The Philosophical Theory of the StateBosanquet, Bernard
Philosophy
The Philosophical Theory of the State
Bosanquet, Bernard
Political science -- Philosophy; State, The -- Philosophy
[4] And thus it is only what we should expect when
we find that States having no _damnosa hereditas_ of a craving for
personal honours are hardly acquainted with the bestowal of rewards
by the public power.
[1] “Speech of Pericles,” Thucyd., ii. 46: “Where there are the
greatest rewards of merit, there will be the best men to do the work
of the State.” Contrast Plato’s principle that there can be no sound
government while public service is done with a view to reward.
[2] The precise theory of the grants in money made to soldiers or
sailors, for distinguished service, is not easy to state. But it
seems clear that they are not intended to act as motives. They are
essentially a recognition after the act, not an inducement held out
before it.
[3] It is perhaps permissible to observe in general, what is very
well known to all who have much experience of what is called
philanthropy, that the tendency to distinguish it by public honours
is exceedingly dangerous to its quality, which depends entirely on
that energy and purity of intelligence which can only accompany the
deepest and highest motives. Mere vulgar self-seeking is not the
danger (though it does occur) so much as obfuscation of intelligence
through a mixture of aims and ideas.
[4] P. 199.
It will be sufficient, then, to complete the account of State action
in maintenance of rights by some account of the nature and principles
of punishment.
And we may profitably begin by recalling M. Durkheim’s suggestion,
which was mentioned in a former chapter. [1] Punishment, he observes,
from the simplest and most actual point of view, includes in itself
all those sides which theory has tended to regard as incompatible.
It is, in essence, simply the reaction of a strong and determinate
collective sentiment against an act which offends it. It is idle
to include such a reaction entirely under the head either of
reformation, or of retaliation, or of prevention. An aggression is
_ipso facto_ a sign of character, an injury, and a menace; and the
reaction against it is equally _ipso facto_ an attempt {221} to
affect character, a retaliation against an injury, and a deterrent
or preventive against a menace. When we fire up at aggression it is
pretty much a chance whether we say “I am going to teach him better
manners,” or “I am going to serve him out,” or “I am going to see
that he doesn’t do that again.” A consideration of each of these
aspects is necessary to do justice both to the theories and to the
facts.
[1] P. 37.
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