Reviving Atrophying Internal Spectatorship

     Adam Smith, in The Theory of Moral Sentiments, describes a metaphorical building when comparing the virtues of justice and beneficence. Smith claims that justice “is the main pillar that holds up the entire edifice” while beneficence “is the ornament which embellishes, not the foundation” (p. 87). While beneficence is “less essential to the existence of society than justice,” it greatly enhances the quality of existing societies (p. 86). To extend the building metaphor, without beneficence, the building may stand, but the windows would be shattered, leaving the residents inside cold and miserable. While beneficence is voluntary, a society devoid of it would be a joyless utility-maximizing marketplace. If beneficence, i.e. voluntary kindness breeds more happiness, then leaders of virtuous societies should seek to incentivize it among their citizens.

    Beneficence is driven by Smith’s “impartial spectator,” an internal force that can “humble the arrogance of his self-love” (p. 83). Indeed, viewing your conduct through the lens of a neutral third party is a surefire way to improve behavior and spur beneficence. Unfortunately, in an increasingly vast and commercialized world, the impartial spectator’s influence is weakening. Post-industrial population booms, globalism, the digital revolution, and other centralizing events have curtailed interpersonal interaction and prioritized utility over character.

The anonymity of the crowd dampens the effects of the internal spectator. In a group of 50 people, reputation matters, in a group of 5 million, less so. When nobody knows your character, you receive zero “merit” for your positive actions. The desire for beneficence goes down as the reward of merit does. Further, the more a society prioritizes utility, the higher emphasis is placed on net worth over moral worth. Beneficence falls by the wayside, when success is vested in maximizing economic growth.

Modern societies cannot be Balkanized into homogenous communities nor reformed into gift economies over markets. Practical solutions to revive impartial spectatorship need to move beyond this simple logic–we cannot simply will ourselves to be more moral. The most practical way to revive the impartial spectator is to increase perspective and tolerance. New urbanism, digital decentralization, support for the arts, spirited debates, things that bring sub-communities together, have some potential, or at the very least, a partial spectator, one that asks what an individual’s tribe would think (e.g. a trusted family member, friend, spouse).

As just a society may be, one with zero beneficence is arguably worse than the state of nature. A building is more than a concrete slab. In order to prevent this kind of instruction, beneficence needs to be taken as seriously as its counterpart.