Negative
and Positive Morality
G.K.
Chesterton
(from
"Illustrated London News" January 3, 1920)
A vast
amount of nonsense is talked against negative and destructive things. The
silliest sort of progressive complains of negative morality and compares it
unfavorably with positive morality. The silliest sort of conservative complains
of destructive reform and compares it unfavourably with constructive reform.
Both the progressive and the conservative entirely neglect to consider the very
meaning of the words "yes" and "no". To give the answer
"yes" to one question is to imply the answer "no" to
another question. To desire the construction of something is to desire
the destruction of whatever prevents its construction. This is particularly
plain in the fuss about the "negative" morality of the Ten
Commandments. The truth is that the curtness of the Commandments is an evidence, not of the gloom and narrowness of a religion
but of its liberality and humanity. It is shorter to state the things forbidden
than the things permitted precisely because most things are permitted and only
a few things are forbidden. An optimist who insisted on a purely positive
morality would have to begin by telling a man that he might pick dandelions on
a common and go on for months before he came to the fact that he might throw
pebbles into the sea. In comparison with this positive morality the Ten
Commandments rather shine in that brevity which is the soul of wit.
But of
course, the fallacy is even more fundamental than this. Negative morality is
positive morality, stated in the plainest and therefore the most positive
way. If I am told not to murder Mr. Robinson, if I am stopped in the very
act of murdering Mr. Robinson, it is obvious that Mr. Robinson is not only
spared, but in a sense renewed, and even created. And those who like Mr.
Robinson, among them my reactionary romanticism might suggest the inclusion of
Mrs. Robinson, will be well aware that they have
recovered a living and complex unity. And similarly, those who like European
civilisation, and the common code of what used to be called Christendom, will
realize that salvation is not negative, but highly positive, and even highly
complex. They will rejoice at its escape, long before they have leisure for its
examination. But, without examination, they will know that there is a
great deal to be examined, and a great deal that is worth examination.
Nothing is negative except nothing. It is not our rescue that was negative, but
only the nothingness and annihilation from which we were rescued.
On the
other side there is the same fallacy about merely destructive reform. It
could be applied just as easily to the merely destructive war. In both cases
destruction may be essential to the avoidance of destruction, and also to the very possibility of construction. Men are
not merely destroying a ship in order to have a
shipwreck; they may be merely destroying a tree in order to
have a ship. To complain that we spent four years in the Great War in mere
destruction is to complain that we spent them in escaping from being destroyed.
And it is, once again, to forget the fact that the failure of the murderer
means the life of a positive and not a negative Mr. Robinson. If we take
the imaginary Mr. Robinson as a type of the average modern man in Western
Europe, and study him from head to foot, we shall find defects as well as
merits. And in the whole civilisation we have saved, we shall find
defects that amount to diseases. Its feet, if not of clay, are certainly in
clay, stuck in the mud of a materialistic industrial destitution and despair.
To say it is a positive good and glory to have saved Mr. Robinson from
strangling is to miss the whole meaning of human life. It is to forget every
good as soon as we have saved it, that is, to lose it as soon as we have got
it. Progress of that kind is a hope that is the enemy of faith, and a
faith that is the enemy of charity.
When
our hopes for the coming time seem disturbed or doubtful, and peace chaotic,
let us remember that it is really our disappointment that is an illusion.
It is our rescue that is a reality. Our grounds for gratitude are really far greater than our powers of being grateful. It
is in the mood of a noble sort of humility, and even a noble sort of fear, that
new things are really made. We adorn things most when we love them most.
And we love them most when we have nearly lost them.