Spinoza:
Ethica
The
State of
Nature
From: Proposition 37
It is there shown, that
an
emotion can
only be restrained by an emotion stronger than, and contrary to itself,
and that men avoid inflicting injury through fear of incurring a
greater
injury themselves.
On this law society can
be
established,
so long as it keeps in its own hand the right, possessed by everyone,
of
avenging injury, and pronouncing on good and evil; and provided it also
possesses the power to lay down a general rule of conduct, and to pass
laws sanctioned, not by reason, which is powerless in restraining
emotion,
but by threats (IV. xvii. note). Such a society established with laws
and
the power of preserving itself is called a State, while those who live
under its protection are called citizens. We may readily understand
that
there is in the state of nature nothing, which by universal consent is
pronounced good or bad; for in the state of nature everyone thinks
solely
of his own advantage, and according to his disposition, with reference
only to his individual advantage, decides what is good or bad, being
bound
by no law to anyone besides himself.
In the state of
nature,
therefore, sin
is inconceivable; it can only exist in a state, where good and evil are
pronounced on by common consent, and where everyone is bound to
obey
the State authority. Sin, then, is nothing else but disobedience, which
is therefore punished by the right of the State only. Obedience, on the
other hand, is set down as merit, inasmuch as a man is thought worthy
of
merit, if he takes delight in the advantages which a State provides.
Again, in the state of
nature, no one
is by common consent master of anything, nor is there anything in
nature,
which can be said to belong to one man rather than another: all things
are common to all. Hence, in the state of nature, we can conceive
no
wish to render to every man his own, or to deprive a man of that which
belongs to him; in other words, there is nothing in the state of nature
answering to justice and injustice. Such ideas are only possible in a
social
state, when it is decreed by common consent what belongs to one man and
what to another.
From all these
considerations
it is evident,
that justice and injustice, sin and merit, are extrinsic ideas, and not
attributes which display the nature of the mind. But I have said enough.