Human nature and the social orderCooley, Charles Horton
Science
Human nature and the social order
Cooley, Charles Horton
Individualism; Social psychology; Sociology
The fact that the judgment of right is likely to present itself to
people of emotional temperament as an imagined voice, admonishing them
what they ought to do, is an illustration of that essentially social or
interlocutory character of thought, spoken of in an earlier chapter. Our
thoughts are always, in some sort, imaginary conversations; and when
vividly felt they are likely to become quite distinctly so. On the other
hand, people whose moral life is calm perceive little or no distinction,
in this regard, between the conclusions of conscience and other
judgments.
Of course, the view that the right is the rational would be untrue, if
by rational were meant merely the result of formal reasoning. The
judgment of right and the conclusion of formal thought are frequently
opposed to each other, because, I take it, the latter is a comparatively
narrow, partial, and conventional product of the mind. The former is
rational and mentally authoritative in a larger sense; its premises are
immeasurably richer; it deals with the whole content of life, with
instincts freighted with the inarticulate conclusions of a remote past,
and with the unformulated inductions of individual experience. To set
the product of a superficial ratiocination over the final output, in
conscience, of our whole mental being, is a kind of pedantry. I do not
mean to imply that there is usually an opposition between the two—they
should work harmoniously together—but only to assert that when there is,
conscience must be regarded as of a profounder rationality.
On the other hand, the wrong, the immoral, is, in a similar sense, the
irrational. It is that which, after the mind has done its full work upon
the matter, presents itself as the mentally isolated, the inharmonious,
that which we cannot follow without having, in our more collected moods,
a sense of having been untrue to ourselves, of having done ourselves a
harm. The mind in its fullest activity is denied and desecrated; we are
split in two. To violate conscience is to act under the control of an
incomplete and fragmentary state of mind; and so to become less a
person, to begin to disintegrate and go to pieces. An unjust or
incontinent deed produces remorse, apparently because the thought of it
will not lie still in the mind, but is of such a nature that there is no
comfortable place for it in the system of thought already established
there.
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