an enquiry concerning human understanding-第24章
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
For what reason？ but because a hasty temper； though a
constant cause or principle in the mind； operates only by
intervals； and infects not the whole character。 Again；
repentance wipes off every crime； if attended with a
reformation of life and manners。 How is this to be accounted
for？ but by asserting that actions render a person criminal
merely as they are proofs of criminal principles in the
mind； and when； by an alteration of these principles； they
cease to be just proofs； they likewise cease to be criminal。
But； except upon the doctrine of necessity； they never were
just proofs； and consequently never were criminal。
It will be equally easy to prove； and from the same
arguments； that ； according to that definition
above mentioned； in which all men agree； is also essential
to morality； and that no human actions； where it is wanting；
are susceptible of any moral qualities； or can be the
objects either of approbation or dislike。 For as actions are
objects of our moral sentiment； so far only as they are
indications of the internal character； passions； and
affections； it is impossible that they can give rise either
to praise or blame； where they proceed not from these
principles； but are derived altogether from external
violence。
I pretend not to have obviated or removed all
objections to this theory； with regard to necessity and
liberty。 I can foresee other objections； derived from topics
which have not here been treated of。 It may be said； for
instance； that； if voluntary actions be subjected to the
same laws of necessity with the operations of matter； there
is a continued chain of necessary causes； pre…ordained and
pre… determined； reaching from the original cause of all to
every single volition of every human creature。 No
contingency anywhere in the universe； no indifference； no
liberty。 While we act； we are； at the same time； acted upon。
The ultimate Author of all our volitions is the Creator of
the world； who first bestowed motion on this immense
machine； and placed all beings in that particular position；
whence every subsequent event； by an inevitable necessity；
must result。 Human actions； therefore； either can have no
moral turpitude at all； as proceeding from so good a cause；
or if they have any turpitude； they must involve our Creator
in the same guilt； while he is acknowledged to be their
ultimate cause and author。 For as a man； who fired a mine；
is answerable for all the consequences whether the train he
employed be long or short； so wherever a continued chain of
necessary causes is fixed； that Being； either finite or
infinite； who produces the first； is likewise the author of
all the rest； and must both bear the blame and acquire the
praise which belong to them。 Our clear and unalterable ideas
of morality establish this rule； upon unquestionable
reasons； when we examine the consequences of any human
action； and these reasons must still have greater force when
applied to the volitions and intentions of a Being
infinitely wise and powerful。 Ignorance or impotence may be
pleaded for so limited a creature as man； but those
imperfections have no place in our Creator。 He foresaw； he
ordained； he intended all those actions of men； which we so
rashly pronounce criminal。 And we must therefore conclude；
either that they are not criminal； or that the Deity； not
man； is accountable for them。 But as either of these
positions is absurd and impious； it follows； that the
doctrine from which they are deduced cannot possibly be
true； as being liable to all the same objections。 An absurd
consequence； if necessary； proves the original doctrine to
be absurd； in the same manner as criminal actions render
criminal the original cause； if the connexion between them
be necessary and inevitable。
This objection consists of two parts； which we shall
examine separately； ； that； if human actions can be
traced up； by a necessary chain； to the Deity； they can
never be criminal； on account of the infinite perfection of
that Being from whom they are derived； and who can intend
nothing but what is altogether good and laudable。 Or；
； if they be criminal； we must retract the
attribute of perfection； which we ascribe to the Deity； and
must acknowledge him to be the ultimate author of guilt and
moral turpitude in all his creatures。
The answer to the first objection seems obvious and
convincing。 There are many philosophers who； after an exact
scrutiny of all the phenomena of nature； conclude； that the
W/HOLE； considered as one system； is； in every period of
its existence； ordered with perfect benevolence； and that
the utmost possible happiness will； in the end； result to
all created beings； without any mixture of positive or
absolute ill or misery。 Every physical ill； say they； makes
an essential part of this benevolent system； and could not
possibly be removed； even by the Deity himself； considered
as a wise agent； without giving entrance to greater ill； or
excluding greater good； which will result from it。 From this
theory； some philosophers； and the ancient among
the rest； derived a topic of consolation under all
afflictions； while they taught their pupils that those ills
under which they laboured were； in reality； goods to the
universe； and that to an enlarged view； which could
comprehend the whole system of nature； every event became an
object of joy and exultation。 But though this topic be
specious and sublime； it was soon found in practice weak and
ineffectual。 You would surely more irritate than appease a
man lying under the racking pains of the gout by preaching
up to him the rectitude of those general laws； which
produced the malignant humours in his body； and led them
through the proper canals； to the sinews and nerves； where
they now excite such acute torments。 These enlarged views
may； for a moment； please the imagination of a speculative
man； who is placed in ease and security； but neither can
they dwell with constancy on his mind； even though
undisturbed by the emotions of pain or passion； much less
can they maintain their ground when attacked by such
powerful antagonists。 The affections take a narrower and
more natural survey of their object； and by an economy； more
suitable to the infirmity of human minds； regard alone the
beings around us； and are actuated by such events as appear
good or ill to the private system。
The case is the same with as with
ill。 It cannot reasonably be supposed； that those remote
considerations； which are found of so little efficacy with
regard to one； will have a more powerful influence with
regard to the other。 The mind of man is so formed by nature
that； upon the appearance of certain characters；
dispositions； and actions； it immediately feels the
sentiment of approbation or blame； nor are there any
emotions more essential to its frame and constitution。 The
characters which engage our approbation are chiefly such as
contribute to the peace and security of human society； as
the characters which excite blame are chiefly such as tend
to public detriment and disturbance： Whence it may
reasonably be presumed； that the moral sentiments arise；
either mediately or immediately； from a reflection of these
opposite interests。 What though philosophical meditations
establish a different opinion or conjecture； that everything
is right with regard to the W/HOLE； and that the qualities；
which disturb society； are； in the main； as beneficial； and
are as suitable to the primary intention of nature as those
which more directly promote its happiness and welfare？ Are
such remote and uncertain speculations able to
counterbalance the sentiments which arise from the natural
and immediate view of the objects？ A man who is robbed of a
considerable sum； does he find his vexation for the loss
anywise diminished by these sublime reflections？ Why then
should his moral resentment against the crime be supposed
incompatible with them？ Or why should not the acknowledgment
of a real distinction between vice and virtue be
reconcileable to all speculative systems of philosophy； as
well as that of a real distinction between pe
