The Ethics

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19

XXXII. Regret is the desire or appetite to possess something,
kept alive by the remembrance of the said thing, and at the same
time constrained by the remembrance of other things which exclude
the existence of it.
Explanation-When we remember a thing, we are by that very
fact, as I have already said more than once, disposed to
contemplate it with the same emotion as if it were something
present ; but this disposition or endeavour, while we are awake,
is generally checked by the images of things which exclude the
existence of that which we remember. Thus when we remember
something which affected us with a certain pleasure, we by that
very fact endeavour to regard it with the same emotion of
pleasure as though it were present, but this endeavour is at once
checked by the remembrance of things which exclude the existence
of the thing in question. Wherefore regret is, strictly
speaking, a pain opposed to that of pleasure, which arises from
the absence of something we hate (cf. III. xlvii. note). But, as
the name regret seems to refer to desire, I set this emotion
down, among the emotions springing from desire.

XXXIII. Emulation is the desire of something, engendered in us
by our conception that others have the same desire.
Explanation-He who runs away, because he sees others running
away, or he who fears, because he sees others in fear ; or again,
he who, on seeing that another man has burnt his hand, draws
towards him his own hand, and moves his body as though his own
were burnt ; such an one can be said to imitate another's
emotion, but not to emulate him ; not because the causes of
emulation and imitation are different, but because it has become
customary to speak of emulation only in him, who imitates that
which we deem to be honourable, useful, or pleasant. As to the
cause of emulation, cf. III. xxvii. and note. The reason why
this emotion is generally coupled with envy may be seen from III.
xxxii. and note.

XXXIV. Thankfulness or Gratitude is the desire or zeal springing
from love, whereby we endeavour to benefit him, who with similar
feelings of love has conferred a benefit on us. Cf. III. xxxix.
note and xl.

XXXV. Benevolence is the desire of benefiting one whom we pity.
Cf. III. xxvii. note.

XXXVI. Anger is the desire, whereby through hatred we are
induced to injure one whom we hate, III. xxxix.

XXXVII. Revenge is the desire whereby we are induced, through
mutual hatred, to injure one who, with similar feelings, has
injured us. (See III. xl. Coroll. ii and note.)

XXXVIII. Cruelty or savageness is the desire, whereby a man is
impelled to injure one whom we love or pity.
Explanation-To cruelty is opposed clemency, which is not a
passive state of the mind, but a power whereby man restrains his
anger and revenge.

XXXIX. Timidity is the desire to avoid a greater evil, which we
dread, by undergoing a lesser evil. Cf. III. xxxix. note.

XL. Daring is the desire, whereby a man is set on to do
something dangerous which his equals fear to attempt.

XLI. Cowardice is attributed to one, whose desire is checked by
the fear of some danger which his equals dare to encounter.
Explanation-Cowardice is, therefore, nothing else but the
fear of some evil, which most men are wont not to fear ; hence I
do not reckon it among the emotions springing from desire.
Nevertheless, I have chosen to explain it here, because, in so
far as we look to the desire, it is truly opposed to the emotion
of daring.

XLII. Consternation is attributed to one, whose desire of
avoiding evil is checked by amazement at the evil which he fears.
Explanation-Consternation is, therefore, a species of
cowardice. But, inasmuch as consternation arises from a double
fear, it may be more conveniently defined as a fear which keeps a
man so bewildered and wavering, that he is not able to remove the
evil. I say bewildered, in so far as we understand his desire of
removing the evil to be constrained by his amazement. I say
wavering, in so far as we understand the said desire to be
constrained by the fear of another evil, which equally torments
him : whence it comes to pass that he knows not, which he may
avert of the two. On this subject, see III. xxxix. note, and
III. lii. note. Concerning cowardice and daring, see III. li.
note.

XLIII. Courtesy, or deference (Humanitas seu modestia), is the
desire of acting in a way that should please men, and refraining
from that which should displease them.

XLIV. Ambition is the immoderate desire of power.
Explanation-Ambition is the desire, whereby all the emotions
(cf. III. xxvii. and xxxi.) are fostered and strengthened ;
therefore this emotion can with difficulty be overcome. For, so
long as a man is bound by any desire, he is at the same time
necessarily bound by this. "The best men," says Cicero, "are
especially led by honour. Even philosophers, when they write a
book contemning honour, sign their names thereto," and so on.

XLV. Luxury is excessive desire, or even love of living
sumptuously.

XLVI. Intemperance is the excessive desire and love of drinking.

XLVII. Avarice is the excessive desire and love of riches.

XLVIII. Lust is desire and love in the matter of sexual
intercourse.
Explanation-Whether this desire be excessive or not, it is
still called lust. These last five emotions (as I have shown in
III. lvi.) have on contraries. For deference is a species of
ambition. Cf. III. xxix. note.
Again, I have already pointed out, that temperance, sobriety,
and chastity indicate rather a power than a passivity of the
mind. It may, nevertheless, happen, that an avaricious, an
ambitious, or a timid man may abstain from excess in eating,
drinking, or sexual indulgence, yet avarice, ambition, and fear
are not contraries to luxury, drunkenness, and debauchery. For
an avaricious man often is glad to gorge himself with food and
drink at another man's expense. An ambitious man will restrain
himself in nothing, so long as he thinks his indulgences are
secret ; and if he lives among drunkards and debauchees, he will,
from the mere fact of being ambitious, be more prone to those
vices. Lastly, a timid man does that which he would not. For
though an avaricious man should, for the sake of avoiding death,
cast his riches into the sea, he will none the less remain
avaricious ; so, also, if a lustful man is downcast, because he
cannot follow his bent, he does not, on the ground of abstention,
cease to be lustful. In fact, these emotions are not so much
concerned with the actual feasting, drinking, &c., as with the
appetite and love of such. Nothing, therefore, can be opposed to
these emotions, but high-mindedness and valour, whereof I will
speak presently.
The definitions of jealousy and other waverings of the mind I
pass over in silence, first, because they arise from the
compounding of the emotions already described ; secondly, because
many of them have no distinctive names, which shows that it is
sufficient for practical purposes to have merely a general
knowledge of them. However, it is established from the
definitions of the emotions, which we have set forth, that they
all spring from desire, pleasure, or pain, or, rather, that there
is nothing besides these three ; wherefore each is wont to be
called by a variety of names in accordance with its various
relations and extrinsic tokens. If we now direct our attention
to these primitive emotions, and to what has been said concerning
the nature of the mind, we shall be able thus to define the
emotions, in so far as they are referred to the mind only.

GENERAL DEFINITION OF THE EMOTIONS

Emotion, which is called a passivity of the soul, is a
confused idea, whereby the mind affirms concerning its body, or
any part thereof, a force for existence (existendi vis) greater
or less than before, and by the presence of which the mind is
determined to think of one thing rather than another.
Explanation-I say, first, that emotion or passion of the soul
is a confused idea. For we have shown that the mind is only
passive, in so far as it has inadequate or confused ideas. (III.
iii.) I say, further, whereby the mind affirms concerning its
body or any part thereof a force for existence greater than
before. For all the ideas of bodies, which we possess, denote
rather the actual disposition of our own body (II. xvi. Coroll.
ii.) than the nature of an external body. But the idea which
constitutes the reality of an emotion must denote or express the
disposition of the body, or of some part thereof, because its
power of action or force for existence is increased or
diminished, helped or hindered. But it must be noted that, when
I say a greater or less force for existence than before, I do not
mean that the mind compares the present with the past disposition
of the body, but that the idea which constitutes the reality of
an emotion affirms something of the body, which, in fact,
involves more or less of reality than before.
And inasmuch as the essence of mind consists in the fact (II.
xi., xiii.), that it affirms the actual existence of its own
body, and inasmuch as we understand by perfection the very
essence of a thing, it follows that the mind passes to greater or
less perfection, when it happens to affirm concerning its own
body, or any part thereof, something involving more or less
reality than before.
When, therefore, I said above that the power of the mind is
increased or diminished, I merely meant that the mind had formed
of its own body, or of some part thereof, an idea involving more
or less of reality, than it had already affirmed concerning its
own body. For the excellence of ideas, and the actual power of
thinking are measured by the excellence of the object. Lastly, I
have added by the presence of which the mind is determined to
think of one thing rather than another, so that, besides the
nature of pleasure and pain, which the first part of the
definition explains, I might also express the nature of desire.

PART IV :
Of Human Bondage, or the Strength of the Emotions

PREFACE

Human infirmity in moderating and checking the emotions I
name bondage : for, when a man is a prey to his emotions, he is
not his own master, but lies at the mercy of fortune : so much
so, that he is often compelled, while seeing that which is better
for him, to follow that which is worse. Why this is so, and what
is good or evil in the emotions, I propose to show in this part
of my treatise. But, before I begin, it would be well to make a
few prefatory observations on perfection and imperfection, good
and evil.
When a man has purposed to make a given thing, and has
brought it to perfection, his work will be pronounced perfect,
not only by himself, but by everyone who rightly knows, or thinks
that he knows, the intention and aim of its author. For
instance, suppose anyone sees a work (which I assume to be not
yet completed), and knows that the aim of the author of that work
is to build a house, he will call the work imperfect ; he will,
on the other hand, call it perfect, as soon as he sees that it is
carried through to the end, which its author had purposed for it.
But if a man sees a work, the like whereof he has never seen
before, and if he knows not the intention of the artificer, he
plainly cannot know, whether that work be perfect or imperfect.
Such seems to be the primary meaning of these terms.
But, after men began to form general ideas, to think out
types of houses, buildings, towers, &c., and to prefer certain
types to others, it came about, that each man called perfect that
which he saw agree with the general idea he had formed of the
thing in question, and called imperfect that which he saw agree
less with his own preconceived type, even though it had evidently
been completed in accordance with the idea of its artificer.
This seems to be the only reason for calling natural phenomena,
which, indeed, are not made with human hands, perfect or
imperfect : for men are wont to form general ideas of things
natural, no less than of things artificial, and such ideas they
hold as types, believing that Nature (who they think does nothing
without an object) has them in view, and has set them as types
before herself. Therefore, when they behold something in Nature,
which does not wholly conform to the preconceived type which they
have formed of the thing in question, they say that Nature has
fallen short or has blundered, and has left her work incomplete.
Thus we see that men are wont to style natural phenomena perfect
or imperfect rather from their own prejudices, than from true
knowledge of what they pronounce upon.
Now we showed in the Appendix to Part I., that Nature does
not work with an end in view. For the eternal and infinite
Being, which we call God or Nature, acts by the same necessity as
that whereby it exists. For we have shown, that by the same
necessity of its nature, whereby it exists, it likewise works (I.
xvi.). The reason or cause why God or Nature exists, and the
reason why he acts, are one and the same. Therefore, as he does
not exist for the sake of an end, so neither does he act for the
sake of an end ; of his existence and of his action there is
neither origin nor end. Wherefore, a cause which is called final
is nothing else but human desire, in so far as it is considered
as the origin or cause of anything. For example, when we say
that to be inhabited is the final cause of this or that house, we
mean nothing more than that a man, conceiving the conveniences of
household life, had a desire to build a house. Wherefore, the
being inhabited, in so far as it is regarded as a final cause, is
nothing else but this particular desire, which is really the
efficient cause ; it is regarded as the primary cause, because
men are generally ignorant of the causes of their desires. They
are, as I have often said already, conscious of their own actions
and appetites, but ignorant of the causes whereby they are
determined to any particular desire. Therefore, the common
saying that Nature sometimes falls short, or blunders, and
produces things which are imperfect, I set down among the glosses
treated of in the Appendix to Part I. Perfection and
imperfection, then, are in reality merely modes of thinking, or
notions which we form from a comparison among one another of
individuals of the same species ; hence I said above (II. Def.
vi.), that by reality and perfection I mean the same thing. For
we are wont to refer all the individual things in nature to one
genus, which is called the highest genus, namely, to the category
of Being, whereto absolutely all individuals in nature belong.
Thus, in so far as we refer the individuals in nature to this
category, and comparing them one with another, find that some
possess more of being or reality than others, we, to this extent,
say that some are more perfect than others. Again, in so far as
we attribute to them anything implying negation-as term, end,
infirmity, etc., we, to this extent, call them imperfect, because
they do not affect our mind so much as the things which we call
perfect, not because they have any intrinsic deficiency, or
because Nature has blundered. For nothing lies within the scope
of a thing's nature, save that which follows from the necessity
of the nature of its efficient cause, and whatsoever follows from
the necessity of the nature of its efficient cause necessarily
comes to pass.
As for the terms good and bad, they indicate no positive
quality in things regarded in themselves, but are merely modes of
thinking, or notions which we form from the comparison of things
one with another. Thus one and the same thing can be at the same
time good, bad, and indifferent. For instance, music is good for
him that is melancholy, bad for him that mourns ; for him that is
deaf, it is neither good nor bad.
Nevertheless, though this be so, the terms should still be
retained. For, inasmuch as we desire to form an idea of man as a
type of human nature which we may hold in view, it will be useful
for us to retain the terms in question, in the sense I have
indicated.
In what follows, then, I shall mean by, "good" that, which we
certainly know to be a means of approaching more nearly to the
type of human nature, which we have set before ourselves ; by
"bad," that which we certainly know to be a hindrance to us in
approaching the said type. Again, we shall that men are more
perfect, or more imperfect, in proportion as they approach more
or less nearly to the said type. For it must be specially
remarked that, when I say that a man passes from a lesser to a
greater perfection, or vice versâ, I do not mean that he is
changed from one essence or reality to another ; for instance, a
horse would be as completely destroyed by being changed into a
man, as by being changed into an insect. What I mean is, that we
conceive the thing's power of action, in so far as this is
understood by its nature, to be increased or diminished. Lastly,
by perfection in general I shall, as I have said, mean reality-in
other words, each thing's essence, in so far as it exists, and
operates in a particular manner, and without paying any regard to
its duration. For no given thing can be said to be more perfect,
because it has passed a longer time in existence. The duration
of things cannot be determined by their essence, for the essence
of things involves no fixed and definite period of existence ;
but everything, whether it be more perfect or less perfect, will
always be able to persist in existence with the same force
wherewith it began to exist ; wherefore, in this respect, all
things are equal.

DEFINITIONS.

I. By good I mean that which we certainly know to be useful to
us.

II. By evil I mean that which we certainly know to be a
hindrance
to us in the attainment of any good.
(Concerning these terms see the foregoing preface towards the
end.)

III. Particular things I call contingent in so far as, while
regarding their essence only, we find nothing therein, which
necessarily asserts their existence or excludes it.

IV. Particular things I call possible in so far as, while
regarding the causes whereby they must be produced, we know not,
whether such causes be determined for producing them.
(In I. xxxiii. note. i., I drew no distinction between
possible and contingent, because there was in that place no need
to distinguish them accurately.)

V. By conflicting emotions I mean those which draw a man in
different directions, though they are of the same kind, such as
luxury and avarice, which are both species of love, and are
contraries, not by nature, but by accident.

VI. What I mean by emotion felt towards a thing, future,
present, and past, I explained in III. xviii., notes. i. and ii.,
which see.
(But I should here also remark, that we can only distinctly
conceive distance of space or time up to a certain definite limit
; that is, all objects distant from us more than two hundred
feet, or whose distance from the place where we are exceeds that
which we can distinctly conceive, seem to be an equal distance
from us, and all in the same plane ; so also objects, whose time
of existing is conceived as removed from the present by a longer
interval than we can distinctly conceive, seem to be all equally
distant from the present, and are set down, as it were, to the
same moment of time.)

VII. By an end, for the sake of which we do something, I mean a
desire.

VIII. By virtue (virtus) and power I mean the same thing ; that
is (III. vii), virtue, in so far as it is referred to man, is a
man's nature or essence, in so far as it has the power of
effecting what can only be understood by the laws of that nature.

AXIOM.

There is no individual thing in nature, than which there is
not another more powerful and strong. Whatsoever thing be given,
there is something stronger whereby it can be destroyed.

PROPOSITIONS.

PROP. I. No positive quality possessed by a false idea is
removed by the presence of what is true, in virtue of its being
true.
Proof.-Falsity consists solely in the privation of knowledge
which inadequate ideas involve (II. xxxv.), nor have they any
positive quality on account of which they are called false (II.
xxxiii.) ; contrariwise, in so far as they are referred to God,
they are true (II. xxxii.). Wherefore, if the positive quality
possessed by a false idea were removed by the presence of what is
true, in virtue of its being true, a true idea would then be
removed by itself, which (IV. iii.) is absurd. Therefore, no
positive quality possessed by a false idea, &c. Q.E.D.
Note.-This proposition is more clearly understood from II.
xvi. Coroll. ii. For imagination is an idea, which indicates
rather the present disposition of the human body than the nature
of the external body ; not indeed distinctly, but confusedly ;
whence it comes to pass, that the mind is said to err. For
instance, when we look at the sun, we conceive that it is distant
from us about two hundred feet ; in this judgment we err, so long
as we are in ignorance of its true distance ; when its true
distance is known, the error is removed, but not the imagination
; or, in other words, the idea of the sun, which only explains
tho nature of that luminary, in so far as the body is affected
thereby : wherefore, though we know the real distance, we shall
still nevertheless imagine the sun to be near us. For, as we
said in II. xxxv. note, we do not imagine the sun to be so near
us, because we are ignorant of its true distance, but because the
mind conceives the magnitude of the sun to the extent that the
body is affected thereby. Thus, when the rays of the sun falling
on the surface of water are reflected into our eyes, we imagine
the sun as if it were in the water, though we are aware of its
real position ; and similarly other imaginations, wherein the
mind is deceived, whether they indicate the natural disposition
of the body, or that its power of activity is increased or
diminished, are not contrary to the truth, and do not vanish at
its presence. It happens indeed that, when we mistakenly fear an
evil, the fear vanishes when we hear the true tidings ; but the
contrary also happens, namely, that we fear an evil which will
certainly come, and our fear vanishes when we hear false tidings
; thus imaginations do not vanish at the presence of the truth,
in virtue of its being true, but because other imaginations,
stronger than the first, supervene and exclude the present
existence of that which we imagined, as I have shown in II. xvii.

PROP. II. We are only passive, in so far as we are apart of
Nature, which cannot be conceived by itself without other parts.
Proof.-We are said to be passive, when something arises in
us, whereof we are only a partial cause (III. Def. ii.), that is
(III. Def. i.), something which cannot be deduced solely from the
laws of our nature. We are passive therefore, in so far as we
are a part of Nature, which cannot be conceived by itself without
other parts. Q.E.D.

PROP. III. The force whereby a man persists in existing is
limited, and is infinitely surpassed by the power of external
causes.
Proof.-This is evident from the axiom of this part. For,
when man is given, there is something else-say A-more powerful ;
when A is given, there is something else-say B-more powerful than
A, and so on to infinity ; thus the power of man is limited by
the power of some other thing, and is infinitely surpassed by the
power of external causes. Q.E.D.

PROP. IV. It is impossible, that man should not be a part of
Nature, or that he should be capable of undergoing no changes,
save such as can be understood through his nature only as their
adequate cause.
Proof.-The power, whereby each particular thing, and
consequently man, preserves his being, is the power of God or of
Nature (I. xxiv. Coroll.) ; not in so far as it is infinite, but
in so far as it can be explained by the actual human essence
(III. vii.). Thus the power of man, in so far as it is explained
through his own actual essence, is a part of the infinite power
of God or Nature, in other words, of the essence thereof (I.
xxxiv.). This was our first point. Again, if it were possible,
that man should undergo no changes save such as can be understood
solely through the nature of man, it would follow that he would
not be able to die, but would always necessarily exist ; this
would be the necessary consequence of a cause whose power was
either finite or infinite ; namely, either of man's power only,
inasmuch as he would be capable of removing from himself all
changes which could spring from external causes ; or of the
infinite power of Nature, whereby all individual things would be
so ordered, that man should be incapable of undergoing any
changes save such as tended towards his own preservation. But
the first alternative is absurd (by the last Prop., the proof of
which is universal, and can be applied to all individual things).
Therefore, if it be possible, that man should not be capable of
undergoing any changes, save such as can be explained solely
through his own nature, and consequently that he must always (as
we have shown) necessarily exist ; such a result must follow from
the infinite power of God, and consequently (I. xvi.) from the
necessity of the divine nature, in so far as it is regarded as
affected by the idea of any given man, the whole order of nature
as conceived under the attributes of extension and thought must
be deducible. It would therefore follow (I. xxi.) that man is
infinite, which (by the first part of this proof) is absurd. It
is, therefore, impossible, that man should not undergo any
changes save those whereof he is the adequate cause. Q.E.D.
Corollary.-Hence it follows, that man is necessarily always a
prey to his passions, that he follows and obeys the general order
of nature, and that he accommodates himself thereto, as much as
the nature of things demands.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19