JB/014/127/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/014/127/001: Difference between revisions

Phil.fawcet (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Phil.fawcet (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 11: Line 11:
<p>This <gap/> apply <gap/> <gap/> <gap/> belongs not to the purpose.</p>
<p>This <gap/> apply <gap/> <gap/> <gap/> belongs not to the purpose.</p>


<p>What is und<gap/> to happiness is more certain than that <gap/> <gap/> <gap/><lb/>
<p>What is conducive to happiness is more certain than that <gap/> <gap/> <gap/><lb/>
conduciveness to happiness is <unclear>informall</unclear> to <add>any mans</add> <unclear>expression-marks</unclear>, <unclear>imemfirnable</unclear></p>
conduciveness to happiness is <unclear>informall</unclear> to <add>any mans</add> <unclear>expression-marks</unclear>, <unclear>unenforceable</unclear></p>


<p>Take any religion &#x2014; in other words <del>any</del> <add>meaning by any religion</add> the notion<lb/>
<p>Take any religion &#x2014; in other words <del>any</del> <add>meaning by any religion</add> the notion<lb/>
Line 18: Line 18:
of religion &#x2014; if <del>it</del> in any of its precepts it be repugnant<lb/>
of religion &#x2014; if <del>it</del> in any of its precepts it be repugnant<lb/>
<add>irreconcilable</add> to the principle of utility, what is the consequence?<lb/>
<add>irreconcilable</add> to the principle of utility, what is the consequence?<lb/>
&#x2014; that the religion is false. <unclear>Than</unclear> <add>of the falsity of any religion</add> there can<lb/>
&#x2014; that the religion is false. Thus <add>of the falsity of any religion</add> there can<lb/>
not be a plainer nor more conclusive nor <add>or</add> a plainer<lb/>
not be a plainer nor more conclusive nor <add>or</add> a plainer<lb/>
proof <add>evidence</add> than the fact supposing it proved that in any<lb/>
proof <add>evidence</add> than the fact supposing it proved that in any<lb/>
point it is repugnant to that principle which for the<lb/>
point it is repugnant to that principle which for the<lb/>
<unclear>net</unclear> of <unclear>propensity</unclear> in every act takes its conduciveness<lb/>
<unclear>net</unclear> of propriety in every act takes its conduciveness<lb/>
or <del><gap/></del> repugnancy to the greatest <add>known</add> happiness of the greatest<lb/>
or <del><gap/></del> repugnancy to the greatest <add>known</add> happiness of the greatest<lb/>
number of mankind.</p>
number of mankind.</p>
Line 33: Line 33:
the quantity of <hi rend="underline">happiness</hi> which it is his wish to see<lb/>
the quantity of <hi rend="underline">happiness</hi> which it is his wish to see<lb/>
enjoyed by those who are subject to his power? And if it<lb/>
enjoyed by those who are subject to his power? And if it<lb/>
be any other than one <gap/>ply name of what is it that<lb/>
be any other than an empty name of what is it that<lb/>
happiness can be composed, but of pleasures? Be the<lb/>
happiness can be composed, but of pleasures? Be the<lb/>
pleasure what it may, to <del><gap/></del> speak of any person <add>being</add> as<lb/>
pleasure what it may, to <del><gap/></del> speak of any person <add>being</add> as<lb/>
Line 41: Line 41:
and at the same time to speak of such person <add>being</add> in the character<lb/>
and at the same time to speak of such person <add>being</add> in the character<lb/>
of a benevolent one is a contradiction in terms.<lb/>
of a benevolent one is a contradiction in terms.<lb/>
By a mere change in <del>terms</del> <add>of terms</add> the use made of the <gap/> and character<lb/>
By a mere change <add>of terms</add> in <del>terms</del> the use made of the <gap/> and character<lb/>
of which discourse is made <add>composed</add>, can actions or can persons <add>agents</add><lb/>
of which discourse is made <add>composed</add>, can actions or can persons <add>agents</add><lb/>
be made to change their nature? By calling it a kiss, can that which<lb/>
be made to change their nature? By calling it a kiss, can that which<lb/>

Revision as of 01:39, 18 August 2017

Click Here To Edit

16 Sept. 1814

Logic or Ethics Ch. Causes of Immorality

2

§.3 Religion Misapplied

This apply belongs not to the purpose.

What is conducive to happiness is more certain than that
conduciveness to happiness is informall to any mans expression-marks, unenforceable

Take any religion — in other words any meaning by any religion the notion
or notions of any human person or persons on the subject
of religion — if it in any of its precepts it be repugnant
irreconcilable to the principle of utility, what is the consequence?
— that the religion is false. Thus of the falsity of any religion there can
not be a plainer nor more conclusive nor or a plainer
proof evidence than the fact supposing it proved that in any
point it is repugnant to that principle which for the
net of propriety in every act takes its conduciveness
or repugnancy to the greatest known happiness of the greatest
number of mankind.

To understand religion is to understand the will of
God. God is a being, {having of in the number of his attributes,}
not among whose one of whose attributes is benevolence: and that not
ordinary such as human but infinite benevolence. But, be he God or man
how can any person be benevolent but in proportion to
the quantity of happiness which it is his wish to see
enjoyed by those who are subject to his power? And if it
be any other than an empty name of what is it that
happiness can be composed, but of pleasures? Be the
pleasure what it may, to speak of any person being as
desiring that it should be given up in for any other account cause
than that of its not being receivable without being accompanied
or followed by a more than equivalent pain — thus to speak
and at the same time to speak of such person being in the character
of a benevolent one is a contradiction in terms.
By a mere change of terms in terms the use made of the and character
of which discourse is made composed, can actions or can persons agents
be made to change their nature? By calling it a kiss, can that which
used to be termed a stab be rendered an act of kindness?



Identifier: | JB/014/127/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 14.

Date_1

1814-09-16

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

014

Main Headings

deontology

Folio number

127

Info in main headings field

logic or ethics

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

e2

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

[[watermarks::[prince of wales feathers] mj&l 1811]]

Marginals

Paper Producer

colonel aaron burr

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1811

Notes public

ID Number

4890

Box Contents

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