The Theory of Moral Sentiments

This book by Adam Smith is the one he was actually known for during his lifetime, rather than the Wealth of Nations. The book is basically a system of morality based upon the feelings of individuals, as corrected by reason. Smith outlines the source of moral sentiments about the feelings and virtues of others as the sympathy that individuals have with the feelings of others. Hence, if someone throws a rotten pomegranate at me, then, sympathizing with my resentment for that action, others will feel that it is just for that person to be rebuked or punished, if it is done in proportion to the action taken. Thus most would consent to the person being ticketed, but would not sympathize with a demand on my part to have the offender beheaded, and would consider such to be a symptom of vice. Further, each individual may gauge their own sentiments using the 'impartial observer in their own breast' to paraphrase, thereby avoiding excess or deficiency in feeling.

Smith includes a summary of various other systems of morality and distinguishes his system from them, dividing them into systems based on propriety, such as those of Aristotle and Plato as well as Stoicism, systems based on selfish virtue (prudence), such as Epicureanism, and those based on benevolence, such as Neo-Platonism. This was interesting in that I had formerly heard of Smith being a Stoic, but he emphatically denies this claim himself, criticizing this philosophical school as being inhumane in its lack of emotion. Also, it appears that he may have misunderstood Epicureanism, in that he states that Epicureans would seek office for the comforts of it, whereas what I have read of them seems to indicate that they would regard this as a source of anxiety, which would be contrary to their philosophy. However, this does not really detract from his overall point.

This book is extremely edifying but very long and the writing style is convoluted. The only books I have read that are more difficult to read are by Edmund Burke and possibly John Locke, and the joke I normally tell about Burke's style is that his sentences are longer than his paragraphs. So, if you can handle the sheer volume of subordinate clauses, then I recommend this book very strongly.