In this blog post, we will examine whether morality stems from reason or emotion, focusing on Adam Smith’s theory of moral sentiment.
What is the hidden nature inherent in humans that ensures order and harmony in a society of free individuals? In 18th-century England, there were two approaches to this question: one sought the principles of social order in individual reason, while the other focused on the innate moral sentiments inherent in individuals. Adam Smith, who belonged to the latter school of thought, saw the core of moral sentiment as the capacity for empathy that all humans possess.
The empathy he refers to means that the observer achieves emotional harmony with the actor through imagination and putting oneself in the other’s shoes. An impartial observer, who is not biased by his own interests, imagines what emotions he would feel and what actions he would take in the situation and circumstances faced by the actor. Then, he compares this with the emotions and actions of the actor as observed in reality, and if the two match, he empathizes with the actor. At this point, the observer approves the emotions and actions of the actor as appropriate, and if they differ from what they imagined, they are seen as inappropriate.
This principle of empathy also applies when an individual judges their own emotions and actions. Even within an individual, there is a self that acts as an actor dominated by selfish impulses and a self that takes the position of an observer through imagination and reflects on their actions. This observer is another self who objectively judges the appropriateness of emotions and actions without being bound by vested interests. Smith described this abstract being as a “hypothetical impartial observer” or “ideal human being in the mind.” One’s emotions and actions are approved as moral by the sympathy of such an observer.
From this perspective, even if an actor’s actions are selfish rather than altruistic, they can be approved as moral if they gain the sympathy of a fair observer. If a fair observer agrees that they would have acted in the same way if they were in the same situation as the actor, then the actor’s selfish actions can be approved as moral. On the other hand, even altruistic acts may not be recognized as moral if they are not appropriate. For example, it is difficult to gain the sympathy of a fair observer when someone devotes himself entirely to altruistic acts for others without caring for himself or his family.
He defined altruism as the extension of altruistic acts to the extent that they can gain the sympathy of an impartial observer, and justice as the suppression of selfish acts to the extent that they can gain the sympathy of an impartial observer. Altruism is a positive act of kindness toward others, so even if people do not practice it, it does not provoke feelings of retaliation in others. This is because benevolence has beneficiaries but no victims. However, if justice is not upheld, it is easy to infringe on the life, body, property, and honor of others, which ultimately leads to feelings of retaliation. Therefore, he believed that violations of justice must be strictly regulated.
In this regard, Smith emphasized the distinction between benevolence and justice in terms of their social functions and meanings, saying the following. “Benevolence is less important than justice for the preservation of society.” Society can exist even without mutual affection among its members, but when justice is violated, chaos reaches its peak and the very existence of society becomes impossible. In other words, justice is the foundation of society, and it is human moral sentiment, or sympathy, that makes justice exist.
Adam Smith discusses these concepts in more detail in his book The Theory of Moral Sentiments. He argued that human moral sentiment is not only important on an individual level, but also plays a key role in maintaining harmony and order in society as a whole. In particular, he believed that the ability to understand and empathize with others through imagination is essential for forming and strengthening social bonds. In this way, sympathy acts as a fundamental bond in human society, enabling individuals and society to develop in a mutually complementary manner.
Smith also believed that moral sentiment plays an important role in economic activity. In The Wealth of Nations, he explained that free competition in the market can be regulated in a way that promotes social welfare through the perspective of impartial observers, even when actors are pursuing their own interests. This is related to the concept of the invisible hand and supports his argument that selfish behavior by individuals can ultimately lead to the prosperity of society as a whole. Therefore, in Smith’s thinking, economic freedom and moral responsibility form an interdependent relationship.
Smith’s insight is still valid today. The importance of moral sentiment is increasingly emphasized in modern society, serving as an important criterion for resolving various social and economic issues. For example, concepts such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) and ethical consumption all reflect the efforts of individuals and companies to evaluate and adjust their behavior from the perspective of a fair observer. This clearly shows how Smith’s principle of sympathy can be applied in modern society.
In conclusion, Adam Smith believed that the moral sentiments inherent in human beings play an important role in maintaining social order and harmony. His theory of sympathy explains the basis of individual moral judgment and social interaction, and it remains an important principle that can be applied throughout society and the economy. Smith’s ideas continue to have a significant impact on modern society, suggesting that the importance of moral sentiment is timeless.
