The English works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Volume 05 (of 11)
Thomas Hobbes · en
(_p_) “His other objection against this distinction of the acts of the
will into _elicite_ and _imperate_, is obscurity. ‘Might it not,’ saith
he, ‘have been as easily said in English, a voluntary action.’ Yes, it
might have been said as easily, but not as truly, nor properly.
Whatsoever hath its original from the will, whether immediately or
mediately, whether it be a proper act of the will itself, as to elect,
or an act of the understanding, as to deliberate, or an act of the
inferior faculties or of the members, is a voluntary action: but neither
the act of reason, nor of the senses, nor of the sensitive appetite, nor
of the members, are the proper acts of the will, nor drawn immediately
out of the will itself; but the members and faculties are applied to
their proper and respective acts by the power of the will.
“And so he comes to cast up the total sum of my second reason with the
same faith that the unjust steward did make his accounts (Luke xvi).
‘The sum of J. D.’s distinction is,’ saith he, ‘that a voluntary act may
be done on compulsion,’ (just contrary to what I have maintained), ‘that
is to say, by foul means: but to will that or any act, cannot be but by
allurement or fair means.’ I confess the distinction is mine, because I
use it; as the sun is mine, or the air is mine, that is common to me
with all who treat of this subject. (_q_) But his mistakes are so thick,
both in relating my mind and his own, that the reader may conclude he is
wandered out of his known way. I will do my duty to show him the right
way. First, no acts which are properly said to be compelled, are
voluntary. Secondly, acts of terror, (which he calls foul means), which
are sometimes in a large improper sense called compulsory actions, may
be, and for the most part are, consistent with true liberty. Thirdly,
actions proceeding from blandishments or sweet persuasions, (which he
calls fair means), if they be indeliberated, as in children who want the
use of reason, are not presently free actions. Lastly, the strength of
consequent and deliberated desires doth neither diminish guilt, nor
excuse from punishment, as just fears of extreme and imminent dangers
threatened by extrinsical agents often do; because the strength of the
former proceeds from our own fault, and was freely elected in the causes
of it; but neither desires nor fears, which are consequent and
deliberated, do absolutely necessitate the will.
ANIMADVERSIONS UPON THE BISHOP’S REPLY NO. XX.