JB/100/172/001: 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/100/172/001: Difference between revisions

Kdownunder (talk | contribs)
m Protected "JB/100/172/001": ready for review ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))
Kdownunder (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:
'''[{{fullurl:JB/100/172/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/100/172/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
 
<p><!-- pencil --><head>Civil</head> Introd. 2</p>
''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<p>Such are the four political blessings which appear<lb/>
 
to constitute the immediately subordinate <add>or particular</add> ends<lb/>
 
of a system of legislation which has <add>having</add> general happiness<lb/>
 
for its principal <add>highest ultimate</add> and most general end.<hi rend="superscript">⊞</hi> <note><hi rend="superscript">⊞</hi> Upon looking over the<lb/>
list thus given of them<lb/>
it may be affirmed with<lb/>
some confidence, that<lb/>
there is not any one of<lb/>
them whose title to<lb/>
<del>admittance upon the list</del><lb/>
occupy a place in<lb/>
the catalogue will appear<lb/>
subject to dispute.  <del>The title In<lb/>
the instance</del> <add>The Title</add> of three,<lb/>
of them, Security,<lb/>
Subsistence <del>Security</del> and<lb/>
Opulence <add><del>that title</del></add> is as plainly<lb/>
incontestable as it is<lb/>
obvious the goodness<lb/>
of their title seems instinctively<lb/>
apparent:  in<lb/>
the instance of the 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi><lb/>
Equality, it is demonstrable,<lb/>
and <add><del>will have</del></add> has been<lb/>
demonstrated.  But<lb/>
1.  is the catalogue thus<lb/>
given a compleat one?<lb/>
<del>Among In the whole <gap/></del><lb/>
Are there are no other<lb/>
<add>political</add> blessings <del>ingredients of<lb/>
felicity</del> dependent upon<lb/>
the state of law with<lb/>
which we are acquainted<lb/>
and <del>with</del> which the language<lb/>
has furnished us<lb/>
with names for are there<lb/>
no others which, as being<lb/>
incapable of being referred to <del>he head of</del> any of he above four <del>above</del> enumerated <add>headed</add> are thereby entitled to <del>a place</del> <add>stand</add> in the catalogue with <gap/> in the same<lb/>
line?  2.  As to the four here in question, is</note><lb/>
<del>be</del> the pursuit of each independent of that of the<lb/>
rest?  Is the attainment of the highest attainable<lb/>
<del>quantity</del> <add>measure</add> of each compatible with the attainment<lb/>
of the highest attainable measure of every other?</p>
<p>3.  If not, are they all of them of equal importance,<lb/>
or what is the order of their importance?  4.  Is the<lb/>
quantity of exertion which they <add>respectively</add> require on the part<lb/>
of the law<hi rend="superscript">⊞2</hi> <note><hi rend="superscript">⊞2</hi> as a condition to<lb/>
their existing in a<lb/>
measure proportioned<lb/>
to their importance,<lb/>
is that quantity of<lb/>
exertion</note> proportioned to their comparative degrees<lb/>
of importance?  5.  In what instances do the measures<lb/>
that would <del>be</del> require to be taken on behalf of each<lb/>
one of them were that alone to govern <add>determine</add> the conduct<lb/>
of the legislator clash with the measures which require<lb/>
to be taken on behalf of the others <add>rest</add> admitting those<lb/>
others also to have a claim to his attention?  Where<lb/>
this clashing or interference takes <add>has</add> place in what order<lb/>
are they <add>ought they to be made</add> to give way the one to the other, and (which<lb/>
is the same question in other words) in what order<lb/>
stand the <hi rend="underline">sacrifices</hi> which require to be made of <del>the each</del> <add>each one<lb/>
of them to every other</add> one of them to another as a <del><gap/></del> condition requisite in the<lb/>
attainment of the greatest quantity of happiness upon<lb/>
the whole?</p>
<p>&#9758; Here announce the general results? reserving the proof for<lb/>
the project of the book.</p>
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{In_Progress}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Ready_For_Review}}

Revision as of 00:03, 17 December 2021

Click Here To Edit

Civil Introd. 2

Such are the four political blessings which appear
to constitute the immediately subordinate or particular ends
of a system of legislation which has having general happiness
for its principal highest ultimate and most general end. Upon looking over the
list thus given of them
it may be affirmed with
some confidence, that
there is not any one of
them whose title to
admittance upon the list
occupy a place in
the catalogue will appear
subject to dispute. The title In
the instance
The Title of three,
of them, Security,
Subsistence Security and
Opulence that title is as plainly
incontestable as it is
obvious the goodness
of their title seems instinctively
apparent: in
the instance of the 4th
Equality, it is demonstrable,
and will have has been
demonstrated. But
1. is the catalogue thus
given a compleat one?
Among In the whole
Are there are no other
political blessings ingredients of
felicity
dependent upon
the state of law with
which we are acquainted
and with which the language
has furnished us
with names for are there
no others which, as being
incapable of being referred to he head of any of he above four above enumerated headed are thereby entitled to a place stand in the catalogue with in the same
line? 2. As to the four here in question, is

be the pursuit of each independent of that of the
rest? Is the attainment of the highest attainable
quantity measure of each compatible with the attainment
of the highest attainable measure of every other?

3. If not, are they all of them of equal importance,
or what is the order of their importance? 4. Is the
quantity of exertion which they respectively require on the part
of the law⊞2 ⊞2 as a condition to
their existing in a
measure proportioned
to their importance,
is that quantity of
exertion
proportioned to their comparative degrees
of importance? 5. In what instances do the measures
that would be require to be taken on behalf of each
one of them were that alone to govern determine the conduct
of the legislator clash with the measures which require
to be taken on behalf of the others rest admitting those
others also to have a claim to his attention? Where
this clashing or interference takes has place in what order
are they ought they to be made to give way the one to the other, and (which
is the same question in other words) in what order
stand the sacrifices which require to be made of the each each one
of them to every other
one of them to another as a condition requisite in the
attainment of the greatest quantity of happiness upon
the whole?

☞ Here announce the general results? reserving the proof for
the project of the book.


Identifier: | JB/100/172/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 100.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

100

Main Headings

civil code

Folio number

172

Info in main headings field

civil introd

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

f3

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

32188

Box Contents

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