Self-love and self-liking in the moral and political philosophy of Bernard Mandeville and David Hume

This work offers a novel interpretation of David Hume’s (1711–1776) conception of the conjectural development of civil society and artificial moral institutions. It focuses on the social elements of Hume’s Treatise of human nature (1739–40) and the necessary connection between science of man and politeness, civilised monarchies, social distance and hierarchical structure of civil society. The study incorporates aspects of intellectual history, history of philosophy and book history. In order to understand David Hume’s thinking, the intellectual development of Bernard Mandeville (1670–1733) needs to be accounted for. When put into a historical perspective, the moral, political and social components of Treatise of human nature can be read in the context of a philosophical tradition, in which Mandeville plays a pivotal role. A distinctive character of Mandeville and Hume’s account of human nature and moral institutions was the introduction of a simple distinction between self-love and self-liking. The symmetric passions of self-interest and pride can only be controlled by the corresponding moral institutions. This is also the way in which we can say that moral institutions are drawn from human nature. In the case of self-love or self-interest, the corresponding moral institution is justice. Respectively, concerning self-liking or pride the moral institution is politeness. There is an explicit analogy between these moral institutions. If we do not understand this analogy, we do not understand the nature of either justice or politeness. The present work is divided into two parts. In the first part, ‘Intellectual development of Bernard Mandeville’, it is argued that the relevance of the paradigmatic change in Mandeville’s thinking has been missed. It draws a picture of Mandeville turning from the Hobbism of The Fable of the Bees to an original theory of civil society put forward in his later works. In order to make this change more apparent, Mandeville’s career and the publishing history of The Fable of the Bees are examined comprehensively. This interpretation, based partly on previously unknown sources, challenges F. B. Kaye’s influential decision to publish the two parts of The Fable of the Bees as a uniform work of two volumes. The main relevance, however, of the ‘Intellectual development of Mandeville’ is to function as the context for the young Hume. The second part of the work, ‘David Hume and Greatness of mind’, explores in philosophical detail the social theory of the Treatise and politics and the science of man in his Essays. This part will also reveal the relevance of Greatness of mind as a general concept for David Hume’s moral and political philosophy.

Herätys kylässä ja tuvissa : Rääkkylän Oravisalon kylä ja renqvistiläinen herätys 1820-luvulla

A Revival in a Village and its Households. The Village of Oravisalo in Rääkkylä Parish and the Renqvistist Revivalism in the 1820s. My purpose is to apply the science of religion and the study of past communities to the study of religious revivalism. Revivalism will be considered a religious phenomenon as well as a cultural and social phenomenon. What makes this study unique is the possibility to reconstruct a list of participating revivalists based on entries in the communion book of the time. The conflict between the revivalists and the chaplain of Rääkkylä also generated other documentary material. The community in Oravisalo was relatively stratified. People lived in complex and varying forms of households. They also had plentiful contacts both with unrelated inhabitants of Oravisalo and with the neighbouring villages. Through these contacts the inhabitants of Oravisalo were introduced to revivalism. In Oravisalo, the revival for the most part fell into a certain social stratum and did not severely damage existing relationships within families or among acquaintances. The revivalists formed a new community within the village but the community was neither very tightly-knit nor was it closed. The revival was an individual phenomenon affected by general factors. First, there were factors that brought about a quest for an applicable system of meanings. These factors included at least three important issues: the Great Partition of land, the crisis of slash-and-burn cultivation, and a population growth that increased the proportion of the landless in the village. As a result, many of the revivalists had low status and poor expectations for the future. Second, there were factors that appealed to the people in the message and character of the preacher, Henrik Renqvist. Third, the proximity of the village to Liperi, where the revival got its start, was crucial to revivalism s spread to Oravisalo. Culturally, the revival meant a change in the system of symbols or meanings, so it was not solely a matter of intensified religious fervour. For instance, Communion, prayer, reading, and perhaps baptism symbolised different things to the revivalists than to other villagers. However, the revivalists do not seem to have started any moral revolution in their village. The religious aspect defined the limits of the protest and the resistance towards authorities. The revivalists wanted only to have the right to follow their conscience. The freedom granted the female members was limited to the religious sphere. No social or economic claims were made. The revival altered the situation of its members only on a symbolic level, yet it also offered them status within their own group.