★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''[{{fullurl:JB/096/033/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | '''[{{fullurl:JB/096/033/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head><hi rend='underline'>To be copied</hi></head> | |||
of conduct, and the doctrines only, are<lb/> the rule of faith: the one are intended to <lb/>teach us what we ought to do: the other hold<lb/> out to us, motives for so doing. <hi rend='superscript'>+</hi> <note><hi rend='superscript'>+</hi> <sic>Qu?</sic> this. If this, do then are they parts of Laws. That which holds out motives is a Sanction: and the Sanction is one part of a Law: the Precept <gap/>, being the other. It seems the doctrines are nothing but accounts of matters of fact.</note> We <del>might</del> <add>have<lb/> just</add> <del>have</del> noticed this mistake of our author<del>'s</del><lb/>in the preceding section: <del>for he had before</del> <add>where he</add> told <lb/>us, that the <hi rend='underline'>doctrines</hi> delivered by imme<lb/>diate revelation were called the <hi rend='underline'>divine law:</hi><lb/> He might have learned clearer ideas even from<lb/> <del>whereas every sensible</del><unclear>corilerson</unclear>theology <del>far</del><lb/>confused as they generally are, <del>yet</del>they do <add>distinguish</add><lb/><del>carefully distinguished</del>the doctrines from the <lb/>precepts.<p>He has distinguished the rule of civil con<lb/>duct from the rule of moral conduct</p> <del>whereas</del><lb/> As our author draws some very curious consequences from this distinc<lb/>tion <del>must examine it with some attention</del> <add>it must not be slightly past over </add><lb/><del>had he understood the nature of morality he</del><lb/>Morality considered as a Science, is the doctrine of <del>would </del><add>social</add><lb/>duties a Rule of moral <del>duties</del>conduct would be a rule directing us<lb/>how<pb/> | |||
of conduct, and the doctrines only, are<lb/>the rule of faith: the one are intended to <lb/>teach us what we ought to do: the other hold<lb/>out to us, motives for so doing. + We <del>might | |||
Click Here To Edit To be copied
of conduct, and the doctrines only, are
the rule of faith: the one are intended to
teach us what we ought to do: the other hold
out to us, motives for so doing. + + Qu? this. If this, do then are they parts of Laws. That which holds out motives is a Sanction: and the Sanction is one part of a Law: the Precept , being the other. It seems the doctrines are nothing but accounts of matters of fact. We might have
just have noticed this mistake of our author's
in the preceding section: for he had before where he told
us, that the doctrines delivered by imme
diate revelation were called the divine law:
He might have learned clearer ideas even from
whereas every sensiblecorilersontheology far
confused as they generally are, yetthey do distinguish
carefully distinguishedthe doctrines from the
precepts.
He has distinguished the rule of civil con
duct from the rule of moral conduct
whereas
As our author draws some very curious consequences from this distinc
tion must examine it with some attention it must not be slightly past over
had he understood the nature of morality he
Morality considered as a Science, is the doctrine of would social
duties a Rule of moral dutiesconduct would be a rule directing us
how
---page break---
|
Identifier: | JB/096/033/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 96. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
096 |
comment on the commentaries |
||
|
033 |
|||
|
001 |
|||
|
collectanea |
4 |
||
|
recto |
c84 / c85 / c86 / c87 |
||
|
168 |
[[watermarks::gr [quartered royal arms motif]]] |
||
|
[[notes_public::"to be copied" [note not in bentham's hand]]] |
31037 |
||
