known and given relations of the parts of these figures;
and thence infers some unknown relation, which is
dependent on the former. But in moral deliberations
we must be acquainted beforehand with all the objects,
and all their relations to each other; and from a
comparison of the whole, fix our choice or approbation.
No new fact to be ascertained; no new relation to
be discovered. All the circumstances of the case
are supposed to be laid before us, ere we can fix
any sentence of blame or approbation. If any
material circumstance be yet unknown or doubtful,
we must first employ our inquiry or intellectual faculties
to assure us of it; and must suspend for a time all
moral decision or sentiment. While we are ignorant
whether a man were aggressor or not, how can we determine
whether the person who killed him be criminal or innocent?
But after every circumstance, every relation is known,
the understanding has no further room to operate,
nor any object on which it could employ itself.
The approbation or blame which then ensues, cannot
be the work of the judgement, but of the heart; and
is not a speculative proposition or affirmation, but
an active feeling or sentiment. In the disquisitions
of the understanding, from known circumstances and
relations, we infer some new and unknown. In
moral decisions, all the circumstances and relations
must be previously known; and the mind, from the contemplation
of the whole, feels some new impression of affection
or disgust, esteem or contempt, approbation or blame.
Hence the great difference between a mistake of fact
and one of right; and hence the reason why the
one is commonly criminal and not the other. When
Oedipus killed Laius, he was ignorant of the relation,
and from circumstances, innocent and involuntary,
formed erroneous opinions concerning the action which
he committed. But when Nero killed Agrippina,
all the relations between himself and the person,
and all the circumstances of the fact, were previously
known to him; but the motive of revenge, or fear,
or interest, prevailed in his savage heart over the
sentiments of duty and humanity. And when we express
that detestation against him to which he himself,
in a little time, became insensible, it is not that
we see any relations, of which he was ignorant; but
that, for the rectitude of our disposition, we feel
sentiments against which he was hardened from flattery
and a long perseverance in the most enormous crimes.
In these sentiments then, not in a discovery of relations
of any kind, do all moral determinations consist.
Before we can pretend to form any decision of this
kind, everything must be known and ascertained on
the side of the object or action. Nothing remains
but to feel, on our part, some sentiment of blame or
approbation; whence we pronounce the action criminal
or virtuous.