The Theory of Moral Sentiments · Chapter
Section II: Of the Character of the Individual, So Far as It Can Affect the Happiness of Other People explained
This section explores how individual character affects the happiness of others, focusing on the distinction between justice and beneficence.
What happens
This section explores how individual character affects the happiness of others, focusing on the distinction between justice and beneficence. It argues that only proper resentment for injustice can justify harming another in the eyes of the impartial spectator, and that a sacred regard not to hurt others constitutes the character of the perfectly just man. The section then outlines the natural order for distributing our limited powers of beneficence, first towards individuals and then towards societies.
Themes in this chapter
The Impartial Spectator
The impartial spectator is invoked as the arbiter of whether resentment for injustice is proper, justifying actions that might hurt another's happiness.
Justice as the Pillar of Society vs. Beneficence as Ornament
The chapter distinguishes between the strict rules of justice (which forbid harming others) and the more voluntary distribution of beneficence, which is guided by a natural order.
Key passages
“Proper resentment for injustice attempted, or actually committed, is the only motive which, in the eyes of the impartial spectator, can justify our hurting or disturbing in any respect the happiness of our neighbour.”
Only a justified sense of resentment against an injustice, whether attempted or done, can make harming another's happiness acceptable when viewed from an impartial perspective.
This establishes the central role of the impartial spectator in justifying actions that affect others' happiness.
“A sacred and religious regard not to hurt or disturb in any respect the happiness of our neighbour, even in those cases where no law can properly protect him, constitutes the character of the perfectly innocent and just man.”
The truly just person has a deep, almost sacred commitment to never harm another's happiness, even when no law requires it.
This defines the ideal of perfect justice as going beyond legal obligations.