The Origin of the Knowledge of Right and WrongBrentano, Franz
Philosophy
The Origin of the Knowledge of Right and Wrong
Brentano, Franz
Ethics
Chiefly belonging to this class are obviously (1) the case where we
prefer something good, and recognized as good, to something bad, and
recognized as bad. Also (2) the case where we prefer the existence of
something recognized as good to its non-existence, or the non-existence
of something recognized as bad to its existence.
This case embraces in itself a series of important cases, as the case
where we prefer a good to the same good with an admixture of the bad;
and, on the other hand, where we prefer something bad, with an admixture
of good, to the same bad purely for its own sake. Further, the cases in
which we prefer the whole of a good to its part, and again, the part of
something bad to its whole. Aristotle has already called attention to
the fact that in the case of the good the sum is always better than the
separate parts which together make up its sum. Such a case of summation
presents itself wherever a state has a certain permanence. The same
amount of joy which endures an hour is better than if it only lasted for
a moment. Whoever denies this, like Epicurus when he would console us on
account of the mortality of the soul, may easily be led into still more
striking absurdities. For then an hour’s torture would be no worse than
that of a moment. And, by combining both these propositions, we should
have to assume that an entire life full of joy with a single moment of
pain is in no way preferable to an entire life full of pain with a
single moment of joy. This is a result at which not only every sound
mind in general would demur, but also one respecting which Epicurus in
particular, expressly asserts the contrary.
Closely related to this is the case (3) where one good is preferred to
another, which, while forming no part of the first, is yet similar in
every respect to one of its parts. It is not merely by adding a good to
the same good but also by adding it to a good which is in every respect
similar that we get a better for total. The case is analogous when to a
similar bad another bad is thought of as added. When therefore, for
example, a fine picture is seen, the first time as a whole, the second
time only partially though exactly in the same way, we must then say
that the first view, considered in itself, is better: Or, when one
imagines something that is good and a second time not only imagines it
even as perfectly as before, but also loves it, this latter sum of
psychical acts is then something better.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account