While discussing the views of Hume on chastity, there would be some aspects that must be addressed. For instance, it has to be examined if he approves of chastity as virtue or not. It is also to be studied if the account that Hume has provided in his literary work in the name of ‘An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding’ is complete or not. If Hume's account is complete or not would be best comprehensible if we explore and judge the arguments that he has made to substantiate his views. It may also happen that the views that he has expressed are just and also acceptable, but the justification that he has given in his work may not be sufficient to offer solid base to his views. In that case other philosophical justifications can be searched for, so that the 'quality' or the 'virtue' in the name of 'chastity' can be approved.
In his ‘An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding’, David Hume discusses the woman virtue of chastity mainly in the fourth and the sixth section. It is in the fourth section that Hume lets the subject of chastity be introduced in relevance to the human requirement of the combination of parents for the subsistence of their young. According to Hume, “that combination requires the virtue of chastity or fidelity to the marriage bed” (Hume, 2004). He even goes to the extent of making the comment that it is quite unlikely for such a virtue to be thought of if there is no such utility. He then refers to De Rep, Phaedrus, Plutarch and the Stoics in order to substantiate his views on the virtue of chastity. If what he meant by such comment is to be elaborated, it is necessary to mention that he occasions the subject of the virtue of chastity directly with its necessity or utility in the society. After he initiates the query about why it is necessary to regard chastity as a virtue or a moral behavior to be maintained and to be approved, he makes it clear that the comparatively long infancy of the human being necessitates the combination of the parents and a typical kind of security that can be provided to the human infants by a stable home environment. If such advantages are not available to the human beings in their infancy, they would hardly have the opportunity to grow or develop in a healthy or normal manner so that he can be the member of the civilized and advanced society. The regulations or the social conventions that concerns marriage and other relationships are, as Hume thinks, much useful or of great utility in the sense that the desired conditions for the perfect society are not quite possible without the virtues such as chastity.
There is no denial to the fact that Hume has made some very logical interpretations of the virtue of chastity, and such views of him have earned different types of reactions from the critics. There are early reactions to Hume’s views of human nature and virtues like chastity just as there have been feminist interpretations of Hume’s views on chastity in the postcolonial era. Before we embark upon exploring the scholarly criticism of Hume, let us have an overview of some of the ideas on chastity, which Hume has expressed in his ‘An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding’. The most striking comment that Hume makes on the subject of woman chastity in the perspective of the way of its being regarded or treated in the society is, “An infidelity of this nature is much more pernicious in women than in men. Hence the laws of chastity are much stricter over the one sex than over the other” (Hume, 1748). Hume is so mush confident about the fact that the virtue of chastity exists only because of its dire necessity for a healthy society or social behavior of a generation of a society that he says that the virtue of chastity would never have come into being without its utility that it bears with it.
The demarcation that Hume has done between the chastity of the women and that of the men has well been explained by Eduardo A. Velasquez in his literary work bearing the title, “Nature, Woman, and the Art of Politics”. In this book, the author bases on the views of Hume and says that the excess as well as the deficiencies of self-love of both men and women are expressed in the most basic relationships, and there are huge numbers of consequences for the society at a larger scale. The manly honor is often associated with the sexual prowess of the male. But the female complements take into account the virtues like ‘chastity’ and ‘modesty’. “The assertive “masculine” and the deferential “feminine” virtues are based on the assumptions about the relative physical and intellectual endowments of each sex” (Velasquez, E. A., 2000, p.211).
Let us now discuss the feminist interpretations of David Hume’s views on the virtue of chastity. In the book, ‘Feminist Interpretations of David Hume’, Anne Jaap Jacobson states that Hume had persuaded that the virtues of women have positive, and not a negative, role to play in the society. “Chastity and modesty secure social stability by assuring men that their wives’ children are also their own offspring and thereby inducing men to support these children and remain within the marriage bond” (Jacobson, A. J., 2000, p.299).
It is now quite important to examine the way in which Hume has presented his arguments to substantiate his views. There is little doubt in the fact that Hume has shown enough reason and rationality to testify the necessity of the virtue of chastity. Yet, it is not that there have not been left some loopholes. For instance, the arguments that he has placed have not been duly elaborated, though the purpose of making the argument has been served. Elaborating the argument might have med itself even stronger. Again, if the positive aspects of his way of making the arguments are to be discussed, the way in which stresses some facts are to be appreciated. Here is an instance. The purpose of Hume is to make it clear that chastity is a virtue that is essentially required to maintain a healthy society. He makes it in the way that had chastity been of no utility of social necessity, it never would have existed at all. As a result, the utility of the virtue of chastity is stressed on quite strategically and effectively.
There is one more point that needs to be mentioned in this regard. It is very much obvious after analyzing David Hume’s views on the virtue of chastity that his has made a typical approach to the subject of chastity. There are very few thinkers or philosophers who have treated chastity from such a view point of utility and materialism. Hume’s views or the approach to the subject can also be described as quite realistic. Yet, the views seem to be more utilitarian and materialistic rather than practical. Hume ignores, though he does not miss, the psychological aspects that are related to the virtue of chastity. He seems to be totally concentrating on chastity with its relation to and impact on the future society.
Whether such too much utilitarian or materialistic views on virtue are to be accepted or not, or how they are to be treated if they are accepted, is a different issue altogether. But the reason for Hume’s having such purely utilitarian views on chastity may be due to his being influenced by the tempo of the society in his time. The eighteenth century society that he was living in necessitated realistic attitude from its members. Being a thinker and a philosopher, he could foresee the realistic, practical and utilitarian attitude coming forth in the future England. The basic materialism and utilitarianism of the Victorian era or the nineteenth century testify to the fact that Hume had a proper perception of what is going to come. Realizing the necessity, he might have been very much practical in his views even on a subject like the virtue of chastity.
References:
1. Hume, 2004, ‘An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding’ http://books.google.co.in/books?id=XbCXULjpPJsC
2. Velasquez, E. A., 2000, ‘Nature, Woman, and the Art of Politics’, http://books.google.co.in/books?id=W4gV-exeMEwC&pg=PA209&lpg=PA209&dq=David+Hume%27s+views+on+chastity&source=bl&ots=uR72d4ZVF8&sig=nDWMQTgIec6MReCLLoaDlTL8hYA&hl=en&ei=a5DZSdiTK8iSkAWKxbC-CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#PPA211,M1
3. Jacobson, A. J., 2000, ‘Feminist Interpretations of David Hume’, http://books.google.co.in/books?id=vwCX5kJ_CVkC&pg=PA289&lpg=PA289&dq=David+Hume%27s+views+on+chastity&source=bl&ots=aJIEYrlPys&sig=UN4nJOHI_tYcFpI-D6RLi1qxp1Y&hl=en&ei=a5DZSdiTK8iSkAWKxbC-CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7#PPA299,M1
No comments:
Post a Comment