The Theory of Moral Sentiments: Or, an Essay Towards an Analysis of the Principles by Which Men Naturally Judge Concerning the Conduct and Character, First of Their Neighbours, and Afterwards of Themselves. to Which Is Added, a Dissertation on the Origin of Languages.Smith, Adam
Philosophy
The Theory of Moral Sentiments: Or, an Essay Towards an Analysis of the Principles by Which Men Naturally Judge Concerning the Conduct and Character, First of Their Neighbours, and Afterwards of Themselves. to Which Is Added, a Dissertation on the Origin of Languages.
Smith, Adam
Ethics -- Early works to 1800; Language and languages -- Early works to 1800
Benevolence may, perhaps, be the sole principle of action in the Deity,
and there are several, not improbable, arguments which tend to persuade
us that it is so. It is not easy to conceive what other motive an
independent and all perfect being, who stands in need of nothing
external, and whose happiness is complete in himself, can act from. But
whatever may be the case with the Deity, so imperfect a creature as man,
the support of whose existence requires so many things external to him,
must often act from many other motives. The condition of human nature
were peculiarly hard, if those affections, which, by the very nature of
our being, ought frequently to influence our conduct, could upon no
occasion appear virtuous, or deserve esteem and commendation from any
body.
Those three systems, that which places virtue in propriety, that which
places it in prudence, and that which makes it consist in benevolence,
are the principal accounts which have been given of the nature of
virtue. To one or other of them, all the other descriptions of virtue,
how different soever they may appear, are easily reducible.
That system which places virtue in obedience to the will of the Deity,
may be counted either among those which make it consist in prudence, or
among those which make it consist in propriety. When it is asked, why we
ought to obey the will of the Deity, this question, which would be
impious and absurd in the highest degree, if asked from any doubt that
we ought to obey him, can admit but of two different answers. It must
either be said that we ought to obey the will of the Deity because he is
a being of infinite power, who will reward us eternally if we do so, and
punish us eternally if we do otherwise: Or it must be said, that
independent of any regard to our own happiness, or to rewards and
punishments of any kind, there is a congruity and fitness that a
creature should obey its creator, that a limited and imperfect being
should submit to one of infinite and incomprehensible perfections.
Besides one or other of these two it is impossible to conceive that any
other answer can be given to this question. If the first answer be the
proper one, virtue consists in prudence, or in the proper pursuit of our
own final interest and happiness; since it is upon this account that we
are obliged to obey the will of the Deity. If the second answer be the
proper one, virtue must consist in propriety, since the ground of our
obligation to obedience is the suitableness or congruity of the
sentiments of humility and submission to the superiority of the object
which excites them.
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