★ Keep up to date with the latest news - subscribe to the Transcribe Bentham newsletter; Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
102.
On false principles of reasoning
Antipathy on the side of lenity - influence where the demand for punishment is created only by the strength of the temptation
circumstances under in which the offence is committed being
such as tend to lessen the adverse antipathy with which men
are apt to regard it, at the same time that
they do not lessen but perhaps increase the quantity
of punishment which it is necessary for the purposes of advantage of
the community to answer to it.
This is the case with the circumstances by
which which as the same time that the advantages
of the offence is not increased the temptation to committ
is is increased.
The principle of antipathy
2
However, in an enlightened age like the present,
its dictates in many points and perhaps
ended in most points coincide with those of the
principles of utility: mans aversion to a practise
being grounded either on first thoughts or at least
on second thoughts upon their opinion of its mischieviousness
to society: if not on at first thoughts, at least
on second.
As to the principle of utility antipathy , nothing
can be more vague and inconsistent than the offence as well
as the dictates of this principle: for speaking with reference to mankind in general it is composed
of the judgements and sentiments of all men where
it is at least of us many sort of men where sentiments as it is thought
worth while to pay regard to howsoever taken up and contained
with or without reason. First taking the whole body of motves in
together as a multitude of questions as is commonly known & lamented,
nothing can be more discordant than these
sentiments; nor by any other means than by appealing
to the standard of utility more irreconciliable.
---page break---
On false principles
How the connection between the phrase Principle
of Antipathy (including moral & Religious Antipathy) and the phrase moral Sanction
Put it to opponents - Whether they will discard
the principle of utility altogether.
2. If not how far they will adopt it.
3. Let them say when this will stop and then ask
them how they justify the adopting it so far, and
why they will not adopt it any further:
4. Put it to them to teach us how to distinguish any
separate principles they set up from the mere
averment of their own unfounded sentiments, that is
what in any other persons they would stile caprice.
5. If it rests entirely on sentiment that is on a sentiment of approbation applied immediately to each action without regard to its utility or mischieviousness then this sentiment
of one man is as good as that of another then
the mischief is only to be decided by counting suffrages
- unless they are the Elect.
6. if they say nay - for the sentiment must
be grounded in reflection, let them say on what
particulars the reflection is to turn - if one particulars
relate relating to utility influencing the utility of the this is
diverting their own principles and assistance
from that against which this set it up. If not on
these particulars, on what other particulars?
7. Admitting that a principle may then share of utility
is what is right to pursue; admitting (what is not true) that the word right can have a meaning without any reference to utility let them
say what motive we can have to prove it?
Can such a motive be taken from Religion. Suppose it
agreed that by acting in such a way the happiness of mankind
shall be best promoted What is there that should
induce them to act in the opposite way ? So if the fear of God
So if that a being of infinite benevolence will punish them
for taking the most effective way to increase their happiness?
Identifier: | JB/027/048/002 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 27.
|
|||
---|---|---|---|
027 |
penal code |
||
048 |
of principles adverse |
||
002 |
note |
||
text sheet |
4 |
||
recto |
f101 / f102 / f103 / f104 |
||
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::w [britannia with shield motif]]] |
||
9138 |
|||