★ Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
Auto loaded |
No edit summary |
||
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
' | <p>11 Sept 1814 §7 21</p> | ||
<head>Logic or Ethics</head> | |||
<note>Ch <foreign>Summum bonum</foreign></note> | |||
<p>1 <note>§<gap/> Theoretics</note></p> | |||
<p>III. Lastly come a set of people, who, supposing them to<lb/> | |||
exist are <add>here</add> called <hi rend="underline">Theoretics</hi>. <del><gap/> It is</del> In <add>It is to</add> contemplation<lb/> | |||
and that alone, do these men place <add>look for</add> their <foreign>summum</foreign><lb/> | |||
<foreign>bonum</foreign> such as it is:</p> | |||
<p>Contemplation?? To <del><gap/></del> obtain <add>attain</add> the summit of felicity has<lb/> | |||
a man nothing to do but contemplate? If this be <add>ever</add> the case</p> | |||
<p>If the <foreign>summum bonum</foreign> were any thing like what<lb/> | |||
<del>it</del> has been said of it, who is there that would not be a<lb/> | |||
Theoretic. <foreign>Corde quod habit et <unclear>habos</unclear></foreign> — if there be<lb/> | |||
really a case in which <add>the truth of</add> their position is verified <add>maxim is exemplified</add><lb/> | |||
surely it must be this: for between being in every<lb/> | |||
given degree happy, and <del><gap/></del> in that same degree <del>fancying</del><lb/> | |||
<del>one's</del> self so <add>happy</add>, <del><gap/> so</del> where, so long as the fancy<lb/> | |||
lasts — where is the difference <add>(let any body say)</add>? <del><gap/></del></p> | |||
<p>Of these men surely may be said, and with no<lb/> | |||
less propriety what by Cicero was said of another set<lb/> | |||
of men. <!-- Latin text here, not transcribed. --> These are a good sort <add>set</add> of<lb/> | |||
men, and forasmuch as such they are in their own<lb/> | |||
opinion, a blessed one.</p> | |||
<p>Not so this <add>our</add> modern <unclear>Loliaist</unclear> <add>philosopher</add>. Whatsoever<lb/> | |||
Happy as they may think themselves Let them <unclear>think</unclear> <add>fancy</add><lb/> | |||
themselves ever so happy, he proves to them that it is<lb/> | |||
no such thing.</p> | |||
<p>We are born to act <add>for action</add>, he says to act <add>for action</add>: and to<lb/> | |||
prove it he calls The <sic>Fabrick</sic> of our Nature: whereupon<lb/> | |||
he goes on the observe that therefore <del>the</del> if in such acting<lb/> | |||
no action no action of <hi rend="underline">offices</hi> (or for offices say <hi rend="underline">Deities</hi>)<lb/> | |||
whatsoever he meant to say by action of offices or action<lb/> | |||
of deities, takes place, the highest knowledge in <gap/><lb/> | |||
or <gap/> is in a certain sort defective, and such<lb/> | |||
as will be of little service to mankind. Testator <gap/> &</p> | |||
<note>p.9.</note> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} |
11 Sept 1814 §7 21
Logic or Ethics Ch Summum bonum
1 § Theoretics
III. Lastly come a set of people, who, supposing them to
exist are here called Theoretics. It is In It is to contemplation
and that alone, do these men place look for their summum
bonum such as it is:
Contemplation?? To obtain attain the summit of felicity has
a man nothing to do but contemplate? If this be ever the case
If the summum bonum were any thing like what
it has been said of it, who is there that would not be a
Theoretic. Corde quod habit et habos — if there be
really a case in which the truth of their position is verified maxim is exemplified
surely it must be this: for between being in every
given degree happy, and in that same degree fancying
one's self so happy, so where, so long as the fancy
lasts — where is the difference (let any body say)?
Of these men surely may be said, and with no
less propriety what by Cicero was said of another set
of men. These are a good sort set of
men, and forasmuch as such they are in their own
opinion, a blessed one.
Not so this our modern Loliaist philosopher. Whatsoever
Happy as they may think themselves Let them think fancy
themselves ever so happy, he proves to them that it is
no such thing.
We are born to act for action, he says to act for action: and to
prove it he calls The Fabrick of our Nature: whereupon
he goes on the observe that therefore the if in such acting
no action no action of offices (or for offices say Deities)
whatsoever he meant to say by action of offices or action
of deities, takes place, the highest knowledge in
or is in a certain sort defective, and such
as will be of little service to mankind. Testator &
p.9.
Identifier: | JB/014/076/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 14. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
1814-09-11 |
|||
014 |
deontology |
||
076 |
logic or ethics |
||
001 |
|||
text sheet |
1 |
||
recto |
d21 / e1 |
||
jeremy bentham |
|||
4839 |
|||