1821 Oct. 14.

Jug. Util.

Plan of Procedure

Rule 4. (For the avoidance of irritation) make use upon occasion of this parenthesis—Revelation apart. This caution was observed and frequently employed in Bentham Introduction to Morals and Legislation L n 1789.

Rule 5. (For avoidance of irritation) In the attack on supposed Revealed Religion, commence with supposed Revealed Religion considered in all its shapes. The argument will thus be much less irritative than if pointed in the first instance against the supposed Revealed Religion of Jesus.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1821 March 2. Jug. Util and True]
    Description: 1821 March 2.

    Jug. Util and True

    9

    Plan of the Work

    Part III. Revealed Verity apart

    9

    III. In Part the third, the question of usefulness in the present life having been examined by arguments that apply at the same time to Natural and to supposed Revealed Religion, the question of verity is now considered: not now apparent, but real verity. But in this Part it is considered in the most general and abstract point of view, abstraction made of all supposed /particular/ revealed religion in general and the supposed revealed religion of Jesus in particular: but at the same time by arguments the tendency of which is to disprove the existence of all such imagined as well as all other imaginable revelation in the [...?]: applying to all of them alike.

    This part is indeed compleatly at issue with the advocates of the religion of Jesus: and by it the whole of the ground they maintain is attacked, and in case of success taken from them. But still nothing is done to produce that peculiar irritation which an attack directed against an individual object of reverence individually and separately considered, can not but excite. The hold he possessed on their affections is by this means more or less weakened, antecedently to the period at which the direct, individual, direct, and in the highest degree irritative, attack is made.

    On this occasion, all other supposed Revealed Religions being comprized in the attack, that which has Religion reprisals to him as false, as well as those which it represents to him as true—the religion of Mahomet and that of Bramah for example, as well as that of Jesus and that of Moses—by this circumstance likewise will the irritation be naturally diminished. As the attack proceeds, he may /to the last continue/ for a greater or less length of time continuing indulging himself in the hope that while all other religions are simultaneously or successively laid prostrate, his own may by its peculiar excellence be preserved to the end of the engagement from the destructive fire. In the mean time the force of reason and the habit /practice/ of applying attention[?] to it has /found entrance into/ gained possession of his mind.
  • Title: [1821 Oct. 14 Jug Util 2]
    Description: 1821 Oct. 14

    Jug Util

    2

    Plan of Procedure

    2

    Rule 3. Take Natural Religion for the object of the first attack: leaving Revealed Religion, as carefully as possible unassailed. See Bentham to Jean Baptiste Say, 4 August 1823, Letter 2988, The Correspondence of Jeremy Bentham, Volume 11. Bring to view in every occasion the alliance between the opinion here advocated and those of Revealed Religionists: in particular those of the English Establishment.

    On the occasion of the attack on Natural Religion the question as to Usefulness and the question as to Verity will be found considerably entangled: to extricate them from this entanglement considerable care will be necessary.

    In regard to Natural Religion, so far as concerns Verity actual want of Verity must not be imputed to it; for in that case the attack would reach supposed Revealed Religion: want of apparent verity is all that must be imputed to it: viz: from the want of sufficient evidence: of the sufficient evidence which Revealed Religion is supposed to have furnished.

    So far as regards Usefulness, the first point to prove is the negative point—namely the want of positive usefulness. On this occasion the argument is more at liberty, than when the positive mischievousness is brought to view. For here, as in the case of the question of verity, the deficiency tells in favour of supposed Revealed Religion: whereas when you come to speak of positive mischievousness, it is not without difficulty that you will be able to keep the attack clear of supposed Revealed Religion. In addition to the fears inseparable from it, the positive mischiefs will consist chiefly of the mischiefs produced by all confessed false Religions, and those produced by the misconception and misapplication of the alledged only true one.
  • Title: [1821 Oct. 14 Jug. Util Plan]
    Description: 1821 Oct. 14

    Jug. Util

    Plan of Procedure

    Considerandum pestia[?]—How many of the Parts shall be compleated before any of them are published. For scrutiny consistency, compactness &c all the argumentative parts should be first compleated before any are published.

    Subject matter question of the belief of supernatural rational agency the beneficial or mischievous effects predominate? Result of the inquiry, the mischievous.

    1. Direct object in this occasion, maximizing number of converts.

    2. Collateral object, avoiding sufferance at the hands of the political and popular or moral sanction: and suppression of the work at the hands of the political.

    Rules of procedure for guidance of the course of conduct to be pursued for the accomplishment of the above objects or ends in view.

    Rule 1. Minimize irritation. The more you irritate and the more highly you irritate them the fewer you will convert. Thence

    Rule 2. In attacking a part of the enemy leave him, as long as you can, a loop-hole to creep out at: in such sort that, on yielding the part first attacked it shall not appear to him that he yields the whole, or that the strength of the whole will be lessened by the partial abandonment.

    Particularization. Among believers in supposed Revealed Religion (viz. that of Jesus) there are many in whose eyes Natural Religion, considered independently of their Revealed d o, is of little value. Indeed the insufficiency of Natural Religion is brought forward by them as a proof of the necessity of Revealed: and, in the contrast between the insufficiency of it, as exemplified in Pagan antiquity, and the sufficiency of Revealed, they dwell not without complacency. In attacking the usefulness of Natural Religion you may therefore so manage as that without relinquishing their belief, the Revealed Religion may be, if not for you in thinking you on their side, at any rate not decidedly or violently against you. Hence