109 



trary to the plainest and most obvious reason of mankind, to 

 assert, and not without some Subtilty endeavoured to prove 

 that there is no such real difference originally, necessarily, 

 and absolutely in the Nature of Things, but that air obli- 

 gation of Duty to God, arises merely from his absolute ir- 

 resistible Power, and all duty towards Men, merely from posi- 

 tive Compact: And have founded their whole Scheme of 

 Politicks upon that Opinion." 1 



It is maintained that moral norms possess as great objective 

 reality as mathematical and physical laws; in fact, to break 

 a moral law is similar to a change in the properties of bodies 

 which break the laws of nature in the physical world. Just 

 as the laws of nature are invariable, so, on Clarke's theory, 

 there is a certain invariable fitness in the relations of all 

 things to each other, in which their moral nature consists. 

 For example, "As the Addition of certain Numbers neces- 

 sarily produces a certain Sum, and certain Geometrical or 

 Mechanical Operations give a constant and unalterable 

 Solution of certain Problems or Propositions, so in Moral 

 Matters, there are certain necessary and unalterable Respects 

 or Relations of Things, which have not their Original from 

 arbitrary and positive Constitution, but are of eternal ne- 

 cessity of their own Nature." 2 



"Thus it appears in general," Clarke states, "that the 

 mind of Man cannot avoid giving its Assent to the eternal law 

 of Righteousness, that is, cannot but acknowledge the rea- 

 sonableness and fitness of Men's governing all their Actions 

 by the Rule of Right or Equity: And also that this Assent is 

 a formal Obligation upon every Man, actually and constantly 

 to conform himself to that Rule." 5 



A similar position is taken up by Wollaston in which he 

 maintains that a bad action is one which contains the denial of 

 a true proposition. 



Moral wrong, therefore, is seen to be nothing less than a 

 violation of the laws of nature, which are as absolute as the 

 laws of mathematics. But, although it may be admitted 

 that there is a resemblance between moral maxims and 

 mathematical axioms, if the two are taken to be identical, 

 and it is claimed that there is as much intellectual absurdity 

 in acting unjustly as in denying a mathematical proposition, 

 it remains true also, that in the large majority of cases, if 

 a man is obliged to choose between absurdity and happiness, 

 he will naturally prefer the latter. 



iS.B. 484. 

 S.B. 507. 

 'S.B. 498. 



