FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290  
291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   >>   >|  
ness or good of mankind. The most specious objection to Utility is the supposed necessity of going through a calculation of the consequences of every act that we have to perform, an operation often beyond our power, and likely to be abused to forward our private wishes. To this, the author replies first, that supposing utility our only index, we must make the best of it. Of course, if we were endowed with a moral sense, a special organ for ascertaining our duties, the attempt to displace that invincible consciousness, and to thrust the principle of utility into the vacant seat, would be impossible and absurd. According to the theory of Utility, our conduct would conform to _rules_ inferred from the tendencies of actions, but would not be determined by a direct resort to the principle of general utility. Utility would be the ultimate, not the immediate test. To preface each act or forbearance by a conjecture and comparison of consequences were both superfluous and mischievous:--superfluous, inasmuch as the result is already embodied in a known rule; and mischievous, inasmuch as the process, if performed on the spur of the occasion, would probably be faulty. With the rules are associated _sentiments_, the result of the Divine, or other, command to obey the rules. It is a gross and flagrant error to talk of _substituting_ calculation for sentiment; this is to oppose the rudder to the sail. Sentiment without calculation were capricious; calculation without sentiment is inert. There are cases where the _specific_ consequences of an action are so momentous as to overbear the rule; for example, resistance to a bad government, which the author calls an _anomalous_ question, to be tried not by the rule, but by a direct resort to the ultimate or presiding-principle, and by a separate calculation of good and evil. Such was the political emergency of the Commonwealth, and the American revolution. It would have been well, the author thinks, if utility had been the sole guide in both cases. There is a second objection to Utility, more perplexing to deal with. How can we know fully and correctly all the consequences of actions? The answer is that Ethics, as a science of observation and induction, has been formed, through a long succession of ages, by many and separate contributions from many and separate discoverers. Like all other sciences, it is progressive, although unfortunately, subject to special drawbacks. The men th
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290  
291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

calculation

 

consequences

 

utility

 
Utility
 
author
 

separate

 
principle
 

special

 

direct

 

actions


sentiment
 

superfluous

 

ultimate

 

mischievous

 

result

 
resort
 

objection

 

anomalous

 

question

 
Commonwealth

American

 
presiding
 

political

 

government

 

emergency

 

resistance

 

supposed

 
capricious
 

Sentiment

 

necessity


oppose

 

rudder

 

specious

 

overbear

 

revolution

 

momentous

 

specific

 

action

 

thinks

 

contributions


discoverers

 

succession

 

formed

 

sciences

 

drawbacks

 

subject

 
progressive
 

induction

 

observation

 

perplexing