Page:A Philosophical Inquiry Concerning Human Liberty (Foote).djvu/21



Too much care cannot be taken to prevent being misunderstood and prejudged, in handling questions of such nice speculation as those of Liberty and Necessity; and therefore, though I might in justice expect to be read before any judgment be passed on me, I think it proper to premise the following observations.

1. First, though I deny liberty, in a certain meaning of that word, yet I contend for Liberty as it signifies a power in man to do as he wills, or pleases; which is the notion of Liberty maintained by Aristotle, Cicero, Mr. Locke, and several other philosophers, ancient and modern; and indeed, after a careful examination of the best authors who have treated of Liberty, I may affirm that however opposite they appear in words to one another, and how much soever some of them seem to maintain another notion of liberty, yet at the bottom, there is an almost universal agreement in the notion defended by me, and all that they say, when examined, will be found to amount to no more.

2. Secondly, when I affirm Necessity, I contend only for what is called Moral Necessity, meaning thereby, that man, who is an intelligent and sensible being, is determined by his reason and his senses; and I deny man to be subject to such necessity as is in clocks, watches, and such other beings, which for want of sensation and intelligence, are subject to an absolute, physical, or mechanical necessity. And here also I have the concurrence of almost all the greatest asserters of Liberty, who either expressly maintain moral necessity, or the thing signified by those words.

3. Thirdly, I have undertaken to show, that the notions I advance, are so far from being inconsistent with, that they are the sole foundations of morality and laws and of rewards and punishments in society