A Treatise of Human Nature by David Hume, - HTML preview

PLEASE NOTE: This is an HTML preview only and some elements such as links or page numbers may be incorrect.
Download the book in PDF, ePub, Kindle for a complete version.

is, there scarce is a probability or even possibility of his employing

it in the acquisition of the pleasures and conveniences of life. To

himself alone this power seems perfect and entire; and therefore we must

receive his sentiments by sympathy, before we can have a strong intense

idea of these enjoyments, or esteem him upon account of them.

Thus we have found, that the first principle, viz, the agreeable idea of

those objects, which riches afford the enjoyment of; resolves itself in

a great measure into the third, and becomes a sympathy with the person

we esteem or love. Let us now examine the second principle, viz, the

agreeable expectation of advantage, and see what force we may justly

attribute to it.

It is obvious, that though riches and authority undoubtedly give

their owner a power of doing us service, yet this power is not to be

considered as on the same footing with that, which they afford him, of

pleasing himself, and satisfying his own appetites.

Self-love approaches

the power and exercise very near each other in the latter case; but

in order to produce a similar effect in the former, we must suppose a

friendship and good-will to be conjoined with the riches. Without that

circumstance it is difficult to conceive on what we can found our hope

of advantage from the riches of others, though there is nothing more

certain, than that we naturally esteem and respect the rich, even before

we discover in them any such favourable disposition towards us.

But I carry this farther, and observe, not only that we respect the rich

and powerful, where they shew no inclination to serve us, but also when

we lie so much out of the sphere of their activity, that they cannot

even be supposed to be endowed with that power.

Prisoners of war are

always treated with a respect suitable to their condition; and it is

certain riches go very far towards fixing the condition of any person.

If birth and quality enter for a share, this still affords us an

argument of the same kind. For what is it we call a man of birth,

but one who is descended from a long succession of rich and powerful

ancestors, and who acquires our esteem by his relation to persons whom

we esteem? His ancestors, therefore, though dead, are respected, in some

measure, on account of their riches, and consequently without any kind

of expectation.

But not to go so far as prisoners of war and the dead to find instances

of this disinterested esteem for riches, let us observe with a

little attention those phaenomena that occur to us in common life and

conversation. A man, who is himself of a competent fortune, upon coming

into a company of strangers, naturally treats them with different

degrees of respect and deference, as he is informed of their different

fortunes and conditions; though it is impossible he can ever propose,

and perhaps would not accept of any advantage from them.

A traveller is

always admitted into company, and meets with civility, in proportion as

his train and equipage speak him a man of great or moderate fortune. In

short, the different ranks of men are, in a great measure, regulated

by riches, and that with regard to superiors as well as inferiors,

strangers as well as acquaintance.

There is, indeed, an answer to these arguments, drawn from the influence

of general rules. It may be pretended, that being accustomed to expect

succour and protection from the rich and powerful, and to esteem them

upon that account, we extend the same sentiments to those, who

resemble them in their fortune, but from whom we can never hope for any

advantage. The general rule still prevails, and by giving a bent to the

imagination draws along the passion, in the same manner as if its proper

object were real and existent.

But that this principle does not here take place, will easily appear,

if we consider, that in order to establish a general rule, and extend it

beyond its proper bounds, there is required a certain uniformity in

our experience, and a great superiority of those instances, which are

conformable to the rule, above the contrary. But here the case is quite

otherwise. Of a hundred men of credit and fortune I meet with, there

is not, perhaps, one from whom I can expect advantage; so that it is

impossible any custom can ever prevail in the present case.

Upon the whole, there remains nothing, which can give us an esteem for

power and riches, and a contempt for meanness and poverty, except the

principle of sympathy, by which we enter into the sentiments of the

rich and poor, and partake of their pleasure and uneasiness. Riches give

satisfaction to their possessor; and this satisfaction is conveyed to

the beholder by the imagination, which produces an idea resembling

the original impression in force and vivacity. This agreeable idea or

impression is connected with love, which is an agreeable passion. It

proceeds from a thinking conscious being, which is the very object of

love. From this relation of impressions, and identity of ideas, the

passion arises, according to my hypothesis.

The best method of reconciling us to this opinion is to take a general

survey of the universe, and observe the force of sympathy through the

whole animal creation, and the easy communication of sentiments from one

thinking being to another. In all creatures, that prey not upon others,

and are not agitated with violent passions, there appears a remarkable

desire of company, which associates them together, without any

advantages they can ever propose to reap from their union. This is still

more conspicuous in man, as being the creature of the universe, who

has the most ardent desire of society, and is fitted for it by the most

advantages. We can form no wish, which has not a reference to society.

A perfect solitude is, perhaps, the greatest punishment we can suffer.

Every pleasure languishes when enjoyed a-part from company, and every

pain becomes more cruel and intolerable. Whatever other passions we may

be actuated by; pride, ambition, avarice, curiosity, revenge or lust;

the soul or animating principle of them all is sympathy; nor would

they have any force, were we to abstract entirely from the thoughts and

sentiments of others. Let all the powers and elements of nature conspire

to serve and obey one man: Let the sun rise and set at his command: The

sea and rivers roll as he pleases, and the earth furnish spontaneously

whatever may be useful or agreeable to him: He will still be miserable,

till you give him some one person at least, with whom he may share his

happiness, and whose esteem and friendship he may enjoy.

This conclusion from a general view of human nature, we may confirm by

particular instances, wherein the force of sympathy is very remarkable.

Most kinds of beauty are derived from this origin; and though our first

object be some senseless inanimate piece of matter, it is seldom we rest

there, and carry not our view to its influence on sensible and rational

creatures. A man, who shews us any house or building, takes particular

care among other things to point out the convenience of the apartments,

the advantages of their situation, and the little room lost in the

stairs, antichambers and passages; and indeed it is evident, the chief

part of the beauty consists in these particulars. The observation of

convenience gives pleasure, since convenience is a beauty. But after

what manner does it give pleasure? It is certain our own interest is

not in the least concerned; and as this is a beauty of interest, not of

form, so to speak, it must delight us merely by communication, and by

our sympathizing with the proprietor of the lodging. We enter into his

interest by the force of imagination, and feel the same satisfaction,

that the objects naturally occasion in him.

This observation extends to tables, chairs, scritoires, chimneys,

coaches, sadles, ploughs, and indeed to every work of art; it being an

universal rule, that their beauty is chiefly derived from their utility,

and from their fitness for that purpose, to which they are destined.

But this is an advantage, that concerns only the owner, nor is there any

thing but sympathy, which can interest the spectator.

It is evident, that nothing renders a field more agreeable than its

fertility, and that scarce any advantages of ornament or situation will

be able to equal this beauty. It is the same case with particular trees

and plants, as with the field on which they grow. I know not but a

plain, overgrown with furze and broom, may be, in itself, as beautiful

as a hill covered with vines or olive-trees; though it will never appear

so to one, who is acquainted with the value of each. But this is a

beauty merely of imagination, and has no foundation in what appears to

the senses. Fertility and value have a plain reference to use; and

that to riches, joy, and plenty; in which though we have no hope of

partaking, yet we enter into them by the vivacity of the fancy, and

share them, in some measure, with the proprietor.

There is no rule in painting more reasonable than that of ballancing the

figures, and placing them with the greatest exactness on their proper

centers of gravity. A figure, which is not justly ballanced, is

disagreeable; and that because it conveys the ideas of its fall, of

harm, and of pain: Which ideas are painful, when by sympathy they

acquire any degree of force and vivacity.

Add to this, that the principal part of personal beauty is an air

of health and vigour, and such a construction of members as promises

strength and activity. This idea of beauty cannot be accounted for but

by sympathy.

In general we may remark, that the minds of men are mirrors to one

another, not only because they reflect each others emotions, but also

because those rays of passions, sentiments and opinions may be often

reverberated, and may decay away by insensible degrees.

Thus the

pleasure, which a rich man receives from his possessions, being thrown

upon the beholder, causes a pleasure and esteem; which sentiments again,

being perceived and sympathized with, encrease the pleasure of the

possessor; and being once more reflected, become a new foundation for

pleasure and esteem in the beholder. There is certainly an original

satisfaction in riches derived from that power, which they bestow, of

enjoying all the pleasures of life; and as this is their very nature and

essence, it must be the first source of all the passions, which arise

from them. One of the most considerable of these passions is that of

love or esteem in others, which therefore proceeds from a sympathy with

the pleasure of the possessor. But the possessor has also a secondary

satisfaction in riches arising from the love and esteem he acquires by

them, and this satisfaction is nothing but a second reflexion of

that original pleasure, which proceeded from himself.

This secondary

satisfaction or vanity becomes one of the principal recommendations

of riches, and is the chief reason, why we either desire them for

ourselves, or esteem them in others. Here then is a third rebound of the

original pleasure; after which it is difficult to distinguish the images

and reflexions, by reason of their faintness and confusion.

SECT. VI OF BENEVOLENCE AND ANGER

Ideas may be compared to the extension and solidity of matter, and

impressions, especially reflective ones, to colours, tastes, smells and

other sensible qualities. Ideas never admit of a total union, but are

endowed with a kind of impenetrability, by which they exclude each

other, and are capable of forming a compound by their conjunction,

not by their mixture. On the other hand, impressions and passions are

susceptible of an entire union; and like colours, may be blended so

perfectly together, that each of them may lose itself, and contribute

only to vary that uniform impression, which arises from the whole. Some

of the most curious phaenomena of the human mind are derived from this

property of the passions.

In examining those ingredients, which are capable of uniting with love

and hatred, I begin to be sensible, in some measure, of a misfortune,

that has attended every system of philosophy, with which the world has

been yet acquainted. It is commonly found, that in accounting for the

operations of nature by any particular hypothesis; among a number

of experiments, that quadrate exactly with the principles we would

endeavour to establish; there is always some phaenomenon, which is more

stubborn, and will not so easily bend to our purpose. We need not be

surprized, that this should happen in natural philosophy. The essence

and composition of external bodies are so obscure, that we must

necessarily, in our reasonings, or rather conjectures concerning

them, involve ourselves in contradictions and absurdities. But as

the perceptions of the mind are perfectly known, and I have used all

imaginable caution in forming conclusions concerning them, I have always

hoped to keep clear of those contradictions, which have attended every

other system. Accordingly the difficulty, which I have at present in

my eye, is nowise contrary to my system; but only departs a little from

that simplicity, which has been hitherto its principal force and beauty.

The passions of love and hatred are always followed by, or rather

conjoined with benevolence and anger. It is this conjunction, which

chiefly distinguishes these affections from pride and humility. For

pride and humility are pure emotions in the soul, unattended with any

desire, and not immediately exciting us to action. But love and hatred

are not compleated within themselves, nor rest in that emotion, which

they produce, but carry the mind to something farther.

Love is always

followed by a desire of the happiness of the person beloved, and an

aversion to his misery: As hatred produces a desire of the misery and

an aversion to the happiness of the person hated. So remarkable a

difference betwixt these two sets of passions of pride and humility,

love and hatred, which in so many other particulars correspond to each

other, merits our attention.

The conjunction of this desire and aversion with love and hatred may be

accounted for by two different hypotheses. The first is, that love and

hatred have not only a cause, which excites them, viz, pleasure and

pain; and an object, to which they are directed, viz, a person or

thinking being; but likewise an end, which they endeavour to attain,

viz, the happiness or misery of the person beloved or hated; all which

views, mixing together, make only one passion. According to this system,

love is nothing but the desire of happiness to another person, and

hatred that of misery. The desire and aversion constitute the very

nature of love and hatred. They are not only inseparable but the same.

But this is evidently contrary to experience. For though it is certain

we never love any person without desiring his happiness, nor hate any

without wishing his misery, yet these desires arise only upon the ideas

of the happiness or misery of our friend or enemy being presented by the

imagination, and are not absolutely essential to love and hatred. They

are the most obvious and natural sentiments of these affections, but not

the only ones. The passions may express themselves in a hundred ways,

and may subsist a considerable time, without our reflecting on the

happiness or misery of their objects; which clearly proves, that these

desires are not the same with love and hatred, nor make any essential

part of them.

We may, therefore, infer, that benevolence and anger are passions

different from love and hatred, and only conjoined with them, by the

original constitution of the mind. As nature has given to the body

certain appetites and inclinations, which she encreases, diminishes,

or changes according to the situation of the fluids or solids; she

has proceeded in the same manner with the mind.

According as we are

possessed with love or hatred, the correspondent desire of the happiness

or misery of the person, who is the object of these passions, arises

in the mind, and varies with each variation of these opposite passions.

This order of things, abstractedly considered, is not necessary. Love

and hatred might have been unattended with any such desires, or their

particular connexion might have been entirely reversed.

If nature had

so pleased, love might have had the same effect as hatred, and hatred as

love. I see no contradiction in supposing a desire of producing misery

annexed to love, and of happiness to hatred. If the sensation of the

passion and desire be opposite, nature coued have altered the sensation

without altering the tendency of the desire, and by that means made them

compatible with each other.

SECT. VII OF COMPASSION

But though the desire of the happiness or misery of others, according to

the love or hatred we bear them, be an arbitrary and original instinct

implanted in our nature, we find it may be counterfeited on many

occasions, and may arise from secondary principles. Pity is a concern

for, and malice a joy in the misery of others, without any friendship or

enmity to occasion this concern or joy. We pity even strangers, and

such as are perfectly indifferent to us: And if our ill-will to another

proceed from any harm or injury, it is not, properly speaking, malice,

but revenge. But if we examine these affections of pity and malice we

shall find them to be secondary ones, arising from original affections,

which are varied by some particular turn of thought and imagination.

It will be easy to explain the passion of pity, from the precedent

reasoning concerning sympathy. We have a lively idea of every thing

related to us. All human creatures are related to us by resemblance.

Their persons, therefore, their interests, their passions, their pains

and pleasures must strike upon us in a lively manner, and produce an

emotion similar to the original one; since a lively idea is easily

converted into an impression. If this be true in general, it must be

more so of affliction and sorrow. These have always a stronger and more

lasting influence than any pleasure or enjoyment.

A spectator of a tragedy passes through a long train of grief, terror,

indignation, and other affections, which the poet represents in the

persons he introduces. As many tragedies end happily, and no excellent

one can be composed without some reverses of fortune, the spectator must

sympathize with all these changes, and receive the fictitious joy as

well as every other passion. Unless, therefore, it be asserted, that

every distinct passion is communicated by a distinct original

quality, and is not derived from the general principle of sympathy

above-explained, it must be allowed, that all of them arise from

that principle. To except any one in particular must appear highly

unreasonable. As they are all first present in the mind of one person,

and afterwards appear in the mind of another; and as the manner of their

appearance, first as an idea, then as an impression, is in every case

the same, the transition must arise from the same principle. I am

at least sure, that this method of reasoning would be considered as

certain, either in natural philosophy or common life.

Add to this, that pity depends, in a great measure, on the contiguity,

and even sight of the object; which is a proof, that it is derived from

the imagination. Not to mention that women and children are most subject

to pity, as being most guided by that faculty. The same infirmity, which

makes them faint at the sight of a naked sword, though in the hands of

their best friend, makes them pity extremely those, whom they find in

any grief or affliction. Those philosophers, who derive this passion

from I know not what subtile reflections on the instability of fortune,

and our being liable to the same miseries we behold, will find this

observation contrary to them among a great many others, which it were

easy to produce.

There remains only to take notice of a pretty remarkable phaenomenon

of this passion; which is, that the communicated passion of sympathy

sometimes acquires strength from the weakness of its original, and even

arises by a transition from affections, which have no existence.

Thus when a person obtains any honourable office, or inherits a great

fortune, we are always the more rejoiced for his prosperity, the

less sense he seems to have of it, and the greater equanimity and

indifference he shews in its enjoyment. In like manner a man, who is

not dejected by misfortunes, is the more lamented on account of his

patience; and if that virtue extends so far as utterly to remove all

sense of uneasiness, it still farther encreases our compassion. When a

person of merit falls into what is vulgarly esteemed a great misfortune,

we form a notion of his condition; and carrying our fancy from the cause

to the usual effect, first conceive a lively idea of his sorrow, and

then feel an impression of it, entirely over-looking that greatness of

mind, which elevates him above such emotions, or only considering it so

far as to encrease our admiration, love and tenderness for him. We find

from experience, that such a degree of passion is usually connected with

such a misfortune; and though there be an exception in the present

case, yet the imagination is affected by the general rule, and makes

us conceive a lively idea of the passion, or rather feel the passion

itself, in the same manner, as if the person were really actuated by it.

From the same principles we blush for the conduct of those, who behave

themselves foolishly before us; and that though they shew no sense of

shame, nor seem in the least conscious of their folly.

All this proceeds

from sympathy; but it is of a partial kind, and views its objects only

on one side, without considering the other, which has a contrary effect,

and would entirely destroy that emotion, which arises from the first

appearance.

We have also instances, wherein an indifference and insensibility under

misfortune encreases our concern for the misfortunate, even though

the indifference proceed not from any virtue and magnanimity. It is an

aggravation of a murder, that it was committed upon persons asleep and

in perfect security; as historians readily observe of any infant prince,

who is captive in the hands of his enemies, that he is the more worthy

of compassion the less sensible he is of his miserable condition. As we

ourselves are here acquainted with the wretched situation of the person,

it gives us a lively idea and sensation of sorrow, which is the passion

that generally attends it; and this idea becomes still more lively,

and the sensation more violent by a contrast with that security and

indifference, which we observe in the person himself. A contrast of any

kind never fails to affect the imagination, especially when presented by

the subject; and it is on the imagination that pity entirely depends.

[Footnote 11. To prevent all ambiguity, I must observe,

that where I oppose the imagination to the memor