It was a consequence, perhaps, of the limited extent to which he had
carried the utilitarian theory, that Hume was charged with having left
no distinct line between talent and virtue. By making it seem as if he
held that each man was virtuous according as he did good to mankind at
large, and vicious in as far as he failed in accomplishing this end, he
made way for the argument, that no man can rise high in virtue, unless
he also rise high in intellectual gifts; since, without possessing the
latter, he is not capable of deciding what actions are, and what are
not, conducive to the good of the human race. Many sentiments expressed
in the Inquiry appeared to justify this charge.[347:1] There was thus no
merit assigned to what is called good intention; and no ground for
extending the just approbation of mankind to those who have never
attempted to frame a code of morality to themselves, but who, following
the track of established opinions, or the rules laid down by some of the
many leaders of the human race, believe that, by a steadfast and
disinterested pursuit of their adopted course, they are doing that which
is right in the eye of God and man. It is certain, however, that in this
way many a man may be pursuing a line of conduct conducive to the good
of his fellow-creatures, without knowing that his actions have that
ultimate end. While he follows the rules that have been laid down for
him, his code of morality may be as far superior to that of his clever
and aspiring neighbour, who has fabricated a system for himself, as the
intelligence of the leader, followed by the one, is greater than the
self-sufficient wisdom of the other. Hence multitudes in the humblest
classes of society, in any well regulated community of modern Europe,
will be found, almost blindly, following a code of morality as much
above what the genius either of Socrates or Cicero could devise, as the
order of the universe is superior to the greatest efforts of man's
artificial skill.