At the present time it is considered necessary to judge all philosophical systems by the standards of to-day. If the thoughts of previous generations refuse to be measured by conceptions which did not appeal to their age, so much the worse for them. That such a procedure leads to injustice and absurdity seems to make no difference to the people who employ it. The general practice demands such an enforced conformity, and its behests must be obeyed. Before leaving More, then, we must find a label for him. There are certain questions that must be answered. Was he an intuitionist? Did he believe in hedonism? Could he be counted among the utilitarians? The answers to these questions are made easy by the fact that the same reply will do for them all. A simple affirmative is sufficient. He belonged to all the schools.
The hedonistic aspect is evident enough. He made virtue depend in part upon its pleasure-giving qualities. To be sure, the pleasure is of so lofty a character that it would appeal to comparatively few; but it is pleasure, nevertheless. Hedonism which recognizes qualitative distinctions in pleasure is of rather a doubtful variety, and it is here that intuitionism finds its opportunity. If virtue is dependent upon pleasure, pleasure is just as dependent upon virtue; and virtue is known intuitively. Its intrinsic nature is recognized without any reference, conscious or unconscious, to what is outside itself. Utilitarianism is not so obvious an element as the other two; but, once found, one is likely to place more weight upon it than is justifiable. Among the noemata there are three which seem to point toward such an interpretation: "(14) The good that you would like to have done to yourself under given circumstances, you should do to another under the same circumstances, so far as is possible without injury to any third person; (15) The evil that you would be unwilling to have done to yourself, you should refrain from doing to another, so far as is possible without injury to any third person; (18) If it is good that one man should be supplied with the means of living well and happily, it follows by certain and plain mathematical analogy that it is doubly good for two men to be supplied,
