Nature of True Virtue

Jonathan Edwards composed this philosophical treatise on moral virtue during his final years as president of the College of New Jersey, completing it shortly before his death in 1758. Published posthumously in 1765, the work represents Edwards's most systematic engagement with Enlightenment moral philosophy, particularly responding to the ethical theories of Francis Hutcheson and other moral sense philosophers who grounded virtue in natural human sentiment.

Edwards argues that true virtue consists solely in "benevolence to being in general" — a disinterested love that extends to all existence in proportion to its degree of being, with God as the highest being receiving the fullest love. He distinguishes this genuine virtue from what he terms "secondary" or "natural" virtue, which includes qualities like natural affection, gratitude, and justice that arise from human nature but lack the universal scope of true virtue. These natural virtues, while beneficial for society, remain fundamentally self-interested and particular rather than universal. Edwards contends that authentic virtue requires supernatural regeneration through divine grace, as fallen human nature cannot achieve the complete selflessness that true benevolence demands. The treatise systematically dismantles competing theories that locate virtue in natural human capacities, arguing instead that moral beauty mirrors aesthetic beauty in its harmony and proportion.

The work established Edwards as a significant voice in eighteenth-century moral philosophy while maintaining his distinctively Reformed theological commitments. It influenced later American philosophical theology and continues to shape discussions about the relationship between divine grace and human morality. Who should read this: philosophers and theologians interested in Reformed approaches to ethics, particularly those engaging questions about whether genuine virtue requires religious foundation, though readers unfamiliar with Enlightenment moral philosophy may find Edwards's technical arguments challenging to follow.