JB/014/067/001

Click Here To Edit

10 Sept. 1814 12

Logic or Ethics Ch. Summum bonum

3 §. Epicurians

1. The part ignoble — well, and if so it be. In

1. Ignoble is it the part in question? well, and if it be
so what of that? Not that as thus applied ignoble means
any thing but ignoble: the sound of the word, when you have
that, you have all there is in it. The life of A is
filled up with pleasures, all of them ignoble all of them
intense in the highest degree intense, none of them alloyed
by any thing in the shape of pain. In The life if B. has
what pleasures there are, are all of them of the noble kind, whether
nothing in it no pleasure in it or none they are that one that of the noble kind, but all of them but what are
alloyed with and outweighed by pains: Whose lot, of A, or
B, would a man (in his senses) choose? he being in his senses, supposing him
always in his senses

The part ignoble — well, and if so it be, what follows?
Ignoble as it is, is it less necessary than any other part.
The compared-writer, or not to speak his master would
Ignoble as it is, the compared-writer or his not to speak of
his master would he like have liked to have been without it?

Not that, as then applied, ignoble &c means any thing
but ignoble: the sound of the word ignoble — the sound of the word
is all there is in it.

But let it mean what any one pleases it these the modern philosophers will.
Take two men A. & B. Felix and Misin

The life of A. Felix is filled up with pleasures, all of them
quite altogether ignoble, but on the other hand all of them intense,
and all of them unalloyed by pain, and in that only
intelligible sense all of them pure. In The life of Misin, what
pleasures there are are all of them of the noble kind, whatsoever be is the
noble kind, but all of every one of them faint in itself every one of them alloyed and outweighed by pains.

Felix or Misin
philosopher as you
which would you
rather be?

Alas alas all this is all a mistake. Not the particular
organ but the whole body but body and all to which it belongs is
the ignoble thing here meant: and if the pleasure be
the thing that to which the organ is subservient, the body is the
thing to which the pleasure is subservient to. Well,
but let suppose ignoble though it means nothing mean any
thing, and let the body be as ignoble as heart can wish: as purpose can
require
what follows? Is it not The seat of the pleasures, be the
pleasure what it will, is it not all this while in the mind?
Did ever a man any body see ever see a body that felt pleasure, after when the mind was out of it?

Identifier: | JB/014/067/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 14.
Date_1	1814-09-10	Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	014	Main Headings	deontology
Folio number	067	Info in main headings field	logic or ethics
Image	001	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	d12 / e3
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	4830
Box Contents