According to Adam Smith, people are by their very nature endowed with the sense of morality. In its turn, this presupposes that, while deciding in favor of a particular course of action, which will affect others, individuals do strive to assess the extent of this action’s moral appropriateness.
Nevertheless, there is much subjectivity in how they do it because the universally applicable rules of a moral behavior do not necessarily correlate with what happened to be the essence of each particular individual’s ethical longings.
This is why, as practice indicates, people’s affiliation with the rules of morality often appears rather superficial: “Many men behave very decently… (but) never felt the sentiment upon the propriety of which we found our approbation of their conduct” (Smith par. 1).
The reason for this is that, contrary to what many people think, the rules of morality are simultaneously ‘given’ (by God) and continuously formed, in regards to what happened to be the affiliated external circumstances. As such, they are better defined as social constructs, meant to ensure the society’s proper functioning.
What causes many people to disregard the rules of morality, while facing life-challenges, is that there is a certain inconsistency between people’s longing towards justice and their irrational expectation for this longing to be rewarded.
While justifying his line of reasoning, in this respect, Smith points out to the fact that people are predetermined to seek truth and justice, as their foremost priority in life: “What is agreeable to our moral faculties, is fit, and right, and proper to be done; the contrary wrong, unfit, and improper” (par. 5).
Therefore, it is only natural for them to expect that, while acting in the morally virtuous manner, they should face the prospect of an eventual compensation: “What is the reward most proper for encouraging industry, prudence, and circumspection? Success in every sort of business” (par. 9).
Nevertheless, as practice indicates, such people’s expectation often remains in vain, as the laws of nature do not always favor morally virtuous individuals. Quite on the contrary – it is specifically people’s willingness to defy the rules of a conventional morally, which usually makes it possible for them to be able to attain a social prominence.
As Smith noted: “The natural course of things decides it in favor of the knave: the natural sentiments of mankind in favor of the man of virtue” (par. 9). This, however, does not provide people with a good enough excuse to behave immorally. The reason for this is apparent – while engaging with the notion of justice, individuals tend to overlook what accounts for the appropriateness of their application of this notion when it comes to judging others.
For example, it is often being the case that, when exposed to the sight of a con-master enjoying riches, they assume that this can well serve the indication of the fact that there is no justice in the universe. After all, there are many honest and yet poor individuals out there.
However, it rarely occurs to people that this situation can be well explained by the fact that; whereas the earlier mentioned con-master happened to be a hard-working individual, his honest and poor counterparts are lazy. In other words, it is namely the people’s lack of perceptual objectivity, which causes them to misinterpret the workings of God and consequently, to defy the rules of conventional morality.
The earlier outlined line of Smith’s logic has led him to suggest that, despite these rules often appear to be rather ineffective, this is nothing but an illusion. God himself passed down these rules to people. This is the reason why individuals can never cease observing them while facing life-challenges – even when in their eyes; there is very little practical sense in it.
Being the subjects of God, people are simply in no position to doubt the legitimacy of divinely inspired moral rules: “The very thought of disobedience appears to involve in it the most shocking impropriety. How vain, how absurd would it be for man, either to oppose or to neglect the commands that were laid upon him by Infinite Wisdom, and Infinite Power” (par. 12).
It is the fact that following these commandments is never easy, which justifies the idea that they must be followed, in the first place. Only by being able to suppress their animalistic urges, while opting in favor of remaining faithful to the conventional rules of morality, that people can expect the actual fulfillment of their destinies.
Smith suggests that the prospect of being placed in the ‘kingdom of heaven’, as a reward for their willingness to act morally while on Earth, should provide people with a strong enough incentive to act as God expects them to. According to him: “We may escape the observation of man, or be placed above the reach of human punishment, yet we are always acting under the eye, and exposed to the punishment of God, the great avenger of injustice” (par. 12).
Thus, Smith’s conceptualization of the rules of morality presupposes that these rules’ validity is best confirmed, in regards to what appears to be their very source – the God himself.
Works Cited
Smith, Adam. “Chap. V: Of the Influence and Authority of the General Rules of Morality, and that they are Justly Regarded as the Laws of the Deity.” The Theory of Moral Sentiments 1759. Web.