412R. J. H. A. Sparrow to Harrod, 27 November 1934 [a]

Follows on from 411 R. Sparrow wonders what causes the loss of confidence in case of repeated lying, and is not sure that the missed opportunities engendered by 100 lies is necessarily more than 100 times as numerous as those engendered by one, as it depends on the circumstances. Sparrow also submits a general criticism to Harrod's paper, that it was neither an analysis of popular moral theory (an account of what one means when one calls conduct "good"), nor a moral theory of Harrod's own. He points out that the ordinary application of the word "good" to conduct has reference to motive, while in Harrod's approach it is not a "quality", but the answering to Harrod's definition. [1]

  1. 1. In a further letter dated 30 November, Sparrow expressed satisfaction with Harrod's reply on the general aspect, but was still puzzled over the "loss of confidence" point (in HPBL Add 71612/176).
    1. a. From 3 Pump Court [London], ALS, six pages, in HPBL Add. 71189/15-17.

Welcome page

top of page

Return to index of this section

Go to previous page

Go to next page