Summary
Smith reveals a crucial truth about human society: kindness is nice, but justice is essential. He shows how society can survive without people loving each other—think of business transactions between strangers—but it cannot survive injustice. When people start hurting each other, everything falls apart. Smith uses a powerful analogy: kindness is like decorative trim on a building, but justice is the foundation. Remove the trim and the building still stands; remove the foundation and it collapses. He then explores why we actually punish wrongdoers, arguing that it's not really about protecting society (though we tell ourselves it is). Instead, we have a gut-level reaction that certain actions deserve punishment, period. This natural moral sense runs so deep that we believe even God should punish evil in the afterlife—even when no earthly example would deter future crimes. Smith distinguishes between two types of punishment: those that feel right to us (punishing a murderer) and those that feel harsh but necessary (executing a sleeping guard who endangered his unit). The first comes from our natural moral feelings; the second from calculated social utility. This chapter reveals how our moral reasoning often works backward—we feel something is wrong first, then construct logical arguments about social harm to justify those feelings. Smith suggests this backward reasoning isn't a flaw but a feature of human nature, designed to make us reliable moral actors even when we don't fully understand why.
Coming Up in Chapter 22
Smith next examines how luck and circumstances affect our moral judgments. Why do we judge failed attempts differently than successful crimes, even when the intention was identical?
Share it with friends
An excerpt from the original text.(~500 words)
Of the utility of this constitution of nature. It is thus that man, who can subsist only in society, was fitted by nature to that situation for which he was made. All the members of human society stand in need of each others assistance, and are likewise exposed to mutual injuries. Where the necessary assistance is reciprocally afforded from love, from gratitude, from friendship and esteem, the society flourishes and is happy. All the different members of it are bound together by the agreeable bands of love and affection, and are, as it were, drawn to one common centre of mutual good offices. But though the necessary assistance should not be afforded from such generous and disinterested motives, though among the different members of the society there should be no mutual love and affection, the society, though less happy and agreeable, will not necessarily be dissolved. Society may subsist among different men, as among different merchants, from a sense of its utility, without any mutual love or affection; and though no man in it should owe any obligation, or be bound in gratitude to any other, it may still be upheld by a mercenary exchange of good offices according to an agreed valuation. 133Society, however, cannot subsist among those who are at all times ready to hurt and injure one another. The moment that injury begins, the moment that mutual resentment and animosity take place, all the bands of it are broke asunder, and the different members of which it consisted are, as it were, dissipated and scattered abroad by the violence and opposition of their discordant affections. If there is any society among robbers and murderers, they must at least, according to the trite observation, abstain from robbing and murdering one another. Beneficence, therefore, is less essential to the exigence of society than justice. Society may subsist, though not in the most comfortable state, without beneficence; but the prevalence of injustice must utterly destroy it. Though Nature, therefore, exhorts mankind to acts of beneficence, by the pleasing consciousness of deserved reward, she has not thought it necessary to guard and enforce the practice of it by the terrors of merited punishment in case it should be neglected. It is the ornament which embellishes, not the foundation which supports the building, and which it was, therefore, sufficient to recommend, but by no means necessary to impose. Justice, on the contrary, is the main pillar that upholds the whole edifice. If it is removed, the great, the immense fabric of human society, that fabric which to raise and support seems in this world, if I may say so, to have been the peculiar and darling care of Nature, must in a moment crumble into atoms. In order to enforce the observation of justice, therefore, Nature has implanted in the human breast that consciousness of ill desert, those terrors of merited punishment 134which attend upon its violation, as the great safe-guards of the association of mankind, to protect the weak, to curb...
Master this chapter. Complete your experience
Purchase the complete book to access all chapters and support classic literature
As an Amazon Associate, we earn a small commission from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
Available in paperback, hardcover, and e-book formats
Intelligence Amplifier™ Analysis
The Road of Backward Reasoning - Why We Feel First, Justify Later
We experience immediate moral feelings, then construct logical arguments to justify those feelings, believing we reasoned our way to moral conclusions.
Why This Matters
Connect literature to life
This chapter teaches how to recognize when people construct logical arguments to justify gut feelings they've already had.
Practice This Today
This week, notice when someone gives you elaborate reasons for a decision that seems emotionally driven—listen for the feeling underneath their logic.
Now let's explore the literary elements.
Terms to Know
Moral Sentiments
The natural feelings and instincts that guide our sense of right and wrong, like the gut reaction that makes you angry when you see someone being cruel. Smith argues these feelings, not logical reasoning, are the foundation of morality.
Modern Usage:
When you immediately dislike someone who's rude to service workers, that's your moral sentiments at work.
Mercenary Exchange
Relationships based purely on mutual benefit rather than affection or loyalty. People cooperate because it serves their interests, not because they care about each other.
Modern Usage:
Most business relationships are mercenary exchanges - you're polite to your insurance agent because you need coverage, not because you're friends.
Mutual Resentment
When people in a group start harboring grudges and hostility toward each other. Smith warns this destroys any chance of cooperation or social harmony.
Modern Usage:
Office drama where coworkers stop helping each other and start sabotaging projects is mutual resentment in action.
Agreed Valuation
When people decide what favors, services, or goods are worth in their exchanges with each other. It's the basis of fair dealing even without friendship.
Modern Usage:
Splitting bills evenly at dinner or paying your babysitter the going rate represents agreed valuation.
Bands of Society
The invisible ties that hold communities together - whether love and friendship (the strong ties) or simple mutual benefit (the weak but functional ties).
Modern Usage:
Social media connections, neighborhood watch groups, and even customer loyalty programs are all modern bands of society.
Natural Justice
The instinctive sense that certain actions deserve punishment, regardless of whether punishing them actually prevents future crimes or benefits society.
Modern Usage:
The public outrage demanding harsh sentences for child abusers, even when rehabilitation might be more effective, shows natural justice at work.
Characters in This Chapter
The Merchant
Representative figure
Smith uses merchants as examples of people who cooperate successfully without personal affection. They demonstrate how society can function on mutual benefit alone, following rules and honoring contracts even with strangers.
Modern Equivalent:
The professional contractor who does good work because reputation matters
The Wrongdoer
Moral example
Smith examines why we feel compelled to punish people who harm others, arguing our desire for punishment comes from natural moral feelings rather than calculated social benefits.
Modern Equivalent:
The person everyone wants fired after they're caught stealing from coworkers
Key Quotes & Analysis
"Society may subsist among different men, as among different merchants, from a sense of its utility, without any mutual love or affection"
Context: Explaining how communities can function even without warm relationships
This reveals Smith's realistic view of human cooperation. He's not a romantic who thinks everyone needs to love each other - he understands that shared interests and fair dealing can hold society together even when people don't particularly like each other.
In Today's Words:
You don't have to be friends with everyone to live in the same neighborhood and get along fine.
"Society, however, cannot subsist among those who are at all times ready to hurt and injure one another"
Context: Drawing the line between what societies can and cannot tolerate
Smith identifies the absolute minimum requirement for any functioning community: people must refrain from actively harming each other. This isn't about being nice - it's about basic safety and trust.
In Today's Words:
A community falls apart the moment people start actively trying to hurt each other.
"The moment that injury begins, the moment that mutual resentment and animosity take place, all the bands of it are broke asunder"
Context: Describing how quickly social bonds can dissolve
Smith captures how fragile social cooperation really is. Once people start viewing each other as enemies rather than neutral parties or allies, the whole system breaks down rapidly and completely.
In Today's Words:
Once people start holding serious grudges against each other, the group is basically done for.
Thematic Threads
Justice
In This Chapter
Smith distinguishes between kindness (nice but optional) and justice (absolutely essential for society's survival)
Development
Building from earlier chapters about moral sentiments to show justice as society's foundation
In Your Life:
You might notice how workplace conflicts often stem from perceived unfairness, not actual policy violations
Social Expectations
In This Chapter
Society functions through minimal expectations of non-harm rather than maximum expectations of love
Development
Evolved from discussions of sympathy to show realistic social contracts
In Your Life:
You can maintain professional relationships without deep affection, but not without basic respect
Human Relationships
In This Chapter
People can cooperate without loving each other, but cannot coexist while actively harming each other
Development
Refined understanding from earlier relationship dynamics to show minimum viable social bonds
In Your Life:
You don't need to be friends with difficult family members, but you need to avoid actively hurting each other
Personal Growth
In This Chapter
Understanding your own moral reasoning process—recognizing when you justify feelings versus think through problems
Development
Advanced from simple moral awareness to metacognition about moral thinking
In Your Life:
You might catch yourself building elaborate arguments for decisions you've already made emotionally
Class
In This Chapter
Different classes may have different moral intuitions, but the pattern of feeling-then-reasoning remains universal
Development
Subtle exploration of how moral reasoning patterns transcend class boundaries
In Your Life:
You might notice how both you and your supervisor justify similar behaviors using different moral vocabularies
You now have the context. Time to form your own thoughts.
Discussion Questions
- 1
Smith says kindness is like decorative trim on a building, while justice is the foundation. What does this comparison reveal about what holds society together?
analysis • surface - 2
Why does Smith argue that we punish wrongdoers based on gut feelings first, then create logical arguments second? What drives this backward reasoning?
analysis • medium - 3
Think about a recent time you felt moral outrage—at work, in your family, or watching the news. Can you identify the immediate feeling versus the logical arguments you built afterward?
application • medium - 4
When someone violates your sense of fairness, how might recognizing the 'feeling first, reasoning second' pattern change how you respond to them?
application • deep - 5
Smith suggests our moral alarm system isn't a flaw but a feature of human nature. What does this teach us about trusting our instincts versus questioning our reactions?
reflection • deep
Critical Thinking Exercise
Track Your Moral Reasoning
Think of a recent situation where you felt someone did something wrong—a coworker, family member, public figure, or stranger. Write down your immediate emotional reaction first, then list all the logical reasons you gave (to yourself or others) for why their behavior was unacceptable. Notice which came first: the feeling or the reasoning.
Consider:
- •Be honest about your gut reaction, even if it seems petty or emotional
- •Look for patterns in how you justify your feelings to make them sound more reasonable
- •Consider whether your logical arguments would convince someone who didn't share your initial emotional response
Journaling Prompt
Write about a time when you later realized your moral outrage was more about your own discomfort or ego than about genuine wrongdoing. What did that teach you about your own moral reasoning?
Coming Up Next...
Chapter 22: Why We Blame Objects and Praise Intentions
The coming pages reveal we get angry at inanimate objects that hurt us, and teach us makes gratitude and resentment truly satisfying. These discoveries help us navigate similar situations in our own lives.