Summary
Smith reveals a fundamental truth about human judgment: we approve of others' emotions when they match what we would feel in the same situation, and disapprove when they don't. If someone gets angry about an insult and we'd feel the same level of anger, we think their reaction is justified. If they're furious while we'd barely be annoyed, we judge them as overreacting. This happens automatically—we use our own emotional responses as the standard for measuring everyone else's. Smith shows this works even when we're not actively feeling the emotion ourselves. We might approve of someone's grief over losing a parent even if we're not currently sad, because we know from experience that we would grieve deeply in that situation. This 'conditional sympathy' lets us judge appropriately even when distracted or in different moods. The chapter also introduces a crucial distinction: we judge emotions in two ways. First, we ask if the feeling fits the cause—is this level of anger appropriate for this insult? Second, we consider the consequences—will this anger lead to helpful or harmful actions? Most philosophers focus only on consequences, but in daily life, we constantly evaluate both. This insight explains why we might support someone's right to be upset while still worrying about how they'll act on those feelings. Understanding this pattern helps us recognize our own biases and become more thoughtful about how we judge others' emotional lives.
Coming Up in Chapter 4
Smith continues exploring this theme of emotional judgment, diving deeper into how we measure the appropriateness of feelings and the complex ways sympathy shapes our moral decisions.
Share it with friends
An excerpt from the original text.(~500 words)
Of the manner in which we judge of the propriety or impropriety of the affections of other men, by their concord or dissonance with our own. When the original passions of the person principally concerned are in perfect concord with the sympathetic emotions of the spectator, they necessarily appear to this last just and proper, and suitable to their objects; and, on the contrary, when, upon bringing the case home to himself, he finds that they do not coincide with what he feels, they necessarily appear to him unjust and improper, and unsuitable to the causes which excite them. To approve of the passions of another, therefore, as suitable to their objects, is the same thing as to observe that we entirely sympathize with them; and not to approve of them as such, is the same thing as to observe that we do not entirely sympathize with them. The man who resents the injuries that have been done to me, and 15observes that I resent them precisely as he does, necessarily approves of my resentment. The man whose sympathy keeps time to my grief, cannot but admit the reasonableness of my sorrow. He who admires the same poem, or the same picture, and admires them exactly as I do, must surely allow the justness of my admiration. He who laughs at the same joke, and laughs along with me, cannot well deny the propriety of my laughter. On the contrary, the person who, upon these different occasions, either feels no such emotion as that which I feel, or feels none that bears any proportion to mine, cannot avoid disapproving my sentiments on account of their dissonance with his own. If my animosity goes beyond what the indignation of my friend can correspond to; if my grief exceeds what his most tender compassion can go along with; if my admiration is either too high or too low to tally with his own; if I laugh loud and heartily when he only smiles, or, on the contrary, only smile when he laughs loud and heartily; in all these cases, as soon as he comes from considering the object, to observe how I am affected by it, according as there is more or less disproportion between his sentiments and mine, I must incur a greater or less degree of his disapprobation: and upon all occasions his own sentiments are the standards and measures by which he judges of mine. To approve of another man’s opinions is to adopt those opinions, and to adopt them is to approve of them. If the same arguments which convince you convince me likewise, I necessarily approve of your conviction; and if they do not, I necessarily disapprove of it: neither can I possibly conceive that I 16should do the one without the other. To approve or disapprove, therefore, of the opinions of others is acknowledged, by every body, to mean no more than to observe their agreement or disagreement with our own. But this is equally the...
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 Emotional Scorekeeping
We automatically judge others' emotional responses by measuring them against our own internal scale, assuming our reactions are the universal standard.
Why This Matters
Connect literature to life
This chapter teaches you to recognize when you're using your own emotional scale to judge others inappropriately.
Practice This Today
This week, notice when someone's reaction seems 'wrong' to you—pause and ask what experiences might make it feel different to them than it would to you.
Now let's explore the literary elements.
Terms to Know
Sympathetic emotions
The feelings we experience when imagining ourselves in someone else's situation. Smith argues these aren't just pity, but actually feeling what they feel by putting ourselves in their shoes. This is how we connect with others and judge if their reactions make sense.
Modern Usage:
When you watch someone get embarrassed and feel embarrassed yourself, or when you tense up watching someone about to fall.
Spectator
Smith's term for anyone observing another person's emotions or actions. The spectator doesn't have to be physically watching - they could be hearing about events later. What matters is they're judging from the outside looking in.
Modern Usage:
Anyone scrolling through social media drama, listening to a friend vent, or watching reality TV is being a 'spectator' in Smith's sense.
Concord and dissonance
Musical terms Smith uses to describe emotional matching. When your feelings 'harmonize' with someone else's, that's concord. When they clash or feel off-key, that's dissonance. He's saying we judge emotions like we judge whether singers are in tune.
Modern Usage:
When someone's reaction feels 'right' to you versus when it feels 'off' or 'too much' or 'not enough.'
Propriety
Whether an emotion fits the situation that caused it. Not about following social rules, but about whether the feeling matches the trigger. Smith says we naturally sense when emotions are proportionate to their causes.
Modern Usage:
Judging whether someone's anger at being cut off in traffic is reasonable versus completely over the top.
Bringing the case home
Smith's phrase for mentally putting yourself in someone else's exact situation to see how you'd feel. It's more than just imagining - it's trying to feel what they felt by recreating their circumstances in your mind.
Modern Usage:
When you think 'If that happened to me, I'd be furious too' or 'I can't imagine getting that upset over something so small.'
Original passions
The actual emotions felt by the person experiencing the situation firsthand. These are contrasted with the 'sympathetic emotions' of observers. Smith argues we judge by comparing these two sets of feelings.
Modern Usage:
The difference between how mad you actually are when someone cuts you off versus how mad your passenger thinks you should be.
Characters in This Chapter
The injured party
Example figure
Smith uses this as his main example - someone who has been wronged and feels resentment. Their emotional response becomes the test case for how spectators judge appropriateness of feelings.
Modern Equivalent:
The person posting about being wronged on social media
The sympathetic observer
Moral judge
The person watching or hearing about the injured party's situation. They automatically measure their own imagined response against what the injured person actually feels, creating approval or disapproval.
Modern Equivalent:
The friend listening to someone vent about their problems
The person who resents injuries
Emotional validator
Smith's example of someone whose anger matches the observer's imagined anger perfectly. This creates automatic approval and shows how emotional harmony leads to moral approval.
Modern Equivalent:
The coworker who gets just as mad as you do about unfair treatment
Key Quotes & Analysis
"To approve of the passions of another, therefore, as suitable to their objects, is the same thing as to observe that we entirely sympathize with them"
Context: Smith is explaining his core theory about how moral judgment works
This reveals that moral approval isn't based on abstract rules but on emotional resonance. We think someone's feelings are 'right' when they match what we'd feel. This makes morality deeply personal and experiential rather than purely rational.
In Today's Words:
When someone's reaction feels exactly like what yours would be, you automatically think they're justified.
"The man whose sympathy keeps time to my grief, cannot but admit the reasonableness of my sorrow"
Context: Smith is using musical metaphor to show how emotional matching creates moral approval
The musical metaphor reveals how natural and automatic this process is. Just as we can hear when music is in rhythm, we can feel when emotions are 'in time' with situations. This suggests moral judgment is more intuitive than we often think.
In Today's Words:
When someone grieves at the same pace and intensity you would, they can't help but think your sadness makes perfect sense.
"He who laughs at the same joke, and laughs along with me, cannot well deny the propriety of my laughter"
Context: Smith is showing how this principle works even with positive emotions
This everyday example makes the abstract theory concrete. It shows that shared emotional responses create instant validation, even for something as simple as humor. It also reveals how isolated we feel when others don't share our emotional reactions.
In Today's Words:
If you think something is funny too, you can't really say I'm wrong for laughing at it.
Thematic Threads
Human Relationships
In This Chapter
Smith shows how we use our own emotional responses as the standard for judging others, creating the foundation for all social approval and disapproval
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might catch yourself thinking a friend is 'overreacting' to workplace drama because you handle stress differently.
Social Expectations
In This Chapter
Our approval of others' emotions creates unspoken rules about what feelings are 'appropriate' in different situations
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might feel pressure to hide your excitement about small victories because others seem less enthusiastic.
Personal Growth
In This Chapter
Understanding how we judge emotions reveals our biases and opens the door to more thoughtful responses to others
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might start questioning why certain emotional reactions bother you and what that reveals about your own experiences.
Identity
In This Chapter
Our emotional responses become part of how we define ourselves and measure our place in social hierarchies
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might realize you pride yourself on being 'low-maintenance' and judge others who express needs more directly.
You now have the context. Time to form your own thoughts.
Discussion Questions
- 1
According to Smith, how do we decide if someone else's emotional reaction is appropriate or justified?
analysis • surface - 2
Why do we automatically use our own emotional experiences as the measuring stick for judging others' feelings, even when we're not currently experiencing those emotions ourselves?
analysis • medium - 3
Think about a recent disagreement with a family member, coworker, or friend. How might your different emotional 'thermostats' have contributed to the conflict?
application • medium - 4
When you catch yourself thinking someone is 'overreacting' or 'not caring enough,' what questions could you ask to understand their perspective instead of dismissing their feelings?
application • deep - 5
If everyone judges emotions through the lens of their own experiences, what does this reveal about the challenge of truly understanding another person?
reflection • deep
Critical Thinking Exercise
Recalibrate Your Emotional Thermometer
Think of someone whose emotional reactions often seem 'wrong' to you - maybe they get too upset about small things, or don't seem bothered by things that would anger you. Write a brief story explaining their reaction from their perspective, considering what experiences might have shaped their emotional scale differently than yours.
Consider:
- •What past experiences might make this situation feel bigger or smaller to them than to you?
- •How might their current circumstances (stress, health, responsibilities) affect their emotional capacity?
- •What cultural, family, or personal values might make them prioritize different aspects of the situation?
Journaling Prompt
Write about a time when someone dismissed your emotional reaction as inappropriate. How did that feel? What did they miss about your experience that made the situation feel different to you than it would to them?
Coming Up Next...
Chapter 4: The Art of Emotional Harmony
Moving forward, we'll examine we judge others based on whether they see things our way, and understand personal problems create deeper conflicts than opinions about art or ideas. These insights bridge the gap between classic literature and modern experience.