Smith

in section 2 ch. 1 paragraph 9, Smith says "the man who barely abstains from violating either the person, or the estate, or the reputation of his neighbours, has surely very little positive merit.  He fulfills, however  all the rules of what is peculiarly called justice, and does every thing which his equals can with propriety force him to do, or which they can punish him for not doing.  We may often fulfill all the rules of justice by sitting still and doing nothing."  Which would you say is better: the man who does this bare minimum of social justice, caring only for himself and following the laws, or a man that tries to do good but always does more harm than good?  Do motives matter more than actions?