An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals | Page 8

fail to be employed, and with success, where we would
inspire esteem for any one; may it not thence be concluded, that the utility, resulting from
the social virtues, forms, at least, a PART of their merit, and is one source of that
approbation and regard so universally paid to them?
When we recommend even an animal or a plant as USEFUL and BENEFICIAL, we give
it an applause and recommendation suited to its nature. As, on the other hand, reflection
on the baneful influence of any of these inferior beings always inspires us with the
sentiment of aversion. The eye is pleased with the prospect of corn-fields and loaded
vine-yards; horses grazing, and flocks pasturing: but flies the view of briars and brambles,
affording shelter to wolves and serpents.
A machine, a piece of furniture, a vestment, a house well contrived for use and
conveniency, is so far beautiful, and is contemplated with pleasure and approbation. An
experienced eye is here sensible to many excellencies, which escape persons ignorant and
uninstructed.
Can anything stronger be said in praise of a profession, such as merchandize or
manufacture, than to observe the advantages which it procures to society; and is not a
monk and inquisitor enraged when we treat his order as useless or pernicious to mankind?
The historian exults in displaying the benefit arising from his labours. The writer of
romance alleviates or denies the bad consequences ascribed to his manner of
composition.
In general, what praise is implied in the simple epithet USEFUL! What reproach in the
contrary!
Your Gods, says Cicero [De Nat. Deor. lib. i.], in opposition to the Epicureans, cannot
justly claim any worship or adoration, with whatever imaginary perfections you may
suppose them endowed. They are totally useless and inactive. Even the Egyptians, whom
you so much ridicule, never consecrated any animal but on account of its utility.
The sceptics assert [Sext. Emp. adrersus Math. lib. viii.], though absurdly, that the origin
of all religious worship was derived from the utility of inanimate objects, as the sun and
moon, to the support and well-being of mankind. This is also the common reason
assigned by historians, for the deification of eminent heroes and legislators [Diod. Sic.
passim.].
To plant a tree, to cultivate a field, to beget children; meritorious acts, according to the
religion of Zoroaster.
In all determinations of morality, this circumstance of public utility is ever principally in
view; and wherever disputes arise, either in philosophy or common life, concerning the
bounds of duty, the question cannot, by any means, be decided with greater certainty,
than by ascertaining, on any side, the true interests of mankind. If any false opinion,

embraced from appearances, has been found to prevail; as soon as farther experience and
sounder reasoning have given us juster notions of human affairs, we retract our first
sentiment, and adjust anew the boundaries of moral good and evil.
Giving alms to common beggars is naturally praised; because it seems to carry relief to
the distressed and indigent: but when we observe the encouragement thence arising to
idleness and debauchery, we regard that species of charity rather as a weakness than a
virtue.
Tyrannicide, or the assassination of usurpers and oppressive princes, was highly extolled
in ancient times; because it both freed mankind from many of these monsters, and
seemed to keep the others in awe, whom the sword or poinard could not reach. But
history and experience having since convinced us, that this practice increases the jealousy
and cruelty of princes, a Timoleon and a Brutus, though treated with indulgence on
account of the prejudices of their times, are now considered as very improper models for
imitation.
Liberality in princes is regarded as a mark of beneficence, but when it occurs, that the
homely bread of the honest and industrious is often thereby converted into delicious cates
for the idle and the prodigal, we soon retract our heedless praises. The regrets of a prince,
for having lost a day, were noble and generous: but had he intended to have spent it in
acts of generosity to his greedy courtiers, it was better lost than misemployed after that
manner.
Luxury, or a refinement on the pleasures and conveniences of life, had not long been
supposed the source of every corruption in government, and the immediate cause of
faction, sedition, civil wars, and the total loss of liberty. It was, therefore, universally
regarded as a vice, and was an object of declamation to all satirists, and severe moralists.
Those, who prove, or attempt to prove, that such refinements rather tend to the increase
of industry, civility, and arts regulate anew our MORAL as well as POLITICAL
sentiments, and represent, as laudable or innocent, what had formerly been regarded as
pernicious and blameable.
Upon the whole, then,