontoenterintocasualandtemporarysexualrelationswithmen，thereisnonecessitythattheirlivesshouldcomparedisadvantageouslyinrespectofhappinesswiththoseofotherwomeninthelessfavouredclassesofsociety。
Thisviewhasperhapsasuperficialplausibility:
butitignorestheessentialfactthatitisonlybythepresentsevereenforcementagainstunchastewomenofthepenaltiesofsocialcontemptandexclusion，restingonmoraldisapprobation，thattheclassofcourtesansiskeptsufficientlyseparatefromtherestoffemalesocietytopreventthecontagionofunchastityfromspreading；andthattheillicitintercourseofthesexesisrestrainedwithinsuchlimitsasnottointerferemateriallywiththeduedevelopmentoftherace。ThisconsiderationissufficienttodecideaUtilitariantosupportgenerallytheestablishedruleagainstthiskindofconduct，andthereforetocondemnviolationsoftheruleasonthewholeinfelicific，eventhoughtheymayperhapsappeartohavethisqualityonlyinconsequenceofthemoralcensureattachedtothem。[1]
Further，the`manoftheworld’ignoresthevastimportancetothehumanraceofmaintainingthathighertypeofsexualrelationswhichisnot，generallyspeaking，possible，exceptwhereahighvalueissetuponchastityinbothsexes。FromthispointofviewtheVirtueofPuritymayberegardedasprovidinganecessaryshelterunderwhichthatintenseandelevatedaffectionbetweenthesexes，whichismostconducivebothtothehappinessoftheindividualandtothewellbeingofthefamily，maygrowandflourish。
AndinthiswayweareabletoexplainwhatmusthaveperplexedmanyreflectivemindsincontemplatingthecommonsenseregulationofconductundertheheadofPurity:viz。thatontheonehandthesentimentthatsupportstheserulesisveryintense，sothatthesubjectivedifferencebetweenrightandwronginthisdepartmentismarkedwithpeculiarstrength:
whileontheotherhanditisfoundimpossibletogiveacleardefinitionoftheconductcondemnedunderthisnotion。Fortheimpulsetoberestrainedissopowerfulandsosensitivetostimulantsofallkinds，that，inorderthatthesentimentofpuritymayadequatelyperformitsprotectivefunction，itisrequiredtobeverykeenandvivid；andtheaversiontoimpuritymustextendfarbeyondtheactsthatprimarilyneedtobeprohibited，andincludeinitsscopeeverythingindress，language，socialcustoms，etc。
whichmaytendtoexcitelasciviousideas。Atthesametimeitisnotnecessarythatthelinebetweenrightandwronginsuchmattersshouldbedrawnwiththeoreticalprecision:itissufficientforpracticalpurposesifthemaincentralportionoftheregionofdutybestronglyilluminated，whilethemarginisleftsomewhatobscure。And，infact，thedetailedregulationswhichitisimportanttosocietytomaintaindependsomuchuponhabitandassociationofideas，thattheymustvarytoagreatextentfromagetoageandfromcountrytocountry。