It can be seen at once that while virtue and vice are popularly regarded as opposites, no amount of stretching applied to either of these concepts will make it the true antonym of the _other_. It is idle for anyone to remark that they ought nevertheless to be regarded as diametrically opposed; empirically they are not, as the following analytical table plainly shows:— VIRTUES VICES Valor, courage, intrepidity, No antonym, except in the (strength). The spectacular rare cases where cowardice virtues. may be regarded as vicious. Caution, probity, temperance, Negated by mendacity, sobriety (and the unobtrusive drunkenness, and debauchery, Christian virtues). but not precisely; nor popularly by gluttony and indolence. Medicinal efficacy of drugs. No antonym. The phrases, “by virtue of,” No antonym. “in virtue of,” etc. No antonym. Fault mistake, error. No antonym. Imperfection, defect, or blemish. No antonym. The faults of untrained animals. No antonym. Constitutional vices. How, now, shall we proceed to construct our definition of the ethical concept “vice”? It will be recalled that we used the term virtue to describe a situation in which energy was being either mobilized or expended to obtain what the organism considered to be a dependable good. Does vice imply the opposite of this? Hardly, for it must be admitted by the uncensorious observer that many of even the most violently condemned actions could be described as part of somebody’s program to attain a durable satisfaction. The glutton, remembering once more how comfortable a full belly makes him feel, may gorge himself without stint; and even if he has been warned that diabetes and gout are likely to be the final results of such persistent devotion to the pastry and the roast, he may still pursue these foods with avidity, cheerfully and hopefully making himself an exception to the general rule of impending disaster. In the same way, the lusty pursuer of sex enjoyments may be dispassionately regarded as planning and achieving his own type of satisfaction, and while he may often “in a cool hour” be aware of the likelihood of entangling alliances, yet even his self-censure is not guaranteed to keep him from mobilizing his energy for the attainment of his chosen, private “good.”