Chapter 16 The second treatise of personal qualities, insofar as they may affect the happiness of others
SECOND PART II ON THE QUALITY OF INDIVIDUALS, SOF ITS POSSIBLE INFLUENCE ON THE HAPPINESS OF OTHERS INTRODUCTION The quality of every individual, so far as it may affect the happiness of others, must occur according to its tendency to be injurious or beneficial to others. of this effect.
To the impartial spectator, the just indignation of men against our unjust designs, or actual crimes, is the only motive which can in every way justify us in endangering or destroying the happiness of our neighbours.Another motive to his resentment is that the act itself violates the laws of justice, the force of which should be employed to restrain or punish transgressions.Every government or country, with the utmost care, can also do it, and use the power of society to restrain those who are afraid of the power of social power and dare not endanger each other or destroy the happiness of each other.These codes, established for this purpose, constitute the civil and criminal laws of each particular government or country.The principles on which these maxims are grounded, or should be grounded, are the object of study of a particular science, the most important of all sciences.But, perhaps to date, this discipline has been the least researched and developed.It is natural law.It is not our present purpose to treat this subject in any detail.A certain sacred and pious respect, which does not injure or destroy the happiness of our neighbors in any respect, even where no law can properly afford protection, constitutes the quality of the most innocent and just man; This quality, which in some degree also expresses concern for others, is itself always highly respected and even revered, and is hardly unaccompanied by many other virtues, such as deep sympathy for others, great humanity and Noble kindness.This is a quality so well understood that it needs no further explanation.In this one I will only try to explain: the order which nature seems to have drawn—the order which distinguishes our acts of benevolence, or the order to which our very limited capacity for benevolence is directed and acts, that is, first directed and Acts on the individual, and secondarily points to and acts on the order of society—the basis.
It will be seen that the same supreme wisdom which regulates what nature does in other respects, directs in this respect the order which it gives; Proportional to the size of the sex or the size of the usefulness.
CHAPTER I. Of the order in which nature makes individuals the objects of our care and attention. As the Stoics used to say, each man's first and principal concern is himself.In every respect, each is of course better suited and more able to care for himself than the other.Everyone is more sensitive to his own feelings of pleasure and pain than to those of others.The former are primitive feelings; the latter are reflections or sympathetic imaginations of those feelings.The former can be said to be entities; the latter can be said to be shadows.
The members of his own family, those who usually lived in the same house with him, his parents, his children, his brothers and sisters, were, of course, next to himself the most passionate concerns of his. object.
Often, of course, they are those whose happiness or misery must be most profoundly affected by his actions.He is more used to sympathizing with them.He knew more clearly how each event might affect them, and felt more sympathetic and definite for them than he could for most other people.In short, it was closer to those feelings when he cared about himself.
Nature pours out this sympathy, and the affections based on it, on his child more strongly than he pours on his parents, and he feels more tenderly for the former than he does for the latter. Respect and gratitude often seem to be a more active nature.We have said that, in the natural state of things, the child's existence, for some time after his arrival in the world, is wholly dependent upon the care of his parents;Human nature seems to regard the child as a more important object than the old; and the child excites a stronger and more general sympathy.This is a matter of course.
Everything can be expected, or at least hoped for, from a child.Very little can be expected or hoped for from old people on ordinary occasions.The weakness of childhood attracts the attention of the cruelest and hardest.Only for the virtuous and humane are the infirmities of old age not an object of contempt and aversion.On ordinary occasions the death of old people is not very sorry to anyone.The death of a child hardly fails to break the hearts of some.
The first friendships, the kind that form naturally when young minds are most receptive, are those between brothers and sisters.When they are in a family together, mutual affection is necessary for the stability and happiness of the family.They can give each other more pleasure or pain than they can give most other people.This situation of theirs makes mutual sympathy among them a matter of the utmost importance to their common happiness, and, by natural wisdom, the same circumstance makes this sympathy the more habitual by compelling them to take care of one another. , so it is more intense, definite and certain.
The children of brothers and sisters are naturally united by that friendship which, after the separation of families, continues between their parents.The sympathy of the children increases the pleasure which such friendship can give; their discord disturbs it.However, since they are seldom in the same family, their mutual sympathy, though more important than that of most other people, is less important than that of siblings.Since mutual sympathy between them is less necessary, less customary, and correspondingly weaker.
Cousin brothers and sisters' children, because they have less contact, mutual sympathy is even less important; as the kinship is gradually alienated, the relationship is gradually weakened.
What is called affection is really just a habitual sympathy.Our concern for the happiness or pain of those whom we regard as the object of our affection, our desire to promote their happiness and prevent their pain, is both a concrete feeling which springs from this habitual sympathy, and a necessary consequence of it.Relatives are generally in circumstances in which this habitual sympathy naturally arises, and a considerable degree of affection may be expected between them.We generally see that this affection does arise; therefore, we must expect it to arise.Therefore, on any occasion, we find that this feeling does not arise, we are very excited.From this a general maxim is established: There should always be a certain affection between persons in a certain relation; and if it is not so between them, there must be the greatest inappropriateness, and sometimes even some evil. .To be a parent without the tenderness of a parent, and to be a child without all the respect due to a child, seems a kind of monster, not only the object of hatred, but the object of extreme loathing.
Though in particular occasions, for some accidental cause, as it is said, the circumstances which usually give rise to those natural affections may not arise, respect for general maxims will often, to some extent, furnish those environment, and often produces certain sentiments--though not quite the same as those in the above-mentioned environment, but very similar to those natural sentiments.A father is apt to lose his fondness for a child whom he, for some accidental reason, did not live with in his infancy, and who did not come back to him until he was a man.The father's love for the child will be less in his heart, and the child's filial piety to his father will also tend to be lessened.Brothers and sisters are likewise lessened in their affection for one another if they are educated in distant countries.A respectful and virtuous consideration, however, of the above-mentioned general maxims, often produces affections which are by no means identical to those of natural affection, but which are very much like them.Even when separated, father and child, brother or sister, are by no means indifferent to one another.They see each other as persons to whom certain affections are to be given and which are to be taken from them, and they both live in the hope of enjoying themselves under certain circumstances at this or that time. The kind of family happiness that naturally arises among people who get along day and night.Before they got together, this absent son, this absent brother, was often the favorite son and brother in my heart.There was never any discord between them.
If so, it was long ago, forgotten like some child's toy not worth remembering.Everything they hear about each other would give them great satisfaction and pleasure if it had been relayed by some of the better qualities.This absent son, this absent brother, is not like other sons and brothers in general, a perfect son, a perfect brother; The romantic hope it embraces.Often, when they meet, they have such a strong tendency to imagine that customary sympathy which constitutes the affections of family members, that they are very apt to think that they do have it, and that they behave towards each other as It's the same when there is such sympathy.However, I worry that time and experience will often shatter their illusions.As they become more acquainted, they often find in each other that, for lack of customary sympathy, for lack of the actual motive and basis of what is properly called familial affection, the other's habits, tempers, and inclinations are not what they expect. .They can no longer live in harmony now.They had never lived under circumstances which almost necessarily prompted them to live in peace, and though they might now sincerely wish to live in peace, it was indeed impossible for them to do so.Their ordinary conversation and intercourse soon became tedious to them, and were infrequently carried on.They may continue to live together, looking out for each other and being superficially courteous.But they seldom fully enjoy that hearty cheerfulness, that precious sympathy, that openness and freedom of confession which naturally arise in the conversation of people who have lived long and intimately with each other.
However, it is only with respect to dutiful and virtuous men that these general maxims have this feeble force.
It doesn't work at all for those who are rambunctious, dissolute and pompous.They had the greatest disrespect for it, and seldom mentioned it except in the crudest mockery; and the childhood separation and long separation of such people must have kept them very estranged from one another.The respect of such persons for the above-mentioned general maxim produces at best a certain indifference and affectation (which bears little resemblance to genuine respect); often brings the courtesies to an end entirely.
The education of boys in well-known schools far away, of young men in distant universities, of young women in distant convents and boarding schools, seems to have fundamentally damaged France and France. Ethics and morality in upper-class English families, to the detriment of family happiness.Would you like to educate your children to be filial and respectful to their parents, kind and affectionate to their brothers and sisters?
To enable them to be children who honor their father, and to be kind and affectionate to their brothers and sisters, they must be educated in your own family.They are to leave their parents' house every day with courtesy and order to attend a public school education, but let them live at home often.Respect for you must often place a very useful restraint on their conduct; respect for them will often place a useful restraint on your own.Indeed, the gains which may be gained from so-called public education do not compensate for the almost certain and inevitable losses which such education entails.Family education is a natural educational system; public education is an artificial educational method.It is certainly not necessary to decide which one is probably the best method of education.
In tragedies and love stories we have seen many beautiful and moving scenes based on the so-called power of blood ties, or on that wonderful feeling by which relatives are supposed to bond to each other. Missing, even before they knew they had this relationship with each other——as evidence.However, I worry that the power of this kinship does not exist anywhere but in tragedies and love stories.Even in tragedies and love stories, this affection exists only between those who live in the same family, that is, only between parents and children, between brothers and sisters.It is absurd to think that any such mysterious affection exists between cousins, or even between aunts and uncles and nephews and nieces, etc.
In cattle-breeding countries, and in all countries where the force of the laws is insufficient to give complete security to every citizen, members of different branches of the same family generally prefer to live near one another.Their association is often necessary for their common defense.All men, from the highest to the lowest, are more or less useful to each other.Their harmony strengthens the necessary bond between them; their dissonance always weakens and may even destroy it.They interact more with each other than with any other family member.Even the most distant members of the same family are connected in some way; therefore, all other things being equal, they can expect more attention than those who are not.Not so many years ago, in the Highlands of Scotland, it was the custom of a chieftain to regard the poorest of his clan as his cousins and relations.It is said that among the Tartars, Arabs, and Turkomens there is also a widespread concern for fellow-clans, and, I think, in all other peoples whose social condition is almost the same as that of the Scottish Highland tribes at the beginning of this century. situation.
In a commercial country, the force of the laws is always sufficient to protect the lowest rank of citizens, and the descendants of the same family, having no such motive of congregation, will necessarily be driven to disperse in various places by interest or inclination.They soon ceased to be of much value to each other; and, after only a few generations, they not only lost all concern for each other, but forgot that they were of the same blood, and of their ancestry. past connections.In every country, as this state of civilization has been established longer and more complete, care for distant relatives has become less and less.This state of civilization is longer established and more complete in England than in Scotland; The difference between the two countries is narrowing day by day.In every nation the great nobles do take pride in remembering and acknowledging their relations with one another, however remote they may be.The memory of these illustrious relatives flaunts the glory of their entire family to a considerable degree.
Moreover, this memory is so carefully preserved, neither from familial affection, nor from anything resembling it, but from the most dull and childish vanity.If a very lowly but perhaps much closer male relative dared to remind these great men of his connection to their family, they would probably tell him that they were bad genealogists and ignorant of their own family history.
I am afraid we should not expect any particularly great extension of the so-called innate affections in that direction.
What is called innate affection, I think, is more the result of the moral connection between parent and child than of an imagined natural connection.Indeed, a suspicious husband often regards with hatred and disgust the unfortunate child whom he regards as the product of his wife's infidelity, despite his ethical paternity, despite the child's Has been educated in his family.To him it was the permanent mark of a most unpleasant adventure, of the shame he had suffered, and of the disgrace of his family.
Among well-meaning people, the necessity and convenience of mutual accommodation often produce a friendship not unlike that which arises between those who are born to live in the same family.Colleagues in the office, partners in business, call each other brothers and often feel like real brothers.A sympathy between them is good for all; and, if they are reasonable beings, they are naturally inclined to harmony.We thought they should, and saw their rift as a small scandal.The Romans used the word "necessitudo" for this dependence, which, taken etymologically, seems to indicate that this dependence is a necessary requirement of the environment on people.
Even the details of the lives of people living in the same district have some influence on morality.We do not tarnish the face of a man whom we see every day, if he never offends us.Neighbors can bring great convenience to each other, and they can also bring great trouble to each other.If they are people of good character, they naturally tend to be harmonious.We expect them to be harmonious; and think a bad neighbor to be a man of bad character.There is, therefore, a slight mutual help among neighbors, which, generally speaking, is always given to a neighbor before anyone who is not related to him.
Our natural disposition to accommodate and agree with others as much as possible, our own emotions, morals, and feelings that we consider to be established and ingrained among those with whom we must live and interact regularly, is a disservice to good friends and bad alike. The reason why friends have a contagious influence.A man who associates chiefly with wise and virtuous men, though he himself will be neither wise nor virtuous, cannot fail to have at least some respect for either wisdom or virtue.And the man who deals chiefly with licentiousness and licentiousness, though he himself will not be licentious and licentious, must at least soon lose all his old aversion to licentiousness and licentiousness.Perhaps the resemblance in the qualities of family members which we so often see produced by the inheritance of successive generations may be in part due to this disposition to seek agreement with those with whom we must live and frequently associate. intention.It seems, however, that the qualities of the members of the family, like the looks of the members of the family, should not be attributable wholly to moral ties, but in part to blood ties.The family appearance is of course entirely due to the latter connection.
However, all affection for a person is the most respectable affection if it is based entirely on respect and approval of the noble behavior and behavior of this person, and is confirmed by many experiences and long-term associations.This friendship does not arise from a forced sympathy, nor from such a sympathy pretended and shown as habit for the sake of convenience and convenience, but from a natural sympathy, from such a natural feeling--we One's own attachment to these people is the natural and proper object of respect and approval, and this kind of affection can only exist in virtuous people.Virtuous people simply think that each other's behavior and manners--at any time, they can be sure that they will never offend each other--are completely trustworthy.Evil is always capricious; only virtue is consistent and normal.Attachment, founded on the love of virtue, is, as it is undoubtedly the most virtuous of all affections, the most agreeable, the most enduring, and the surest.This friendship need not be confined to one person, but it is assuredly shared by all those who are wise and virtuous, with whom we have had long and intimate association, and whose wisdom and virtue we may therefore have complete confidence in.Those who confine it to two persons seem to confuse, indeed, the clarity of friendship with the jealousy and debauchery of love.The indiscreet, sentimental, and ignorant intimacy of youth is usually founded on small resemblances of characters which have no relation at all to noble conduct, or on the same objects of study, the same amusements, and the same pastimes. on a certain taste of manner, or on their agreement on some peculiar principle or point of view not generally adopted.Such perverted intimacy, however pleasant it may appear in its existence, should never be called sacred and respectable friendship.
Yet, of all whom nature points out to be fit for our particular favor, none seem to be more fitted for it than those to whom we have already received it.Shape people into the creators who are very necessary for their own happiness to treat each other with kindness, and turn everyone who has done good things to people into a specific friendly object for people.Though the gratitude of men is not always proportionate to his good deeds, yet the opinion of the impartial spectator on his good character, and the sympathetic gratitude, are always proportionate to his good deeds.The general indignation of others against some despicable ungrateful man sometimes adds to the full awareness of his good qualities.A benevolent man is never entirely without the results of his beneficence.If he does not always get them from the people to whom he deserves them, he seldom forgets to get them from others in tenfold increments.What is good is rewarded; and if being loved by our fellowmen is the greatest end we aspire to, the surest way of attaining this end is to show by our conduct that we really love them.
Whether because of their relation to us, or their personal qualities, or because of their past service to us, after they have been the objects of our good deeds, they do not really deserve our affection called friendship, Rather, they deserve our benevolent care and warm help; those who, by their peculiar circumstances--some very happy, some very unhappy; some rich and powerful, some poor and Poor -- and different.The distinctions in rank, the stability and order of society, are based in large measure on the respect we naturally feel for the former.The alleviation and consolation of human misfortune is entirely based on our pity for the latter kind of people.The stability and order of society are even more important than the relief of the misery of the unfortunate.Our respect for great men is too apt to be disturbed by its excess; our sympathy for the unfortunate is too easily disturbed by its deficiency.Ethicists exhort us to be lenient and sympathetic to others.They warn us not to be fooled by dignitaries.So strong is this fascination that men always prefer to be rich and great rather than wise and virtuous.Nature makes wise decisions: distinctions of rank, social stability and order, should be founded more surely on clear and obvious distinctions of birth and property than on obscure and often indeterminate distinctions of wisdom and virtue. as the basis.The common eye of most men is perfectly capable of perceiving the former difference, while the fine discernment of wise and virtuous men sometimes has difficulty in discerning the latter.In all the above sequence of things which are objects of our concern, the wisdom of good nature is likewise evident.
It is perhaps unnecessary to state that the union of two or more causes which excite a good, increases it.Where there is no envy, the affection and partiality which we necessarily have for great persons are deepened by their association with wisdom and virtue.For all his wisdom and virtue, the great man is still subject to those misfortunes, those dangers and pains.The man of the highest rank is often most affected, and we are more deeply interested in his fate than we should be in that of a lesser man of the same virtue.The most attractive themes in tragedies and love stories are the misfortunes of virtuous and noble kings and princes.If, by wisdom and perseverance, they had liberated themselves from this misfortune, and restored fully to their former position of superiority and security, we cannot help looking at them with the utmost enthusiasm, even inordinate admiration. look at them.Our sorrow at their pain, and our joy at their success, seem to combine to intensify that one-sided admiration--our natural admiration for their position and character.
When those different benevolent sentiments happen to tend to different inclinations, by any exact criterion for judging when we ought to act on the one and when we should act on the other, it may be Totally impossible.When should friendship give way to gratitude, or gratitude to friendship; when should the strongest of all natural affections give way to safety for those Security rests upon their safety—the importance; and whenever natural affection may rightly outweigh this importance, it must be left to the inner man—the supposed impartial spectator, the grandeur of our deeds. judges and adjudicators.If we put ourselves entirely in his place, if we really see ourselves through his eyes and as he sees us, if we pay attention to what he has to say to us, his opinion will never overwhelm us. deceived.We don't need arbitrary rules to guide our behavior.These maxims often do not adapt us to shades and gradations of circumstances, qualities, and situations, and to differences and distinctions which, though not imperceptible, are often, from their own delicacy and subtlety, quite indefinable.In Voltaire's touching tragedy, The Chinese Orphan, we are admiring Zamti - who would sacrifice the life of his own children to preserve the only weak surviving offspring of past princes and masters - Noble act while not only forgiving but praising the maternal love of Idame, who, at the risk of exposing her husband's vital secret, retrieved her own child from the clutches of the Tartars to the one who had rescued him hands.
Chapter II. Of the order in which nature makes societies the objects of our benevolence. These principles, which govern the sequence of individuals as objects of our benevolence, likewise guide the sequence of societies which make them objects of our benevolence.It is the most important, or perhaps the most important, social groups which are first and chief objects of our charity.
The government or country under which we are brought up and educated, and under whose protection we continue to live, is, in ordinary cases, the most important body of society on whose happiness or unhappiness our noble or bad conduct may very much affect. .Nature, then, is most determined to make it the object of our beneficence.Not only ourselves, but all objects to which our most benevolent affections are directed-our children, parents, relations, friends, and benefactors, all those whom we naturally love and respect most, are generally contained in the State; and Their happiness and security depend in part on the prosperity and security of the nation.Nature, therefore, makes us love our country not only through all the selfish, but also benevolent affections in us.Because we ourselves are connected with it, its prosperity and glory seem to bring us a certain honor.We are proud of its superiority when we compare it with other groups of its kind, and we are somehow humiliated if it appears inferior in any way.Those eminent figures of our own country in past ages (unlike contemporary eminent figures, envy sometimes makes us look at them with a little prejudice), such as warriors, statesmen, poets, philosophers, all kinds of We tend to look upon them with the greatest partiality of admiration, and rank (sometimes most unjustly) above the eminent men of all other nations.The patriot who has given his life for the security of the country as a social body, and even for its honor, has shown an act of most propriety.He evidently sees himself in the light with which the impartial spectator naturally and necessarily sees him.According to this impartial judge, he sees himself only as one of the multitude who is only obliged at any time to sacrifice and contribute his life for the safety, interest, and even honor of the majority.Very just and fitting as this sacrifice seems, we know how difficult it is to make it, and how few are able to make it.His conduct, therefore, is not only wholly approved of, but greatly admired and admired, but which seems to deserve all the praise that can be accorded to the noblest virtues.On the contrary, the traitor who, under certain special circumstances, imagines that he can gain a little of his own self-interest by selling the interests of his country to a public enemy, disregards the judgment of the inner man, and pursues his own interests in the most shameful and despicable way regardless of all Traitors to the interests of their kindred are evidently the worst of all villains.
Love of our own country often makes us regard the prosperity and power of any neighboring country with the worst suspicion and envy.Independent and bordering states, without a common authority to decide their disputes, live in constant fear and suspicion of their neighbours.Every prince can scarcely expect justice from his neighbor, so that he treats it indiscriminately.Respect for the laws of nations, or for the norms to which independent nations assert or profess to be obliged to observe in their dealings with one another, is often no more than posturing.Every day we see countries shamelessly or relentlessly evading or directly violating these norms, in the light of the smallest stakes.Every nation expects, or thinks it expects, to be subjugated by the growing power and expansion of any of its neighbours; and this bad habit of national discrimination is often based on some noble idea of love for one's own country.It is said that whenever Cato the Elder spoke in the Senate, no matter what the subject of the speech, he always concluded with: "This is also my opinion: Carthage should be destroyed." A natural expression of the patriotism of a man who is borderline insanely irritated by a country that has caused so much misery to his own country.It is said that the more humane sentence of Scibionesica at the end of all his speeches was: "This is my opinion, too: Carthage should not be destroyed." The generosity of a large and enlightened man who was not averse even to the prosperity of an old enemy if it had declined to the point where it was no longer a threat to Rome.Both France and Great Britain probably had some reason to fear the strengthening of the other's navy and army.However, if the two countries envy each other's domestic prosperity, the intensive cultivation of the land, the development of manufactures, the prosperity of commerce, the safety and number of ports and bays, and the progress of all the arts and natural sciences, it will undoubtedly be detrimental to these two great nations. dignity.These are real advances for the world we live in.Mankind has benefited from these advances, and human nature has been ennobled by them.In such progress, each nation should not only try to outdo its neighbors, but, out of love for humanity, promote rather than hinder the progress of their neighbors.These advances are fitting objects of competition among nations, not of prejudice and envy.
Love of one's own country does not seem to spring from love of humanity.前一种感情完全不受后一种感情的支配，有时甚至似乎使我们的行动同后一种感情大相迳庭。或许法国的居民数等于大不列颠居民数的近三倍。因此，在人类这个大家庭中，法国的繁荣同英国的繁荣相比好像应当是一个更重要的目标。然而，大不列颠的国民因此在一切场合看重法国的繁荣而不看重英国的繁荣，不能认为是大不列颠的好公民。我们热爱自己的国家并不只是由于它是人类大家庭的一部分；我们热爱它是因为它是我们的祖国，而且这种热爱同前面的理由全然无关。设计出人类感情体系的那种智慧，同设计出天性的一切其它方面的体系的智慧一样，似乎已经断定：把每个人主要的注意力引向人类大家庭的一个特定部分——这个部分基本上处在个人的能力和理解力所及的范围之内——可以大大地促进人类大家庭的利益。
民族的偏见和仇恨很少能不影响到邻近的民族。我们或许怯懦而又愚蠢地把法国称为我们当然的敌人。法国或许也同样怯懦而又愚蠢地把我们看成是当然的敌人。法国和我们都不会对日本或中国的繁荣心怀妒忌。然而，我们也很少能卓有成效地运用我们对这些遥远国家的友好感情。
最广泛的公共善行——这是通常可以相当有效地实行的——是政治家们的善行。他们筹划和实现同邻国或距离不远的国家结成同盟，以保持所谓力量平衡， 或者在与其谈判的一些国家的范围内保持普遍的和平和安定。然而，政治家们谋划和执行这些条约，除了考虑各自国家的利益之外，很少会有任何其它目的。确实，有时他们的意图更为广些。阿沃（Avaux）伯爵，这个法国全权大使，在签订蒙斯特条约时，甘愿牺牲自己的生命（根据雷斯［Retz］红衣主教，一个不轻易相信他人品德的人的要求），以便通过签订条约恢复欧洲的普遍安定。威廉王似乎对欧洲大部分主权国家的自由和独立具有一种真正的热忱；或许这种热忱在很大程度上是由他对法国特有的嫌恶激发出来的，德国的自由和独立在威廉王时代大抵处于危险之中。同一种仇视法国的心情似乎部分地传到了安妮女王的首相身上。
每个独立的国家分成许多不同的阶层和社会团体，每个阶层和社会团体都有它自己特定的权力、特权和豁免权。每个人同自己的阶层或社会团体的关系自然比他同其他阶层或社会团体的关系更为密切。他自己的利益，他自己的声誉、以及他的许多朋友和同伴的利益和声誉，都在很大程度上同它人有关联。他雄心勃勃地扩展这个阶层或社会团体的特权和豁免权；他热诚地维护这些权益，防止它们受到其他阶层或社会团体的侵犯。
每个国家的所谓国体，取决于如何划分不同的阶层和社会团体，取决于在它们之间如何分配权力、特权和豁免权。
国体的稳定性，取决于每个阶层或社会团体维护自己的权力、特权和豁免权免受其他阶层侵犯的能力。无论什么时候，某个阶层的地位和状况比从前有所上升或下降，国体都必然会被或大或小地改变。
所有不同的阶层和社会团体都依靠国家，从国家那里得到安全和保护。每个阶层或社会团体中最有偏见的成员也承认如下的真理：各个社会阶层或等级都从属于国家，只是凭借国家的繁荣和生存，它们才有立足之地。然而，要使他相信， 国家的繁荣和生存需要减少他自己那个阶层或社会团体的权力、特权和豁免权， 往往难以做到。这种偏心，虽然有时可能是不正当的，但是也许不会因此而毫无用处。它抑制了创新精神，它倾向于保持这个国家划分出来的各个不同的阶层和社会团体之间任何已经确立的平衡；当它有时似乎阻碍了当时也许是时髦和流行的政治体制的变更时，它实际上促进了整个体制的巩固和稳定。
在一般情况下，对自己国家的热爱，似乎牵涉到两条不同的原则：第一，对实际上已经确立的政治体制的结构或组织的一定程度的尊重和尊敬；第二，尽可能使同胞们的处境趋于安全、体面和幸福这个诚挚的愿望。他不是一个不尊重法律和不服从行政官的公民；他肯定也不是一个不愿用自己力所能及的一切方法去增进全社会同胞们福利的循规蹈矩的公民。
在和平和安定的时期，这两个原则通常保持一致并引出同样的行为。支持现有的政治体制，显然是维持同胞们的安全、体面和幸福处境的最好的办法，如果我们看到这种政治体制实际上维护着同胞们的这种处境。但是，在公众们有不满情绪、发生派别纠纷和骚乱时，这两个不同的原则会引出不同的行为方式，即使是一个明智的人也会想到这种政治体制的结构和组织需要某些改革，就现状而言，它显然不能维持社会的安定。然而，在这种情况下，或许常常需要政治上的能人智士作出最大的努力去判断：一个真正的爱国者在什么时候应当维护和努力恢复旧体制的权威；什么时候应当顺从更大胆但也常常是危险的改革精神。
对外战争和国内的派别斗争，是能够为热心公益的精神提供极好的表现机会的两种环境。在对外战争中成功地为自己的祖国做出了贡献的英雄，满足了全民族的愿望，并因此而成为普遍感激和赞美的对象。进行国内派别斗争的各党派的领袖们虽然可能受到半数同胞的赞美，但常常被另一半同胞咒骂。他们的品质和各自行为的是非曲直，通常似乎是更不明确的。因此，从对外战争中获得的荣誉， 几乎总是比从国内派别斗争中得到的荣誉更为纯真和显著。
然而，取得政权的政党的领袖，如果他有足够的威信来劝导他的朋友们以适当的心情和稳健的态度（这是他自己常常没有的）来行事，他对自己国家做出的贡献，有时就可能比从对外战争中取得的辉煌胜利和范围极其广泛的征服更为实在和更为重要。他可以重新确定和改进国体，防范某个政党的领袖中那种很可疑和态度暧昧的人，他可以担当一个伟大国家的所有改革者和立法者中最优异和最卓越的人物；并且，用他的各种聪明的规定来保证自己的同胞们在国内得到好几个世代的安定和幸福。
在派别斗争的骚乱和混乱之中，某种体制的精髓容易与热心公益的精神混和，后者是以人类之爱，以对自己的一些同胞可能遭受的不便和痛苦产生的真正同情为基础的。这种体制的精髓通常倾向于那种更高尚的热心公益的精神，总是激励它，常常为它火上加油，甚至激励到狂热的程度。在野党的领袖们，常常会提出某种好像有道理的改革计划——他们自称这种计划不仅会消除不便和减轻一直在诉说的痛苦，而且可以防止同样的不便和痛苦在将来任何时候重现。为此， 他们常常提议改变国体，并且建议在某些最重要的方面更改政治体制，尽管在这种政体下，一个大帝国的臣民们已经连续好几个世纪享受着和平、安定甚至荣耀。
这个政党中的大部分成员，通常都陶醉于这种体制的虚构的完美，虽然他们并未亲身经历这种体制，但是，他们的领袖们用自己的辩才向他们进行描述时却给它涂上了极其眩目的色彩。对这些领袖本身来说，虽然他们的本意也许只是扩大自己的权势，但是他们中的许多人迟早会成为自己雄辩术的捉弄对象，并且同他们的极不中用和愚蠢的一些追随者一样，渴望这种宏伟的改革。即使这些政党领袖实际上像他们通常所做的那样，保持了清醒的头脑，没有盲从，他们也始终不敢使自己的追随者失望；而常常不得不在行动上做出他们是按照大家的共同幻想行事的样子，虽然这种行动同自己的原则和良心相违背。这种党派的狂热行为拒绝一切缓和手段、一切调和方法、一切合理的迁就通融，常常由于要求过高而一无所获；而稍加节制就大半可以消除和减轻的那些不便和痛苦，却完全没有缓解的希望了。
其热心公益的精神完全由人性和仁爱激发出来的那个人，会尊重已确立的权力、甚至个人的特权，更尊重这个国家划分出来的主要社会阶层和等级的权力和特权。虽然他会认为其中某些权力和特权在某种程度上被滥用了，他还是满足于调和那些不用强大的暴力便常常无法取消的权力和特权。当他不能用理性和劝说来克服人们根深蒂固的偏见时，他不想用强力去压服它们，而去虔诚地奉行西塞罗正确地认为是柏拉图的神圣的箴言的那句话：“同不用暴力对待你的父母一样， 决不用暴力对待你的国家。”他将尽可能使自己的政治计划适应于人们根深蒂固的习惯和偏见；并且，将尽可能消除也许来自人们不愿服从的那些法规的要求的不便之处。如果不能树立正确的东西，他就不会不屑于修正错误的东西；而当他不能建立最好的法律体系时，他将像梭伦那样尽力去建立人们所能接受的最好的法律体系。
相反，在政府中掌权的人，容易自以为非常聪明，并且常常对自己所想象的政治计划的那种虚构的完美迷恋不已，以致不能容忍它的任何一部分稍有偏差。
他不断全面地实施这个计划，并且在这个计划的各个部分中，对可能妨碍这个计划实施的重大利益或强烈偏见不作任何考虑。他似乎认为他能够像用手摆布一副棋盘中的各个棋子那样非常容易地摆布若大一个社会中的各个成员；他并没有考虑到：棋盘上的棋子除了手摆布时的作用之外，不存在别的行动原则；但是，在人类社会这个大棋盘上每个棋子都有它自己的行动原则，它完全不同于立法机关可能选用来指导它的那种行动原则。如果这两种原则一致、行动方向也相同，人类社会这盘棋就可以顺利和谐地走下去，并且很可能是巧妙的和结局良好的。如果这两种原则彼此抵触或不一致，这盘棋就会下得很艰苦，而人类社会必然时刻处在高度的混乱之中。
某种一般的甚至是有系统的有关政策和法律的完整的设想，对于指导政治家持何见解很可能是必要的。但是坚决要求实现这个设想所要求做到的一切，甚至要求一切都马上实现，而无视所有的反对意见，必然常常是蛮横无理的。这里想使他自己的判断成为辨别正确和错误的最高标准。这使他幻想自己成为全体国民中唯一有智慧和杰出的人物，幻想同胞们迁就他，而不是他去适应同胞们的要求。
因此，在所有搞政治投机的人中，握有最高权力的君主们是最危险的。这种蛮横无理在他们身上屡见不鲜，他们不容置疑地认为自己的判断远比别人正确。因此， 当这些至高无上的皇家改革者们屈尊考虑受其统治的国家的组成情况时，他们看到的最不合心意的东西，便是有可能妨碍其意志贯彻执行的障碍。他们轻视柏拉图的神圣箴言，并且认为国家是为他们而设的，而不是他们自己是为国家而设的。
因此，他们的改革的伟大目标是：消除那些障碍；缩小贵族的权力；剥夺各城市和省份的特权；使这个国家地位极高的个人和最高阶层的人士成为像最软弱和最微不足道的人那样的无力反对他们统治的人。
第三章论普施万物的善行虽然我们有效的善良行为很少能超出自己国家的社会范围，我们的好意却没有什么界限，而可以遍及茫茫世界上的一切生物。我们想象不出有任何单纯而有知觉的生物，对他们的幸福，我们不衷心企盼，对他们的不幸当我们设身处地想象这种不幸时，我们不感到某种程度的厌恶。而想到有害的（虽然是有知觉的） 生物，则自然而然地会激起我们的憎恨；但在这种情况下，我们对它怀有的恶意实际上是我们普施万物的仁慈所起的作用。这是我们对另外一些单纯而有知觉的生物——它们的幸福为它的恶意所妨害——身上的不幸和怨恨感到同情的结果。
这种普施万物的善行，无论它如何高尚和慷慨，对任何这样的人来说——他并不完全相信：世界上所有的居民，无论是最卑贱的还是最高贵的，都处于那个伟大、仁慈以及大智大慧的神的直接关怀和保护之下，这个神指导着人类本性的全部行为；而且，其本身不能改变的美德使他注意每时每刻在其行动中给人们带来尽可能大的幸福——只能是不可靠的幸福的源泉。相反，对这种普施万物的善行来说，他这种对于一个无人主宰的世界的猜疑，必然是所有感想中最令人伤感的；因为他想到在无限的、广大的无边的空间中人所未知的地方除了充满着无穷的苦难和不幸以外什么也没有。一切极端幸运的灿烂光辉，决不能驱散阴影，从而上述十分可怕的悲观想法必然使想象出来的事物黯然失色；所有最折磨人的不幸所产生的忧伤，也不能在一个有智慧和有美德的人身上，消除他的愉快情绪— —他之所以有这种愉快情绪肯定是由于他习惯性地完全相信与上述悲观看法相反的看法的真实性。
有智慧和有美德的人乐意在一切时候为了他那阶层或社会团体的公共利益而牺牲自己的私人利益。他也愿意在一切时候，为了国家或君权更大的利益，而牺牲自己所属阶层或社会团体的局部利益。然而，他得同样乐意为了全世界更大的利益，为了一切有知觉和有理智的生物——上帝本身是这些生物的直接主管和指导者——这个更大的社会的利益，去牺牲上述一切次要的利益。如果他出于习惯和虔诚的信念而深切地感到，这个仁慈和具有无上智慧的神，不会把对普天下的幸福来说是没有必要的局部的邪恶纳入他所管理的范围，那么，他就必须把可能落到自己身上、朋友身上、他那社会团体身上或者他那国家身上的一切灾难， 看成是世界的繁荣所必需的，从而认为它们不仅是自己应当甘受的灾难，而且是——如果他知道事物之间的一切联系和依赖关系——他自己应当由衷地和虔诚地愿意承受的灾难。
对于宇宙伟大主宰意志的这种高尚的顺从，看来也没有超出人类天性所能接受的范围。热爱和信赖自己的将军的优秀军人们，开往他们毫无生还希望的作战地点，常常比开往没有困难和危险的地方，更为乐意和欣然从命。在向后一地方行军的途中，他们所能产生的情感只是单调沉闷的平常的责任感；在向前一地方行军的途中，他们感到自己正在作出人类所能作出的最高尚的努力。他们知道， 如果不是为军队的安全和战争的胜利所必需，他们的将军不会命令他们开往这个地点。他们心甘情愿地为了一个很大的机体的幸福而牺牲自己微不足道的血肉之躯。他们深情地告别了自己的同伴，祝愿他们幸福和成功，并且不仅是俯首帖耳地从命，而且常常是满怀喜悦地欢呼着出发，前往指定的那个必死无疑但是壮丽而光荣的作战地点。任何一支军队的指挥者，都不能得到比宇宙的这个最大的管理者所得到的更为充分的信任、更为强烈和狂热的爱戴。无论对于最重大的国家的灾祸还是个人的灾难，一个有理智的人都应当这样考虑：他自己、他的朋友们和同胞们不过是奉宇宙的最大管理者之命前往世上这个凄惨的场所；如果这对整个世界的幸福来说不是必要的，他们就不会接到这样的命令；他们的责任是，不仅要乖乖地顺从这种指派，而且要尽力怀着乐意和愉快的心情来接受它。一个有理智的人，确实应当能够做一个优秀的军人时刻准备去做的事情。
亘古以来，以其仁慈和智慧设计和制造出宇宙这架大机器，以便不断地产生尽可能大的幸福的那个神的意念，当然是人类极其崇敬地思索的全部对象。同这种思索相比，所有其它的想法必然显得平庸。我们相信，倾注心力作这种崇高的思索的人，很少不成为我们极为尊敬的对象；并且虽然他的一生都用来作这种思索，但是，我们所怀有的对他的虔诚的敬意，常常比我们看待国家最勤勉和最有益的官员时所怀有的敬意更进一步。马库斯安东尼努斯主要针对这个问题所作的冥想，其使他的品质得到的赞美，或许比他公正、温和和仁慈的统治期间处理的一切事务所得到的更为广泛。
然而，对宇宙这个巨大的机体的管理，对一切有理智和有知觉的生物的普遍幸福的关怀，是神的职责，而不是人的职责、人们对他自己的幸福、对他的家庭、 朋友和国家的幸福的关心，被指定在一个很小的范围之内，但是，这却是一个更适于他那绵薄之力、也更适合于他那狭小的理解力的范围。他忙于思考更为高尚的事情，决不能成为他忽略较小事情的理由；而且，他必须不使自己受到这样一种指责，据说这是阿维犹乌斯卡修斯用来反对马库斯安东尼努斯的或许是不公正的指责：在他忙于哲学推理和思考整个世界的繁荣昌盛时，他忽略了罗马帝国的繁荣昌盛。爱默想的哲学家的最高尚的思考，几乎不能补偿对眼前最小责任的忽略。