OCR Text |
Show 160 Moral Relation. Book II. own Club. He mufl: be of a nrange, and unufual Confl:itution, who can content himfelf, to live in con!lant Difgrace and Difi·epute wit! I his own particular Society. Solitude many Men have fought, and been reconciled to: But no Body, that has the leafl: Thoughts, or Scnfe of a Man about him, can _live in Society, under the conftanc Dillike, and ill Opinion of .his Familiars, and thofe he converfes wirh. This is a Burthen too heavy for humane Sufferance: And he muft he made up of irreconci lcable ContradiCtions, who can takePleafure in Company, and yet be infcnlible 'of Contempt and Difgrace from his Companions. §. 13. Thefe Three then, Fir /I, The Law of God. Secondly, the Law of politick Societies. Thirdly, the Law ofF albion, or private Cenfurc, are thofe, to which Men varioully compare their ACtions : And 'tis by their Conformity to one of thefe Laws, that they take their mcafures when they would judge of their Moral ReCtitude, and denominate thci; ACtions good or bad. §. '4· Whether the Rul~, to which, as to a Touch-ftonc,we bring our voluntary ACt10ns,to examme themby,and ny theirGoodnefs, andaccor· 'dingly to name them ; which is, as it were,the Mark of the value we lCt upon them. Whether, I fay, we take that Rule from the Fafl1ion ofthe Country, or the Will of a Law-maker, the Mind is eafily able ro obfervc the Rel:uion.a?y ACtion hath to it;and to judge, whether the ACtion agrees, or. difagre~ WJth the Rule;. and fo hath a Notion of Moral Goodneft or Evil, which IS either_ Confotmity, or not Confor.mity of any Action to .that Rule: And tbetefote, IS often called Moral ReCtitude. This Rule being nothing but a ColleCtion of feveral fimple lt!eas, the Conformity ·!hereto IS but fo ordenng the ACt10n, that the limple Ideas, belonging to 1t, may correfpond to thof~, whtch the Law requires. And tbus we fee, how Moral Bemgs and Nottons, are founded· on, and terminated in tliCfe fimple Ideas, we have received from Senfation or Refledion be fides which we have nothing at all in our Underftandings, to employ 'our Though~ about. For Example, let us confider. the complex Idea, we fignifie by the Word Murther; and when we have taken it afunder and examined all the Par~iculars, we fi1all6nd tliem to_amount to a Collcttion of fimple Ideas, denved fromReflechon o~Senfat!on,viz. l '"irjl, From Relletl:ion on the Operations of our own-Mmds, we have the Idras of Willing Confidering P~rpoling before hand, ~alice, or wifl1ing III to another'; and alfo of L1fe, or Perception, and Self-morton. Secondly, FromSenfation, we have the CollcCt10n of the fimplc fenf1ble Ideas of a Man, and of fomc Al.tion, w!1~reby we put an end to that Perception, and Motion in the Man ; all w.uch limple ldeaJ, are comprehended in the Word Murther. This 1 Colled10n of fimple Ideas, being found by me to agree or difagrce, with the Efteemofthe Cou~try !have been bred in; and to be held by mofl Men there, worthy Pra1fe, or Blame, I call the ACtion venuops or vitious: If! have the Will of a fupreme, invifible Law·maker for. my Rule; then, as I fuppofcd tbe ACtton commanded, or forbidden by God, J call it Good or Evtl, Sm or Dutr : and If I compare it to civil Law, the Rule made by the Legtllanve of the Country, I call it lawful, or unlawful, a Crime, or no Cnme. So that whencefoever, we take the Rule of Moral ACtions; or by what Standard foever,we frame in our Minds the IdeasofVertuesor V1~es, they co_nfill only,_ and are made up of ColleCtions of fimple Jdw, wluch we ongmally received from Scnfc or. RefleCtion ; and their ReCtitude or Obltqutty, confifts m the Agreement or Dif.ogreement with thofc Patterns prefcnbcd by fome Law. ' g. 15. To conceive a Right of Moral Afli011s, we muft take notice of them, Cna:p~ XXVII. .Moral L\e/41/if)n. thc111; under this two-foldJConlidernllion. l'irfll As they• are- i"n• tllerrt; fi!lveseach rna~• uv off fuch ruColleCllion oij fimple id~as.Tilus DrunkennejS or Jl.ying, figniiie fudr o~ fuch. a Colle&on.of timple Ideas·, which l' calP taiieiN'-~od~s . ; and m.tlliS Senfe, they are as mueh pofhi'!Je· a6folut~JV.qs; so~t!kdnnkmg· oti a. Honfe, o~ fpcakmg of :vl?arrG>t. Second/J;,Our A&orii ammnfidered! as. Good, _lla:d\ or indiff<rent: and in tbis r-efpeijl,' they· are lklati.ve, !tlbemg,clleir Oi>nformity to, <>t D1fagl'l!emenc wic.h fomeo IbM, thnG mal<i<!s them to he regulao or irreguln•, @ood'or Bad'; and fo,. u flar·:JII they are com paved with a Rule, and thereupen denominated, they to<M"undet Rolat[om l:"hu••the challenging, and flgllting wi~h a Man :as-it i~a certain politille Mode, <>r particrular f<>rt of A!l'l:ion, ' by pa.rric",J~' ft/MS, difl:ingui01ed• &om' all others, is called IDuelling ; wh1ch, when r;onfidered; iri. te!lltion G<i> r~e t:>w of God, will deferve the Name. Sin ." ICJtbe Law of Fafbion1in feme Countries, "V aloor and- Vertue ; and! r.o th,~' Rlllllicipal· Laws of fcllllC Governments, a cnpi10J. Crime. fn this ~afe, ~ the pofitive Mod'e !bas one Nam.,, and another Name as i~ flan<4 ia rd:ltion to the Law, the d\fiiod-ion. may as ea(,fy be obferved, a~ it t~ inSablbnces, where one Name, v.g. Man, i~ ufcd-to figni·fie ~he 'hjn~, another, v. g. Father, to fognifie the Relation. · ~· t6. tiut brcaufe, very f.equendy rhe pofitive !de a of. the ACtion, and ils Moral Relation ar¢ comprehended togerher under one Name, ~nd · tti,e fame Word made ufe o~ to expretS both the Mode or AB'(o)l, an(! it£ Mma1 Red:itude or Obliquity: therefore rae Relation it felf isle& tak~t\ ROtice of; and there is<>ften no diflinEfi.,. made Aet,veeu rh• po/itive It/ea of the Aaion, and the rejereHct it ba1 t• •ule. By which CQnfulfon,of tljefc rwo dillinet Confiderations, under one Term, thole ~ho yield too eafily to the Impreffion& of Sounds, and are forward to take Names for Things, areotien milled in their Judgment of ACtions. Thus the takinll from ~norber what is his, without his Knowledge or Allowance, is properly called Sttaling: but that N~me, being commonly under(tood to fignifie alfo the Moral pravity of the ACtion, and to denote its contrariety tQ th~ Law, Men are apt to condemn whatever they hear called Stealing, as an ill ACtion, difagreeing with the Rule of Right. And yet the private taking away his Swotd fi·om a Mad-man, to prevent his d.oing Mifchief, though it be properly denominated Stealing, as the. Name of fucJ1 a mix· ttf Motfr: yet when compared to the I,aw of God; when confidered in its relation to that fupreme Rule, it is no Sin, or Tranfgreffion, tl)ov~ the Name StealiHf. otdinarily carries fuch an intimation with it. ;. t7. And thus much for the Relation of humane Actipns to ;t Lllw, \orhich therefore I call Moral Relations. 'Twould make a Volume, to go over all forts of Relations: 'tis not thereb-e io be expeCted, that I fhould here mention thel]l al). It f~ffic: ts to .6ur prefent purpofe, to !hew by th~fe, whu the N••J are, we have of tim comprehenfive Confideration, call d Relafl•n, wh1~h ls fo va• ,; .. ,, and d~e Oceafions of it fo many, (as many a• there p.n ill' of c.om! Wingthing. one to anorber,)that it is not very ealie to red!lcc it to Rules, or under jult Heads. Thofe I have mentioned, I think, ar~ fome of tl)e mod confolerable, and fuch, as may ferve to let us fee, from whence we get our U~asofRdations, and wberein they lire founded. Bllt f;>ef9re I tpllt d!is Ar~moot, from what has been fn1d,give me Le;tve to.9bfeJve, ~- tS. Fufil That k is evident, -rl111t all RelatJon t<rm~natr;- ''• and is 111ti-.oely ~ocled oo thofe Jimple !dear, we llave t,ot_Fom ~enfation or ~-rSotilatalhl~&t we have in our ThoughtS our{e.lves,(Ifwe t.hmk 111· aay Cling >Or have4lny meaAing,) or would· 1ig<~ilieto others, when we ' y ~ |