History of European Morals From Augustus to Charlemagne (Vol. 1 of 2)Lecky, William Edward Hartpole
Philosophy
History of European Morals From Augustus to Charlemagne (Vol. 1 of 2)
Lecky, William Edward Hartpole
Ethics; Europe -- Moral conditions
10 “There can be no greater argument to a man of his own power, than to
find himself able not only to accomplish his own desires, but also
to assist other men in theirs; and this is that conception wherein
consisteth charity.”—Hobbes _On Hum. Nat._ ch. ix. § 17. “No man
giveth but with intention of good to himself, because gift is
voluntary; and of all voluntary acts, the object to every man is his
own good.”—Hobbes’ _Leviathan_, part i. ch. xv. “Dream not that men
will move their little finger to serve you, unless their advantage
in so doing be obvious to them. Men never did so, and never will
while human nature is made of its present materials.”—Bentham’s
_Deontology_, vol. ii. p. 133.
11 “Pity is imagination or fiction of future calamity to ourselves,
proceeding from the sense of another man’s calamity. But when it
lighteth on such as we think have not deserved the same, the
compassion is greater, because there then appeareth more probability
that the same may happen to us; for the evil that happeneth to an
innocent man may happen to every man.”—Hobbes _On Hum. Nat._ ch. ix.
§ 10. “La pitié est souvent un sentiment de nos propres maux dans
les maux d’autrui. C’est une habile prévoyance des malheurs où nous
pouvons tomber. Nous donnons des secours aux autres pour les engager
à nous en donner en de semblables occasions, et ces services que
nous leur rendons sont, à proprement parler, des biens que nous nous
faisons à nous-mêmes par avance.”—La Rochefoucauld, _Maximes_, 264.
Butler has remarked that if Hobbes’ account were true, the most
fearful would be the most compassionate nature; but this is perhaps
not quite just, for Hobbes’ notion of pity implies the union of two
not absolutely identical, though nearly allied, influences, timidity
and imagination. The theory of Adam Smith, though closely connected
with, differs totally in consequences from that of Hobbes on this
point. He says, “When I condole with you for the loss of your son,
in order to enter into your grief, I do not consider what I, a
person of such a character and profession, should suffer if I had a
son, and if that son should die—I consider what I should suffer if I
was really you. I not only change circumstances with you, but I
change persons and characters. My grief, therefore, is entirely upon
your account.... A man may sympathise with a woman in child-bed,
though it is impossible he should conceive himself suffering her
pains in his own proper person and character.”—_Moral Sentiments_,
part vii. ch. i. §3.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account