The London School of Economics and Political Science Hume’s Conservative Utilitarianism: An Interpretation of David Hume’s Political and Moral Philosophy Chien-Kang (Brian) Chen A thesis submitted to the Department of Government of the London School of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, October 2012 1 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 93,861 words. I can confirm that my thesis was copy edited for conventions of language, spelling and grammar by KBH Associates. 2 Abstract The thesis aims to recover Hume’s connection with utilitarianism. It is argued that Hume is best interpreted as a conservative utilitarian, and this is intended to be a corrective to recent approaches in Hume scholarship. Nowadays the view that Hume is one of the founders of modern utilitarianism is undermined by two views: one sees Hume as a conventionalist contractarian who is the follower of Hobbes, another situates Hume in the Scottish Enlightenment and emphasises his resemblance to Hutcheson. The thesis does not deny that Hume’s political philosophy is influenced by these philosophers. Instead, it is because these views are regarded as providing an exhaustive account of Hume that the thesis aims to challenge them. What is crucial to contemporary Hume studies is a more balanced interpretation of Hume, and this is to be found in the traditional approach which sees Hume as a utilitarian. The thesis is original because, although it recovers a traditional approach, it relates it to contemporary debate by showing that the late 20th century concern to avoid seeing everything through the eyes of utilitarianism has obscured the genuine utilitarian elements of Hume’s political philosophy. The resurgence of interest in the problems of utilitarianism is part of the legacy of post-Rawlsian political theory. Philosophers the thesis criticises such as Gauthier and Barry both follow Rawls in marginalising the contribution of utilitarianism to liberalism. For scholars, the traditional interpretation of Hume should be rejected if Hume’s political philosophy is to be secured, thus they found it on the basis of social contract. The thesis challenges them on two grounds. First, it illustrates that more similarities are to be identified between Hume and Locke. Second, it argues that Hume is best interpreted as founding the school succeeded by Burke and Sidgwick, which has impact on contemporary utilitarianism and philosophical debates. 3 Acknowledgements First and foremost, my special thanks must go to my doctoral supervisor, Professor Paul Kelly, for his patient and unfailing guidance in my development and completion of this thesis. Without his careful supervision and inspiring teachings over the last five years, I could not have developed an interpretation of Hume’s political philosophy. Without his support and encouragement, I could not have completed this doctoral dissertation. I am grateful to my advisor, Professor Katrin Flikschuh, for her valuable comments on the earlier drafts of this thesis. It has been a pleasure to be a member of the Political Theory Group of Government Department and to meet many talented researchers. I would like to thank Professor Chandran Kukathas for his comments on the earlier draft of the thesis, and for his insightful talks both in the POTY seminar and in the reading group. Also, I would like to thank my fellow doctoral students, especially Baldwin Wong and James Wong, for generously sharing their views on various aspects of life. My thanks also go to the Ministry of Education in Taiwan, the Department of Government, and the London School of Economics and Political Science for their generous financial support. I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Roy Tseng of National Sun Yat-Sen University for encouraging me to further my exploration of political philosophy at the LSE. 4 Finally, I would like to acknowledge my great debt to my parents and my sister. Without their support and understanding, I would not have been able to concentrate on my research in London. It is with their care and love that I am able to understand the values of familial society in the political theories of Hume and Locke. This thesis is dedicated to them. 5 Table of contents Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................. 8 1.1 Recovering Hume’s Conservative Utilitarianism ......................... 8 1.2 Method and Approach .................................................................. 10 1.3 The Interpretation of Hume’s Political Philosophy: An Overview ................................................................................... 16 1.4 The Structure of the Argument and the Order of Chapters ...... 31 Chapter 2 Sympathy and Utility: A Comparison between Treatise and EPM ........................................................................ 39 2.1 Anatomist and Painter ................................................................. 39 2.2 Between Benevolence and Selfishness ....................................... 41 2.3 From the Treatise to EPM ............................................................. 58 Chapter 3 Anatomy of Human Nature ....................................................... 72 3.1 Unsympathetic Criticisms of Hume ............................................. 72 3.2 Hume’s Anatomy of Human Nature ............................................ 79 3.3 MacIntyre’s Defence of Hume Ethical Naturalism ..................... 92 3.4 Fountain of the Question: Hume’s Criticism of Religious Philosophy ............................................................................... 100 Chapter 4 Descriptive Naturalism and Utility ....................................... 110 4.1 Ethics: Normative and Metaethical ........................................... 110 4.2 Varieties of Naturalism .............................................................. 111 4.3 Features of Hume’s Descriptive Naturalism............................. 119 4.4 Utility and Good .......................................................................... 126 4.5 Moore’s Question ........................................................................ 135 Chapter 5 Hume’s Non-Instrumental Public Utility ............................. 142 5.1 A Third Theory of Justice ........................................................... 142 5.2 Non-Instrumental Public Utility ................................................ 147 5.3 Man’s Self-Justification and Hume’s Utilitarianism ................. 162 5.4 Hume’s Egalitarianism in Essays ............................................... 175 6 Chapter 6 Hobbesian or Lockean? Reconsidering Hume’s Theory of Property ................................................................... 186 6.1 Hardin and Barry: A Debate in the Same Camp ....................... 186 6.2 Some of Hardin’s Misunderstandings ....................................... 188 6.3 Barry: No Political Authority, No Social Order ......................... 200 6.4 Sympathy and Hume’s Social Order .......................................... 209 6.5 Sociability and Locke’s Impact on Hume .................................. 228 Chapter 7 Conservative Utilitarianism and Hume’s Political Philosophy ................................................................................. 251 7.1 The Tradition of Conservative Utilitarianism .......................... 251 7.2 Hume’s Conservatism: Wolin and Whelan ............................... 254 7.3 Negative Prescriptivism: Response to Whelan ........................ 267 7.4 Natural and Civil Moralities: Response to Wolin ..................... 276 Chapter 8 Conclusion: Conservative Utilitarianism from Hume to Burke ...................................................................................... 286 Bibliography ...................................................................................................... 305 7 Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Recovering Hume’s Conservative Utilitarianism The purpose of the thesis is to recover David Hume’s theoretical connection with the tradition of utilitarianism. I argue in this thesis that Hume is best interpreted as a conservative utilitarian, and this is intended to be a corrective to more recent approaches in Hume scholarship. Recently the view that Hume is one of the founders of modern utilitarianism is undermined by two other views which are prevalent in Hume studies: one sees Hume as a conventionalist contractarian who is the follower of Thomas Hobbes, another situates Hume in the context of the Scottish Enlightenment and emphasises his resemblance to Scottish philosophers such as Francis Hutcheson and Adam Smith. The thesis aims to challenge these interpretations of Hume by showing that neither of them alone is able to provide an adequate account of Hume’s political philosophy. Some essential elements of Hume’s political philosophy