466 Fasznott GF WILL. granted that these three larinciples, viz. The greatest apparent good, the last dictate of the understanding, or the removal of present uneasiness, whether you suppose them distinct or the same; may have apersuasive influence so far as to prevail upon and to incline the will of men to -far the greatest part of their volitions or actsof choice : But we have proved that these are not the universal and certain or necessary principles of all the will's determinations. Let us enquire now whether there are not many instances wherein the will is determined neither by present uneasiness, nor by the greatest apparent good, nor by the last dictate of the understanding, nor hy any thing else, but merely by itself as a sovereign and self-determining power of the soul: or whether the soul doesnot will this or that action in some cases, not by any other influence but because it will, and perhaps to shew its own sovereignty or self-determining power. Let us put this case : SupposeI have a mind to prove to an atheist, or a fatalist, that I am a free being, for I can turn my face to the south or the north, it can point with my finger upward or downward, just as I please, and according as my soul wills ; and that I have a power towill and cluse which of these motions 1 shall perform : Now if to demonstrate this freedom, I determine to move my' finger upward, or turn my face to the north, it is not because I was under any present uneasiness by standing still without motion ; nor was the pointing upward or the looking northward a greater apparent good than looking to the south ór pointing downward : Nor could my understanding dictate one rather than the other : but it was a mere arbitrary volition, to slew that I have within me this self-determining power. And thus in some cases the will determines its own actions in a very sovereign manner be- cause it will, and without a reason borrowed from the under- standing; and hereby it discovers its own perfect power ofchoice arising' fromwithin itself, and free from all influence or restraint of any kind. And perhaps this may be as good a way to resolve some difficultiesthat relate to the actions of choice, and liberty of the will, either in Godor in man, as any other laborious methods of solution which have not attained the desired success, nor sals- fied the enquiring part of mankind. I will not deny but that I am indebted to archbishopKing in his treatise of the Origin of Evil, many years ago, for my first thoughts of this kind : And inmy review of these papers, I am confirmed in these sentiments by au English translation of that book in quarto, with ingeni- ous notes upon it bya writer who' conceals hisname, printed in 1731*. Though I ask leave in some points to differ from the sentimentsof the archbishop in that treatise. * Since this was written, there is another edition of that hook in octavo. with valuableamplifications and corrections and the learned author, Mr. Edmund Law, has no longer concealed his 'name.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=