AndduringthefirstperiodofethicalcontroversyinmodernEngland，aftertheaudaciousenunciationofEgoismbyHobbesbadrousedinrealearnestthesearchforaphilosophicalbasisofmorality，UtilitarianismappearsinfriendlyalliancewithIntuitionism。ItwasnottosupersedebuttosupportthemoralityofCommonSense，againstthedangerousinnovationsofHobbes，thatCumberlanddeclared``thecommongoodofallRationals’’tobetheendtowhichmoralruleswerethemeans。WefindhimquotedwithapprovalbyClarke，whoiscommonlytakentorepresentIntuitionisminanextremeform。NordoesShaftesbury，inintroducingthetheoryofa``moralsense’’，seemtohavedreamtthatitcouldeverimpelustoactionsnotclearlyconducivetotheGoodoftheWhole:antihisdiscipleHutchesonexpresslyidentifieditspromptingswiththoseofBenevolence。Butler，Ithink，wasourfirstinfluentialwriterwhodweltonthediscrepanciesbetweenVirtueascommonlyunderstoodand``conductlikeliesttoproduceanoverbalanceofhappiness’’。[5]WhenHumepresentedUtilitarianismasamodeofexplainingcurrentmorality，itwasseenorsuspectedtohaveapartiallydestructivetendency。ButitwasnottillthetimeofPaleyandBenthamthatitwasofferedasamethodfordeterminingconduct，whichwastooverrulealltraditionalpreceptsandsupersedeallexistingmoralsentiments。Andeventhisfinalantagonismrelatesrathertotheoryandmethodthantopracticalresults:practicalconflict，inordinaryhumanminds，ismainlybetweenSelf-interestandSocialDutyhoweverdetermined。Indeed，fromapracticalpointofviewtheprincipleofaimingatthe``greatesthappinessofthegreatestnumber’’
isprimafaciemoredefinitelyopposedtoEgoismthantheCommon-Sensemoralityis。Forthislatterseemstoleaveamanfreetopursuehisownhappinessundercertaindefinitelimitsandconditions:whereasUtilitarianismseemstorequireamorecomprehensiveandunceasingsubordinationofself-interesttothecommongood。Andthus，asMillremarks，Utilitarianismissometimesattackedfromtwopreciselyoppositesides:fromaconfusionwithEgoisticHedonismitiscalledbaseandgrovelling；whileatthesametimeitismoreplausiblychargedwithsettinguptoohighastandardofunselfishnessandmakingexaggerateddemandsonhumannature。
Agooddealremainstobesaid，inordertomaketheprincipleandmethodofUtilitarianismperfectlyclearandexplicit:
butitseemsbesttodeferthistillwecometotheinvestigationofitsdetails。Itwillbeconvenienttotakethisasthefinalstageofourexaminationofmethods。ForontheonehanditissimplerthatthediscussionofEgoisticshouldprecedethatofUniversalisticHedonism；andontheother，itseemsdesirablethatweshouldobtaininasexactaformaspossibletheenunciationsofIntuitiveMorality，beforewecomparethesewiththeresultsofthemoredoubtfulanddifficultcalculationsofutilitarianconsequences。
IntheremainingchaptersofthisBookIshallendeavourtoremovecertainambiguitiesastothegeneralnatureandrelationsoftheothertwomethods，asdesignatedrespectivelybythetermsEgoismandIntuitionism，beforeproceedingtothefullerexaminationoftheminBooksii。andiii。{Note}