The Theistic Conception of the World: An Essay in Opposition to Certain Tendencies of Modern ThoughtCocker, B. F. (Benjamin Franklin)
Religion
The Theistic Conception of the World: An Essay in Opposition to Certain Tendencies of Modern Thought
Cocker, B. F. (Benjamin Franklin)
Theism
The terms _natural_ and _moral_ are employed to denote opposite modes of
action and classes of effects. In the one case the mode of action is
fixed and uniform, and the effect is necessary; in the other case the
mode of action is free and volitional, and the effect is contingent and
variable. The first is the order of nature where force reigns, the
second is the order of moral life where freedom prevails. "Whatever is
comprised in the chain and mechanism of cause and effect, of course
necessitated, and having its necessity in some other thing antecedent or
concurrent, this is said to be _natural_, and the aggregate and system
of all such things is nature."[511] While, on the contrary, that which
lies within the agent's power, and to which he determines himself by an
act of free choice; and especially that which the agent knows he _ought_
to do, and in choosing which he is conscious of power to put forth, in
the same unchanged circumstances, a different volition instead, is
called _moral_.
Thus does morality commence with "the sacred distinction" between
_thing_ and _person_. "On this distinction all legislation, human and
Divine, proceeds." That which fundamentally distinguishes a person from
a mere thing of nature is _free causality_--that is, "the power or
immunity to put forth in the same circumstances either of several
volitions." A thing is unconscious, involuntary, and powerless, and
consequently limited to one sole possible eventuation. A thing has no
responsibility for its movements, which it has not willed, and of the
nature and consequences of which it is ignorant. A person alone is
responsible, because he is intelligent and free; that is, he can foresee
the consequences of his action, and freely determines himself to its
performance. A thing has no dignity; dignity attaches only to
personality. Personality is inalienable, sacred, and inviolable; it can
not be abrogated, surrendered, or transferred, and it demands to be
respected. In a word, it has both duties and rights, while things have
neither.[512]
Thus do we find that all dignity, all sacredness, all responsibility,
all morality belong to and are predicable only of the personal being,
because intelligence and freedom are the essential moments of
personality.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account