FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W37199872> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W37199872 abstract "IN THE THIRD VOLUME OF A TREATISE OF HUMAN NATURE, DAVID HUME argues that the mind is characterized by a selfishness or limited generosity that is reinforced by nature's having made scant provision for our wants.(1) Justice, as the predicate of this limitation of the subject's interested affection, comes into being order that society should make greater advances acquiring possessions and avoid running into the solitary and forlorn condition, which must follow upon violence and an universal licence (492). According to Hume's hierarchical scale, affection begins with the self, descends logically to our relations and acquaintances, and culminates with the weakest [of our attention] reach[ing] to strangers and indifferent persons. Indeed, any contradiction these degrees of partiality--by enlargement or contraction of the affections--Hume deems both vicious and immoral (488). It is thus possible for Hume to envision singular acts of private justice that would be contrary to the larger public construct of justice. To illustrate the ruinous potential of singular justice, Hume at one point offers a specific scenario which an enlarged affection for the stranger violates justice: When a man of merit, of a beneficent disposition, restores a great fortune to a miser, or a he has acted justly and laudably, but the public is a real sufferer (497). By labeling the recipient of generosity a or seditious bigot, Hume disguises both the charitable act and the request which precedes it, making the motive for such singular justice as hard to envision as the circumstances which a miser loses and begs for the restoration of his fortune. Though it is at least possible to imagine particular cases which the courts would be asked to rule with regard to seized properties of misers and bigots, Hume's scenario depends more plausibly on the socially familiar example of giving to beggars. This implicit analogy suspends the request that begets and reads it instead as a miserliness associated with political sedition, presumably because begging would suggest an inadequacy the present social order. The configuration of miserliness and begging, though initially jarring its apparent contradiction, more likely reflects a popular currency, namely, stories which circulated to refute almsgiving. Writing some twenty years on the other side of the Wordsworth poems here to be considered and sixty after Hume, Charles Lamb would defend the practice of almsgiving against just such suspicion: Half of these stories about the prodigious fortunes made by begging are (I verily believe) misers' calumnies.(2) Inverting the implicit charge of miserliness by attributing the miserly intentions to the storytellers rather than their beggarly subjects, Lamb recounts a particular story, which appeared in the public papers some time since, about a beggar who when he died left all the amassings of his alms to a regular benefactor. As Lamb partly recognizes, the moral of this story may cut both ways--polemicizing against the real need of beggars by the fantastic assertion of accumulated, unused wealth, while still encouraging well-directed charity by offering benefactors a fantastic return on generosity and by further allowing the amassed fortune to signify the beggar's noble gratitude. In a different register, one that yet preserves the anxiety behind such stories, Hume imagines the recipient of generosity not as one who begs from real need, but as one who is preternaturally undeserving.(3) What Hume recognizes, perhaps only as an unwitting insight of his anxiety, is that excessive need is unreasonable, for the additional charge of bigotry implies that the metaphorically concealed beggar is also an enemy of reason and justice. If Hume's anecdote is riddled by a distorting illogicality which perceives the recipient of generosity as a threat to social order, what is less apparent is why singular charity, which Hume's time (as our own) was often associated with more conservative political views of the poor, is deemed so threatening. …" @default.
• W37199872 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W37199872 creator A5019780063 @default.
• W37199872 date "2000-01-01" @default.
• W37199872 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W37199872 title "Begging the Question of Responsibility: The Vagrant Poor in Wordsworth's Beggars and Resolution and Independence" @default.
• W37199872 doi "https://doi.org/10.2307/25601431" @default.
• W37199872 hasPublicationYear "2000" @default.
• W37199872 type Work @default.
• W37199872 sameAs 37199872 @default.
• W37199872 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W37199872 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W37199872 hasAuthorship W37199872A5019780063 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C139621336 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C161191863 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C200113983 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C2777433734 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C2777855551 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C2778841147 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C2779115301 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C2779597210 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C2779861158 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C2780595226 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W37199872 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C111472728 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C138885662 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C139621336 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C144024400 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C15744967 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C161191863 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C17744445 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C190253527 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C199539241 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C200113983 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C2777433734 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C2777855551 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C2778841147 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C2779115301 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C2779597210 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C2779861158 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C2780595226 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C41008148 @default.
• W37199872 hasConceptScore W37199872C77805123 @default.
• W37199872 hasLocation W371998721 @default.
• W37199872 hasOpenAccess W37199872 @default.
• W37199872 hasPrimaryLocation W371998721 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W115114377 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W136306559 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W1524066187 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W190343586 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W1995500146 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W1999573528 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W2025280918 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W2063157263 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W2115310706 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W2276861490 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W2327481518 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W2520358715 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W271916940 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W2904161033 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W29568564 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W303230043 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W314878639 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W1968215143 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W2588749089 @default.
• W37199872 hasRelatedWork W2687104670 @default.
• W37199872 isParatext "false" @default.
• W37199872 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W37199872 magId "37199872" @default.
• W37199872 workType "article" @default.