ETHICS

((Jr. i»0o$, custom, moral character.) The science the object of winch la to determine what ought to be in relation to voluntary action, and to those dispositions, • of mind winch tend mediately or tely to voluntary action. n our aim it the present work, in all articles relating lo abto such as have 1 11 mailer of loim c.inir.ivcrsy, rather 1" ]<<■ ■.Mil a history of the opinions winch have been held i, ami to direct lliem to the works In which those ma i ned with the greatest ability, than lo int oi what appeared to us the cor- ■■ particular department of inquiry before definition with which we prelace this article may appear in come degree a deviation from this our practice, nt bj Implical i of certain nee before us, which some of our of terms to which itib hasjudice,"i W eertain modern writers on ethics that no Intelligible meen inu' can be attached. Our answer is, that we can conceive in it i on, not Including the terms in qui uvalenl8, win.. fy us in a igning to the i ethics an Independent existence, or, by Cornell] giving to the word which designates it ■ distinct place and a ■ ether the words "ought" and '•voluntary" have any meaning or not, must appear from the sequel: it is enough lor our present purpose that the majority of moralists have believed them to \ mbject within the limits of specul laa been waged with greater i the exception, perhaps, of theol ive not far In search for the general reasons of this fact Besides, being a science of pro-eminent interest to those who mule high moral feeling and a concern for the interests of their kind wilh ■ c i| speculation, it is a science also the treatment of which is peculiarly liable to be affected by the moral nature and habits of those who lake it in hand' WithoUl taking upon us that, to be a good ethical writer, it is nece ary lo ■! man, we think that ihe history of specnlaiion is ui the belief that a partial or confined view of i, for the moat part, ■ corresponding exce or defect in the moral qualities of the person hold leas) where such peculiarity cannot be traced mperfect Intellectual qualifications, or to singularly unfavourable circumstances, of tune, place, or educawhich have sprung up under such iiilluimfflnnly expire Wilh the circumstances which in into being The youthful student may Indeed ■ i by the ingenuity or confounded by ihe subtlety with which they have been maintained; but with a person in iin I, who has acce to writers of larger and deeper views, they cannot long maintain a place in his midenstandirtg, much le in his practical habits, vl I these remarks, partly as our justification for from this article all notice of such systems as those ol l'.picurus in am-icul. and Hnbbes, Helvelius, and Muideville in modern times; and partly as mi introduction10what we shall make the central point of our obserount of the controversy which at present thical speculators in England, We allude, it will he perceived, to the dispute which has for some time prevailed between the respective partisans of what have heen called Hie "utilitarian" and " sentimental" schools., rho are acquainted with the most recent records ii which have been published on both ildt controversy will see reason to wonder at two things: at the and very at small'the singular real discrepancy vehemence between with which the parties they engaged disclaim; nil community of opinion, and strive to establish a difference.i which historical'docs not examination exist, or to of exaggerate the origin and one growth which so schools will in a great degree explain these two la its; Inasmuch as it will show that the difference between Is one rather of feeling and habit than of If will also serve as a thead whereon lo hang such notices of past systems as it was nece ary la give, In order to Impart to this article the same historical chancier with that po e ed by the articles on similar suh- ■ur during the course of this work. We sh ill thus have•1JJ an opportunity of communicating to our [s. 437]