Sensibility, empathy and sympathy. In the 18th century, European philosophers debated the origins of morality and how they presented themselves within society. David Hume and Bernard Mandeville offer two differing interpretations of the function of self-interest within a mature, sensible society.
Before discussing either philosopher, the basis of 18th century arguments regarding human doctrine must first be understood. Empiricism and rationalism are two conflicting outlooks that dominated political conversations during the rise of sensibility. Sensibility, itself, is the ideal of having a deep, instinctual reaction to the emotional and physical state of other people. In the 18th century, this trait was seen as the divider between those capable of higher-level thinking and morals versus the common-place citizen.
In the early 18th century, the recent events of the popish plot (1678), exclusion crisis (1679-1683) and the Glorious Revolution (1688-1689) left the nation still reeling from the effects of uncertainty. Whig politics – where the legislative branch was deemed superior to all else – was the basis in which the modern constitutional monarchy of the United Kingdom was able to develop.
Empiricism argues that all true human knowledge and understanding arises purely from physical experiences and empirical evidence, such as quantity or appearance. Highly limited, this view offers merely an understanding of already known facts and does not encourage the production of new ideas. This differs from the previously popular trust in rationalism, an ideology that offers there is a base standard of human knowledge innate within everyone. The primary debate between the two lies in the origins of morals and what determines good from evil.
Mandeville is the author of The Grumbling Hive, a notable piece of literature from 1705 (expanded in 1728) that suggests that individual, private corruption leads to public benefit for the whole society. It offers that justice itself is inherently unjust, as citizen’s individual moral failings, such as selfishness, creates demand that keeps the society economically thriving and promotes social advancement. Mandeville was generally empiricist, suggesting that morals are not black-and-white enough to be innate, as seen through his virtue-within-vice example.
Hume, a Scot born in 1711, is known for his solid beliefs rooted in extreme empiricism and scientific approach to human nature. Highly skeptical, he argues that morals are a result of societal judgement rather than guidelines already instilled in people upon birth. These two are some of the most relevant thinkers when it comes to popular (yet controversial) novels such as Fanny Hill: Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure and The Adventures of Eovaai.
In author Alexander Pope’s The Rape of the Lock, published in 1714, the upper-class is portrayed with an extreme ironic lack of sensibility, demonstrating how their personal vices of extravagance and vanity acts as the antithesis of sensible notions and ideals. Pope writes, “If on some meaner head this Lock had grown, / The nymph despis’d, the Rape had been unknown. / But what concerns the valiant and the fair, / The Muse asserts as her peculiar care,” demonstrating how miniscule the story would be had it not taken place within an elite, self-interested family. This is a reflection of the tense political attitude towards England’s monarchy and popularity of whig politics, satirizing the extravagance of English rulers and questioning their divination.
While both satirical in nature and rooted in whig policies, The Rape of the Lock and The Grumbling Hive demonstrate contrasting motivation behind a vice-filled society. For Pope, vice is a superficial, morally hollow placeholder for things of genuine value, like human spirit and compassion. In Mandeville’s eyes, vice is a necessity to a functioning society, acting as a minor evil that is worth being able to sustain further opportunities for human development.
These differing analyses and perspectives on what constitutes “sensibility” according to 18th century writers reflects how politics influenced the state of philosophical developments. Looking at these nuanced variants in opinion can help understand the state and environment literature was being produced under. For more insight on sensible literature and arguments surrounding morality, a read into Fanny Hill: Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure can be found here.
Leave a Reply