If the Creature is thus limited in his Actions, being able to do only such Things as God would have him to do, and not being able to refuse doing what God would have done; then he can have no such Thing as Liberty, Free-will or Power to do or refrain an Action.
This is the fixt Nature of Pleasure and Pain, and will always be found to be so by those who examine it. This is Truth likewise, and A acts according to it when he steals the Horse. It was literally enlightening to see so much of what I have intuited in the past put down in one place so concisely.
The Soul is a mere Power or Faculty of contemplating on, and comparing those Ideas when it has them; hence springs Reason: This Pain produces Desire to be freed from it, in exact proportion to itself. This section anticipates all of modern psychology and then some. Thus if A steals a Horse from B, and rides away upon him, he uses him not as what he is in Truth, viz.
With the meanest part of the Creation! And to deny any Thing or Action, which he consents to the existence of, to be good, is entirely to destroy his two Attributes of Wisdom and Goodness.
As fast as we have excluded one Uneasiness another appears, otherwise the Motion would cease. It is this distinguishes Life and Consciousness from unactive unconscious Matter. Evil is hereby excluded, with all Merit and Demerit; and likewise all preference in the Esteem of God, of one Part of the Creation to another.
If He is all-powerful, there can be nothing either existing or acting in the Universe against or without his Consent; and what He consents to must be good, because He is good; therefore Evil doth not exist.
Also, his assertion that this force we refer to as God is rational in a suspiciously humanlike way throws up a red flag for me.
As we cannot know these, we have but as one Chance to ten thousand, to hit on the right Action; we should then be perpetually blundering about in the Dark, and putting the Scheme in Disorder; for every wrong Action of a Part, is a Defect or Blemish in the Order of the Whole.
This is the Summary of the first Part. To know or be sensible of Suffering or being acted upon is to live; and whatsoever is not so, among created Things, is properly and truly dead.
It is in short this, "Every Action which is done according to Truth, is good; and every Action contrary to Truth, is evil: I think the main flaws in this first point though are his insistence that we move through time in a linear, rather than circular fashion.
That Being which has ten Degrees of Pain subtracted from ten of Pleasure, has nothing remaining, and is upon an equality with that Being which is insensible of both. If He is all-good, whatsoever He doth must be good. You have a View of the whole Argument in a few familiar Examples: Here I should continue to sit motionless with the Pen in my Hand thus —— and neither leave my Seat nor write one Letter more.
But it is a Liberty of the same Nature with the Fall of a heavy Body to the Ground; it has Liberty to fall, that is, it meets with nothing to hinder its Fall, but at the same Time it is necessitated to fall, and has no Power or Liberty to remain suspended.
Others appear continually dejected and full of Sorrow; but even Grief itself is sometimes pleasant, and Tears are not always without their Sweetness: You have a View of the whole Argument in a few familiar Examples: All the heavenly Bodies, the Stars and Planets, are regulated with the utmost Wisdom!
This Uneasiness, whenever felt, produces Desire to be freed from it, great in exact proportion to the Uneasiness. I need not give you any Caution to distinguish the hypothetical Parts of the Argument from the conclusive: The former is inconsistent with his before-given Attribute of Goodness, therefore the latter must be true.
Nor has B any Reason to boast that his Pleasure was five Degrees greater than that of A, for his Pain was proportionate: I shall here subjoin a short Recapitulation of the Whole, that it may with all its Parts be comprehended at one View.Sep 04, · A Dissertation on Liberty and Necessity, Pleasure and Pain () by Benjamin Franklin A Dissertation on Liberty and Necessity, Pleasure and Pain Benjamin Franklin A dissertation on liberty and necessity pleasure and pain analysis 16 Сентябрь Seems like a reasoned & reasonable opinion, thanks for drawing my attention to alf baird's essay.
earthquake research papers A Dissertation On Liberty And Necessity Pleasure And Pain Summary college essays help writing research papers cv writing service essex/10(). A Dissertation on Liberty and Necessity, Pleasure and Pain is a philosophical pamphlet by Benjamin Franklin, published in London in It argues that an omnipotent, benevolent God is incompatible with notions of human free will and morality.
The second portion of the pamphlet goes on to formulate that all motivations are derived from pain. A Dissertation on Liberty and Necessity, Pleasure and Pain is an essay by Benjamin Franklin, a founder of the United States.
A noted polymath, Franklin was a leading author, printer, political theorist, politician, postmaster, scientist, musician, inventor, satirist, civic activist, statesman, and diplomat.
A Dissertation on Liberty and Necessity, Pleasure and Pain is a philosophical pamphlet by Benjamin Franklin, published in London in in response to The Religion of Nature Delineated.
It argues that an omnipotent, benevolent God is incompatible with notions of human free will and killarney10mile.comal language: English.Download