CHAPTER IV SELF-REALIZATION AND THE MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
1. The Motive of Good Conduct.--2. The Egoistic Motive: Self-Interest.--3. Inadequacy of the Egoistic Motive.--4. The Altruistic Motive: Sympathy.--5. Inadequacy of the Altruistic Motive.--6. The Religious Motive.--7. Self-Realization as the Motive of Good Conduct.--8. Self-Respect.--9. Philanthropy.--10. Reverence.--11. Mixed Motives.
1. The Motive of Good Conduct.
The motive of conduct has been defined as that idea which as an end attracts the self to action in its pursuit. The motive of good conduct is, of course, the idea of the Good. The Good is now understood to be Self-realization. We have in the present chapter then to consider the adequacy and efficacy of Self-realization as the motive of good conduct. There are many motives which actually impel men to action, varying in comprehensiveness and power from the particular object of the individual's momentary desire to the great cause which commands the devotion of tens of thousands in successive generations. Among these different motives three ,,tat-id out as predominant in the influence they exert upon human conduct. They are-love of self, sympathy for others, and fear of God. It will be found helpful to discuss these leading motives singly-first, the egoistic or self-interest; second, the altruistic or sympathy; third, the religious, or reverence: and then to consider Self-realization in the capacity of motive, as related to each of these three. Thus we may hope to gain a true idea of the potency of Self-realization as an impelling principle in the conduct of men.
261 THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
262
2. The Egoistic Motive: Self-Interest.
Certainly the love of self, or “self-interest,” is a controlling force in human life and affairs. So important a part does it play that many moralists have regarded it as the sole motive actuating man's conduct. “Of all the voluntary acts of man the object is some good to himself,”1 says Hobbes, and by this he means that man seeks his own pleasure and that only, in all that he does. Accordingly, Hobbes and the school of Egoistic Utilitarians which he founded sought to explain all the actions of men--even those which appear most unselfish, or, it may be, self-sacrificing-as expressions of self-interest. “Pity,” says the philosopher in question, “is imagination or fiction of future calamity to ourselves, proceeding from the sense of another man's calamity.”2 Charity or good-will, he thus explains: “There can be no greater argument to a man of his own power, than to find himself able not only to accomplish his own desires but also to assist other men in theirs: and this charity.”3 Reverence is also interpreted in terms of self-interest as “The conception we have concerning another, that he hath the power to do unto us both good and hurt.”4Thus to resolve all the springs of human action into forms of self-interest seems to present thought a gross exaggeration of the importance of this motive and a perversion of the plain facts of moral experience. Indeed some students of morality today not merely deny that self-interest is the sole motive but question whether it is even an important motive in the conduct of man. These thinkers maintain that a true psychology of action shows that the human will is directed primarily upon external objects and not upon subjective states, such
1 HOBBES: Leviathan, Part 1, Chap. XIV.
2 HOBBES: Human Nature, Chap. IX, § 10.
3 Ibid., § 17.
4 Op. cit., Chap. VIII, § 7.
SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
263
as the pleasure or comfort of the self.,, Thus the man whose conduct appears most selfish is probably moved by the idea of food or of drink, of the most comfortable seat or the finest view, rather than by any idea of his own pleasure. Now it is undoubtedly true that the human will is first attracted by such external objects as promise to satisfy its natural desires. But it is also a fact that the instinct of self-preservation leads man to seek to prolong and to renew pleasant experiences, and to curtail and to avoid those that are painful. Hence objects which experience shows will yield pleasure are sought as pleasurable, while those that have been found to bring pain are avoided as painful. Thus far the facts can scarcely be disputed. When we consider next that self-consciousness develops in due time, bringing with it a recognition of individuality in its exclusive character, we see how the motive of self-interest takes form and acquires great power as a spring of action. In this motive, the idea which impels the individual to act is not that of his own pleasure in the abstract, but rather the idea of some object or objects, attractive because known to be a source of individual enjoyment. The man whose conduct is actuated entirely by self-interest is not wholly absorbed in increasing his own pleasure, thought of as a subjective or psychological state. Such a character scarcely exists outside the books of ethical theorists. But love of self is a leading motive in human conduct, nevertheless; and some men's lives seem completely dominated by it. What such individuals seek is money, or land, or power, or some other object, which they imagine themselves as enjoying. Thus the moving-spring of their action may with truth be said to be their own enjoyment or comfort. We may therefore accept Sidgwick's statement, as correct in substance at least, when he says that the object of self-love is “the kind of feeling we call pleasure taken in its
5 DEWEY AND TUFTS: Ethics, p. 379.
THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
264
widest sense and including every species of delight, enjoyment, and satisfaction, except in so far as any particular species may be excluded by its incompatibility with some other greater pleasures.”6 The object with which the anticipated enjoyment is identified may be a material one, or it may be the ideal object of some spiritual capacity, such as the discovery of truth in the intellectual, or the attainment of beauty in the aesthetic, sphere. In such case, however, the ideal object is sought by the individual merely as a means to his own enjoyment; and, since the ability of such larger ends to yield pleasure in their attainment is less obvious and certain, self-interest usually prompts to the pursuit of , the narrower objects of natural desire. Aristotle recognizes that two meanings are given to the term self-love-the word in its more restricted and also more common signification being properly applied to “people who assign themselves a larger share of money, honors, and bodily pleasures, tha`âlongs to them.” 7 When the motive of self-interest is defined as the appeal which the idea of his own comfort and pleasure makes to the human individual, few indeed will deny its power and efficacy as a dynamic in the field of conduct. While the statements of those moralists who explain all the deeds of men as due to the working of self-interest are justly condemned as cynical and exaggerated, still their general plausibility and partial truth bear witness to the extensive influence of this motive. When joined with an intelligence that foresees consequences and understands the larger relationships of human life, it is capable of imposing a thorough and far-reaching regulation upon the conduct of man. Self-interest enjoins strict temperance upon the man who foresees the injurious consequences of excess. Comparatively
6 SIDGWICK: Method of Ethics, P. 88.
7 ARISTOTLE: Nicomachean Ethics, Bk. IX, Chap. VIII (Welldon's trans., p. 300).
SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
265
little knowledge is required to show the individual that since his own security and comfort are dependent upon the maintenance of the social and political orders, it is for his interest to support their authority. The lesson that honesty (at least in the sense of an outward observance of others' property-rights) is the best policy, is easily learned. Thus love of self becomes a great conserving agency in human society which no ethical theory can afford to neglect, making for steadiness of purpose in the individual and stability in society. Not confining ourselves to the positive contributions to social welfare which an enlightened self-interest will prompt, we may notice further the benefits which accrue to society incidentally from the operation of this motive, even when the thought of the individual is altogether concerned with his own enjoyment. The man who is impelled by love of self to preserve his bodily vigor and mental capacity while accumulating sufficient property to provide for himself during his old age, at least relieves society of the burden of caring for him in his declining years. Moreover, that normal degree of self-interest which leads the individual to seek healthful amusement and to keep his bodily functions vigorous is productive of a cheerful disposition and a flow of animal spirits which are contagious and themselves a contribution to social welfare. As Spencer says, in defending the rights of egoism to a place in a well-ordered and socially efficient life: The conclusion forced on us is that the pursuit of individual happiness within those limits prescribed by social conditions, is the first requisite to the attainment of the greatest general happiness. To see this it needs but to contrast one whose self-regard has maintained bodily well-being, with one whose regardlessness of self has brought its natural results; and then to ask what must be the contrast between two societies formed of two such kinds of individuals.
THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
266
“Bounding out of bed after an unbroken sleep, singing or whistling as he dresses, coming down with beaming face ready to laugh on the smallest provocation, the healthy man of high powers, conscious of past successes, and by his energy, quickness, resource, made confident of the future, enters on the day's business not with repugnance but with gladness; and from hour to hour experiencing satisfaction 's from work effectually done, comes home with an abundant surplus of energy remaining for hours of relaxation. Far otherwise is it with one who is enfeebled by great neglect of self. Already deficient, his energies are made more deficient by constant endeavors to execute tasks that prove beyond his strength, and by the resulting discouragement. Besides the depressing consciousness of the immediate future, there is the depressing consciousness of the remoter future, with its probability of accumulated difficulties and diminished ability to meet them. Hours of leisure which, rightly passed, bring pleasures that raise the tide of life and renew the powers of work, cannot be utilized: there is not vigor enough for enjoyments involving action, and lack of spirits prevents passive enjoyments being entered upon with zest. In brief, life becomes a burden. Now, if, as must be admitted, in a community composed of individuals like the first the happiness will be relatively great, while in one composed of individuals like the last, there will be relatively little happiness, or rather much misery; it must be admitted that conduct causing the one result is good, and conduct causing the other is bad.” Data of Ethics, § 70.
3 Inadequacy of the Egoistic Motive.
After doing full justice to the actual importance and ethical value of the motive of self-interest, we must admit that when this motive is allowed to rule alone in human conduct or to dominate all other motives, it not only proves itself inadequate but also positively ruinous in its effects, stunting and deforming the nature of the individual, checking and subverting social progress, and endangering human welfare. The defect of self-love may at first appear to be of a purely negative character-that it is not sufficiently inclusive, but confines itself to the happiness of the individual. Beginning thus with a passive neglect of others' interest, to be sure,SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
267
when it is given the opportunity to grow and expand through continuous exercise,-this motive leads directly to an active violation, and finally to a complete annihilation, of the rights of others. The worst feature of the life entirely controlled by self-interest is not, therefore, that it seeks wealth and honor and pleasure which it does not propose to share with others, but that in an increasing degree it seeks to use other human beings as instruments in the amassing of wealth-i, as stepping-stones in the acquiring of reputation, as tools in the gaining of pleasure. The ethical problem would be simpler if such uncurbed and ruthless selfishness always defeated its own ends-bringing satiety and disgust, a sense of estrangement from fellow-men increasingly painful, and a growing feeling of regret over the suffering caused to others. Unfortunately this is not always true. History affords conspicuous examples of monsters of selfishness who throughout a long life have used intelligence and skill in preserving their bodily vigor, husbanding their financial resources, and maintaining their reputation and influence over their fellows, all in order that they might the more fully gratify their private lusts. No, the fundamental fact is that self-interest in the sense of individual enjoyment, and the largest human welfare do not always coincide. The attainment of the latter often--usually, it seems--requires the sacrifice of the former. The motive of self-interest cannot be relied on, consequently, to furnish the dynamic for good conduct, conduct that shall have for its aim the realization of all capacities of human personality. The short-sightedness and folly of appealing to this motive when the desire is to promote social efficiency and personal development, have recently been demonstrated in this country. For decades the gospel of “success” has been preached to American youths in school and in home, from lecture platform and magazine page. The success which was thus glorified in the mind of the
THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
268
growing boy was generally a purely individualistic one: his imagination was stimulated by tales of the making of enormous fortunes, the building up of extensive industries, and the attainment of supreme political power. The anti-social character of such teaching remained for long unnoticed; for the settlement of a new country placed an especially high premium upon individual initiative and aggressiveness, and the exploitation of undiscovered resources or the organization of new industries which were incidental to the acquisition of private fortunes, seemed to constitute a sufficient social justification. But now that the country is nearly all settled and some of its resources show signs of exhaustion, on the one hand, and the ability of favored individuals to exploit the land and its resources has been tremendously increased by combinations of capital, superior organization of industry, and better facilities of production and distribution, on the other, things assume a different complexion. The further depletion of national resources which belong to the whole people by a few individuals for their own enrichment appears no longer as a case of commendable initiative and enterprise but of deplorable rapacity and greed. In fact the “enterprising” business man is now seen as the commercial pirate, and the “shrewd” politician who works with him (and upon him) as the political freebooter. Of the two characterizations perhaps the latter is the truer, but both are extreme. One lesson should be learned, however; that if we would lay the foundations of democracy and social justice deep in the character of our people, we should not attempt in our teaching of youth primarily to arouse individual ambition through appeal to the motive of self-interest, but rather to develop an interest in civic problems and a capacity for public service, by an appeal to that sentiment of comradeship and capacity for loyal devotion to ideal causes which is latent in all normal human beings.SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
269
4. The Altruistic Motive: Sympathy.
The failure of egoistic interpretations of morality such as that of Hobbes to win general acceptance is due principally to the recognized presence in human nature of an altruistic tendency which makes others' welfare in itself attractive as an end of action. Against this fact of the existence of an altruistic or social motive in the nature of man, as against an impregnable rock, all egoistic theories are shattered in pieces. While the existence of an altruistic motive had been recognized by earlier thought, it remained for the biological studies carried on in the last century under the inspiration of the idea of evolution, to establish the true importance of this motive for human conduct and to give it unquestionable scientific standing. Darwin, as is generally known, found in the social instinct which man inherits from the lower animals, the foundation of human morality. This instinct, he believed, was an extension of the parental and filial affections which are rooted as deep in the nature of the organism as the instinct of self-preservation itself.8 He thought it highly probable that “any animal whatever, endowed with well-marked social instincts, the parental and filial affections being here included, would inevitably acquire a moral sense or conscience as soon as its intellectual powers had become as well, or nearly as well, developed as in man.”9 Those practices and beliefs which originate in this instinct and consequently tend to promote social welfare would, he believed, be favored by natural selection because they make a group stronger and more efficient in its struggle with other groups.10 Other writers, following Darwin and approaching Ethics from the biological standpoint, sought to show with increasing fullness and detail how human morality had grown out of this social or sympathetic instinct. Leslie Stephen explained morality as
8 DARWIN: Descent of Man, Chap. IV.
9 Ibid.
10 Op. cit., Chap. V.
THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
270
the condition of social health and survival. Mr. Sutherland in his compendious work The Origin and Growth of the Moral instinct reviews the whole course of moral development, endeavoring to prove that it consists essentially in an extension of the instinct of sympathy, which is itself derived from the parental instinct. In the words of this writer, who gives the most complete exposition of the view we are considering, ” Moral conduct is that conduct which is actuated by wise sympathy. Sympathy, of course, is the natural capacity of being pleased at the pleasures and pained at the sufferings of others. Sympathy is wise when it sacrifices no ultimately greater happiness of others for the sake of a smaller but more immediate happiness.“11 ”Hence Mr. Sutherland is led to maintain that “An efficient degree of sympathy will, and among the mass of mankind actually does, provide an adequate morality without a great admixture of other qualities.”12 With reference to moral development, it consa growth of sympathy which involves both a widening and a deepening. Arising in family life out of the parental and sexual instincts, sympathy first spreads to all members of the tribe where it is deepened and strengthened through the increasing friendliness and devotion of fellow-tribesmen. Then its area is extended beyond the tribal bounds, first in toleration, then in friendliness, and finally in universal human brotherhood.13 I Moralists of the school just referred to have done a service of inestimable value to ethical reflection. They have established beyond possibility of further doubt or question the existence and importance of an altruistic motive in human conduct. By their historical and ethnological researches they have demonstrated the preeminently
11 SUTHERLAND: Origin and Growth Of the Moral Instinct, Vol. 14, p. 19.
12 Op. cit., Vol. II, p. 9.
13 Ibid., Vol. I, p. 369.
SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
271
social character of morality from its earliest beginnings; thus a death-blow has been dealt to all egoistic theories whether of a naturalistic or theological character. Moreover they have summoned the incontrovertible facts of Biology to show that altruism is as authentic and necessary a product of the organic evolution as is egoism. While the range or meaning of benevolence is not limited by the scope of the instinct in which it originated, still it is reassuring to know that the instinct of sympathy is as deeply rooted in human nature as the instinct of self-preservation. The fact that sympathy is not a derivative or secondary product gives an additional warrant for those developments of intelligent altruism which pass altogether beyond the limits of organic adaptation. With reference to the importance and value of the motive of sympathy in the field of human life and conduct, it is scarcely possible to exaggerate, In many periods of human history, it alone has thrown a cheerful kindly light in scenes of darkness and disorder where insatiate greed and brutal passion have vaunted themselves. Although it does not possess the breadth and elevation characteristic of the self-sacrificing devotion of patriot or martyr to his ideal cause, yet sympathy has a spontaneity and readiness about it that renders it a peculiarly gracious and inspiring element in human life. It creates an atmosphere in which good deeds and noble aspirations flourish. Upon the subject the words of Mr. Sutherland may again be quoted with heartiest approval:
” So too with our social relations, duty makes a substitute, but only an indifferent substitute, for kindly sympathies. The man who does what he ought to do, though actuated by no feeling of gladness in giving happiness, no sense of compassion for the sorrows of others, may indeed make a good enough citizen. But if he reluctantly help another out of a ditch because it is his duty to do so, instead of cheerfully giving a hand becauseTHE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
272
eager to help, the quality of the resulting morality is very inferior. The man who is incapable of a warm friendship or a noble enthusiasm of patriotism or the glow of benevolence is in so far a poorer type. Though upright he is frigid; though courteous he is stiff. We all think him a good man, but our hearts never gladden at his approach. Whereas the man whose life finds the spring of its goodness in active sympathy brings happiness wherever he goes, and his morality is contagious.” 14
5. Inadequacy of the Altruistic Motive.
Although it seems frequently to constitute the redeeming virtue of man's nature, this altruistic motive, if allowed to rule without check or control, produces a life as incomplete and one-sided, if not as perverted and monstrous, as that dominated entirely by egoism. For altruism, when it is not balanced by the opposite tendency or included within a principle of action comprehensive enough to embrace them both, defeats itself. In the first place, a person who is so far preoccupied with the welfare of others as to neglect altogether his individual interest will soon find himself lacking the ability to give further help, and will finally become a care and a burden upon those whom he wishes to benefit. Thus the head of a family whose incessant exertions on behalf of wife and children leave no time. for rest or recreation is in danger of being incapacitated in middle life and becoming an invalid to be supported by the labor of those whom he would serve. Or, think of a man in a position of great social or political responsibility upon whose wisdom and skill the continued prosperity and moral betterment of hundreds of thousands of his fellow-beings depend. Let such a man become so absorbed in his plans for others' good that he forgets the limits of his own strength, and breaks his health down,, or heedlessly exposes himself, contracts pneumonia, and dies; the objects of his devotion, the men and women who are dependent
14 SUTHERLAND: Op. Cit., Vol. II, p. 8.
SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
273
upon him, will pay the penalty of his exaggerated altruism. Hence the cause of altruism itself justifies a moderate and healthy egoism-an indulgence of desires for rest and recreation, for appetizing food and comfortable clothing, and all other objects which contribute to individual strength and efficiency. Then, secondly, unbalanced altruism defeats itself by encouraging an extreme of egoism in those to whom it ministers. How often do the unwearied efforts of a devoted wife and mother to increase the comfort and happiness of husband and children encourage a deplorable selfishness in these members of her family! A similar result is frequently observable where an unrestricted generosity leads to the distribution of bounties without the expectation or desire of any service in return. The effect seems usually to be the fostering of selfishness in the recipients-their appetite for further benefits is whetted, and their willingness to render adequate service in return is correspondingly diminished. Self-respect is lost and pauperization begins. Even within the field of altruism proper the instinct of sympathy, when it is not reinforced by other factors and abilities, proves to be an insufficient motive. Like all other organic instincts it responds only to its proper stimulus, and this stimulus must be a particular object or event. Thus sympathy is elicited by the pleasure or pain of follow-beings when this is seen, or otherwise perceived. Hence it is naturally circumscribed in the scope of its object to individual cases and particular occasions. True, it may, through the help of memory and the imagination, be extended to cover the future happiness or misery of particular persons. Yet it remains too limited in its influence to move men to the service of ideal causes representing some general aspect of human welfare-like the moral awakening of a nation, or the establishment of peace throughout the world. Furthermore, sympathy, because an
THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
274
organic reaction, will be determined as to intensity and duration by the physiological condition of the subject as well as by the character of the stimulating object. Thus the amount of sympathy which the same situation arouses in any individual will vary from time to time, depending upon the condition of his health, his mood, the time in his day, etc. Hence sympathy has not motive-power sufficient to inspire devotion to a social end which can be realized only by small degrees but must be steadily pursued, such as the good of a city or the welfare of an institution. Mr. Sutherland himself recognizes its defects as a motive.”15 It is capricious in its play, he admits, varying from person to person, and in the same person from time to time. It is dependent for its strength upon external and accidental conditions such as the good humor of the agent, and the beauty or attractiveness of the object. Hence-his conclusion is-while sympathy supplies the motive-power, the sense of duty is required as a kind of fly-wheel to steady its spasmodic energies. This sense of duty he explains as methodized sympathy, it is true; but the important point for our notice is that even this champion of sympathy is forced to confess that in its natural manifestation and without being supplemented by other faculties, it is inadequate as a motive of good conduct. The limitations of sympathy as a motive of altruistic conduct are well illustrated by a too-familiar type of political leader in our cities. The ward “boss” often owes his influence in his district largely to his ready kindness. To no cry of suffering or distress can he turn. a deaf ear and his constituents when in trouble can appeal to him with the assurance of meeting quick sympathy and substantial aid. He is loyal to active supporters, keeping every promise made to them; for his friends he has a genuine affection and safeguards their interest as his own.
15 SUTHERLAND: Op. Cit., Vol. II, p. 30.
SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
275
But at the same time he is absolutely without a sense of the larger social obligation. He will ” sell out “ his city without a qualm and betray the interests of its people for the profit of a privileged few.
6. The Religious Motive.
Religion must now be considered as furnishing man with a third great dynamic to action. For the “fear of the Lord” is not only the “beginning of wisdom”; it has always been a powerful incentive to good conduct. We shall not have to discuss the question whether the religious motive, like the other two just described, originates from a primary instinct or inherent faculty of human nature. Sufficient for purposes of our discussion is the fact now well-established that a religious tendency or “ sense ” is practically universal among mankind. Recent studies of the history and development of religion agree in their emphasis upon two points: first, that religion is an outgrowth of man's consciousness of value; and, second, that religion, especially in its beginning, is primarily social both in origin and reference. A recognition of these two facts paves the way for a clearer understanding of the function which religion discharges in moral development. The object which underlies all formselief is the universe--the all-encompassing reality. Thus religion has been lately defined as a “feeling of harmony between ourselves and the universe.”16 Of course a clear conception of the universe as such does not enter into all religious belief; rather is the object of belief and worship often a very insignificant part of it--a carved stick, a solitary tree, a species of animal. But these objects are all thought of as endowed with what a recent writer on the subject has well called a “mysterious potency” which they derive from the great hidden forces of the universe, the total scheme
16 McTAGGART: Some Dogmas of Religion, p. 3.
THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
276
of things.17 In this way they become divine. Now man's attitude toward these his divinities is that of valuation. He regards them not merely as facts which exist, but in a certain sense as ends which he desires to achieve; that is, he believes that their favor and assistance may be won, and that if he complies with certain conditions the super-human power of these divinities-and they represent always the great hidden forces of the universe-may be enlisted in his service to secure the greatest goods of life. These, the greatest goods of life, are always conceived, during the earlier stages of human development, in social terms, and represent, under the varying forms of the imagination, the best welfare, largest power, and longest life, of the tribe itself. Thus religion appears to be in its essence a belief that the powers of the universe are, or may be, allied on the side of the Good-of the highest human welfare. It is, in short, a belief that Universal Reality is good. The same conclusion is reached by a somewhat different path when we agree with Hoffding in defining religion as “faith in the ultimate conservation of values.”18 I'll From this standpoint, religion is exhibited as the belief not that Reality is good but that Goodness is Real. Yet if, in accordance with the second form of statement, our religion consists in the belief that those ends and ideals which we value most highly are conserved and provided for in the nature of things, what is this but belief that the universe or reality is good? Thus the second proposition may be accepted as the simple converse of the first, a belief in the goodness of reality implying a faith in the reality of goodness. If religion is such an adjustment between the good of man and the nature of the universe it is plain that religious belief may furnish a strong support, a powerful
17 IRVING KING: Development of Religion, Chap. VI.
18 HOFFDING: Philosophy of Religion.
SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
277
incentive, to good conduct. For if the Supreme Power of the universe is allied with the cause of goodness, the man who performs a good act has the universe behind him. Even though the act appear to be one of absolute self-sacrifice yet the individual cannot really lose, since God is on his side. Hence religion has exerted tremendous influence throughout the whole course of human history in impelling individuals to surrender their private interests to the welfare, or supposed welfare, of the group or nation. This influence has not always been exerted for the true good of man, or his genuine development, however. Often, too often, it has supplied an external and artificial sanction for a conventional morality long outgrown, but which, partly through the aid of religion, is able to preserve its authority and block all progress. Such is the case in Russia to-day, where the influence of religion and the Orthodox Church is exercised effectively to maintain in existence and power an antiquated and barbarous regime. These facts prove the inadequacy of religion as a motive of good conduct, when acting alone and not including an intelligent self-interest and a due regard for the welfare of others. When unaccompanied by an insight into the dependence of the Good upon the true interest of the individual and the real welfare of society, religion presents the requirements of goodness to man as if they were the commands of an external power which must be obeyed if the individual is to escape the punishment which this power can inflict, and enjoy the reward which it proffers. These rewards and punishments were at first supposed to come in the present life; but the observed facts of human existence made this view no longer possible and hence the divine judgment was postponed until after death. It is apparent that the religious motive, when its appeal is based upon such considerations, is but a disguised form of self-interest, and shares all the defects of this latter motive. The individual
THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
278
is moved by a desire to increase his enjoyment and to diminish his suffering, not, in this case, within the limits of his earthly existence merely, but during the future life as well. That religion may be transformed into a mere appeal to a lower kind of self-interest is proved by the frequency with which the Christian doctrine of self-realization through self-sacrifice has been degraded by its exponents into an arbitrary device whereby the human individual can gain heaven and escape hell. Further evidence to the same effect is supplied by the fact that the egoistic utilitarianism of the school of Hobbs often dad recourse to theology to provide hedonic sanctions for conduct which, though necessary for social welfare, could not be shown to increase the sum-total of the individual's enjoyment during the present life. In pursuance of this method, Paley defined virtue as “the doing good to mankind, in obedience to the will of God, for the sake of everlasting happiness.”
7.Self-Realization as the Motive of Good Conduct.
Self-realization has now to be exhibited as the only adequate motive of good conduct, including the three just mentioned and raising each to a higher plane of meaning and efficiency. Self-realization does not simply combine in an external fashion the egoistic, altruistic, and religious motives. It unites them organically, making each a function of the central activity of volition and causing each to express within a certain department of human life the characteristic and insistent demand of volition for a completely organized life. Of these different motives at least two originate in native instincts which, when raised to the level of intelligent desire or purpose, express the craving of the human will for a larger satisfaction--the first in such a system of objects as will yield fullest enjoyment throughout the individual's life, and the second in such activities as will increase the happiness of other individualsSELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
279
with whom he comes into contact. To the attainment of such ends are the promptings of self-interest and sympathy limited, in their natural and undeveloped form. But when the individual is illuminated by a better understanding of his capacities as a conscious person and these capacities are themselves developed through constant exercise, the two motives, egoistic and altruistic, and the religious as well, are expanded in meaning, and strengthened in power, until each expresses in its own way the supreme and unifying motive in the conduct of man as a moral agent--a yearning for the largest and most comprehensive life. The impelling force of self-love is extended beyond the boundaries of “self-interest” and is bestowed upon such ideal and inclusive objects as Truth and Beauty, which are required to satisfy the higher psychic capacities of human nature. The propulsive power of sympathy is extended beyond the happiness of a limited number of individuals and communicated to humanity--the welfare of the whole human race being rendered supremely attractive as an end of action. The compelling influence of religion is no longer limited to the enforcement of a divine command which promises punishment if disobeyed, but is extended to a divine purpose which is made inspiring by the fact that it guarantees the attainment of those ideals which man values most highly, and provides for the welfare of both the individual and the race. Thus these three motives prove to be only manifestations of the impelling power of a single inclusive object-that of complete Self-realization. They do not inaugurate three different lines of action; they all prompt to one. They represent three aspects of the one process of self-organization, and while there is a difference of emphasis in every case, each one includes and makes place for the other two. The attainment by the individual of the larger ideal objects of his higher powers, intellectual, practical, and emotional, requires from
THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
280
him the fullest cooperation with his fellows in a mutual sympathy and service. The promotion of the true welfare of humanity must include the attainment of the real interest of the individual himself. Finally the realization of the Divine Purpose will secure the highest well-being of self and others as integral parts of the universal order. Let us now reconsider these three motives as interpreted anew in the light of Self-realization.
8. Self-Respect.
Self-love, as expressing the demand of the human will for complete Self-realization, does not remain a desire of the individual for his own enjoyment through the objects which he may possess to the exclusion of all other individuals. It is rather the individual's regard for himself in the universal aspect of his nature--for the satisfaction--of those capacities for intellectual attainment, for social companionship and conversation, and of those abilities for constructive and creative achievement, which, are characteristic of human personality universally. These capacities require for their satisfaction objects that also are not exclusive but universal, and shared by all individuals composing the community of intelligence and personality. Self-love in this larger sense has not the subjective and intimate character of self-interest. Rather it has an objective and. almost external reference, since it directs the attention of the individual to those powers and abilities in his nature which distinguish human personality as such. He esteems himself not as an individual but as a person. Self-love in this higher development is frequently called self-respect, and is recognized as an important factor in moral development. Self-respect is a regard for one's own worth and dignity as a human person, and a concern for the due satisfaction of the powers and capacities of intelligent personality consequently possessed. As a motive it has a powerful influence in restraining the individual from actions that are mean, tricky, and selfish,SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
281
and impels him to the pursuit of larger and more appropriate ends of intellectual and artistic activity and public service. The force of self-respect alone has influenced men to lead clean and well-regulated lives when removed by circumstances from critical scrutiny of their fellows in the lonely outposts of civilization and has enabled them to resist the insidiously debasing effect of close contact with uncivilized peoples with their lower standards of contact. Indeed, as was explained in the preceding section, when the motive of self-love is taken in this wider meaning and understood to voice the demand of the whole self, natural and spiritual,for satisfaction, it is an expression of the moral idea and is identical with conscience itself. It is thus that Butler understands the principle of self-love which he makes coordinate with conscience, asserting that both “always lead us in the same way.” Aristotle, as noted above, distinguishes between two meanings given to the term “self-love.”one, the narrower meaning, the designation “love-of-self” is justly used as as term of reproach, signifying selfishness and greed. But in the second and larger sense it is applicable to the good man, for he “loves and gratifies the supreme part of his being.” “It follows that the virtuous man is a lover of self, although not in the sense in which a man is censured for self-love is a lover of self, but in a sense differing from it as widely as a life directed by reason differs from a life directed by emotion, and as the desire for what is noble differs from a desire for what seems to be in one's own interest.”19 Hence Aristotle believes that the good man may in the true sense be a friend of himself. Since friendship is based upon a recognition of personal worth and the good man esteems most highly the universal, rational principle in his nature.
19 ARISTOTLE: Nicomachean Ethics, Bk. IX, Chap. VIII (Welldon's trans., p. 301).
THE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
282
9. Philanthropy.
The altruistic motive, when it is enlightened by a true understanding of the nature and capacities of man, undergoes a like development. Its limits are no longer those of natural sympathy which, at its best, is restricted in application to the happiness of a certain number of individuals. Instead, altruism becomes the love of humanity, an affection for all men, a genuine philanthropy, which is based upon a realizing sense of the value of every human being as possessed of the capacity for personal development and self-realization. Such is the Christian spirit of love for fellow-men, the feeling of human brotherhood springing from a recognition of the spiritual kinship of the whole human race. Philanthropy is thus universal in a way that sympathy could never be-not having to depend upon the accidents of personal contact, individual attractiveness, and temperamental affinity, but reaching as far as the essential characteristics of human nature themselves go. It is more catholic and all-embracing than the sympathy of a Walt Whitman whose liking for his human kind led him to mingle with the jostling throng on crowded street or ferry, for mere delight of human presence and contact. Even such wide sympathy has necessarily its boundaries of time and space; it is, moreover, in a large degree a native endowment and hence cannot be acquired by that large majority of persons who do not by nature possess it. Furthermore, philanthropy, in the sense just explained, is much more effective as a factor in moral development than even the wide sympathy of a Whitman could be. For such sympathy finds human beings supremely attractive as they are, with the qualities and dispositions they actually possess. It tends to rest in enjoyment of the characteristics which at present exist and is seized by no passion to change and improve the character of men and women. The deeper love of humanity, on the contrary, is not awakened by the existent traitsSELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
283
and qualities of human beings-these may be neutral or even repellent-but rather by the unrealized possibilities for personal growth and achievement which it detects and responds to, in every human individual, qua human. That these capabilities of higher attainment and larger life should thus prove attractive, means that they will become ends to be pursued and realized. Thus the man interested by the motive of philanthropy in his fellow-men is impelled to constant effort to bring out and make actual the potency for better things which he discovers is latent within each of them. The love which Jesus sought to arouse among men was of this sort-not a love for our fellows as they are, for their defects, their frailties, their sins--but for them as they might be, for the splendid and noble possibilities of every human self. This is the love which has inspired all great moral reformers with their visions of a regenerate humanity, of an uplifted and purified human nature-has animated all great liberators with their dreams of nations relieved from oppression and their inhabitants permitted in consequence to live larger and happier lives. The transforming effect of a love of this sort is happily illustrated in Jerome K. Jerome's pretty story or allegory, The Passing of the Third Floor Back. Here a ” stranger “ is represented as entering into association with a group of people from whom every fine and gentle trait seems to be absent and, through a love based upon an insight into their better nature and higher possibilities, awakening each to a new and higher life.
10. Reverence.
A few words will suffice to indicate a little more fully how the religious motive is illuminated and transformed through a true conception of man's highest good. It is a psychological truism that if the commands of God are to move men to action they must, like any other object of pursuit, appeal, to some part of his nature, to some tendency in himself. Now unless the requirementsTHE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
284
of deity are believed to be based upon the highest human welfare, unless their appeal is made to that yearning of man's will for fullest Self-realization, they must make their appeal to some lower and more restricted desire. This is precisely what happens when moral laws are obeyed without any real insight into their character or questioning of their authority, as the dictates of the external power supreme in the universe and hence able to enforce its commands. Under such conditions these divine behests acquire their influence over man's will through their appeal to a desire that is comparatively low-that of gaining pleasure, the pleasure of reward, and of escaping pain, the pain of punishment. Thus the performance of duty in obedience to the will of God becomes part of a very simple and elementary egoism. The attempt may be made to avoid this conclusion by assuming that the commands of deity, unlike all other objects of thought, appeal in some mystical or supernatural fashion to a special faculty in human nature, th-Ls deriving a unique authority. But there is not the slightest evidence in favor of such a belief. Like all other ends which we pursue and seek to attain, obedience to God must appeal to some one of our actual interests-if not to a higher, why then to a lower. Nor does a recognition of this fact deprive the divine will of its rightful authority over us. Rather do we secure for it the highest possible authority when we identify it with the Moral Ideal understood as the most complete realization of the powers of intelligent personality. The absolute worth of this object is witnessed by the feeling of reverence which it arouses within us, a feeling which is akin to religious awe, and which in its turn proves that these possibilities of higher personal development. Which we human beings possess are a divine birth-right and a consequence of our spiritual origin.SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
285
11. Mixed Motives.
It is a fact of moral experience, frequently commented upon, that men seldom act from a single motive, but are usually impelled to their action by the combined efficacy of several motives. Thus we are often--most often, it might appear--led to serve others when our sympathy for them is reinforced by a recognition that in helping them we shall ultimately be benefiting ourselves. In the same way the egoistic motive combines with the religious until they seem indeed to merge completely. On first thought this fact that an action is due to a mixture of motives may appear to discredit it--as when a person gives generously to the cause of charity, recognizing that it will improve his standing in the community, or when a man realizes high ideals of professional achievement in order to please wife or mother. Now, to be sure, it. is discreditable to perform an act ostensibly from one motive which is generally admired but actually from another not given such approval, thus practicing a kind of deception upon the community and winning praise which is undeserved--as when a business or professional man undertakes charitable work solely for purposes of self-advertisement. Action from mixed motives is not always blameworthy, however; it is to be regarded rather as the normal thing in conduct, indicating in the majority of cases increasing intelligence and moral development. For, as we have seen, the leading motives of human action are not necessarily exclusive and antagonistic: they turn out, when developed in all their implications, to be different expressions of the one underlying tendency of volition to seek complete Self-realization. Hence it is perfectly natural and extremely advantageous that they should supplement one another and lend their combined strength of impulsion, especially where the attainment of the good end requires severe exertion and the surmounting of great obstacles. At first +.he presence and influence of the two different and apparentlyTHE GOOD AS SELF-REALIZATION
286
antagonistic motives may be accompanied by no consciousness of their unity in the higher synthesis of the Moral Ideal; but the experience of acting under their combined promptings, with the results achieved, will itself produce a growing sense of the harmonious cooperation of intelligent egoism, altruism, and religious devotion, in the attainment of Self-realization' As a matter of actual fact we do. not by any means always disapprove of action from mixed motives. Instead, our judgments of others' conduct when we come to reflect upon them are striking proof that we do appreciate the other side of the subject just dwelt upon, viz' that the operation of several motives in place of one often indicates a better balanced and more developed character. As the genial essayist Dr. Crothers says in discussing this subject in a witty paper: 11 So far as I have been able to observe, such mixed motives are the ones that take men furthest. Altruism is no exception to the general rule that a man does good work only when he likes his job. . . . We cannot abide an altruist who does not enjoy himself and who has not a sportsmanlike spirit. We resent his attempt to monopolize brotherly kindness. If be be without imagination he will insist on working for us instead of with us. He will not admit us to a partnership in good works. He insists upon doing all the self-sacrifice and having us take the ignominious part of passive recipients of his goodness. He confers a benefit on us with an air that says, 'I have come to do you good. I have no selfish gratification in what I am doing for you. But a sense of duty has triumphed over my personal inclination.' . . . The universal preference which all self-respecting people have for being helped by cheerful friends rather than by conscientious benefactors is a great limitation to all philanthropic effort. Unless we heartily enjoy ourselves other people will not allow up, to improve their minds or their morals.”20
20 CROTHERS: “My Missionary Life in Persia,” Atlantic Monthly, October, 1910, pp. 336-37.
SELF-REALIZATION AND MOTIVE OF GOODNESS
287
REFERENCES
SPENCER, Data of Ethics, Chaps. XI, XII.
SUTHERLAND, Origin and Growth of the Moral Instinct, Chaps. XI-XIV.
DARWIN, Descent of Man, Chap. IV.
HOBBES, Human Nature, Chaps. VII-IX.
PAULSEN, System of Ethics, Book II, Chap. VI.
MARTINEAU, Types of Ethical Theory, Part II, Book I, Chaps. V, VI.
DEWEY AND TUFTS, Ethics, Chap. XVIII, § § 2, 3.
SETH, Ethical Principles, Part I, Chap. III, § 12.
ALEXANDER, Moral Order and Progress, Book II, Chap. IV, § 3.
