This quote implies that if virtue, or moral righteousness, was its own reward, it would cease to be a human quality, and instead become a supernatural one. In other words, if being virtuous automatically led to rewards, it would not be a characteristic of human nature, but something beyond it. This is because it is human nature to sometimes struggle with moral decisions, to be tempted and to sometimes fail. If virtue always led to rewards, there would be no struggle, no temptation and no failure.
The quote suggests that virtue is a human quality precisely because it does not always lead to rewards. It is the ability to be virtuous, even when faced with difficulties or temptations, that makes it a human quality. It is the struggle, the choice to be virtuous even when it is hard, that makes it a human quality. If virtue was always rewarded, there would be no struggle, no choice, and therefore, it would not be a human quality.
In today’s world, this quote could be applied in many ways. For example, in the context of personal development, it suggests that the path to becoming a better person is not always easy or rewarding. It requires making difficult choices and sometimes sacrificing immediate gratification for the sake of long-term growth. But it is precisely this struggle, this choice, that makes personal development a deeply human journey.
In a broader societal context, the quote could be interpreted as a critique of a world where virtue is often not rewarded. It could be seen as a call to create societies where virtuous actions are recognized and rewarded, not because this would make virtue supernatural, but because it would make it more human. It would make it easier for people to choose virtue, to choose to be better, even when it is hard.
