N05663:180
A careful and strict enquiry into the modern prevailing notions of that freedom of…
A careful and strict enquiry into the modern prevailing notions of that freedom of will, which is supposed to be essential to moral agency, virtue and vice, reward and punishment, praise and blame. By Jonathan Edwards, A.M. Pastor of the church in Stockbridge. ; [One line from Romans]A careful and strict enquiry into the modern prevailing notions of that freedom of will, which is supposed to be essential to moral agency, vertue and vice, reward and punishment, praise and blame. By Jonathan Edwards, A.M. Pastor of the church in Stockbridge. ; [One line from Romans]
printed by S. Kneeland, 1754
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
There are two Things especially, which are probably the Occasions of Confusion in the Minds of them who insist upon it, that the Will acts in a proper Indifference, and without being moved by any Inducement, in it's Determinations in such Cases as have been mentioned.
1. They seem to mistake the Point in Question, or at least not to keep it distinctly in View. The Question they dispute about, is, Whether the Mind be indifferent about the Objects presented, one of which is to be taken, touched, pointed to &c. as two Eggs, two Cakes, which appear equally good. Whereas the Question to be considered, is, Whether the Person be indifferent with Respect to his own Actions; whether he don't, on some Consideration or other, prefer one Act with Respect to these Objects before another. The Mind in it's Determination and Choice, in these Cases, is not most immediately and directly conversant about the Objects presented; but the Acts to be done concerning these Objects. The Objects may appear equal, and the Mind may never properly make any Choice between them: But the next Act of the Will being about the external Actions to be performed, Taking, Touching &c. these may not appear equal, and one Action may properly be chosen before another. In each Step of the Mind's Progress, the Determination is not about the Objects, unless indirectly and improperly, but about the Actions, which it chooses for other Reasons than any Preference of the Objects, and for Reasons not taken at all from the Objects.
1. They seem to mistake the Point in Question, or at least not to keep it distinctly in View. The Question they dispute about, is, Whether the Mind be indifferent about the Objects presented, one of which is to be taken, touch'd, pointed to &c. as two Eggs, two Cakes, which appear equally good. Whereas the Question to be considered, is, Whether the Person be indifferent with Respect to his own Actions; whether he don't, on some Consideration or other, prefer one Act with Respect to these Objects before another. The Mind in it's Determination and Choice, in these Cases, is not most immediately and directly conversant about the Objects presented; but the Acts to be done concerning these Objects. The Objects may appear equal, and the Mind may never properly make any Choice between them: But the next Act of the Will being about the external Actions to be performed, Taking, Touching &c. these may not appear equal, and one Action may properly be chosen before another. In each Step of the Mind's Progress, the Determination is not about the Objects, unless indirectly and improperly, but about the Actions, which it chuses for other Reasons than any Preference of the Objects, and for Reasons not taken at all from the Objects.