1havestatedtheRelationofEthicstoPolitics——regardedfromanethicalpointofview——thatseemstometoaccordwiththedefinitionoftheformersubjectadoptedintheprecedingchapter。Somethinkers，however，takeaviewofEthicalTheorywhichinvolvesarelationtoPoliticalTheoryquitedifferentfromthatjust-setforth；regardingTheoreticalor``Absolute’’Ethicsasproperlyaninvestigationnotofwhatoughttobedonehereandnow，butofwhatoughttobetherulesofbehaviourinasocietyofideallyperfecthumanbeings。Thusthesubjectmatterofourstudywouldbedoublyideal:asitwouldnotonlyprescribewhatoughttobedoneasdistinctfromwhatis，butwhatoughttobedoneinasocietythatitselfisnot，butonlyoughttobe。InthisviewtheconclusionsofTheoreticalor``Absolute’’
　　EthicswouldhaveasindirectanduncertainarelationtothepracticalproblemsofactuallifeasthoseofTheoreticalPolitics:——orevenmoreso，asinsoberpoliticaltheoryitiscommonlyonlythegovernmentandnotthegovernedsocietythatisconceivedinanidealcondition。Stillthetwostudiesarenotunlikelytoblendinonetheoryofidealsocialrelations；-unlesstheidealsocietyisconceivedashavingnoneedofgovernment，sothatPolitics，intheordinarysense，vanishesaltogether。
　　ThosewhotakethisviewadducetheanalogyofGeometrytoshowthatEthicsoughttodealwithideallyperfecthumanrelations，justasGeometrytreatsofideallystraightlinesandperfectcircles。ButtheirregularlineswhichwemeetwithinexperiencehavespatialrelationswhichGeometrydoesnotignorealtogether；itcananddoesascertainthemwithasufficientdegreeofaccuracyforpracticalpurposes:thoughofcoursetheyaremorecomplexthanthoseofperfectlystraightlines。SoinAstronomy，itwouldbemoreconvenientforpurposesofstudyifthestarsmovedincircles，aswasoncebelieved:butthefactthattheymovenotincirclesbutinellipses，andeveninimperfectandperturbedellipses，doesnottakethemoutofthesphereofscientificinvestigation:bypatienceandindustrywehavelearnthowtoreducetoprinciplesandcalculateeventhesemorecomplicatedmotions。Itmaybeusefulforpurposesofinstructiontoassumethattheplanetsmoveinperfectellipses:butwhatwewant，asastronomers，toknowistheactualmotionofthestars，anditscauses:andsimilarlyasmoralistswenaturallyinquirewhatoughttobedoneintheactualworldinwhichwelive。Inneithercasecanwehopetorepresentinourgeneralreasoningsthefullcomplexityoftheactualconsiderations:butweendeavourtoapproximatetoitascloselyaspossible。Itisonlysothatwereallygrapplewiththequestiontowhichmankindgenerallyrequireananswer:`Whatisaman’sdutyinhispresentcondition？’Foritistooparadoxicaltosaythatthewholedutyofmanissummedupintheefforttoattainanidealstateofsocialrelations；andunlesswesaythis，wemustdetermineourdutiestoexistingmeninviewofexistingcircumstances:andthisiswhatthestudentofEthicsseekstodoinasystematicmanner。
　　Theinquiryintothemoralityofanidealsocietycanthereforebeatbestbutapreliminaryinvestigation，afterwhichthestepfromtheidealtotheactual，inaccordancewithreason，remainstobetaken。Wehavetoaskthen，howfarsuchapreliminaryconstructionseemsdesirable。AndinansweringthiswemustdistinguishthedifferentmethodsofEthics。ForitisgenerallyheldbyIntuitioniststhattruemoralityprescribesabsolutelywhatisinitselfright，underallsocialconditions；atleastasfarasdeterminatedutiesareconcerned:ase。g。
　　thattruthshouldalwaysbespokenandpromiseskept，and`Justicebedone，thoughtheskyshouldfall’。Andsofarasthisishelditwouldseemthattherecanbenofundamentaldistinctiondrawn，inthedeterminationofduty，betweentheactualstateofsocietyandanidealstate:atanyratethegeneraldefinitionofe。g。Justicewillbethesameforboth，nolessthanitsabsolutestringency。StillevenanextremeIntuitionistwouldadmitthatthedetailsofJusticeandotherdutieswillvarywithsocialinstitutions:anditisaplausiblesuggestion，thatifwecanclearlycontemplateasapatternthe``absolute’’Justiceofanidealcommunity，weshallbebetterabletoattainthemerely``relative’’Justicethatisalonepossibleunderexistingconditions。Howfarthisisso，weshallbeinabetterpositiontojudgewhenwehaveexaminedthedefinitionofJusticefromanIntuitionalpointofview。
　　Thequestiontakesasimplerforminthecaseofthemethodwhichproposesasanultimateend，andsupremestandard，UniversalHappiness。Herewehavemerelytoaskhowfarasystematicconsiderationofthesocialrelationsofanideallyhappygroupofhumanbeingsislikelytoaffordguidanceinoureffortstopromotehumanhappinesshereandnow。Ishallnotatpresentdenythatthistaskmightusefullybeincludedinanexhaustivestudyofthismethod。Butitcaneasilybeshownthatitisinvolvedinseriousdifficulties。
　　Forasinordinarydeliberationwehavetoconsiderwhatisbestundercertainconditionsofhumanlife，internalorexternal，sowemustdothisincontemplatingtheidealsociety。Werequiretocontemplatenotsomuchtheendsupposedtobeattained——whichissimplythemostpleasantconsciousnessconceivable，lastingaslongandasuninterruptedlyaspossible——butrathersomemethodofrealisingit，pursuedbyhumanbeings；andthese，again，mustbeconceivedasexistingunderconditionsnottooremotefromourown，sothatwecanatleastendeavourtoimitatethem。Andforthiswemustknowhowfarourpresentcircumstancesaremodifiable；
　　averydifficultquestion，astheconstructionswhichhaveactuallybeenmadeofsuchidealsocietiesshow。Forexample，theRepublicofPlatoseemsinmanyrespectssufficientlydivergentfromthereality，andyethecontemplateswarasapermanentunalterablefact，tobeprovidedforintheidealstate，andindeedsuchprovisionseemsthepredominantaimofhisconstruction；whereasthesoberestmodernUtopiawouldcertainlyincludethesuppressionofwar。Indeedtheidealwilloftenseemtodivergeindiametricallyoppositedirectionsfromtheactual，accordingtothelineofimaginedchangewhichwehappentoadopt，inourvisionaryflightfrompresentevils。Forexample，permanentmarriage-unionsnowcausesomeunhappiness，becauseconjugalaffectionisnotalwayspermanent；buttheyarethoughttobenecessary，partlytoprotectmenandwomenfromvagariesofpassionpernicioustothemselves，butchieflyinordertothebetterrearingofchildren。Nowitmayseemtosomethatinanidealstateofsocietywecouldtrustmoretoparentalaffections，andrequirelesstocontrolthenaturalplayofemotionbetweenthesexes，andthat`FreeLove’
　　isthereforetheideal；whileotherswouldmaintainthatpermanenceinconjugalaffectionisnaturalandnormal，andthatanyexceptionstothisrulemustbesupposedtodisappearasweapproximatetotheideal。Again，thehappinessenjoyedinouractualsocietyseemsmuchdiminishedbytheunequaldistributionofthemeansofhappiness，andthedivisionofmankindintorichandpoor。Butwecanconceivethisevilremovedintwoquitedifferentways:eitherbyanincreaseddispositiononthepartoftherichtoredistributetheirshare，orbysuchsocialarrangementsaswouldenablethepoortosecuremoreforthemselves。Intheonecasetheidealinvolvesagreatextensionandsystematisationofthearbitraryandcasualalmsgivingthatnowgoeson:intheothercase，itsextinction。
　　Inshort，itseemsthatwhenweabandonthefirmgroundofactualsocietywehaveanillimitablecloudlandsurroundingusonallsides，inwhichwemayconstructanyvarietyofpatternstates；
　　butnodefiniteidealtowhichtheactualundeniablyapproximates，asthestraightlinesandcirclesoftheactualphysicalworldapproximatetothoseofscientificgeometry。
　　Itmaybesaid，however，thatwecanreducethisvarietybystudyingthepasthistoryofmankind，asthiswillenableustopredicttosomeextenttheirfuturemannerofexistence。
　　Butevensoitdoesnotappearthatweshallgainmuchdefiniteguidanceforourpresentconduct。Forletusmakethemostfavourablesuppositionsthatwecan，andsuchassoarevenabovetheconfidenceofthemostdogmaticofscientifichistorians。Letusassumethattheprocessofhumanhistoryisaprogressofmankindtowardsevergreaterhappiness。Letusassumefurtherthatwecannotonlyfixcertainlimitswithinwhichthefuturesocialconditionofmankindmusthe，butevendetermineindetailthemutualrelationsofthedifferentelementsofthefuturecommunity，soastoviewinclearoutlinetherulesofbehaviour，byobservingwhichtheywillattainthemaximumofhappiness。Itstillremainsquitedoubtfulhowfaritwouldbedesirableforustoimitatetheserulesinthecircumstancesinwhichwenowlive。Forthisforeknownsocialorderisexhypothesionlypresentedasamoreadvancedstageinoursocialprogress，andnotasatypeorpatternwhichweoughttomakeastruggletorealiseapproximatelyatanearlierstage。Howfaritshouldbetakenassuchapattern，isaquestionwhichwouldstillhavetobedetermined，andintheconsiderationofittheeffectsofouractionsontheexistinggenerationwouldafterallbethemostimportantelement。
　　InthefirstchapterIspokeofactionsthatwejudgetoberightandwhatoughttobedoneasbeing``reasonable’’，or``rational’’，andsimilarlyofultimateendsas``prescribedbyReason’’:
　　andIcontrastedthemotivetoactionsuppliedbytherecognitionofsuchreasonablenesswith``non-rational’’desiresandinclinations。Thismannerofspeakingisemployedbywritersofdifferentschools，andseemsinaccordancewiththecommonviewandlanguageonthesubject。Forwecommonlythinkthatwrongconductisessentiallyirrational，andcanbeshowntobesobyargument；andthoughwedonotconceivethatitisbyreasonalonethatmenareinfluencedtoactrightly，westillholdthatappealstothereasonareanessentialpartofallmoralpersuasion，andthatpartwhichconcernsthemoralistormoralphilosopherasdistinctfromthepreacherormoralrhetorician。Ontheotherhanditiswidelymaintainedthat，asHumesays，``Reason，meaningthejudgmentoftruthandfalsehood，canneverofitselfbeanymotivetotheWill’’；andthatthemotivetoactionisinallcasessomeNon-rationalDesire，includingunderthistermtheimpulsestoactiongivenbypresentpleasureandpain。Itseemsdesirabletoexaminewithsomecarethegroundsofthiscontentionbeforeweproceedanyfurther。
　　Letusbeginbydefiningtheissueraisedasclearlyaspossible。Everyone，Isuppose，hashadexperienceofwhatismeantbytheconflictofnon-rationalorirrationaldesireswithreason:mostofuse。g。occasionallyfeelbodilyappetitepromptingustoindulgenceswhichwejudgetobeimprudent，andangerpromptingustoactswhichwedisapproveasunjustorunkind。Itiswhenthisconflictoccursthatthedesiresaresaidtobeirrational，asimpellingustovolitionsopposedtoourdeliberatejudgments；sometimesweyieldtosuchseductiveimpulses，andsometimesnot；anditisperhapswhenwedonotyieldthattheimpulsiveforceofsuchirrationaldesiresismostdefinitelyfelt，aswehavetoexertinresistingthemavoluntaryeffortsomewhatanalogoustothatinvolvedinanymuscularexertion。Often，again，——sincewearenotalwaysthinkingeitherofourdutyorofourinterest，——desiresofthiskindtakeeffectinvoluntaryactionswithoutourhavingjudgedsuchactionstobeeitherrightorwrong，eitherprudentorimprudent；ase。g。whenanordinaryhealthymaneatshisdinner。Insuchcasesitseemsmostappropriatetocallthedesires``non-rational’’ratherthan``irrational’’。Neithertermisintendedtoimplythatthedesiresspokenof——oratleastthemoreimportantofthem——arenotnormallyaccompaniedbyintellectualprocesses。
　　Itistruethatsomeimpulsestoactionseemtotakeeffect，aswesay``blindly’’or``instinctively’’，withoutanydefiniteconsciousnesseitheroftheendatwhichtheactionisaimed，orofthemeansbywhichtheendistobeattained:butthis，Iconceive，isonlythecasewithimpulsesthatdonotoccupyconsciousnessforanappreciabletime，andordinarilydonotrequireanybutveryfamiliarandhabitualactionsfortheattainmentoftheirproximateends。Inallothercases——thatis，inthecaseoftheactionswithwhichwearechieflyconcernedinethicaldiscussion——theresultaimedat，andsomepartatleastofthemeansbywhichitistoberealised，aremoreorlessdistinctlyrepresentedinconsciousness，previoustothevolitionthatinitiatesthemovementstendingtoitsrealisation。
　　HencetheresultantforcesofwhatIcall``non-rational’’desires，andthevolitionstowhichtheyprompt，arecontinuallymodifiedbyintellectualprocessesintwodistinctways；firstbynewperceptionsorrepresentationsofmeansconducivetothedesiredends，andsecondlybynewpresentationsorrepresentationsoffactsactuallyexistingorinprospect——especiallymoreorlessprobableconsequencesofcontemplatedactions——whichrousenewimpulsesofdesireandaversion。
　　Thequestion，then，iswhethertheaccountjustgivenoftheinfluenceoftheintellectondesireandvolitionisnotexhaustive；
　　andwhethertheexperiencewhichiscommonlydescribedasa``conflictofdesirewithreason’’isnotmoreproperlyconceivedasmerelyaconflictamongdesiresandaversions；thesolefunctionofreasonbeingtobringbeforethemindideasofactualorpossiblefacts，whichmodifyinthemannerabovedescribedtheresultantforceofourvariousimpulses。
　　Iholdthatthisisnotthecase；thattheordinarymoralorprudentialjudgmentswhich，inthecaseofallormostminds，havesome——thoughoftenaninadequate——influenceonvolition，cannotlegitimatelybeinterpretedasjudgmentsrespectingthepresentorfutureexistenceofhumanfeelingsoranyfactsofthesensibleworld；thefundamentalnotionrepresentedbytheword``ought’’or``right’’，whichsuchjudgmentscontainexpresslyorbyimplication，beingessentiallydifferentfromallnotionsrepresentingfactsofphysicalorpsychicalexperience。Thequestionisoneonwhichappealmustultimatelybemadetothereflectionofindividualsontheirpracticaljudgmentsandreasonings: