date

9 Aug. 1811 Fallacies Introd
9 Aug. 1811

Fallacies

Introd.

Historical Sketch

[...?] Fallacies

Serve three fallacies of men[?]: not use of the ly which much mischief has not been produced

That any instance should ever have happened in which a man was by any one of these instruments of deception really deceived, and in such sort deceived, as that from the deception any practical error any act attended with /productive of/ consequences of a mischevious nature was the result, is surely to be conceived.: but though there should be few or none of them by which any man was ever deceived, there is not one of them by which /is being[?] at least/ if not in [...?], is being[?] at least /at any rate/, may not have been puzzled.

Little as at this time of day one should have been apt to imagine any such thing, some /of some considerable/ effectin short their day they must have been productive, or that degree of consideration which it seems was actually derived /obtained/ not only from the fabrication of them could not have been acquired:

Though it is to him that we are indebted fro the enumeration, the exemplification and thereby for the exposure of them, it appears not that his was the hand by which they were any one of them fabricated /contrived and fashioned/
Similar Items
  • Title: [July 1810 + 1 Conclusion Fallacies]
    Description: July 1810 + 1 Conclusion

    Fallacies Ch 3. Utterers device description

    1. [...?] [...?] inventors and utterers

    2. Utterers /[...?]/ and utterers for [...?] of intelligence

    3 Utterer - a authority - of usage

     Postpone this topic to the Conclusion? - Yes ? [...?]. 1811 May.

    14 July 1810. This Chapter requires completion and Rewriting.

    Ch. 2. Causes and use of the utterance of these fallacies.

    '. 1. Causes - Utterer of divers descriptions

    Be /Such being/ the fallacies themselves, who are the sorts of persons by whom they are employed? to /from/ /in/ what diversity in the stock of their respective minds do the parts respectively acted by them in the employment given to these fallacies originate /have /tale/ their rise/? Which of them are pure deceivers merely: which of them, if any of them before that in the character of deceivers they have used their endeavours to spread the deception have been themselves deceived.

    These are questions, to which an answer /to which/ will naturally enough be looked for: looked for or unlooked for it will if I mistake not, be found to have its use.
  • Title: [1 May 1811 Hints[?] (or Fallacies]
    Description: 1 May 1811

    Hints[?] (or Fallacies) (or Necessity of Parl. Reform)

    1.II. Arbitrary Patronage

    Ch. 4. Uses of Controul

    So far as depends upon moral aptitude sole means (in legislature's hands) of

    securing good management, and preventing official (or other) transgression,

    connecting officer's personal with his public interest: so managing; thrust[?]

    the since[?] [...?] of conduct thus conducive to his public shall d\ToT\ to his

    personal. Thus alone[?] more adequate motives

    Public man to whom probity i.e. sincerity is wanting, or intelligence to

    arranagements of the wbove tendency, such to entpolitate[?] preachments

    Bad effects of such preachments - 1. Putting end[?], the only true remedy: 2. By

    exaggeration raising in the scale of disrepute and infamy the least mischevious

    transgressions to a level with the most mischevious - and thus encouraging the

    most mischevious where they are the most profitable. 3. Representing them[?],

    most and least mischevious together as so odious so justly odious that not the

    least danger of falling into any them[?], can be imputed to using person

    individually intense[?], nor if the situation be high to any person filling that

    situation: thus representing a improbable and thence not worth guarding against

    that which in truth is universal, or marly[?] so.
  • Title: [15 Nov r 1813 Omitt this page 8 Aug. 1815]
    Description: 15 Nov r 1813 Omitt this page 8 Aug. 1815?

    Antimir Price & Campbel

    3

    Ch. Beginning

    3

    Of the two opposite states of things which then is it that presents itself to my judgment as most improbable? On the one hand, the verity of the state of things in question or on the other hand the verity of the proposition that in reporting what he has thus reported, the reporter was a deceiver or deceived—a person himself labouring under a deception, or a person the tendency of whose report whether to himself were or were not deceived in respect of it, was to produce deception on the part of every person by whom credence should have been given to it.

    In other and more compressed language—the truth or the falshood of the report—which of them is the most improbable the verity of the report or the falsity of it?