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。