PROBLEMS OF ETHICS 



BY PAUL HENSEL 

 (Translated from the German by Professor J. H. Woods, Harvard University) 



[Paul Hensel, Professor of Systematic Philosophy, University of Erlangen, 

 since 1902. b. May 17, 1860, Great Barten, East Prussia. Ph.D. Freiburg, 

 Baden, 1885. Privat-docent, Strassburg, 1888-95; Special Professor, Strass- 

 burg, 1895-98. Author of The Ethical Basis and Ethical Transactions; Car- 

 lyle; The Principal Problems of Ethics.] 



SINCE the appearance of the three chief works of Kant a certain 

 rhythm in the treatment of philosophical problems, first of all in 

 Germany, but also, in less degree, in other civilized countries, is un- 

 mistakable. After an intense occupation with theoretical problems 

 a flood of ethical discussion usually follows; and this then is usually 

 resolved into a renewed revision of aesthetical problems. If I am 

 not deceived, we are now at the period of transition from the second 

 to the third epoch; so much the more favorable is the time to re- 

 view the present condition of ethical problems. In the first place, 

 then, it seems rather remarkable that recent ethical discussion, so 

 intensely carried on, has resulted in a definite victory for neither one 

 school nor the other. One thing alone, however, may with some 

 accuracy be said, that the school of utilitarianism of the older inter- 

 pretation by Bentham, which earlier prevailed almost alone in 

 England with a fairly strong representation in France and Germany, 

 seems to be withdrawn from the field. Not as if there were no men 

 to-day who in other times would have sworn by Bentham 's flag, 

 rather we are here facing a fact that a theory which formerly ap- 

 peared in independence, now may be deemed a special case of a 

 more inclusive theory, which with the help of its wider horizon can 

 remove a whole series of difficulties, which apparently raised insolv- 

 able problems for the special theory. Utilitarianism, since it had 

 started with the examination of the individual, could not, even in the 

 master-hand of Bentham, transfer itself without remainder into the 

 greatest happiness of the greatest number; the interest paid on 

 the sacrifice offered to fellow men, again and again seemed dubitable 

 and probable; again and again the best calculation seemed to con- 

 sist in egoism pure and simple. The impossibility of an exact calcula- 

 tion of consequences in pleasure and in pain was likewise repeatedly 

 emphasized by opponents; the suggestion that we do not count the 

 shrewd calculator so good as the man who acts impulsively was also 

 not lacking: all these were difficulties, which, on the ground of the 

 older utilitarianism, could be evaded but not quite entirely put out 

 of the world. 



