On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
ferfewer alleges , that the arguments I advance cannot be satisfactory to tfce advocates for human liberty : that 6 i the method of reconciliation pro-| M > sed is to evade 9 and not confront the difficulties of the question . " He adds * " the objection of the libertarian
is this , that , according to th-e hypothesis of his opponent , the state of the fjiiud which immediately precedes , and Indeed produces the physical or corporeal action © that state to which we give the name volition , Is itself produced by causes * whether within or without the mind * over which the
agent has bo controul , and for which therefore , though he may be made accountable in fact , lie cannot be responsible ia equity ; " and be thinks that my expatiating upou the extensive advantages derived to man from our always obeying the dictates of the will , does not remove the objection *
I shajl observe in the first place * that to bring the controversy to this pointy is of do small importance in the debate . It opposes that wantonness pi wills for which the earlier advocates for human liberty so strenuously contended | a&d which is still conspicuous
iii the writings of Madame de Siael ^ nd some of the German philosophers . Their favourite hypothesis asserts that tfee freedom of the will is paramount to all motives : that it is an inherent , independent power , over which
motives have no controul . If we compel them to acknowledge the contrary , they must abandon one of the fortresses which they held with no small degree of confidence , though we may not have reduced the capital .
Again , to continue my allusion ? the statement given of the universal , and silso beneficial influence of the human "Will , has a tendency to draw the opponents out of another strong * hold 0 where they always entrench themselves . Inattentive to all the
advantage of right motives , they immediately place before us the dilemma respecting responsibility for immoral actions , as being qf itself a complete confutation of the whole theory of the
Necessarians . It cwnot , therefore * be totally irrevelawt to the subject * to remind them * that supposing aa abuse of the doctrine should occasionally become the parent of vice * which , by the way * is very seldom the case ,-this dbjMlvautage is counterbalanced by
Untitled Article
the consideration that obedience fe the ipputee of motives is the parent « of every thing useful ,, ornamental aaid pleasing in the natural and social world s and of every virtue ia the moral world .
I shall further -observe , that the hattit of drawing the alarming inferences in order to annihilate the doctrine , so universal among them , is in reality a tacit acknowledgment that the Necessarian hypothesis is founded upon arguments which would render it
totally unobjectionable , could this difficulty be surmounted * They will admit that they never rise from their beds in the morning ? without some cause operating as a motive 5 and that every action of the day is under a similar influences , that is « under a motive
which , although they may have the physical power , they never have the will to resist . But upon , moral subjects tbey immediately revolt . It is immediately urgedp with the utmost emphasis , that it would be unjust to
punish the most nefarious actions , although they result from the most detestable propensities , because the propensities themselves were formed by causes which were not under the controul of the agent .
But , let it be observed * , that under the operation of this grand law * which they are ready to admit in the common concerns of life , it cannot be unjust to punish wicked actions , since the
motives to punish were under an influence as compulsive ? as those which induced the offender to transgress . Should the villain act upon the principle so much redoubted , and think himself
irresistibly impelled to be unjust and cruel ^ let him learn that the same impulsive force must inevitably raise * in every virtuous mind , a hatred and detestation of his conduct : If he be guilty of
murder , it may be impossible for him to avoid remorse upon reflection , however irresistible the motive appeared at the time . His commitment to prison * his trial , his sentence of condemn
nation , his public execution * all take * place under the same immutable law © which influenced the culprit to commit the deed . The conduct of his prosecutors vfras as inevitable as foi $ own j and * therefore , according to fai& own principles , he cannot be utijttstty treated-. Prosecutors * witnesses , j utf 9 judge , executioner ? are-exculpated by
Untitled Article
JJn € 2 ognn on his Mtfoieai Questions * . if |
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1818, page 19, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2472/page/19/
-