バートランド・ラッセル『ヒューマン・ソサエティ-倫理学から政治学へ』13-04- Human Society in Ethics and Politics, 1954
* 原著:Human Society in Ethics and Politics, 1954* 邦訳書:バートランド・ラッセル(著),勝部真長・長谷川鑛平(共訳)『ヒューマン・ソサエティ-倫理学から政治学へ』(玉川大学出版部,1981年7月刊。268+x pp.)
『ヒューマン・ソサエティ』第13章:倫理的制裁 n.4 |
Human Society in Ethics and Politics, 1954, chapter 13: Ethical Sanctions, n.4 | |||
|
In this respect conventional moralists, whose system has a theological basis, consider themselves in a much stronger position than those who adopt some such system as I have been advocating. Locke, for example, is able to get completely satisfactory results by a straightforward appeal to unadulterated egoism. He thinks that those who do right go to Heaven and those who do wrong go to Hell. It follows that the prudent egoist will do right. Prudence therefore is the only virtue that Locke thinks necessary. Bentham, who no longer believed in Heaven and Hell, thought that good institutions here on earth could have much the same effect. Criminals were to be incarcerated in his panopticon, which radiated from a centre and had a skilfully devised system of mirrors so that the head gaoler, like a spider in the middle of his web, could view simultaneously all that the criminals were doing. The head gaoler in this system replaced the Eye of God. When criminals did right, they were rewarded; when they did wrong, they were punished. Consequently - so Bentham maintained - they would all do right. Unfortunately, even if he had obtained all the support for his panopticon that in his most optimistic moments he hoped for, there would still have been people not in prison, and for them other arrangements would have been necessary. Nor is it quite clear why the head gaoler should be virtuous. It cannot be said, therefore, that Bentham's substitute for theological sanctions is wholly satisfactory. |