THEGOODLIFE
Therehavebeenatdifferenttimesandamongdifferentpeoplemanyvaryingconceptionsofthegoodlife．Tosomeextentthedifferenceswereamenabletoargument;thiswaswhenmendifferedastothemeanstoachieveagivenend．Somethinkthatprisonisagoodwayofpreventingcrime;othersholdthateducationwouldbebetter．Adifferenceofthissortcanbedecidedbysufficientevidence．Butsomedifferencescannotbetestedinthisway．Tolstoycondemnedallwar;othershaveheldthelifeofasoldierdoingbattlefortherighttobeverynoble．Heretherewasprobablyinvolvedarealdifferenceastoends．Thosewhopraisethesoldierusuallyconsiderthepunishmentofsinnersagoodthinginitself;Tolstoydidnotthinkso．Onsuchamatternoargumentispossible．Icannot,therefore,provethatmyviewofthegoodlifeisright;Icanonlystatemyview,andhopethatasmanyaspossiblewillagree．Myviewisthis:
Thegoodlifeisoneinspiredbyloveandguidedbyknowledge.
Knowledgeandlovearebothindefinitelyextensible;therefore,howevergoodalifemaybe,abetterlifecanbeimagined．Neitherlovewithoutknowledge,norknowledgewithoutlovecanproduceagoodlife．IntheMiddleAges,whenpestilenceappearedinacountry,holymenadvisedthepopulationtoassembleinchurchesandprayfordeliverance;theresultwasthattheinfectionspreadwithextraordinaryrapidityamongthecrowdedmassesofsupplicants．Thiswasanexampleoflove,withoutknowledge．Thelatewaraffordedanexampleofknow-ledgewithoutlove．Ineachcase,theresultwasdeathonalargescale.
Althoughbothloveandknowledgearenecessary,loveisinasensemorefundamental,sinceitwillleadintelligentpeopletoseekknowledge,inordertofindouthowtobenefitthosewhomtheylove．Butifpeoplearenotintelligent,theywillbecontenttobelievewhattheyhavebeentold,andmaydoharminspiteofthemostgenuinebenevolence．Medicineaffords,perhaps,thebestexampleofwhatImean．Anablephysicianismoreusefultoapatientthanthemostdevotedfriend,andprogressinmedicalknowledgedoesmoreforthehealthofthecommunitythanill-informedphilanthropy．Nevertheless,anelementofbenevolenceisessentialevenhereifanybutthericharetoprofitbyscientificdiscoveries.
Loveisawordwhichcoversavarietyoffeelings;Ihaveuseditpurposely,asIwishtoincludethemall．Loveasanemotion—whichiswhatIamspeakingabout,forlove‘onprinciple’doesnotseemtomegenuine—movesbetweentwopoles:ononeside,puredelightincontem-plation;ontheother,purebenevolence．Whereinanimateobjectsareconcerned,delightaloneentersin;wecannotfeelbenevolencetowardsalandscapeorasonata．Thistypeofenjoymentispresumablythesourceofart．Itisstronger,asarule,inveryyoungchildrenthaninadults,whoareapttoviewobjectsinautilitarianspirit．Itplaysalargepartinourfeelingstowardshumanbeings,someofwhomhavecharmandsomethereverse,whenconsideredsimplyasobjectsofaestheticcontemplation.
Theoppositepoleofloveispurebenevolence．Menhavesacrificedtheirlivestohelpinglepers;insuchacasethelovetheyfeltcannothavehadanyelementofaestheticdelight．Parentalaffection,asarule,isaccompaniedbypleasureinthechild"sappearance,butremainsstrongwhenthiselementiswhollyabsent．Itwouldseemoddtocallamother"sinterestinasickchild‘benevolence’,becauseweareinthehabitofusingthiswordtodescribeapaleemotionninepartshumbug．Butitisdifficulttofindanyotherwordtodescribethedesireforanotherperson"swelfare．Itisafactthatadesireofthissortmayreachanydegreeofstrengthinthecaseofparentalfeeling．Inothercasesitisfarlessintense;indeeditwouldseemlikelythatallaltruisticemotionisasortofoverflowofparentalfeeling,orsometimesasublimationofit．Forwantofabetterword,Ishallcallthisemotion‘benevolence’．ButIwanttomakeitclearthatIamspeakingofanemotion,notaprinciple,andthatIdonotincludeinitanyfeelingofsuperioritysuchasissometimesassociatedwiththeword．Theword‘sympathy’expressespartofwhatImean,butleavesouttheelementofactivitythatIwishtoinclude.
Loveatitsfullestisanindissolublecombinationofthetwoelements,delightandwell-wishing．Thepleasureofaparentinabeautifulandsuccessfulchildcombinesbothelements;sodoessex-loveatitsbest．Butinsex-lovebenevolencewillonlyexistwherethereissecurepossession,sinceotherwisejealousywilldestroyit,whileperhapsactuallyincreasingthedelightincontemplation．Delightwithoutwell-wishingmaybecruel;well-wishingwithoutdelighteasilytendstobecomecoldandalittlesuperior．Apersonwhowishestobelovedwishestobetheobjectofalovecontainingbothelements,exceptincasesofextremeweakness,suchasinfancyandsevereillness．Inthesecasesbenevolencemaybeallthatisdesired．Conversely,incasesofextremestrength,admirationismoredesiredthanbenevolence:thisisthestateofmindofpotentatesandfamousbeauties．Weonlydesireotherpeople"sgoodwishesinproportionaswefeelourselvesinneedofhelporindangerofharmfromthem．Atleast,thatwouldseemtobethebiologicallogicofthesituation,butitisnotquitetruetolife．Wedesireaffectioninordertoescapefromthefeelingofloneliness,inordertobe,aswesay,‘understood’．Thisisamatterofsympathy,notmerelyofbenevolence;thepersonwhoseaffectionissatisfactorytousmustnotmerelywishuswell,butmustknowinwhatourhappinessconsists．Butthisbelongstotheotherelementofthegoodlife,namelyknowledge.
Inaperfectworld,everysentientbeingwouldbetoeveryothertheobjectofthefullestlove,compoundedofdelight,benevolence,andunderstandinginextricablyblended．Itdoesnotfollowthat,inthisactualworld,weoughttoattempttohavesuchfeelingstowardsallthesentientbeingswhomweencounter．Therearemanyinwhomwecannotfeeldelight,becausetheyaredisgusting;ifweweretodoviolencetoournaturebytryingtoseebeautiesinthem,weshouldmerelybluntoursusceptib-ilitiestowhatwenaturallyfindbeautiful．Nottomentionhumanbeingstherearefleasandbugsandlice．WeshouldhavetobeashardpressedastheAncientMarinerbeforewecouldfeeldelightincontemplatingthesecreatures．Somesaints,itistrue,havecalledthem‘pearlsofGod’,butwhatthesemendelightedinwastheopportunityofdisplayingtheirownsanctity.
Benevolenceiseasiertoextendwidely,butevenbenevolencehasitslimits．Ifamanwishedtomarryalady,weshouldnotthinkthebetterofhimforwithdrawingifhefoundthatsomeoneelsealsowishedtomarryher:weshouldregardthisasafairfieldforcompetition．Yethisfeelingstowardsarivalcannotbewhollybenevolent．Ithinkthatinalldescriptionsofthegoodlifehereonearthwemustassumeacertainbasisofanimalvitalityandanimalinstinct;withoutthis,lifebecomestameanduninteresting．Civilisationshouldbesomethingaddedtothis,notsubstitutedforit;theasceticsaintandthedetachedsagefailinthisrespecttobecompletehumanbeings．Asmallnumberofthemmayenrichacommunity;butaworldcomposedofthemwoulddieofboredom.
Theseconsiderationsleadtoacertainemphasisontheelementofdelightasaningredientinthebestlove．Delight,inthisactualworld,isunavoidablyselective,andpreventsusfromhavingthesamefeelingstowardsallmankind．Whenconflictsarisebetweendelightandbenevolence,theymust,asarule,bedecidedbyacompromise,notbyacompletesurrenderofeither．Instincthasitsrights,andifwedoviolencetoitbeyondapointittakesvengeanceinsubtleways．Thereforeinaimingatagoodlifethelimitsofhumanpossibilitymustbeborneinmind．Hereagain,however,wearebroughtbacktothenecessityofknowledge.
WhenIspeakofknowledgeasaningredientofthegoodlife,Iamnotthinkingofethicalknowledge,butofscientificknowledgeandknowledgeofparticularfacts．Idonotthinkthereis,strictlyspeaking,suchathingasethicalknowledge．Ifwedesiretoachievesomeend,knowledgemayshowusthemeans,andthisknowledgemaylooselypassasethical．ButIdonotbelievethatwecandecidewhatsortofconductisrightorwrongexceptbyreferencetoitsprobableconsequences．Givenanendtobeachieved,itisaquestionforsciencetodiscoverhowtoachieveit．Allmoralrulesmustbetestedbyexaminingwhethertheytendtorealiseendsthatwedesire．Isayendsthatwedesire,notendsthatweoughttodesire．Whatwe‘ought’todesireismerelywhatsomeoneelsewishesustodesire．Usuallyitiswhattheauthoritieswishustodesire—parents,school-masters,policemen,andjudges．Ifyousaytome‘yououghttodoso-and-so’,themotivepowerofyourremarkliesinmydesireforyourapproval—together,possibly,withrewardsorpunishmentsattachedtoyourapprovalordisapproval．Sinceallbehaviourspringsfromdesire,itisclearthatethicalnotionscanhavenoimportanceexceptastheyinfluencedesire．Theydothisthroughthedesireforapprovalandthefearofdisapproval．Thesearepowerfulsocialforces,andweshallnaturallyendeavourtowinthemtooursideifwewishtorealiseanysocialpurpose．WhenIsaythatthemoralityofconductistobejudgedbyitsprobableconsequences,ImeanthatIdesiretoseeapprovalgiventobehaviourlikelytorealisesocialpurposeswhichwedesire,anddisapprovaltooppositebehaviour．Atpresentthisisnotdone;therearecertaintraditionalrulesaccordingtowhichapprovalanddisapprovalaremetedoutquiteregardlessofconsequences．Butthisisatopicwithwhichweshalldealinthenextsection.
Thesuperfluityoftheoreticalethicsisobviousinsimplecases．Suppose,forinstance,yourchildisill．Lovemakesyouwishtocureit,andsciencetellsyouhowtodoso．Thereisnotanintermediatestageofethicaltheory,whereitisdemonstratedthatyourchildhadbetterbecured．Youractspringsdirectlyfromdesireforanend,togetherwithknowledgeofmeans．Thisisequallytrueofallacts,whethergoodorbad．Theendsdiffer,andtheknowledgeismoreadequateinsomecasesthaninothers．Butthereisnoconceivablewayofmakingpeopledothingstheydonotwishtodo．Whatispossibleistoaltertheirdesiresbyasystemofrewardsandpenalties,amongwhichsocialapprovalanddisapprovalarenottheleastpotent．Thequestionforthelegislativemoralistis,therefore:Howshallthissystemofrewardsandpunishmentsbearrangedsoastosecurethemaximumofwhatisdesiredbythelegislativeauthority?IfIsaythatthelegislativeauthorityhasbaddesires,ImeanmerelythatitsdesiresconflictwiththoseofsomesectionofthecommunitytowhichIbelong．Outsidehumandesiresthereisnomoralstandard.
Thus,whatdistinguishesethicsfromscienceisnotanyspecialkindofknowledgebutmerelydesire．Theknow-ledgerequiredinethicsisexactlyliketheknowledgeelsewhere;whatispeculiaristhatcertainendsaredesired,andthatrightconductiswhatconducestothem．Ofcourse,ifthedefinitionofrightconductistomakeawideappeal,theendsmustbesuchaslargesectionsofmankinddesire．IfIdefinedrightconductasthatwhichincreasesmyownincome,readerswoulddisagree．Thewholeeffectivenessofanyethicalargumentliesinitsscientificpart,i．e．intheproofthatonekindofconduct,ratherthansomeother,isameanstoanendwhichiswidelydesired．Idistinguish,however,betweenethicalargumentandethicaleducation．Thelatterconsistsinstrengtheningcertaindesiresandweakeningothers．Thisisquiteadifferentprocess,whichwillbeseparatelydiscussedatalaterstage.
Wecannowexplainmoreexactlythepurportofthedefinitionofthegoodlifewithwhichthischapterbegan．WhenIsaidthatthegoodlifeconsistsofloveguidedbyknowledge,thedesirewhichpromptedmewasthedesiretolivesuchalifeasfaraspossible,andtoseeotherslivingit;andthelogicalcontentofthestatementisthat,inacommunitywheremenliveinthisway,moredesireswillbesatisfiedthaninonewherethereislessloveorlessknowledge．Idonotmeanthatsuchalifeis‘virtuous’orthatitsoppositeis‘sinful’,fortheseareconceptionswhichseemtometohavenoscientificjustification.
