thetic affections, as parental, filial and conjugal love, compassion for the distressed, love of country, and the like; affections of antipathy or repellent affections, as anger, revenge, fear, and antipathies of race. All these are common to man and the higher orders of brutes. The Moral, pertaining to the Right; The Esthetic, pertaining to the ideally perfect; The Teleological, pertaining to the Good which reason adjudges to be worthy of the pursuit and enjoyment of rational beings; The Religious, pertaining to Absolute being or God. These have been noticed sufficiently for my purpose in discussing the fundamental ideas of Reason. 63. The Desire of Happiness as a Motive. According to this analysis, happiness or enjoyment is a static condition and is not a motive to action. When a man is happy, his happiness does not of itself move him to seek something else; on the contrary, he is disposed to rest in his happiness. We have seen, however, that the desire of happiness may be a motive to action; when a man abstracts enjoyment from its sources, conditions and consequences, and compares simply enjoyment and suffering, he naturally desires the former rather than the latter. This motive, however, involving such a process of abstraction, cannot be a frequent motive of human action. The common motives are the instincts, desires and affections, the physical and rational impulses which terminate on specific objects. We see, then, from a new point of view how exceedingly far from truth is the assertion, already disproved, that the desire of happiness is the ultimate motive of all moral action. We may also notice here an important fact that so far as the desire of enjoyment does supplant other motives and become the ruling motive of action, it becomes morbid and hurtful. And this the whole history of the world verifies. This is the very characteristic of a period of luxury and effeminacy; people make the most diligent study of ways to enjoy themselves. They live for that end. And while debasing themselves, they miss the enjoyment. Apicius could not sleep because the rose-leaves lay too thickly on him. From the same source come the selfishness and sensitiveness of excessive refinement and delicacy. So in æsthetics, when persons begin to seek enjoyment, they cease to admire the beauty and miss the enjoyment. One who walks abroad scenehunting, does not find nor enjoy the beauty of nature; and great galleries are a weariness to him who is seeking enjoyment instead of sincerely admiring beauty. When enjoyment, which is legitimately the consequent of following some motive, itself supplants the motive, it becomes a morbid and dangerous desire of excitement. For example, one has an appetite for food and he enjoys eating. Suppose now that his mind fixes on the pleasure of eating and he desires that, instead of desiring food; then he becomes an epicure, a gourmand; he devises ways to increase and prolong the pleasure of eating, even to the disgusting device of the Romans— vomere post coenam. And thus he spoils his enjoyment. Similar is the result of the use of alcoholic drinks. The drinker ceases to enjoy the drink; he seeks the excitement. Similar is the mental intoxication of excessive novel-reading. Similar is the result in the religious life, when one no longer seeks God and lives to serve men, but seeks the exhilaration of religious enjoyment. And the result, in all these most diverse and yet similar is to deaden the sensibilities, to benumb the capacity of enjoyment and to create a necessity for more highly-spiced condiments, for more sensational stories-and sermons-and to destroy the susceptibility to the joys of common life. cases, 64. Feeling a Source of Knowledge. The feelings are a source of knowledge in the following particulars: Feeling is always conscious feeling. A pain or pleasure of which the person is unconscious would not be a pain or pleasure; it would not be a feeling. In this sense feeling is a kind of knowing. Man has knowledge of objects through feeling. In sensation man perceives the outward object; in sorrow man is conscious of himself as sorrowing. So when God's Spirit works in the human spirit, in the spiritual motives and emotions man may know God; and thus that may be "spiritually discerned" which is "foolishness" to "the natural man." Feelings may be a source of knowledge by our inferring their cause or object. An instinct indicates a corresponding reality. A young bird's instinct to fly indicates the possibility of flying; a rabbit's instinctive timidity indicates the reality of danger; a sinner's spontaneous fear of judgment indicates the reality of moral law and government. They are also motives interesting us in seeking knowledge. And on the feelings, candor and impartiality in the investigation of facts and truth depend. CHAPTER XV. THE WILL. 65. Definition. I. THE will is the power of a person, in the light of reason and with susceptibility to the influence of rational motives, to determine the ends or objects to which he will direct his energy, and the exertion of his energy with reference to the determined end or object. II. The will is a person's power of self-determination. It is his power of determining the exercise of his own causal efficiency or energy. He can determine the object or end to which he will direct it; he can exert it or call it into action when he will; he can refrain from exerting it when he will. He has power of self-direction, self-exertion and self-restraint. This power is the will. Its function is to determine the exercise of power. Its acts are determinations. We call it the power of self-determination. 1. The determinations of the will are of two kinds-Choice and Volition. In choice a person determines the object or end to which he will direct his energies. In volition a person he refuses to do so. exerts his energies or calls them into action; or Volition is a determination because a person exerts his energies or refrains from exerting them at will. He determines whether to exert them or not. The motor force of a stone, on the contrary, is not exerted by the stone, but is communicated to it. Choice is self-direction. Volition is self-exertion or self-restraint. Both are self-determinations. 2. The will must be distinguished from the causal efficiency or power whose action the will determines. Every determination of will presupposes that the person is constitutionally endowed with causal efficiency or potency. The existence of power or efficiency is essential to the very conception of a will. If there is no power to be exerted and directed, there can be no will to exert and direct it. But causal efficiency is not a distinctive peculiarity of will. Material objects have causal efficiency. They, however, cannot direct it, nor exert or refrain from exerting it of themselves. Electricity is a power. But it cannot determine the direction nor the exertion of its energy. The lightning cannot select the tree which it will strike nor determine when it will exert its energy and strike it. The distinctive peculiarity of will is that it is a power capable of choosing the end or object to which it will direct its energy and of exerting or refraining to exert its energy. Man constitutionally has intellectual power; he knows and thinks. His will does not create this power of knowing and thinking; it simply chooses the object of thought and exerts the intellectual power upon it in fixed attention. Man by his constitution has physical power. His will does not create this physical power; it simply selects its object and exerts the power in the direction determined. Both the intellectual and the physical powers are trained and developed under this exercise. But the will does not create this constitutional capacity of growth; it merely exerts and directs the powers so that the growth is realized. While, then, the will presupposes power or causal efficiency, it is not merely that. The power becomes will only when of itself it can determine the end for which it will act, and can exert its energies or refrain from exerting them for the chosen end. 3. The determinations of the will are distinguished from the sensibilities. They are neither motives nor emotions; they are distinct from all instincts, desires, affections, from all the optative part of human nature, from all the sensibilities, whether natural or rational. Hunger is a motive to seek food and eat. But hunger is not the choice of fish instead of meat for dinner, nor is it the determination to go fishing in order to get it. Man is the subject of many motives impelling him to many and often incompatible objects or ends of action. Impelled by these motives, man by his will determines among all these objects one to which he will direct his action. The choice of the will stands forth entirely distinct from the motives and the emotions, and determines the action. If the man's end and course of action are determined by his feelings, he has no free-will. He simply follows, as a brute, the impulse of nature which at the moment is strongest. 4. The determinations of the will must be distinguished from the determinations and conclusions of the intellect. A determination by the intellect is simply a definition. It is noting in thought the limits or boundaries of anything, as its form and position in space, or its date and duration in time; or it is noting the qualities of a particular concrete reality, or the contents of a logical concept or general notion. Less properly the comparison of objects concluding in a judgment is called an intellectual determination; as one compares different courses of action and judges one of them to be the right one, or the expedient, or the agreeable; or he compares different objects and judges one to be the most beautiful or the most desirable. This, however, is a determination merely of the thought, not of the efficient energies; it concludes merely in a judgment, not in a choice or a volition. A man may be intellectually convinced that one of several courses of action is right, and yet determine to take the contrary; he may be intellectually convinced that a certain character is perfect, or that the possession of a certain object would be agreeable, and yet not choose the character or object as the end to be attained by action. In the determinations of the will is something other than the determinations of the intellect. The will determines not thought, but the efficient energies. In its choice of an object it directs the energies upon the chosen object as the end of action; in its volition it exerts them or calls them into action; it controls them whether in action or at rest, whether potencies or energies. III. Power is constituted will by being endowed with Reason. A rational power is a will. Because man is rational he is able to compare all ends and methods and motives of action and determine among them the motive which he will follow, the ends for which he will act, and when, where and how he will exert his energies for the end chosen. Power endowed with Reason is self-directive in choice and self-exertive in volition; in both it is self-determining. A Will is the name of the mind itself considered as self-determining; just as Reason is the mind itself considered as rational. The names designate two aspects or powers of the person, yet but one indivisible person. If you regard the person as Will, he is a rational Will. If you regard him as Reason, he is an energizing and self-determining Reason; or, as Kant says, "The Will is nothing other than the Practical Reason." That rationality is of the essence of will, that power is constituted will by rationality, is a fact of fundamental importance, and is a clew that guides us through the maze of controversy on the subject. Had this fact been appreciated, the confusion of tongues in discussing the freedom of the will might not have been inflicted on us. Prof. Henry P. Tappan, for example, and others define the will as mere power, and thus, while advocating free-will, identify it with a necessary force of nature. 66. Choice and Volition. I. The distinction of choice and volition is a real one. It is not, however, commonly formulated in the discussion of the will, and the names choice and volition are not commonly recognized as designating two kinds of determination, the determination of the object or end of the action, and of the exertion of the powers in action for the end |