One means by which to interpret these passages is through the lens ofa teleological and theistic account of moral perception (Cuneo2002). On this model, when we are functioning properly in theenvironments for which God designed us, then moral judgments areaccompanied by moral motivations to act. However, this connection willfail in those who are damaged or poorly designed. For example,psychopaths suffer impairment in emotional response. Psychopaths canknow certain of their behaviors are outside standard morality and yetnot be motivated to alter their behavior. This, and the ‘properfunction’ interpretation of the relation between moral judgment andmoral motivation, is suggested in Reid's remark about thedepraved:
In the first of the two passages below, both drawn from ActivePowers, Reid implies that moral judgments about an action are notnecessarily connected to any moral motivation while in the second heasserts that moral judgments about an action are necessarily connectedto moral motivation:
Now that we know how and why Reid argues against the Way of Ideas'representational theory of perception, we needn't address thesequestions in order to continue with a discussion of the components ofReid's own more direct theory of perception. Here we need to keep inmind the fact that, though contemporary philosophers write a prioriabout perception, sensation, and knowledge, Reid does not offernecessary and sufficient conditions for perception or for itscomponent processes. Consistent with his Newtonian empiricism, Reid isaiming for something else altogether: observations and accurateexperiments that reduce to general rules (EIP 1.3, 49–50; EIP 2.8,120–1). Though operations of our intellectual powers are not definableor analyzable a priori, it is possible to describe the operations Reidhas in mind.
According to Reid, the perceptual process operates asfollows. Individuals with functioning sensory organs and a developedbrain interact with physical objects in the world. These objects causesensory experiences in individuals. These sensations function asnatural signs for qualities of the objects. The experience of asensation orients my cognition so as to form a conception of a qualityof a mind-independent object. Sometimes, though rarely, anindividual's perception of an object will not only cause a sensationbut will also cause the person to become aware of thesensation—perhaps even at the exclusion of any further awarenessof primary qualities of the object. For example, when I get hit by abaseball thrown 90 mph I focus on my pain sensations, not thequalities of the ball. To perceive an object is to be aware of theobject or its quality in a particular way, as the possessor of aparticular quality, and, at the same time, to beconvinced that the object exists and is as it is conceived it tobe. To defend a common sensical theory of perception that is supportedby observation and experiment, and that is capable of deliveringknowledge of real objects, Reid thinks he needs to show that weare directly aware of real objects, in contrast to keyfeatures of the Way of Ideas' representational theory ofperception just discussed. While there is debate over the precisesense in which, for Reid, we are directly aware of objects, this muchseems clear: whatever the sense of “direct” is in whichthe subscribers to the representational theory take us to be directlyaware of ideas, it is in that sense that Reid takes us to bedirectly aware of real objects.
If it be argued that these feline fondnesses are essentially ‘selfish’and ‘practical’ in their ultimate composition, let us inquire in return how manyhuman fondnesses, apart from those springing directly upon primitive brute instinct, have anyother basis.
As a matter of fact the boys in the alcoholic beverage trade in the last 10 years or so have taken more from the people who drink those beverages than any beverage tax ever dreamed of. At Sacramento they cut the size of the package, boosted the prices tremendously, denied the people the right to buy cheap bulk wine and in the bars where you used to get a man-sized drink they not only increased the price tremendously but cut the size of a jigger to a mere sniff. And a bottle of beer used to be a bottle of beer and “rushing the growler” was an old American custom that went into the ash can along with bulk wine.
The chief clerk declared that probable reason for heated words between himself and Smith was due to the fact that Smith had been aroused from his sleep unexpectedly and that he had been driving “most of the night from Sacramento.”
“A bill of this character should have been first endorsed by some government agency having to do with the administration of justice or concerned with the regulation or the sale of drugs mentioned in the bill, and should have the support of the police force of the city wherein the member resided, or of some such authority, in order that when introduced it might import good faith.
“A bill of this character should have been first indorsed by some Government agency having the administration of justice concerning the regulation or the sale of the drugs mentioned in the bill and should have the support of the police force of the city wherein the member resided, or of some such authority, in order that when into that when introduced it might impart good faith. We do not offer this in condemnation of any motives in introducing this particular bill, but as a general observation concerning the future.”
“If Brackett is speaking the truth Smith’s name was not used and hence was not used in connection with any of these reports (of extortion). If Fong Wan’s version is true it amounts to hearsay and would appear to have come from Brackett speaking entirely for his own interest and using all of the pressure and arguments in aid thereof, wholly unacquainted with Assemblyman Smith and without authority of any kind or character to speak for Smith.
Wan, the Oakland herbalist in whose place the principal negations were alleged to have been carried on, was the star witness. He sketched in detail the numerous visits of Brackett to his place and told of the first demands of Brackett for $10,000 and of his final agreement to take $4500. He also sustained the statements of Chan and Chuck that an alleged agreement was discussed to pay $750 down to Brackett and place the remainder of the money in the Bank of Italy in Oakland until the bill was finally acted upon.
Los Angeles Assemblyman Augustus Hawkins accused the committee of trying to level “suspicion against allies of this nation” and claimed its extension would empower it to “jump on every progressive group in this state.”
The three Chinese first called before the committee, Chan, Wan, and Lee Chuck of San Francisco, gave corroborating testimony to the fact that final agreement on a sum of $4500 was to be paid for quashing the anti-herb bill in the Legislature; of this sum $2500 was allotted by Brackett to Smith; $750 for Senator Hurley; $750 for himself, and $500 was for incidental expenses.