date

1817 Dec 30 Not Paul III. Doctrine
1817 Dec 30

Not Paul

III. Doctrine

Ch.1. Asceticism

The /Correspondent to the two/ doctrines and principles of asceticism have

respectively two branches: the one that which regards pleasure; the other that which

regards pain—that which regards pleasure requiring the foregoing of /abstaining from/

pleasure call it the negative branch call it the abnegative: that which regards pain

alling for the self-infliction /voluntary susception/ of pain the positive branch,

call it the afflictive.

The two cases in which and in which alone the doctrine and principle of utility call

for the avoidance /non-pursuit/ of pleasure have already been seen: they are the two

cases where the pursuit of it is opposed by the principles /causes/ of limitation

above indicated. By the doctrine and principle of asceticism considered in its

negative or abnegative branch the pursuit of pleasure is interdicted simply, as well

where no such limitative principles have /have not respectively any/ application, as

where they have.

The two cases in which and in which alone the doctrine and principle of utility call

for the susception of pain have been in like manner brought to view.

 [...?] this paragraph from the preceding one.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1817 Dec r 30 Not Paul III]
    Description: 1817 Dec r 30

    Not Paul

    III. Doctrine.

    Ch. Asceticism

    §.1. Asceticism Utility happiness pleasure pain

    The Manicheans have made to themselves one mischievous God—an evil principle; Man is

    to himself an evil principle.

    The dæmon of asceticism is the evil principle of a Manichean

    Part III. Doctrine. I. Asceticism.

    Ch. Paul’s false doctrines. I. Asceticism, injunction of Ascetic

    practices. Asceticism mischievous—not by the principles or practice of Jesus.

    Positions to be proved.

    Ch. 1. Of Asceticism—Asceticism inimical to happiness and

    virtue—mischievous effects produced by it

    §.1. Asceticism what—its opposition to utility—their

    relation happiness, pleasure and pain.

    Of the doctrines above noticed as having been taught by Paul though they had not bee

    taught by Jesus and as belonging therefore to a religion of Paul’s own invention say

    /call it/ for example Paulism, we; come now to that which stands last-mentioned, and

    for the discussion of which the word Asceticism has been /is

    here/ adopted.

    Of /Concerning/ the doctrine of Asceticism three positions have presented themselves

    as demonstrable viz.

    1. That asceticism is to the whole extent of it a doctrine purely and incontestably

    mischievous.

    2. That neither in any of the acts of sayings or acts of Jesus is any countenance

    whatsoever lent to it: but on the contrary, much and uniform discountenance.

    3. That to a great extent and on many occasions it has been taught by Paul and that

    great zeal /anxiety/ has been manifested by him for the enforcement of it.

    4. That to Paul and Paul alone this doctrine is indebted for the influence which

    down to this time has been exercised by it.
  • Title: [1817 Nov. 19. Not Paul II.]
    Description: 1817 Nov. 19.

    Not Paul

    II. Doctrine

    Ch. Asceticism

    §.1. Asceticism what

    restrictive—afflictive

    In the principle of asceticism may be observed, as above, two branches: viz. that by

    which pleasure is in any shape prohibited to be enjoyed—prohibited purely and

    amply—as above: this may be termed the restrictive or negative branch: the other that by which pain in any shape is

    regarded to be embraced and suffered as above: this may be termed the afflictive or positive branch.
  • Title: [1817 Dec 19 Not Paul II. Doctrine]
    Description: 1817 Dec 19

    Not Paul

    II. Doctrine asceticism

    Ch. Asceticism

    §. Utility’s dictates as to Pleasure

    Limitations are those dictated by 1. prudence. 2. probity. 3. benevolence.

    Conceditur this Epicureanism: but Stoicism is either folly or hypocrisy.

    In one case alone in the instance of any individual is the pursuit of pleasure not

    conducive but detrimental to general happiness: this is where the effect of it is to

    exclude pleasure or introduce pain to a greater amount.

    Onus probandi lies on him who objects. Asceticism is to the extent of it detrimental

    to human happiness.

    §. Dictates of Utility in relation to pleasure.

    1. As to pleasure [considered in respect of quantity] to

    enjoy /experience/ as much of it as he can is the constant endeavour of every human

    as well as of every other sensitive being.

    2. Such is the fact /endeavour/: nor under certain limitations can any defensible

    reason be given /assigned/ for wishing that in the instance of any one such

    individual it should be otherwise.

    3. According to the principle of utility there can be /are/ but two accounts

    /suppositions/ on which it can conducive to human happiness by any sensitive being a

    pleasure in any shape should be foregone: these are its being so connected with pains

    or with other pleasures that by reaping it he /a man/ will either debar himself or

    some other sensitive being or beings of pleasure to a greater value in the same or

    some other shape or shapes or subject himself or them respectively to a pain to a

    greater value [Note? or, to a greater value sustain a loss of the matter of happiness

    partly in one of those ways partly in the other.]

    4. In so far as by such uneconomical gratification either he himself or any other

    such sensitive /human/ being or beings will respectively be sufferers, such

    gratification stands prohibited by virtue in some shape or shapes, and thereby in

    certain cases subjects his conduct to the imputations of the opposite /the opposite

    and corresponding/ vice in a corresponding shape or shapes.