Hume on Justice and the Other Artificial Virtues
Book 3, Part 2, Section
1: Natural vs. Artificial Virtue
For Hume, why is the judgment
that an act is virtuous really a judgment about the motive?
A Potential Circularity of Motive and Judgment:
“To suppose, that the mere regard to the
virtue of the action, may be the first motive, which produc’d
the action, and render’d it virtuous, is to reason in
a circle.” (T 3.2.1.4)
For Hume, why does the original
motive for a virtuous act have to be something other than the desire to be
virtuous?
What example does Hume use to
illustrate his solution to the potential circularity? Is it persuasive?
What is the original motive
for just actions?
Not public interest. Why not?
Not private benevolence. Why not?
Solution: Not a natural motive, but an artificial one,
based on education and human conventions.
Section 2: The Circumstances of Justice
What are the three kinds of
goods? Which one is the basis for the
virtue of justice?
What is the problem that
justice is the solution to?
Why does the solution depend
on conventions?
What is the motive for acting
in accordance with the conventions of justice?
Hume’s Three Collective Action Problems
(1) Languages as conventions. The first collective action
problem.
(2) The two rowers. The iterated two-person
prisoners' dilemma.
(3) Respect for property
rights. An n-person
prisoners' dilemma. Property
rights are conventional, not natural.
What is the motivation that,
according to Hume, produces solutions to all three CAPs?
Will self-interest yield the
results Hume claims in all three cases?
The free
rider problem in the n-person prisoners’ dilemma.
MATRIX REPRESENTATION OF A ONE-SHOT
N-PERSON CONVENTION GAME
Everyone else
|
|
Speaks English |
Speaks French |
|
I Speak English |
+100, +100 |
99, 0 |
|
I Speak French |
+99, 0 |
+100, +100 |
Matrix 1. In a
convention game, if I know that everyone else speaks English, self-interest
alone will motivate me to speak English.
No promise is necessary.
MATRIX REPRESENTATION OF A ONE-SHOT
2-PERSON PRISONERS' DILEMMA
The Other Person
|
|
Cooperates (C) |
Defects (D) |
|
I Cooperate (C) |
+3, +3 |
+1, +4 |
|
I Defect (D) |
+4, +1 |
+2, +2 |
Matrix 2. In a one-shot
PD, self-interest alone will not motivate cooperation. However, in an iterated PD, mutual
conditional cooperation is a rational solution.
MATRIX REPRESENTATION OF THE FORM OF A ONE-SHOT N-PERSON
PRISONERS' DILEMMA
Everyone else
|
|
Cooperates (C) |
Defects (D) |
|
I Cooperate (C) |
+100, +100 |
-101, -99.9 |
|
I Defect (D) |
+101, +99.9 |
-100, -100 |
Matrix 3. In a one-shot
n-person PD, self-interest will not motivate cooperation. Even in the iterated n-person PD,
self-interest is unlikely to motivate cooperation. Effective sanctioning of defectors is almost
always necessary to make cooperation rational.
Why is justice a virtue? “Why [do] we annex the idea
of virtue to justice, and of vice to injustice?” (T 3.2.2.23)
When our interests are not
involved, our response is based on what is good for society (“sympathy with
public interest” T 3.2.2.24).
Question for Hume: Why can’t reason discern the following
relation of ideas: Justice is acting in
accordance with conventions that promote the good of society (or that solve
CAPs)?
Hume’s challenge: reason can’t motivate.
Response: Why can’t reason determine that pain is
objectively bad and motivate one to try to alleviate it (no matter whose pain
it is)?
Section 3: The Arbitrariness of the Rules Determining
Original Property
The need is for general rules. Almost any set of rules would be
acceptable. The rules are the product
not of Reason, but of by the imagination, “the most frivolous properties of our
thought and conception” (note 71, p. 323).
When we look at the actual
rules of original acquisition, we find that they are arbitrary and not based on
any intelligible principles.
The five sources of primitive
acquisition:
Present possession when
property rights are first established;
Occupation = first
possession;
Prescription = long
possession (not typically first);
Accession = e.g., fruits of
our garden;
Interesting example: ownership of bays but not oceans.
Succession = On the death of the owner, possessions pass to those who are
dearest to the owner.
Why are these five sources
largely arbitrary?
Section 4: Transfer of property by Consent
The remedy
to the arbitrariness of the rules of primitive acquisition.
Section 5: Promises
Why does Hume think the obligation to keep one’s promise is
conventional not natural?
Promise-keeping (performing on a contract) is a Collective
Action Problem. What kind?
The example of the surgeon and the robber.
Section 6: More Proof of the Artificiality, or
Conventionality, of the Three Fundamental Rules of Justice: "stability of possession, transference
by consent, and the performance of promises" (T 3.2.6.1)
Section 7: The Origin of Government
Governments punish those who violate the conventions of
justice. Why, on Hume's account, are
systems of punishment necessary to enforce those conventions? How can they be established?
Men “cannot change their
natures. All they can do is to change
their situation.” (T 3.2.7. 6)
Is his account correct? Hume did not recognize the logic of a
collective action problem, so he did not recognize the possibility of free
riding.
Enforcing the rules of justice solves a collective action
problem. What else can governments
do? Solve other collective action
problems.