《introduction to the metaphysic of morals》

下载本书

添加书签

introduction to the metaphysic of morals- 第6部分


按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!

former be defined by the latter? It could only be by a definition

which would add to the practical conception of the free…will; its

exercise as shown by experience; but this would be a hybrid definition

which would exhibit the conception in a false light。

  A morally practical law is a proposition which contains a

categorical imperative or command。 He who commands by a law (imperans)

is the lawgiver or legislator。 He is the author of the obligation that

accompanies the law; but he is not always the author of the law

itself。 In the latter case; the law would be positive; contingent; and

arbitrary。 The law which is imposed upon us a priori and

unconditionally by our own reason may also be expressed as

proceeding from the will of a supreme lawgiver or the Divine will。

Such a will as supreme can consequently have only rights and not

duties; and it only indicates the idea of a moral being whose will

is law for all; without conceiving of him as the author of that will。

  Imputation; in the moral sense; is the judgement by which anyone

is declared to be the author or free cause of an action which is

then regarded as his moral fact or deed; and is subjected to law。 When

the judgement likewise lays down the juridical consequences of the

deed; it is judicial or valid (imputatio judiciaria s。 valida);

otherwise it would be only adjudicative or declaratory (imputatio

dijudicatoria)。 That person… individual or collective… who is invested

with the right to impute actions judicially; is called a judge or a

court (judex s。 forum)。

  When any one does; in conformity with duty; more than he can be

compelled to do by the law; it is said to be meritorious (meritum)。

What is done only in exact conformity with the law; is what is due

(debitum)。 And when less is done than can be demanded to be done by

the law; the result is moral demerit (demeritum) or culpability。

  The juridical effect or consequence of a culpable act of demerit

is punishment (paena); that of a meritorious act is reward (praemium);

assuming that this reward was promised in the law and that it formed

the motive of the action。 The coincidence or exact conformity of

conduct to what is due has no juridical effect。 Benevolent

remuneration (remuneratio s。 repensio benefica) has no place in

juridical relations。

  The good or bad consequences arising from the performance of an

obligated action… as also the consequences arising from failing to

perform a meritorious action… cannot be imputed to the agent (modus

imputation is tollens)。 The good consequences of a meritorious action…

as also the bad consequences of a wrongful action… may be imputed to

the agent (modus imputation is poneus)。

  The degree of the imputability of actions is to be reckoned

according to the magnitude of the hindrances or obstacles which it has

been necessary for them to overcome。 The greater the natural

hindrances in the sphere of sense; and the less the moral hindrance of

duty; so much the more is a good deed imputed as meritorious。 This may

be seen by considering such examples as rescuing a man who is an

entire stranger from great distress; and at very considerable

sacrifice。 Conversely; the less the natural hindrance; and the greater

the hindrance on the ground of duty; so much the more is a

transgression imputable as culpable。 Hence the state of mind of the

agent or doer of a deed makes a difference in imputing its

consequences; according as he did it in passion or performed it with

coolness and deliberation。





                              …THE END…

小提示:按 回车 [Enter] 键 返回书目,按 ← 键 返回上一页, 按 → 键 进入下一页。 赞一下 添加书签加入书架