Is The Use Of Sentiments In David Hume's Moral Argument

There has been a dispute in philosophy for centuries now, over morals and what drives human beings to act upon them. David Hume’s, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, discuses his ideas of how reasoning and sentiment play their role in mankind’s motivation. Though he agrees both sides have extremely sound arguments, Hume believes one has a larger influence over the other. He does this by analyzing mental qualities; also know as personal merit, discussing the importance of benevolence, utility, and justice. Through this, Hume is able to argue his philosophy of moral sentimentalism.

After Hume disregards the opponents who refute the existence of moral distinction, he goes to the big question. Is it reason, or sentiment that drives

He has a very clever way of determining whether a personal merit to be desired or not. If one is alleged, by another, to have a certain quality, is that person a friend, or an enemy? With the way language is set up it is particularly easy to make the judgment through sentiment. Hume states “…and as every tongue possesses one set of words which are taken in a good sense, and another in the opposite, the least acquaintance with the idiom suffices…”(Hume, 3) leaving no necessity for reasoning. Reasoning comes into play when looking at both sides, the admirable virtues, and the detestable vices. This is where you build your ethical base and can start forming universal principles.

Hume’s analysis on personal merit allows you to look at it from a whole different perspective. His experimental method pulls from actual experiences, and helps you compare them to one another. When looking at it from an abstract, where you branch out from one idea and end up with multiple conclusions, you cannot get an accurate representation. It often leaves out the factor of human nature, which has a considerable influence on

Hume explains, the labels that go a long with the praise, kind, generous, gracious, etc. bring the highest merit to whom it is directed towards. These social virtues are important for the ordinary man, who does not have as much to offer, because he will always be looked fondly upon when preforming them. For someone who is born into the status or has power, has, what may seem like, unwarranted success may bring resentment from the public. Though this can change to praise, if they use their inherited status for virtuous acts. For example, Hume shared the story of Pericles, an Athenian statesman and general. While on his deathbed, his friends reminisced on all his success and trophies built in his honor. Pericles, however, reminded them they had forgotten the most important part, that no citizens had felt anguish because of him. That is the reason he was motivated to do all the great things. Not for the recognition, but for the sentiment of being virtuous.

When a man is beneficent, everyone benefits, according to Hume. “Like the sun, an inferior minister of providence, he cheers, invigorates, and sustains the surrounding world.”(Hume, 5) The beneficent man cares for everyone, which then his influence can grow and reach others. Whether he is confined to a small area and holds the highest of status, all of mankind with feel