date

31 Aug 1811 1 Sept Jug. Util
31 Aug 1811 1 Sept

Jug. Util

 or ?

6

B.II

Ch.3. Mischief Tolling pleasure

Nay but /Asceticism/ (says the ascetic—which is so much as to say the Christian—at any the Catholic and the Anglo Protestant Christians /Christian—though not as will be shewn in the genuine followers of Jesus/) the pleasures which Christianity /religion/ prescribes are not innocent are not pure pleasures—they are impure they are unclean ones.

But in so far as any thing is meant by impurity other than that of being constantly or at least occasionally attended by a sensation of the opposite kind which otherwise would not have been felt /experienced/ all this language about innocence and purity, and impurity, and cleanness and uncleanness is so much empty sound.

In the only precise sense just mentioned it is never meant: for in that a comparison and comparative estimate is implied, which is never made, a ballance which is never struck, nor was attempted to be struck: a balance which without the sensation of absurdity and tyranny /folly and presumption/ above brought to view /noticed/ could never have been attempted to be struck.

 But note the case where spiritous liquors are taxed to prevent drunkenness. But there no pains are employed: only innoxious pleasure rendered comparatively sharper.

*7

Objection for Ascetic Proscribed by Christianity no pleasure but impure

unclean ones.

8

Answer. Impure means nothing unless it be attended by a sensation of the opposite kind. Yet in this sole significant sense it is never meant: for it supposes comparison and estimate which never are made, nor could be without folly and tyranny as above.
Similar Items
  • Title: [31 Aug 1811 1 Sept Jug. Util.]
    Description: 31 Aug 1811 1 Sept

    Jug. Util.

    7

    B.II.

    Ch.3

    7

    The idea that a man is not to chose his own pleasures

    but that others are to chose them for him is the height of

    tyranny. Given this he is not to do any thing for himself.

    Bounaparte is a less pernicious tyrant.

    For this folly and this presumption, and this mischievousness a sort of mask is made /by/ out of the ambiguous import of such words as pure and impure

    purity and impurity, clean and unclean, cleanness and uncleanness: and on no better or other ground than the identity of denomination, and the weak and distant analogy by /in/ which that identity /took its use/ was produced, a /psychological/ moral quality is inferred from the physical.

    Such or such an act /a mark/ where it is not accompanied with pleasure is disgusting to sense, and on this account may then may with propriety be /made/ termed unclean and impure. Be it so: for those /in that case/ being by the supposition not accompanied with preponderant pleasure, it has for its accompaniment pain—for this is the genus[?] under which the slightest imaginable as well as the most afflictive possible sensation of the disagreeable kind may be ranked—/in the way of sensation/ it has for its accompaniment pain and nothing else.

    But in the other case /case in question/.

    It is then from its being impure and unclean in the physical sense that its being impure and unclean in the psychological, the moral sense is inferred? Oh no: be it ever so impure and unclean in the physical sense no such attribute /quality/ as uncleanness or impurity will be attributed /ascribed/ to it in the moral, in the religious, sense, unless it be considered as accompanied with pleasure.

    In the pleasure consists the impurity and thence with it the blame the ground for censure /cause the supposed/.

    9.

    Mask made for this folly and tyranny out of the ambiguity of pure, impure, clean,uncleanness, unclean on no better ground than identity of denomination, with the distant analogy by which it has been produced, a psychologico-moral quality in inferred from the physical.

    10

    When not accompanied with preponderant pleasure, such or such an act is accompanied with disgust, i.e. with pain. Is it in that case that by the ascetic it is termed impure unclear? No: add the pleasure then only is it impure unclean. Of the pleasure alone is formed the ground for censure.
  • Title: [1819 Oct. 19 Not Paul Consult]
    Description: 1819 Oct. 19

    Not Paul

    Consult

    Ch. Paul’s Doctrine

    Doctrine Asceticism

    §. Utility, dictates as to Pleasure

     1. Insert before the improper mention of the proper sense of purity.

    2. Add that the use of the word impurity in the sense in which moral is inferred

    from physical is an act of tyranny.

    3. [...?] hypocrites. Hypocrites 1. Religious. 2. Philosophical or moral.

    2. As to quality, considered apart from quantity, it is in the eye of reason a

    matter of perfect /the most entire/ indifference. For the sake of having it or not

    having it of such or such a quality, for what reasons should any the least particle

    /portion/ of the attainable quantity be given up.

    To the head /consideration/ of quality belongs that of the

    source from which it is derived—the instrument or instruments, interior or exterior

    to the bodily or mental frame of the individual in question by which (to change the

    metaphor) it is reaped.

    By the ascetic principle—and this is one of the delusions by which it operates—

    pleasure being [taken for] the subject the words pure and impure and pure are in use

    to be employed for the designation of two opposite attributes of which it is regarded

    as susceptible. In this case the groundwork of the idea is impurity alias turpitude

    in the physical sense: and from the circumstance of the physical disgust which in

    this case will in the instance of a number of persons more or less considerable have

    place, impurity or /and/ turpitude in /on the part of/ the act by which the physical

    impurity or turpitude is produced is inferred. and again from this imaginary moral

    turpitude, the existence of a sort of demand for punishment to be employed either for

    the torment of the offender or for the prevention of the offence, or both.

    [Now /In this case/ then in plain language what is the logic that is at the bottom

    of this rhetoric. It is this.]

    In the shape of disgust or some other shape I for my part should feel pain were I to

    perform this act; therefore if you to whom it would not be productive not of pain but

    of pleasure, were to perform it you ought to be made to suffer pain under the name of

    punishment.
  • Title: [18 May 1812 Jug. Util. 7]
    Description: 18 May 1812

    Jug. Util.

    7

    Ch.6. Mischief [...?] pleasure

    Antipathy from Asceticism

    (2)

    This is not pleasure to me therefore it is not pleasure to me: this is simple folly: /but/ this is not pleasure to me, therefore it shall not be pursued by you—this is a great deal worse than folly: rights and duties of parents and guardians apart, this is /injury/ the extreme of /injury and / tyranny. This is altogether indefensible this is barbaric tyranny: tyranny which to every mean or proportion in the joint perspective of his wisdom in his benevolence and his wisdom will be odious and detestable.

    18 or 5

    Folly to say this is or is not pleasure, therefore not to you. Tyranny to say this is not pleasure to me: therefore by you it shall not be reaped.