JB/096/109/002: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts

JB/096/109/002: Difference between revisions

Petergh (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Petergh (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
<del>Positive</del> Law<del>,</del> Positive or Municipal.</p>
<del>Positive</del> Law<del>,</del> Positive or Municipal.</p>


Were I to be asked for a Definition of the <add>a</add> state of Nature, I could not give <add><unclear>long</unclear> <gap/></add> <lb/>
<p>Were I to be asked for a Definition of the <add>a</add> state of Nature, I could not give <add><unclear>long</unclear> <gap/></add> <lb/>
a clearer or more characteristic definition of it, than <add>this,</add> that it was <hi rend='underline'>the State in</hi><lb/>
a clearer or more characteristic definition of it, than <add>this,</add> that it was <hi rend='underline'>the State in</hi><lb/>
<hi rend='underline'>which Mankind were in, while there was no Law.</hi> And yet the practice of speaking of<lb/>
<hi rend='underline'>which Mankind were in, while there was no Law.</hi> And yet the practice of speaking of<lb/>
Line 17: Line 17:
It is <del>very true</del> <add>an obvious</add> <del>obj</del> observation, <add>It is very <del>true</del> &amp; has often been observed that <add>an observation <gap/> that is very true &amp; has been often made</add></add> and <del>nothing can n</del> <add>there can not</add> be a truer one, than there<lb/>
It is <del>very true</del> <add>an obvious</add> <del>obj</del> observation, <add>It is very <del>true</del> &amp; has often been observed that <add>an observation <gap/> that is very true &amp; has been often made</add></add> and <del>nothing can n</del> <add>there can not</add> be a truer one, than there<lb/>
is nothing in words that appropriates them more to one Idea than another<lb/>
is nothing in words that appropriates them more to one Idea than another<lb/>
<del><gap/></del> &amp; that the Ideas <add>of 2 Terms</add> which we respectively <add>employ to</add> express bt the words <add>Ideas of a</add> square &amp;<lb/>
<del><gap/></del> &amp; that the Ideas <add>of 2 Terms</add> which we respectively <add>employ to</add> express by the words <add>Ideas of a</add> square &amp;<lb/>
circle the one, if custom had so order'd it, might as well have stood for the Idea<lb/>
circle the one, if custom had so order'd it, might as well have stood for the Idea<lb/>
<unclear>represented</unclear> by the other, as <add>for</add> that which it <del><gap/></del> denotes <add>at present</add>. &#x2014; <del>Thus much <gap/> be <gap/></del><lb/>
<unclear>represented</unclear> by the other, as <add>for</add> that which it <del><gap/></del> denotes <add>at present</add>. &#x2014; <del>Thus much <gap/> be <gap/></del><lb/>
Line 27: Line 27:
it may then strictly be termed <add>called</add> erroneous, <add>[<del>when</del> <add>as if</add> the same term were applied indiscriminately to both Square and Circle.]</add> because by the necessity it introduces <add><unclear>imposes</unclear></add><lb/>
it may then strictly be termed <add>called</add> erroneous, <add>[<del>when</del> <add>as if</add> the same term were applied indiscriminately to both Square and Circle.]</add> because by the necessity it introduces <add><unclear>imposes</unclear></add><lb/>
of <add>perpetually</add> <sic>counfounding</sic> <add>making a man appear to say one thing while he means another</add> <del>distinct</del> Ideas <add>that should be distinct</add>, it frustrates all the ends of language. &#x2014;<lb/>
of <add>perpetually</add> <sic>counfounding</sic> <add>making a man appear to say one thing while he means another</add> <del>distinct</del> Ideas <add>that should be distinct</add>, it frustrates all the ends of language. &#x2014;<lb/>
<note>If then this <unclear>term</unclear> of the Law of Nature be allowed to be improper, the distinction of <unclear>make</unclear> <gap/> <gap/> and <unclear>make</unclear> <unclear>prohibits</unclear> must fall <add>along</add> with it &#x2014; It may however be retain'd if one pleases, to denote on the one hand such kinds of Action which are more <unclear>uniformly</unclear> &amp; in a greater degree <unclear>distinctive</unclear> of public happiness , <del>than</del> on the other those <unclear>words</unclear> are so in a less degree and only in certain circumstances &amp; certain places &#x2014; <del>tho'</del> I believe after all, it will not be found a very easy matter to settle [with any accuracy] the boundaries of their classes</note>  
<note>If then this <unclear>term</unclear> of the Law of Nature be allowed to be improper, the distinction of <unclear>make</unclear> <gap/> <gap/> and <unclear>make</unclear> <unclear>prohibits</unclear> must fall <add>along</add> with it &#x2014; It may however be retain'd if one pleases, to denote on the one hand such kinds of Action which are more <unclear>uniformly</unclear> &amp; in a greater degree <unclear>distinctive</unclear> of public happiness , <del>than</del> on the other those <unclear>words</unclear> are so in a less degree and only in certain circumstances &amp; certain places &#x2014; <del>tho'</del> I believe after all, it will not be found a very easy matter to settle [with any accuracy] the boundaries of their classes</note></p>


<p><!-- The following paragraph is thoroughly crossed out -->[<del><unclear>From</unclear> <gap/></del> <add><del><gap/> <gap/></del></add> <del>into</del>  <add>An error of this sort</add> <unclear>viz</unclear> subjects of great <add>extension latitude</add> practical importance, it has in the<lb/>
observation of every body <unclear>become</unclear> the <add>fertile</add> source of public calamity<add>ties</add>: [nor can <del>I look upon</del><lb/>
<del>as a very inconsiderable one, that</del> <add><add>this</add> of which I am speaking be deemed an unimportant one which</add> transfused into a work calculated for the<lb/>
instruction of a nation in the most important points, it has introduced along<lb/>
<add>with it</add> a confusion which the elegance of <sic>stile</sic> while it <unclear>palliates</unclear> cannot <sic>dispell</sic>.]<lb/></p>
<p>The Division is a Sanction without any specific precepts &#x2014; <gap/><lb/>
called the Law of Nations <del>being</del> <add>is</add> either a part of Municipal Law or else<lb/>
a precept without a Sanction [viz. a set of reciprocal precepts - or rather of <hi rend='underline'>compacts</hi><lb/>
without a Sanction but the mere opinions of men self-erected <add>self-constituted</add> into Legislators &#x2014;</p>
<head>INTROD. Law - Division into Natural, Divine [BII], [ ] and Municipal.</head>




<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}

Revision as of 10:08, 30 July 2012

Click Here To Edit

Erroneous division. it's Source, and consequences.

or [expressly] establish, are [not only different but] contradictory & inconsistent.
The Division I mean is that into Divine Law, Natural Law, Law of tion, Law of Nature and
Positive Law, Positive or Municipal.

Were I to be asked for a Definition of the a state of Nature, I could not give long
a clearer or more characteristic definition of it, than this, that it was the State in
which Mankind were in, while there was no Law. And yet the practice of speaking of
that State as having a Law, a Law too that is to controul and perplex the operation
of Positive and real Laws, is become so inveterate, that to deny it's existence contest the propriety
of the appellation, must at first sight bear the appearance of nothing a captious refinement .
flatter'd with the title of the Legislature of Mankind, they have called the covert production of their own the Laws of Nature.
It is very true an obvious obj observation, It is very true & has often been observed that <add>an observation that is very true & has been often made</add> and nothing can n there can not be a truer one, than there
is nothing in words that appropriates them more to one Idea than another
& that the Ideas of 2 Terms which we respectively employ to express by the words Ideas of a square &
circle the one, if custom had so order'd it, might as well have stood for the Idea
represented by the other, as for that which it denotes at present. — Thus much be
and that therefore that to compare on the application of in considering a single term to a single as applied singly to
Idea it can never be said to be erroneous and improper. . But the case becomes All this is very true.
far different, when after a term has been long originally appropriated to a given Idea
By turning to the ... v. Commentaries on the Laws of England Introduction ss.2. passion the reader will observe, how this error
it becomes afterwards applied to another which is not only distinct but oppos'd
it may then strictly be termed called erroneous, [when <add>as if the same term were applied indiscriminately to both Square and Circle.]</add> because by the necessity it introduces imposes
of perpetually counfounding making a man appear to say one thing while he means another distinct Ideas that should be distinct, it frustrates all the ends of language. —
If then this term of the Law of Nature be allowed to be improper, the distinction of make and make prohibits must fall along with it — It may however be retain'd if one pleases, to denote on the one hand such kinds of Action which are more uniformly & in a greater degree distinctive of public happiness , than on the other those words are so in a less degree and only in certain circumstances & certain places — tho' I believe after all, it will not be found a very easy matter to settle [with any accuracy] the boundaries of their classes

[From into An error of this sort viz subjects of great extension latitude practical importance, it has in the
observation of every body become the fertile source of public calamityties: [nor can I look upon
as a very inconsiderable one, that <add>this of which I am speaking be deemed an unimportant one which</add> transfused into a work calculated for the
instruction of a nation in the most important points, it has introduced along
with it a confusion which the elegance of stile while it palliates cannot dispell.]

The Division is a Sanction without any specific precepts —
called the Law of Nations being is either a part of Municipal Law or else
a precept without a Sanction [viz. a set of reciprocal precepts - or rather of compacts
without a Sanction but the mere opinions of men self-erected self-constituted into Legislators —

INTROD. Law - Division into Natural, Divine [BII], [ ] and Municipal.



Identifier: | JB/096/109/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 96.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

096

Main Headings

legislation

Folio number

109

Info in main headings field

introd. law - division into natural, divine and municipal

Image

002

Titles

erroneous division - its source, and consequences

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

2

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

[[watermarks::[gr with crown] [britannia with shield motif]]]

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

31113

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in