Questions

This is a list of all the questions and their associated study carrel identifiers. One can learn a lot of the "aboutness" of a text simply by reading the questions.

identifier question
12035And what was his intention?
12035Are field- sports, then, in the same category?
12035But are there no terms by which the somewhat exclusive associations connected with the two sets of phrases already examined may be avoided?
12035But what considerations guide the moral judgment?
12035But why, it may be asked, should not a man accept a bribe, if, on other grounds, he would vote for the candidate who offers it?
12035Do our moral opinions merely vary, or do they grow?
12035For what else can have an influence of this nature?
12035In what sense did he employ the words used?
12035Is there any progress to be traced in morality, or does it simply oscillate, within certain limits, round a fixed point?
12035Now, what, as a mutter of fact, has been the case?
12035Or, again, should we be willing, in this respect, to go back three hundred, or two hundred, or even one hundred years in our own history?
12035Shall I prosecute him?
12035To begin with the first division of my subject, How is morality, properly so called, discriminated from other sanctions of conduct?
12035What are the classes of acts, under their most general aspect, which elicit the feelings of moral approbation and disapprobation?
12035What did the man really say?
12035What was the extent of his knowledge at the time that he made the statement?
12035What would be the result, if every one who had the opportunity were to do the same?
12035When this condition of things is beginning to be intolerable, there often arises the social reformer, and what is the course which he pursues?
56721What is the implication? 56721 And again, what, scientifically viewed, is our personal relation to that inscrutable power which makes for righteousness? 56721 Are they then to be regarded as purposed actions? 56721 Are we to suppose that the Free Will predicated of man is an universal possession of all? 56721 But after all, if we succeed in establishing purposive actions as incidents in a process of equilibration, what have we gained? 56721 But then the question arises, upon what principle should ethical judgments be formed? 56721 Can purpose by any means be made lineable in such a sequence? 56721 Can there then be purpose without consciousness? 56721 Could such a chemical combination accidentally become conscious, and by a succession of sports organise its consciousness into purpose? 56721 Do the idiot and the maniac possess it, or on the contrary is it possessed unequally by men, and by some not at all? 56721 Do we then accept a spiritual evolution to which the materialistic has been altogether subordinate? 56721 Does this mean a chemical action? 56721 For what is the Ego spoken of, and of what does it consist? 56721 Generally speaking, is it a scientific enquiry for the information of our minds, or is it investigated for the enforcement of ethical injunctions? 56721 Has he the vaunted power of self- rule? 56721 Hence arise the questions, What can be the obligation of a relative morality? 56721 How can we understand Purpose as an equilibration? 56721 How then can we arrive at any ethical rule by the study of Biology? 56721 If, again, it is a practical question as to the power of self- rule, are we to suppose that all men have it in equal degrees? 56721 Is it a natural history of human conduct, more particularly of that part of it called ethical? 56721 Is it an investigation into the natural authority of ethical injunction? 56721 Is it merely a concomitant of the physical line of events? 56721 Is it merely scientific determination of the origin, growth, and variations of ethical opinion? 56721 Is it produced without producing? 56721 Or does it refer to the action of heat and light? 56721 Or, to repeat the old difficulty, is the subjective factor present in the line of causation at all? 56721 The great practical question is this: Has man the power of choice amongst motives? 56721 The question arises, must all purpose be conscious purpose? 56721 The question, thereupon arises, Is the subjective a factor in a process of equilibration, and is righteousness subjective equilibration? 56721 We recognise the gradual development, but where is the deductive connexion? 56721 What has science to say to it? 56721 What need then for sentiency in the subsequent development? 56721 What would be the result if I did this? 56721 Whence then the newregulative system,"the want of which fills Mr. Spencer with alarm?
56721Where is the promised system of corollaries from original factors which shall account for the historical development?
56721Why?
56721[ 13]"What shape, then, must the mutual restraints take when co- operation begins?
56721and can he cultivate it?
56721and-- Is there no absolute morality with its imperatives universal in space and in time?
56721on the other hand, would it not be better to do that?
37998A disrespectful Irish member of Parliament, urged by perverse curiosity, asked the Speaker one day:"What would happen if you called me by my name?"
37998Above all, is it beneficial?
37998And these men are to be liberated from the discipline of the moral law?
37998And, above all, ought not Descartes to have given us an explanation of what thought and consciousness are?
37998Are not many beasts physically stronger, more nimble and agile than man?
37998Are the two really different?
37998Brandy undoubtedly produces a sensation of pleasure in the drinker; is brandy, then, good in a moral sense?
37998But at a certain stage of evolution-- how?
37998But by means of what psychic mechanism does this law enforce obedience in the consciousness of man?
37998But can the progress, which can not reasonably be denied in civilization, also be traced in Morality?
37998But how do we come by this law?
37998But what about the effect of the doctrines which they advocated gently or passionately, adducing proofs or uttering threats?
37998But what is conscience found to be if we penetrate the fog of mystic words with which it has come to be surrounded?
37998But what is the good of this self- satisfaction?
37998But what is"the maxim"on which you act?
37998But whence does Reason obtain the standard it applies to the actions of men and their results?
37998But who is the state?
37998But why cudgel one''s brains?
37998But why does He allow it?
37998Does he decide for the good, because after due investigation and consideration he recognized it as preferable, though he might have rejected it?
37998Does he do evil because he willed to do so and not otherwise, although it was in his power to avoid it?
37998Does he only try him in order mercifully to rescue him at the moment when he is about to succumb?
37998Does it stop at that or will it continue?
37998Does the divinity allow man to fall a victim to evil without turning it aside from him?
37998Does this prove the freedom, the absolute independence of these occurrences?
37998Further: must we in the consciousness distinguish between the frame and its contents, the conceptual mechanism and the concept?
37998Has it an aim, and, if so, what?
37998Has it the right to deny life to an entity that does not conceive itself?
37998Has not the carrier pigeon an infinitely better sense of locality than we have?
37998Have we the right to set up a scale of values and place the complicated above the simple?
37998He does not condescend to ask,''What will the world say to this?''
37998He thereby relinquishes the power to ask any further question except:"Did he act in accordance with his own conscience?
37998How could that possibly be?
37998How did the world come into existence?
37998How does Nature work?
37998How does it acquire the fundamental concepts Good and Bad, and what is their significance?
37998How is such an endeavour possible for a man who does not believe in God and for whom consequently no divine Will exists?
37998How, of what material, and why do we fashion this standard?
37998If he obeys, all is well; but if he takes no notice of it, pays no heed to it, the question arises:"What now?
37998Is he fettered by the chain of causes which have existed eternally and continue to act immutably to all eternity?
37998Is it to be the masses?
37998Is man who perceives, judges, has volition and acts, a free being inwardly?
37998Is not all our knowledge of the world, is not our whole view of Nature an illusion?
37998Is not the mouse''s hearing sharper than ours?
37998Is the consciousness of the man standing upon the highest plane of intellectuality the greatest consciousness possible?
37998Is the decision as to what is right and what is wrong to be left to the subjective judgment of the individual?
37998Is the matter which is absorbed as nourishment ultimately anything different?
37998Is the sheep who trots bleating along with the herd to be taken as the type of a moral being?
37998Is the state bound by a treaty?
37998Is there no consciousness without a conceptual content?
37998It has the power right enough; police, judge, prison and gallows bear witness to that; but has it the right?
37998It is a comedy played to win applause and a call before the curtain?
37998It is supposed to be nothing more than a sort of obsequiousness towards the multitude?
37998Its laws are observed for the sake of pleasing others?
37998Must it honour its signature?
37998Must it perform what it has undertaken to do?
37998Or do the two coincide?
37998Or is man always subject to coercion from which at no time and no place he can escape?
37998Or shall all mankind, or at least the majority, and not the individual, decide what is right?
37998The dog''s scent incomparably more delicate?
37998The eagle''s sight keener?
37998The question, what is life?
37998They are to be superior to the moral law?
37998Was that because the heavenly bodies act freely and are eclipsed only at their own spontaneous desire, when and how they please?
37998We come to the question, What is Good, what is Bad?
37998What are the distinguishing marks of Right?
37998What do we find?
37998What guarantee has he that his judgment is right?
37998What is Morality?
37998What is consciousness?
37998What is gained by these discoveries?
37998What is infinity, what eternity?
37998What is life?
37998What is their relation, one to the other?
37998What prevents him from yielding to his impulses?
37998What qualities do the former and the latter possess, or what qualities do we ascribe to them?
37998Why can the latter proceed with his evil work with God''s consent?
37998Why do not all living creatures participate equally in the evolution to which this superiority is due?
37998Why do we approve of one thing as good and condemn another as bad?
37998Why does He tolerate the devil?
37998Will it not mind speaking to deaf ears?
37998Will the refractory individual not suffer for disregarding it, or has it means to enforce obedience, and what are these means?"
37998Will the voice rest content with crying in the wilderness?
37998why?
46129And first, how shall we define conduct?
46129And how, in the absence of definition, can Geometry deal with it?
46129And if we can not define the irregular line itself, how can we know its"spatial relations"definite?
46129And what trait leads us to speak of a bad umbrella or a bad pair of boots?
46129Approaching as we here do to moral obligation, are we not shown its relations to conduct at large?
46129Are the virtues classed as such because of some intrinsic community of nature?
46129Are they modes of thinking and feeling naturally caused in men by experience of these conditions?
46129Are they supernaturally caused modes of thinking and feeling, tending to make men fulfill the conditions to happiness?
46129But now, have these irreconcilable opinions anything in common?
46129But what in such case constitutes the happiness of others?
46129Does B conceive the impartial spectator as awarding to him, B, the product of A''s labor?
46129Does B, in conceiving the impartial spectator, exclude his own interests as completely as A does?
46129Does any one accept this inference?
46129Does he diverge from established theological dogma?
46129Does he think spiritualistic interpretations of phenomena not valid?
46129Does it leave the possessor at the zero point of sentiency?
46129Does it not leave him at the zero point?
46129Does not the family precede the State; and does not the welfare of the State depend on the welfare of the family?
46129Does the proposition that it is my pecuniary interest to choose the most valuable, therefore, become doubtful?
46129Does this mean that, in respect of whatever is proportioned out, each is to have the same share whatever his character, whatever his conduct?
46129Hence, to yield up normal pleasures is to yield up so much life; and there arises the question-- To what extent may this be done?
46129How can Unconditioned Being be subject to conditions beyond itself?
46129How does mechanical science evolve from these experiences?
46129How far may it rightly be carried?
46129How far shall a person who has misbehaved be grieved by showing aversion to him?
46129How shall be determined the degree of transgression beyond which to discharge is less wrong than not to discharge?
46129How shall we so conduct the discussion as most clearly to bring out this necessity for a compromise?
46129If I go to the waterfall, shall I go over the moor or take the path through the wood?
46129In which cases do we distinguish as good, a knife, a gun, a house?
46129Is his mental state pleasurable?
46129Is it admitted?
46129Is it denied that acts classed as good and bad differ in their effect?
46129Is it in dwellings?
46129Is it in nutrition?
46129Is it in warmth?
46129Is it not clear that observance of moral principles is fulfillment of certain general conditions to the successful carrying on of special activities?
46129Is it right to annoy by condemning a prejudice which another displays?
46129Is not his duty to his children even more peremptory?
46129Is the state indifferent or painful?
46129Is there any postulate involved in these judgments on conduct?
46129Is there any unfair treatment of sundry others, involved by more than fair treatment of this one other?
46129Let us next ask what is the something to be distributed?
46129May it not be true that, conversely, general happiness is to be obtained by furthering self- happiness?
46129Must I not choose as well as I can, and if I choose wrongly must I give up my ground of choice?
46129Must it then follow that eventually, with this diminution of the spheres for it, altruism must diminish in total amount?
46129Now suppose some additional influence which makes the process beneficial; what must it be?
46129On the one hand, is it not wrong forthwith to bring on himself, his family, and those who have business relations with him, the evils of his failure?
46129One further question has to be answered-- How does there arise the feeling of moral obligation in general?
46129Page 200: Missing closing quotation mark added after''a means of happiness?''.
46129Shall I walk to the waterfall to- day?
46129Shall he ask a friend for a loan?
46129Shall he if criminal have as much as if virtuous?
46129Shall he if passive have as much as if active?
46129Shall he if useless have as much as if useful?
46129Shall one whose action is to be reprobated have the reprobation expressed to him or shall nothing be said?
46129Shall the interpretation be that the concrete means to happiness are to be equally divided?
46129Shall we take the pessimist view?
46129Should we not contrariwise class them as blameworthy?
46129Surely anything distinguished as definite admits of being defined; but how can we define an irregular line?
46129The loan would probably tide him over his difficulty, in which case would it not be unjust to his creditors did he refrain from asking it?
46129There may in every case be put the questions-- Does the action tend to maintenance of complete life for the time being?
46129To what ends may it be legitimately exercised?
46129Treating of legislative aims, Bentham writes:"But justice, what is it that we are to understand by justice: and why not happiness but justice?
46129Up to what limit may help be given to the existing generation of the inferior, without entailing mischief on future generations of the superior?
46129What bearing have these general inferences on the special question before us?
46129What comes of this entirely unegoistic course?
46129What form is the compromise between egoism and altruism to assume?
46129What is it in respect of which everybody is to count for one and nobody for more than one?
46129What is the ethical warrant for governmental authority?
46129What is the implication?
46129What is to be inferred?
46129What meaning does he here give to the word"definite?"
46129What must be the accompanying evolution of conduct?
46129What must result from this when men''s efforts are joined?
46129What must the relations between egoism and altruism become as this form of nature is neared?
46129What now is the trait possessed in common by Magnificence and Meekness?
46129What now shall we say of one who is, for the time being, blessed in performing an act of mercy?
46129What shape, then, must the mutual restraints take when co- operation begins?
46129What should we say to these acts which now fall into the class we call praiseworthy?
46129What spheres, then, will eventually remain for altruism as it is commonly conceived?
46129What will happen?
46129What will he decide?--what would the spectator direct?
46129Whence then does the pleasure of making it arise?
46129Where, then, is the pleasure to begin?
46129Who shall say where this point is?
46129Why do I here make these reflections on what seems an irrelevant subject?
46129and does it tend to prolongation of life to its full extent?
46129and if any such common trait can be disentangled, is it that which also constitutes the essential trait in Truthfulness?
46129how are their respective claims to be satisfied in due degrees?
46129or shall I ramble along the sea- shore?
46129or shall we take the optimist view?
46129or shall we, after weighing pessimistic and optimistic arguments, conclude that the balance is in favor of a qualified optimism?
28901IfHarold had won the battle of Hastings, what would have been the result?
28901A complete science would clear up fully a problem which must occur often to all of us: How do you account for London?
28901And, beyond this, we come to the question, What would be the bearing of our principles upon the institution of marriage, and upon the family bond?
28901Are the merits of making money so great that they are transmissible to posterity?
28901Are we simply to admit that there is no certainty about economical problems, and to fall back upon mere empiricism?
28901Are we to say that"nature"is cruel because the arrangement increases the sum of undeserved suffering?
28901Before we can judge of the individual, we must answer a hundred difficult questions: If he took the right side, did he take it from the right motives?
28901But putting aside the audacity of asking unbelievers to pay for such teaching, one might be tempted to ask, what harm could it really do?
28901But the problem remains, what considerations should be taken into account by the rule itself?
28901But what are the attractive forces which hold together the body politic?
28901But what kind of equality should be desired in order to secure this desirable organic balance?
28901But why does nobody doubt that meteorology might become an exact science?
28901But would it not be simpler to say,"the doctrine is not true,"than to say,"it is true, but means just the reverse of what it was also taken to mean"?
28901But, then, is not that to increase enormously the field of competition?
28901Can that which is true of the physical sciences be applied in any degree to the so- called moral sciences?
28901Can we suppose that the mechanical repetition of a few barren phrases will do either harm or good?
28901Can you give him more than a string of words as meaningless as magical formulæ?
28901Did he foresee the inevitable effect of the measures which he advocated?
28901Did he see what was the real question at issue?
28901Do a common labourer and Mr. Gladstone deserve the same share of voting power?
28901Do we regret the fact?
28901Do you fancy for a moment that you can really teach a child of ten the true meaning of the Incarnation?
28901Does justice imply the equality of the sexes; and, if so, in what sense of"equality"?
28901Does the theory of the"struggle for existence"throw any new light upon the general problem?
28901Does this fact justify inequality in general?
28901Given the facts, what is the rule under which they come?
28901Has he ever really thought about them?
28901Has he, then, a right to inherit what his father has earned?
28901Here, as before, the question is not, who is to be punished?
28901How can it be just to place a being where he is certain to sin, and then to damn him for sinning?
28901How could Dives justify himself for living in purple and fine linen, while Lazarus was lying at the gates, with the dogs licking his sores?
28901How is it that four or five millions of people manage to subsist on an area of a few square miles, which itself produces nothing?
28901How, if at all, does the principle of equality or of social justice enter the problem?
28901If it is monopoly, do you defend monopoly, or only monopoly in some special cases?
28901If not, how many votes should Mr. Gladstone possess to give him his just influence?
28901If the monarchical theory which Charles represented was sound, and Charles was also a wise and good man, what caused the rebellion?
28901If you remove the rewards accessible to the virtuous and peaceful, how are you to keep the penalties which restrain the vicious and improvident?
28901In what sense, then, can co- operation ever be regarded as really opposed to competition?
28901Is he even capable of the imaginative effort necessary to set before him the vast interests often affected?
28901Is he superficially acquainted with any of the relevant facts?
28901Is it better that it should contain a million red men or sixty millions of civilised whites?
28901Is it desirable that it should be otherwise?
28901Is it fair to call a wolf ruthless because he eats a sheep and fails to consider the transaction from the sheep''s point of view?
28901Is it more than a name for a science which may or may not some day come into existence?
28901Is it possible to contrive so to fuse the crude with the refined as to make at least a working compromise?
28901Is it properly to be described as a development or improvement of the"cosmic process,"or as the beginning of a prolonged contest against it?
28901Is it therefore impossible to consider the industrial organisation separately?
28901Is it, as Mill says, monopoly, or is any third choice possible?
28901Is this, then, a reversal of the old state of things-- a combating of a"cosmic process"?
28901It is always, therefore, a relevant question, what is the suggested alternative?
28901It is the question, what is the cause of certain evils?
28901It reflects and gives sensuous images of truth; but it is only the Philistine or the blockhead who can seriously ask, is it true?
28901May not the bad effect be a necessary part of the system to which we also owe the good; or necessary under some conditions?
28901Might we not be certain that they would vanish of themselves?
28901Must not the system have been wrong, when it had so lost all moral weight as to be at the mercy of a ruffianly plunderer?
28901Nay, can we not even co- operate, and put these hopeless controversies aside?
28901Now, I ask, what is the difference which takes place when the monkey gradually loses his tail and sets up a superior brain?
28901Now, is this true of economic science?
28901Now, suppose that the good Samaritan had himself fallen among thieves, what would have been his duty?
28901Or does not the principle of equality still remain as essentially implied in the Utopia which we all desire to construct?
28901Should a man who has been so good as to become rich, be blessed even to the third and fourth generation?
28901Should people be appointed by interest?
28901Should we then infer from such criticisms that the doctrine of Malthus was false, or was of no importance?
28901Should we wish, for example, that America could still be a hunting- ground for savages?
28901Since we ourselves have made, or at any rate constitute, the mechanism, why should it be so puzzling to find out what it is?
28901Suppose, as is likely enough, that Lazarus is as good a man as Midas, ought they not to change places, or to share their property equally?
28901That is the cause, but is it a reason?
28901That suggests my question: If competition is bad, what is good?
28901The obvious reply is, that he really means, What are we to do with our fools?
28901The question, What is good?
28901The respectable citizen asks, What are we to do with our boys?
28901Then upon whom does the disgrace fall?
28901Then, you may proceed, is it not idle to attempt to introduce a scientific method?
28901There is, shall we say, no science of sociology-- merely a heap of vague, empirical observations, too flimsy to be useful in strict logical inference?
28901Was he selfish even in taking something for himself, as the only prop of his family?
28901Was he selfish?
28901Was it from personal ambition or pure patriotism?
28901Was not the Jew a man of sense?
28901We are engaged in working out a gigantic problem: What is the best, in the sense of the most efficient, type of human being?
28901What are the chances that a majority of people, of whom not one in a hundred has any qualifications for judging, will give a right judgment?
28901What do we assume, and how do we reason?
28901What do we mean by investigating facts?
28901What is meant by adding or subtracting in this connection?
28901What is science?
28901What is the alternative to competition?
28901What is the best combination of brains and stomach?
28901What other rule can be suggested?
28901What remains?
28901What, I ask, is the alternative?
28901What, for example, is the just method of distributing taxation?
28901What, let us ask, is the true relation between justice and equality?
28901What, then, is to come in its place?
28901What, we must therefore ask, is the tacit implication as well as what is the immediate purpose of a change?
28901When the rich man could only answer the question,"What have you done to justify your position?"
28901Why not agree to differ about the questions which no one denies to be all but insoluble, and become allies in promoting morality?
28901Why should he also have the father''s fortune, without earning it?
28901Why should there not be parts of the world in which races of inferior intelligence or energy should hold their own?
28901Why should we fear the attempt to instil these fragments of decayed formulæ into the minds of children of tender age?
28901Why should we not say,"To each man according to his deserts"?
28901Why, as a matter of pure justice, should not all fortunes be applied to public uses, on the death of the man who made them?
28901Why, is the obvious answer, did you allow the explosive materials to accumulate, till the first match must fire the train?
28901Why, then, should we, who can not believe in the dogmas, yet fall into line with believers for practical purposes?
28901Will not a society be the better off, in which every man is set to work upon the tasks for which he is most fitted?
28901Will the whole nation consist in larger proportions of active and responsible workers, or of people who are simply burdens upon the real workers?
28901Would we sentence three- quarters of the nation to remain stupid, in order that the fools in the remaining quarter may have a better chance?
28901Yet, why are we to take for granted the equality of men in the sense required for such deductions?
28901that other millions all over the world are engaged in providing for their wants?
36957Who,he asks,"shall arbitrate?"
36957Am I to go on raising the tariff till murder becomes altogether obsolete?
36957Am I to tell our modern Scheherazades to forget the_ Arabian Nights_, and adopt for our use passages from the homilies of Tillotson?
36957And he replies,"Meat, fire, and clothes-- what more?
36957And what determines the constitution with which the child is born?
36957And why?
36957Are we, then, entitled to argue from the great works an organic superiority in the race?
36957But granting this very obvious remark, what harm does"heredity"do us?
36957But in any case, how can a theory about facts make the facts themselves vanish?
36957But is any such dilemma really offered to us?
36957But is it for our happiness to increase them?
36957But is it not bad, in so far as it is selfish?
36957But then, we say, are not all our actions dependent upon our physical constitution?
36957But was not even the noble savage better than the pauper who now hangs on to the fringes of society?
36957But what if I had not done it?
36957But what is precisely the truth expressed?
36957But what is the real cause of the loss of belief?
36957But what would be the good of writing even a_ Hamlet_ or a_ Divine Comedy_ if nobody was to read it?
36957But would the game be worth the candle?
36957But, now, what is the error of the"naturalist"?
36957Conversely, if we elect to be sceptics in theology, how can we escape from scepticism in science?
36957Do not the desires which have been the mainspring of all modern development imply a desire of each man to get rich at the expense of others?
36957Do those facts give me a right to complain if I am taxed equally with my neighbours?
36957Do we give them a wholesome training, provide them with sound knowledge, and stimulate them to real thought?
36957Do we not love Charles Lamb for a similar reason?
36957Does he believe in God or really in a man like himself, and respected precisely because he is like himself?
36957Does not the existence of a currency affect mankind; and if we could not count, could we make use of it?
36957Does our principle hold when we suppose a man to have the necessary sensibilities for the actual enjoyment of wealth?
36957Does the Eastern theory about the_ filioque_ explain it?
36957Does the philosophical revolution underlie the political or religious revolution, or is that to invert cause and effect?
36957Does, then, the occurrence of a group of great men at a certain period prove a superior organisation in the race?
36957First of all, I should ask, what precisely is meant by"the Greeks"?
36957First, what are the admitted facts?
36957Has any human being ever doubted, since mothers were invented, that children are apt to resemble their parents?
36957Has it died out, or has it been swamped by other races?
36957Has not Dives become rich and bloated by force of the very same process which has made Lazarus a mass of sores and misery?
36957Has such- and- such a life been a happy one?
36957Have they not been the source of all that division between rich and poor which makes one side luxurious and the other miserable?
36957Have we made ourselves, and, if we have not, how can we make ourselves, worthy of our position as free men?
36957How are we to decide?
36957How far, on this hypothesis, or, say, setting aside all question of duty to my neighbour, should I be prudent in accumulating wealth?
36957How is the atomic theory obtained?
36957How is this?
36957How many journalists-- I say nothing of statesmen-- stand firmly enough on their own legs to speak out without giving offence?
36957How many years''imprisonment does a man deserve for putting out his neighbour''s eye?
36957How, and in what sense, are they to be regarded as just?
36957How, then, about the Empire of the East?
36957How, then, can it be inferred that the Greeks perished because of defective altruism?
36957I fancy that the thought which naturally occurs to us when we reflect upon such an influence will be: was I, could I, be worthy of it?
36957If I could prevent a murder, or, indeed, achieve any other desirable object, for a given sum, why should I throw away another penny?
36957If a man develops homicidal mania, may not a murderer of the average type excuse himself upon the same ground?
36957If altruism means care for something outside yourself, where could we find better examples of altruism than at Thermopylæ or Marathon?
36957If the criminal asks, How do you justify yourself for punishing me?
36957If the great Kingdoms of the West are the unique example of progress, what is the unique example of decay?
36957If the metaphysical foundation is so uncertain in both cases, must not the scientific be as uncertain as the theological?
36957If this be true, what follows?
36957If we can transmit depravity, why not genius and bodily health?
36957If you ask, therefore, in what sense is a criminal law just?
36957In what way does it come into direct conflict with a moral theory of punishment?
36957Is it not better to hit your hundred than to aim at your million and miss it?
36957Is it not equally reasonable to say that the promise was itself a blessing?
36957Is it the logical argument that is effective?
36957Is not that a rather consoling reflection?
36957Is not the ordinary journalist''s frame of mind singularly unfavourable to his discharge of this function?
36957Is not the truth tacitly acknowledged by the more philosophical religions?
36957Is one brother just equal to a nephew plus a thousand marks?
36957Is the account to be regarded as accurately balanced?
36957Is the hero whom we are invited to worship everything, or is he next to nothing?
36957Is the world on the whole a scene of misery, of restless desires, proving that we are miserable now, and doomed never to obtain satisfaction?
36957Is there any channel open?
36957Is there no difference between him and the maniac; or, rather, what is the nature of the difference which we clearly recognise in practice?
36957Keeping still to the purely hedonistic point of view, I ask, At what point does expenditure become luxurious in a culpable sense?
36957Now, what are the facts which correspond to the facts of heat in the theory of the atonement?
36957On what ground, then, are we to deal with the problem of justice as regards different classes of crime?
36957Or were the Mohammedans more"altruistic"than the Christians?
36957Ought not a man who undertakes to speak as an authority let us know who he is, and therefore with what authority he speaks?
36957Ought the motive to be allowed as an extenuation of the offence?
36957Shall we, with Schopenhauer, pronounce Hegel to be a thorough impostor?
36957That is perfectly true; but to give pleasure to whom?
36957That leads to a very familiar problem: What were the causes of what we may call the flowering times of arts and sciences?
36957The Jews have enormous merits and great intellectual endowments; but can anybody say that they were altruistic in the sense of being cosmopolitan?
36957The answer is pretty sure to have a very melancholy side to it; and it will lead to the question, what part of that fragment was really worth doing?
36957The mediæval peasant who put the question:-- When Adam delved, and Eve span, Who was then the gentleman?
36957The moral problem always depends ultimately upon this: What is the character implied by this conduct?
36957The pauper may fairly reply,"If you really mean that your wealth brings no happiness, why do n''t you change places with me?"
36957The problem is essentially, is this man accessible to the motives by which normal men regulate their conduct?
36957The problem, are we automatic?
36957The question arises, therefore, how far am I to go?
36957The question occurs: What are the qualities by which we should justify our independence?
36957The question, therefore, How rich should I wish to be?
36957There are the same underlying difficulties, and if we manage to overlook them in the case of science, why not overlook them in the case of theology?
36957They say, though the lawyers are rather recalcitrant, that a man suffering from such a mania is not"responsible"; and if asked, why not?
36957To what does it owe its popularity?
36957Was it not due to Greek altruism in this form( some historians would say) that Mr. Kidd is not now living under the rule of a Persian Satrap?
36957We do not simply wish to provide a sufficient motive to decide the individual who is asking himself, shall I steal or not steal?
36957We should ask, what career will on the whole be fullest of enjoyment?
36957Were the Greeks more or less altruistic than other races?
36957Were there not hundreds of people who would have been only too glad to take my place?
36957What are really the most fascinating books in the language?
36957What are the relative positions of the theologian and his opponent during the modern phase of evolution?
36957What does this mean?
36957What has been the influence of these systems upon men''s lives?
36957What is the application of this to our special question?
36957What more, it may be asked, can we do with a criminal?
36957What was this terrible, heart- paralysing truth which the poor man had discovered?
36957What, he may ask, has he done with his talents?
36957What, indeed, are eight or twenty centuries in the life even of this planet?
36957What, then, is the inequality of development which is essential to Mr. Kidd''s argument?
36957What, then, is the meaning of the statement that he is a madman, and therefore excusable?
36957When did they begin and when did they cease to be superior to other people?
36957Why does the British public love Dickens so well?
36957Why is the scepticism harmless in science and fatal in theology?
36957Why should it startle us in a scientific dress?
36957Why should the"sense of reconciliation"vanish because we show the conditions of its existence?
36957Why, again, do we love Scott, as all men ought to love him?
36957Why, if Christianity was the sole cause of progress in one quarter, was it comparable with complete decay in the other?
36957Why?
36957Would not grief be real just as pain would be real if we could clearly explain how and why it occurred?
36957Would our supposed murderer make out a good case for himself?
36957and do we or do we not resemble a previous generation of automata?
36957and is his existence compensated by the existence of other classes who have more wealth than they can use?
36957and is it not inevitable that it should be so as long as the journalist''s only aim is to gain a hearing somehow?
36957and the validity of the inference, is morality meaningless?
36957and then, what material conditions can enable us to follow that career?
36957and, if so, can we seriously accept Schopenhauer''s own system?
36957are questions altogether independent of the question, what particular kind of automata are we?
36957of France, and the wily and cruel rulers of past ages, whose only aim was to enlarge their own powers and wealth?
36957or shall we say that such action is a good in itself, which requires to be supplemented by no vision of any ulterior end?
36957or, what, if anything, have I done to transmit to others the blessings conferred upon me?
36957requires an answer to the previous question, How rich can I be?
36957what am I that such goodness should have come to me?
36957what little fragment has he achieved of what might once have been in his power?
39155If the question as to what moral sanction is means,''What reason is there why morality exists?'' 39155 [ 116] But is this true?
39155( 2) Can any life be said to have a real value; is any life subjectively, is any objectively, preferable?
39155( 2) Why is it good?
39155( 3) How does goodness come into being; how is it maintained; how does it advance?
39155A good shot may be a good one in that it hits the mark; but what if it kill a man?
39155All individuals?
39155And how is self- sacrifice possible?
39155And the moral question as to mortality or immortality is not:"What is the pleasanter to believe?"
39155And what is to be said of the new- born infant, which sucks when the breast is placed between its lips?
39155And what right have they, on their own showing, to administer this chastisement to the lazy man?
39155And why stop, in this case, exactly with the cells of animal life; why not apply our question to those of plant life also?
39155And will he, as such, decide on a division of these means to happiness with B, C, and D, who have not labored to produce them?
39155Are the characteristics of one chemical compound the same as those of another because both compounds are matter and motion?
39155Are we to believe that any property or accident of a thing may change, and the thing remain yet actually the same thing?
39155Are we to look upon the conditions involved in the environment as mere negatives and simply developing the positive potentialities of the germ- plasm?
39155Are we to regard the Creator''s work as like that of a child, who builds houses out of blocks just for the pleasure of knocking them down again?
39155Are we to suppose it, too, as preëxistent,"in a weaker form,"or in any form, in the inorganic?
39155Are we to suppose that the possession of still greater power and so still larger opportunities for fraud would afford the people greater security?
39155Are we to suppose the color blue to be present in certain chemical elements because their chemical compound is blue?
39155As to the belief in immortality, can not the human being do right without the thought of the reward and punishment of another life?
39155Assuming that, by religion, is meant the belief in a personal God and in the immortality of the soul, is this true?
39155Bain, in an essay entitled"Is there Such a Thing as Pure Malevolence?"
39155But how is the individual to be sure as to what, in the single case, is God''s will?
39155But if the eye gives us the truth, then why do we, in the case of color, correct it again by another phase of our experience?
39155But is this, in fact, all we meant by cause?
39155But the question,''Why should I be moral?''
39155But what do we mean by end?
39155But what is in man artificial and what is natural?
39155But what is the degree of relinquishment which will suffice to raise all the poor to a plane of comfort?
39155But what is there in Fechner''s remarks that stands in need of such a reference?
39155But what_ is_ an object, as present to me, beyond what it is to my consciousness?
39155But who shall decide what part or form of force, what factors of the universe are accidental and what essential?
39155But yet, which is, in the last analysis, the more important to the explosion of the magazine-- spark or powder?
39155By the inward testimony?
39155By what right do these determinists make use of the expression"can but will not"?
39155Can any one contest this?
39155Can one do more than one''s duty?
39155Do we find anything here except blind law?
39155Do we love father and mother, brother or sister, wife or child, or our friends, for God''s sake?
39155Does good action, then, depend on the bad man as well as on the good?
39155Does only one of our senses give us truth?
39155Exactly what is it that is meant by the alteration of organization which is pronounced unnecessary to the"virtual"alteration of human faculties?
39155For if two pleasures or pains be equal, what does it matter where they came from?
39155Has this evolution been a mistake?
39155Have we any direct knowledge of consciousness except in connection with certain normal conditions of our own brain?
39155Heat may exist without light, but is light therefore less essential than heat, where it arises?
39155How are such judgments as these possible?
39155How are we to define"the good man of former days"?
39155How do we know even whether the impaled butterfly is endeavoring to escape pain or merely attempting to continue its flight?
39155How far are the moral qualities acquired in one generation inherited by the next?
39155How have we such an intimate acquaintance with the nature of matter and motion that we can assert this?
39155How is any solution to be arrived at?
39155How is he to distinguish certainly between such and his own natural thoughts and feelings; what means of distinction can be applied?
39155How is the forgiveness of sins by God to be justified?
39155How is the general rule, as distinguished from other rules, deduced from the general principle of social vitality?
39155How shall I order my life?
39155How should we understand other species?
39155How, then, did this sense arise, and what is its nature and composition?
39155If pleasure is but a part of the standard of morality, is it, then, the object of conduct?
39155If so, how is it chosen?
39155If so, what physiological function can we call inherent and essential, since these all also arise with evolution?
39155If so, why not substitute for the term"cause of motion,""component factors of motion"?
39155If the solution is impossible, however, why attempt it?
39155If we ask for the ground of the greatest happiness principle, we come to an_ a priori_ belief also; for whence is the postulate?
39155Is feeling the result of thought, or thought the result of feeling?
39155Is it admitted?
39155Is it denied that acts classed as good and bad differ in their effects?
39155Is it selfish to renounce one''s greatest happiness in order to attain only peace of conscience?
39155Is it the length of the wave which causes the color, or the color which causes the particular wave- length?
39155Is it well to examine the principles of such a system from a scientific standpoint?
39155Is social development the cause of an increase in sympathy, or is the increase of sympathy the cause of social progress and prosperity?
39155Is the bell the less silver to my eye because it appeals to my ear with sound, or the ball the less round to touch because my field of vision is flat?
39155Is the connection of these two general?
39155Is the principle of Authority to decide this?
39155Is the sacrifice worth making?
39155Is the_ intelligibile_ character born?
39155Is there anything further to prove?
39155It does not suffice to answer that God''s justice is not our justice; for in that case, what right have we to apply the word to him at all?
39155Its practical task is to answer the important question: How am I to act?
39155May it not also be the physical cause?
39155May not one human being''s capacity for happiness be greater than another''s, and his happiness, therefore, more to be considered?
39155May not the seeming dimness, however, be due to the incomplete function of memory when turned to events that transpired under its influence?
39155Of the fact that Lange"feels the lack of the proof of this''Tendency to Stability,''"Dr. Petzoldt says:"But how is there a need of proof here?
39155Of what nature were the motives of our ape- like progenitors, and of what nature the first motive that appeared in the universe?
39155On what grounds is this claim based?
39155Or are we to believe that the sense- function alone is essential and not also some actuality in its object, as of this or that color?
39155Or how could the responsibility of the legislative and administrative functions to the people be still better secured than it is anywhere at present?
39155Or how do we know in any case, from an origin, what might evolve with time?
39155Or how is it that even isomeric compounds may exhibit different qualities?
39155Or how, then, are we to distinguish which of other wishes and needs of our nature should, and which should not, be gratified?
39155Or is a minimum of interference the cause of pleasure and of function in a particular direction?
39155Or is function the cause of pleasure?
39155Or is habit the cause of function?
39155Or is increase of population the cause of both by forcing men to companionship?
39155Or is not, rather, continued exercise of function the cause of the absence of interference wherever and as far as it exists?
39155Or is not, rather, increase of population the effect of prosperity?
39155Or is pleasure the cause of continued exercise of function?
39155Or to what length must we go, to what grade of luxury must we descend in our reforms, in order to secure this?
39155Or why should we draw a line here between the movements of animals and all other movements?
39155Or will the perfect kingdom of righteousness one day prevail?
39155Or, conversely: Is lack of sympathy and altruism in general a sign of mental incapacity, of the power of comprehension for another''s suffering?
39155Or, if we are to return, who shall tell us at just what point we leave the"artificial"and arrive at the"natural"?
39155Seldom reflecting that still the new question comes upon us: What is Madness, what are Nerves?
39155Shall we regard the color as not essentially connected with the chemical constitution of the supposed compound?
39155So far as human development supposes an organic change in the individual[?
39155The answer depends upon the answer to the previous question: What is it to be virtuous?
39155The answer to the question: What would happen if every one were to act thus?
39155The first question which presents itself in Individual Ethics is: How is the individual to educate himself to an ethical personality?
39155The method which explains life by the assumption of sensible atoms is a much shorter and easier one; but is it not likewise a method of greater risk?
39155The question is not: Are the extremes of criminality connected with mental incapacity?
39155The question is: What end shall human perfection realize?
39155The question may be asked: Should one, in case of doubt, follow one''s own conviction, or join the side it is thought will prevail?
39155The question of science is not: Wherefore is any creature in the world?
39155The question, Is life worth living?
39155The question: Why shall I act in accordance with the general welfare?
39155These three parts are represented by the questions:( 1) What is it that is good?
39155They act in accordance with the law, without being in possession of the law, and what objection can Ethics have to offer to this?
39155To what are the terms good and bad applied?
39155W. H. ROLPH"BIOLOGICAL PROBLEMS"("Biologische Probleme,"1884) For what purpose are we in the world?
39155Was Luther''s Picture of the Devil less a Reality, whether it were formed within the bodily eye or without it?"
39155Was it not from conviction that Aristotle asserted the right of slavery, and Calvin, with Melancthon''s approval, sent Servetus to the stake?
39155We may argue that mere matter and motion can not have produced such results as these; but how do we know this?
39155We may still ask: How is the relation between the different instincts, the influence exerted by each member of the federation, determined?
39155What are our essences as separated from their properties and accidents?
39155What do we mean by cause?
39155What do we mean here by"altruism,"and what by"beginning"?
39155What does its goodness mean?
39155What ethical significance could it have that here a feeling of pain or pleasure not arising from the action itself, is added to it?
39155What grounds have we for assuming the existence of consciousness where the analogy of our own organization does not furnish us with an argument?
39155What individual?
39155What is his actual aim, that is, his endeavor?
39155What is the ideal?
39155What is the sanction of morality?
39155What manner of obliteration is this?
39155What, then, is the relative value of different kinds of efficiency?
39155Whence have we any grounds for assuming that that which we know only in connection with a certain peculiar organization exists elsewhere?
39155Where is the beginning of feeling and what was feeling in the beginning?
39155Where is there, on closer analysis, passivity as distinguished from activity?
39155Where were we at the origin of the universe( if we suppose such) or where were we at the origin of life, that we should be able to be assured of this?
39155Where, then, is the justice of his punishment?
39155Which is most truly an element in the desired felicity, content or aspiration?
39155Which one of these myriad material parts interacting at any moment shall we single out as the cause of the succeeding state?
39155Which, for instance, shall we regard as the cause of an evil act-- the character of a man or the temptation offered by circumstances?
39155Why can not we accept the simple fact of concomitance in this case also?
39155Why is it represented as wrong to follow Satan''s commands and right to follow God''s will?
39155Why may it not arise, as do sight and hearing, by gradual evolution, as a function of special organisms?
39155Why may not nearly all, if not all of them, be thus explained, and consciousness be regarded as the exclusive property of man?
39155Why may we not love all men, as we love our friends and children, for their own sake?
39155Why should a man be virtuous?
39155Why, indeed, should the patient scream if not in pain?
39155Why, then, do I find such great difficulty in reconciling the simple facts of consciousness and brain- activity?
39155Will this war of the good with the evil always continue?
39155With all these facts before us, how are we to decide as to the end in view in any non- human act?
39155[ 194] Cause or effect, which?
39155and how have we ever arrived at the possession of other motives than these?
39155and what is the significance of feeling as pleasure and of feeling as pain with respect to the will?
39155but"What is the truth?"
39155but, Is the power of intellectual comprehension, is intelligence, always associated with sympathy and altruism?
39155but: What is he?
39155involves two:( 1) Is it actually preferable to the creature who lives it?
39155means, most naturally and usually, What inducements are there to me to do right?"
39155what is the end which it has in view in taking nourishment?
39155which of the two is to be accorded the greater importance with regard to the will?