, 1879-02-16
..E.ti:.
MORAL SENSE.


Mr., T. B. Forbush, Superintendent Of the
Athennnm, lectured before the Philosophical
Society last evening on "The origin Of the
Moral Sense" His first point was that the
moral sense is universal element of human
nature. Distinguishing between the fact Of its
being at present universal and of its being in
nate, affirming present uniycrsality did not
affirm that it had always existed. AS to the dill
ards, moral sense did not decide upon the char
acter Of actions, but said we must
do what is right and not what
is wrong. The character OF actions was
determined By moral standards. These were
m alters of education. Different nations have
ntirely different ones. There was not an act
which those Of civilization condemned but was
approved and practiced By savage oeoplc. Al
lowing the existence of moral sense, the second
question was US to its origin. To this there
were several answers: That Of tradition,
which said man was created immoral aud stole
apples in Paradise, and thereby got the moral
sense; that Of revelation, which said right and
wrong were something God reyealed,-the moral
sense vas something which God specially
put in us; that Of tile utiiitarian, which was
that morality was mere matter Of pleasure and
pain,-that was good which conduced to human
man pain; and that OF the intuitionalist,-moral
truths were among the necessary ideas which
were Unborn In human nature; moral ideas we're
the framework OF the spiritual being. ALI these
answers we're partly right and partly wrong.
The tradition theory was right when nitrepresent-
ed the knowledge Of good and evil to be nc
quired; was wrong in the method of acquisition.
The rcyclationist was right when be affirmed that
the infinite tnality which he called God was
the ultimate cause OF the moral nature; wrong
ffYutf
external command The advocate OF the
pleasure and pain theory was right In asserting
that beneficial actions were morally good aud
harmful actions morally evil, and that the re-
suits OF actions had decided their character;
wrong in infcrring that the moral seusc was
created by individual experience OF pleasure nnd
pain. The intuitionaiiss was right when he
affirmed the persistence Of the moral sense;
wrong in thinking that it existed
perieuce. The modern scientific philosophy
taught that the moral elements, like the intel
lcctual, had been slowly acquired; that they
were tue result OF the actions and experiences,
not OF single indiriduals, but OF tens OF thou
and shaped by human consciousness until at
Inst it had taken definite form, which had be-
come hereditary and Was banded down from
generation to generation. This definite and
persistent form Of consciousness was what VIC
called the moral scusc- II Wos the result OF all
past experience, now become an inherited tacu1-
ty. The question rcmained what tcaused nrimi-
tive mankind to distinguish between classes OF
actjout LarccIy the effect produccd nv those
actions upou family and tribe. An orti.;n benz
Grial 10 the family was rood-wouId he corn-
mcpdc,l; az action harmful vas cyil. and would
be censurcd. The pleasure Of aonrnyui or tie
pain Of disapproyal would lead to doing the one
couutlcss generations, gave us at last the moral
sense aud the moral code. The moral code dis
tiuEuished as right what was beneficial to the
cou1muuity. as wrong what was harm
full to tt: the moral sense saving what
is right must be douc, what is
wrou" must be avoided. The tribo hroadencd
at last to humanity and, what was right was
coincident with it's highest welfare. TIe 1norul
sense, in time, BECAME SO strong and abidiur
that we obcycd its dictates irrespective Of
pleasures, or approbatiAns, or utilities. It was
slowly deyeloned. At first IT. was merely r1,