NewThoughtLibrary.com / DivineLibrary.org

most necessary part of the process by which we arrive at a practical conclusion as to a line of action, whether it be right or wrong. The usefulness of an action, in a broad and deep sense of the word, is a correct criterion of its moral character; it becomes, therefore, very difficult to show, that it does not cover the entire ethical element.

The quality right, like the quality beauty, is seen in an intellection, that is, in an act whose relations and bearings backward and forward have been inquired into and settled. What are the results which flow from it? What are the feelings it expresses? How will it work forward in the world of facts? How does it work backward on the emotions? These are the inquiries which disclose to us the intellectual bearings of the action, and prepare us to pronounce wisely on its character; they are also those which determine its utility. So far the ground is common to the two theories, sensualistic and intuitive. At this point they diverge. Says the one philosopher, these facts exhaust the grounds of intellectual action; says the other, they prepare the conditions of a final, intuitive act overlooked by you, pronouncing the action not useful or otherwise, but right or wrong. The last words are not, and can not be measured by the first. In the intellection which we have reached in part at least as you have reached it, we discover a farther transcendent relation to ourselves, which we term right, and from which springs all our ethical action. In this we affirm we have the testimony of language with us, which by no means confounds, or allows us to confound, these two notions of the right and the useful. Nay, it separates them in clean and clear division from each other, reserving an emphasis for the one which it never thinks of bestowing on the other.

It is, however, when the emotional element is considered, that the utilitarian theory is seen to be most obviously