道徳感情論
- 言語:
- 英語
- 状態:
- 完全な作品
- 著者性:
- 著者自身による
- テキストの状態:
- 良好なテキスト
- 分量:
- 約 120,000 語 · 579 節
この作品を引用
- APAアダム・スミス. (n.d.). 道徳感情論. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/adam-smith/the-theory-of-moral-sentiments
- MLAアダム・スミス. "道徳感情論." SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/adam-smith/the-theory-of-moral-sentiments.
- Chicagoアダム・スミス. 道徳感情論. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/adam-smith/the-theory-of-moral-sentiments.
何についての本か
アダム・スミスの最初の書、一七五九年。道徳的な判断がいかにして生じるかを説く。理性からでも戒律からでもなく、他人の立場に身を置く能力からである、と。
背景と歴史
その仕組みが「同感」(sympathy)だ。ここでは憐れみのことではなく、他人の境遇にあれば自分は何を感じるだろうかと想い描く力を指す。この働きから「公平な観察者」が生まれる。自分の振舞いを引き比べる内なる人物であり、良心の役を務める。この書は『国富論』の後よりも前に読むほうがよい。長らく「アダム・スミス問題」ということが言われてきた。同感を書いた人物と自愛を書いた人物とは相容れぬのではないか、というのである。スミス自身はそう見ていなかったし、この書の改訂を没年まで続けた。もう一方の書から三十年後のことである。彼の職は道徳哲学の教授であって経済学者ではない。これこそが彼の中心の書だ。
これは編集上の背景であり、引用できる典拠ではありません。作品本文の一節とは異なり、これらの記述はコーパスで検証できません。
How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it, except the pleasure of seeing it. Of this kind is pity or compassion, the emotion which we feel for the misery of others, when we either see it, or are made to conceive it in a very lively manner. That we often derive sorrow from the sorrow of others, is a matter of fact too obvious to require any instances to prove it; for this sentiment, like all the other original passions of human nature, is by no means confined to the virtuous and humane, though they perhaps may feel it with the most exquisite sensibility. The greatest ruffian, the most hardened violator of the laws of society, is not altogether without it. As we have no immediate experience of what other men feel, we can form no idea of the manner in which they are affected, but by conceiving what we ourselves should feel in the like situation. Though our brother is upon the rack, as long as we ourselves are at our ease, our senses will never inform us of what he suffers. They never did and never can carry us beyond our own person, and it is by the imagination only that we can form any conception of what are his sensations. Neither can that faculty help us to this any other way, than by representing to us what would be our own, if we were in his case. It is the impressions of our own senses only, not those of his, which our imaginations copy. By the imagination we place ourselves in his situation, we conceive ourselves enduring all the same torments, we enter as it were into his body and become in some measure him, and thence form some idea of his sensations and even feel something which, though weaker in degree, is not altogether unlike them.…