125_329.xml

Title: [14 Jan y 1817 Necessity Cat]

Description: 14 Jan y 1817

Necessity Cat

1 Theory

§.4. Probity how securable

6

Q. And is it then your belief /persuasion/ that on every occasion the conduct of every man will be determined by the stronger interest: for example that on every occasion on which by sacrificing one pound he would gain two he will accordingly make the sacrifice.

A. No: nor do you really mean to ascribe to any such notion: it is only for the sake of bringing out a little necessary explanation that you start it you put the question to me. If this were really the case, no such thing /quality/ as imprudence would there be in the world: of every man on every occasion his conduct would be conformable to the dictates of the most consummate prudence. On this kind what I mean to say is this: viz. /1 in the first place/ that on each occasion man’s conduct will be determined by that which in his own view of the matter at the moment is the stronger body of interest: the interest /aggregate/ corresponding to the aggregate stock /mass/ of the whole stock of his happiness expected to be enjoyed by him during life: and in the next place, that on the occasion of a /any/ judgment to be passed concerning what in the situation in question a man will do, his own conception in regard to which is the stronger interest ought to be taken for correct.

Q. What? to be conformable to the dictates of consummate prudence? and this notwithstanding the lamentable stock of imprudences the existence of which is so generally recognized and in truth so incontestable?

A. O yes: so it must be: individuals being known and considering that for the formation of our judgments on a subject of this kind the nature of the case affords us no ground whatever, other than what is composed of the known constitution of man’s nature in whatsoever situation placed, added to the particular nature of the particular situation in question, such is the supposition on which we are reduced to act.

125_170.xml

Title: [[Marginal summary sheet[?]] [Mainly]

Description: [Marginal summary sheet[?]]

[Mainly in copyist’s hand]

14 Jan y 1817

Necessity Cat

1 Theory

§ 4. Probity how securable

1

1

§ 4. Probity how securable?

Q 1 - Recapitulation - < > question - By what arrangements < > of the form of government can appropriate probity on the part of the supreme rulers be most effectually secured -

A. Short answer: such by means of which each such ruler shall find it his interest to entertain the destrosetion[?] in question, and constantly to act up to it -

2

Q 2: i e. that in the current phrases it shou’d be his interest should in each coincide with his duty -

A - Yes -

3

Q.3. But under every form of government are the instances of every possessor of supreme power does not interest coincide with duty? - i.e the line of conduct presented by interest coincide with d o. prescribed by duty? Exists there that office bearer who possesses not a share in the universal interest? as great a share as any other can possess? -

A. No. But in addition to that fractional interest every member of the community rulers included has an integral interest, viz. a purely personal interest which being distinct from his share in the universal interest is liable to be opposite to it

A - Yes -

§. 4 Probity how securable

4

Q 4 - This 1 undurable it therefore is that he should never deviate, will any such sinister cource. But then he will not deviate, unless and in so far as his such his private compared with public interest is the strongest: will he? -

A. No - but mostly so it will be. The seperate interest is an integer: his share in the universal interest is but a < > fraction, as one to a number of millions. This sinister interest of his acts in the most < > his public in a highly diluted state

{5}

Ans. In this respect, with no other difference than what depends on the number of the portions, this public is on the footing of a private partnership. Bating the tutelary force of the interest < > political or legal, the /by the/ popular or moral, and the religious sanctions, if by a conduct by which the value of his share as the partnership would be diminished one hundred pound a partner can gain two hundred so he will do -

5

Q 5 - You mean that conduct will be determined by the stronger interest viz - when thereby general happiness will not only not be encreased but diminished.

A. Yes - that in the < > of the powers of government < > to be the supposition acted upon say, as there may be so each had several interests by the stronger body of interest -

7

Q 7 - Teach you then that for example on every occasion in which by sacrificing one pound, a man may gain two he will make the sacrifice?

A - Not exactly so: only for the sale if the explanation said so: if these were really so, no imprudence; nothing but consummate prudence.

What I meant was -

I. On each occasion man’s conduct is determined by what in his own conception of the matter is at the < > most conducive to the aggregate interest corresponding to the < > quantity of happiness expected to be enjoyed by him during life:

2. that for the purpose in question that conception ought to be taken for correct

8

Q. 8. What always notwithstanding the known abundances of of imprudences? -

A. Yes - individuals persons not known nothing known but the general comprehension of names nature[?], and the particular situation of the sort it man in question, such the supposition on what we are induced to act This ground is not a fallacious as it may be seen. Per Adam < >. Bankruptcies are comparatively rare: and of Bankruptcies only a part are produced either by improbity or imprudence. - By the very notice taken of imprudences their rarity is evidenced: only by what is rare is nature attracted.

125_336.xml

Title: [13 Jan y 1817 1 Theory §.4]

Description: 13 Jan y 1817

1 Theory

§.4 Probity how securable

13

Quere[?] - By[?] his[?] excellent[?] do[?]

Q. < > Your notion then is it that in the situation in question man’s conduct will on the most important occasions, be determined not only by his own /own/ self-regarding interest, but by that part of his self-regarding interest in which the interests respectively created by the political or legal, the popular or moral, and the religious sanctions are not comprized: I mean always - as explained by you by like conception entertained by him respecting those several interests at the time: which conception, as above, ought for the purpose in question ought to be taken for correct; and that there the line of conduct pursued by him is that which at the time is prescribed by his own conception in regard to that part of his own self regarding interest, how opposite so ever to that which would be prescribed by an exclusive regard for the universal interest?

A. To one I must confess - individuals being all along supposed to be unknown - taking in the situation in question man in general, this preponderance of that part /portion/ of self-regarding interest in which as you have been mentioning above the interest created by those tutelary sanctions are not included over the party share in the universal interest is at any rate so far probable, that to ground in any other supposition any political arrangements relative to the disposition to be made of the supreme power would be altogether unreasonable.