1
results found in
24 ms
Page 1
of 1
9 Aug 1815
Jug. True
D + [?]
I Prolego
Ch. Time of penning
1
§.1. Length of time
N.B. the question to the time of penning is subservient to that of the trustworthiness of the penman. It goes not to probity but to intelligence viz. in respect of [...?] of information.
Causes of diminution of trustworthiness by time 1. Author known, 2. Author unknown.
When the [...?] i.e. Reporting author is known—viz. more or less perfectly 1) The supposed percipient witness mentioned by the author 2) The supposed percipient witness not mentioned
II. When the Author is unknown
§. Interval between the fact and the penning of the history—how by the length of it trustworthiness is diminished.
The greater the distance between the times at which the events and states of things reported as having had place, and the times at which the reports made of them were respectively penned the less trustworthy is the report: and this for several reasons.
For that diminution—in the degree of trustworthiness several causes may be assigned.
Note in margin at this point: ‘ Go on and assign them.’
1. The most favourable case—the case in which the loss of trustworthiness produced by the length of the interval between the time of the supposed action and the time of committing to paper the statement made of it is at its minimum—is that when the supposed percipient witness is himself the reporter or reporting witness by whom the account of what passed or is supposed to have passed is penned. In this case the sources from which misrepresentation is liable to flow are MS alt. ‘reducible’. no more than three viz: 1. Diminution of the retentive power of the memory, thence want of correctness or compleatness, or both in the appropriate pictures which had been [made] in and by the memory: pictures of the events and states of things of which in and by the narrator, a description is undertaken to be given.
2. In the first instance supposing the intention of maintaining these quantities [of] the correctness and compleatness, chance which there may be, that by some change in the state and condition of the narrator in respect of his connection with the events or states of things in question in the way of interests. Note in margin at this point: ‘ Oct 1815 Go on.’
1.
By length of interval between the fact and the penning of the narrating witness’s history trustworthiness is diminished.
2.
Causes of diminution.
1. In the most favourable case loss by length of interval a minimum. Supposed percipient witness, the reporting witness. Sources of diminution here, three 1. Diminution of retentive power, thence want of correctness or compleatness in the picture retained. 2. Chance of a supervening mendacity-prompting interest or interests begotten prejudice.
Similar Items
-
Title: [11 Oct. 1815 Jug. True Ch.]Description: 11 Oct. 1815 Jug. True Ch. Imperfections 2 §.1. Length of time 2. In so far as to this supposed narrating as well as percipient witness it may happen to be desirous of a fact a demand of assistance from the memories of other persons for the purpose of giving [an] additional degree of perfection in the same respect of correctness and compleatness to whatever statement the perception obtained by himself would have enabled him of himself to give to his descriptions, the same cause (of imperfection) will be found operating in the same manner towards the production of the same undesirable effect. 3. The greater the length of this interval the greater the probability of the incapacitation, whether by death, infirmity, expatriation or any other instance of the persons, who, having in relation to the events and states of things in question occupied in the situation of percipient witness might, but for such preventive obstacles, have operated moreover in the character of narrating or reporting witnesses. 3. Chances of like causes of loss of correctness or compleatness in the instance of persons from whose memories his might have derived support. 4. 3. Chances of incapacitation by death, infirmity, or expatriation of percipient witnesses.
-
Title: [7 Aug. 1815 : rework this 14 Aug.]Description: 7 Aug. 1815 : rework this 14 Aug. Jug. True Ch. Imperfections 1 §. Marks of Verity (4) (1) Modes of verity—give the use of all or each 1. Individualization as to time 2. D o as to Place Time 1. abridged 2. relative 4. 3. Individuals present 7. 4. Narrating witness whether percipient or no 6. 5. If not, who the intermediate reporting witnesses and the number of resources 5. 6. Narrative when penned—how soon after the supposed fact 7. 1. No self contradiction /[...?] Negative marks/ 7. And who of other narratives either actual or possible and whether trustworthy or untrustworthy; and why 2. No mutual contradictions. To possess any reasonable claim to credence a statement or narrative to the penning of which supernatural assistance under the name of imposition or any other name purports upon the face of it or is alledged to have been afforded, ought to wear upon the face of it all such marks of verity, internal or external, as human wisdom has ever been known to afford, viz. if not all such as at the present time that wisdom is able and has been known to afford, at any rate and at the least all such as at the time in question human wisdom was able, and has been known to afford. [marginal note] Aphorism respecting title to credence as far as regards the employing the known evidence of trustworthiness.
-
Title: [4 Oct. 1815 Jug. True Ch. Imperfections]Description: 4 Oct. 1815 Jug. True Ch. Imperfections 3 §. Length of time 4. The longer the interval in question, the longer the time during which, the greater the probability that during that time in the place of or in addition to such reports as may or might have been furnished by percipient witnesses themselves, or by witnesses removed by a less number of removes or degrees from the seat of perception, reports from witnesses removed from that same standard by a greater number of removes or degrees. 5. The longer the interval, the greater the length of time in the course of which death or other accidents or changes may have removed out of the way any given number of those who having received information to whose knowledge such facts have presented themselves or enabled them to expose and rectify any such incorrect or deceptively incompleat representations or statements in relation to the matter in question may have been made. The longer the interval the more time there is for any or all such persons to go off as if they had remained would by their knowledge of relevant facts have been in a way to rectify any misrepresentation of erroneous reports which the matter in question may have been the subject. Let the interval be of a certain length, the time of those persons will have expired: and when once the stage is thus cleared, misrepresentation has full swing, and circumstantial evidence or self-contradiction on the part of the witnesses whose testimony constitutes the mass of direct evident self-contradiction or mutual contradiction remain the sole sources from which any correction to the misrepresentation or recourse against deception can be deduced. 5. 4. Chance of remoteness by extinction of percipient witnesses and intermediate reporting witnesses of degrees near to the percipient and first reporting witness. 6. 5. Chance of extinction of those by whom correction might have been administered to reports of percipient and intermediate reporting witnesses. 7. At the end of a certain interval, all such chance being at an end, misrepresentation by reporting witnesses of all sorts has full sway: sole chance of correction then is by self-contradiction or mutual contradiction on their parts.
1
results found.
Page 1
of 1