Forum

Spread the love
Benjamin Franklin o...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Benjamin Franklin on God

2 Posts
1 Users
0 Likes
100 Views
Member Admin
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 693
Topic starter  

Benjamin Franklin, one of America's founding fathers, was not only a statesman but also a profound thinker. In his writing "Of Liberty and Necessity," he delves deep into the concepts of free will, God's omnipotence, and the nature of good and evil. Drawing from this, we can make some poignant observations about America, its freedoms, and its limitations.

Franklin's analogy of the clockmaker is particularly striking. Just as a clockmaker designs a clock to function in a specific way, with each part having its own role and limitations, so too has God designed the universe and everything within it. The clock, once set in motion, operates according to its design, with each part playing its role. Similarly, America, like any other nation, operates within a set of natural and legal limitations. While the country is founded on the principle of freedom, this freedom is not without bounds.

Franklin writes, "If a Creature is made by God, it must depend upon God, and receive all its Power from Him." This can be likened to the American system. While the nation prides itself on its freedoms, these freedoms are granted and limited by the Constitution and the laws of the land. Just as a creature cannot act outside of God's will, citizens cannot act outside of the law.

Furthermore, Franklin's discussion on free will and the absence of merit or demerit in creatures can be related to the American justice system. In America, every individual is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The system is designed to treat everyone equally, regardless of their background or actions, much like how Franklin suggests every creature is equally esteemed by the Creator.

However, Franklin also touches upon the consequences of one's actions. He states, "Tho’ a Creature may do many Actions which by his Fellow Creatures will be nam’d Evil... yet this Proposition proves, that he cannot act what will be in itself really Ill, or displeasing to God." This mirrors the idea that while one has the freedom to act, there are natural and legal consequences for those actions. For instance, someone might have the freedom to commit a crime, but they will face the consequences of the law if caught.

In conclusion, Benjamin Franklin's writings provide a profound insight into the balance between freedom and necessity. Just as there are natural laws governing the universe, there are legal laws governing America. While the nation offers its citizens unparalleled freedoms, these come with their own set of limitations. As Franklin aptly puts it, "Every Action which is done according to Truth, is good; and every Action contrary to Truth, is evil." In the grand design of things, America, like God's creation, operates within a framework of liberty and necessity.


   
Quote
Member Admin
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 693
Topic starter  

From https://franklinpapers.org


"
Sect. I. Of Liberty and Necessity.

I. There is said to be a First Mover,who is called God, Maker of the Universe.

II. He is said to be all-wise, all-good, all powerful.

These two Propositions being allow’d and asserted by People of almost every Sect and Opinion; I have here suppos’d them granted, and laid them down as the Foundation of my Argument; What follows then, being a Chain of Consequences truly drawn from them, will stand or fall as they are true or false.

III. If He is all-good, whatsoever He doth must be good.

IV. If He is all-wise, whatsoever He doth must be wise.

The Truth of these Propositions, with relation to the two first, I think may be justly call’d evident; since, either that infinite Goodness will act what is ill, or infinite Wisdom what is not wise, is too glaring a Contradiction not to be perceiv’d by any Man of common Sense, and deny’d as soon as understood.

V. If He is all-powerful, there can be nothing either existing or acting in the Universe against or without his Consent; and what He consents to must be good, because He is good; thereforeEvil doth not exist.

Unde Malum? has been long a Question, and many of the Learned have perplex’d themselves and Readers to little Purpose in Answer to it. That there are both Things and Actions to which we give the Name of Evil, is not here deny’d, as Pain, Sickness, Want, Theft, Murder, &c. but that these and the like are not in reality Evils, Ills, or Defects in the Order of the Universe, is demonstrated in the next Section, as well as by this and the following Proposition. Indeed, to suppose any Thing to exist or be done, contrary to the Will of the Almighty, is to suppose him not almighty; or that Something (the Cause of Evil) is more mighty than the Almighty; an Inconsistence that I think no One will defend: And to deny any Thing or Action, which he consents to the existence of, to be good, is entirely to destroy his two Attributes of Wisdom and Goodness.

There is nothing done in the Universe, say the Philosophers, butwhat God either does, or permits to be done. This, as He is Almighty, is certainly true: But what need of this Distinction between doing andpermitting? Why, first they take it for granted that many Things in the Universe exist in such a Manner as is not for the best, and that many Actions are done which ought not to be done, or would be better undone; these Things or Actions they cannot ascribe to God as His, because they have already attributed to Him infinite Wisdom and Goodness; Here then is the Use of the Word Permit; He permitsthem to be done, say they. But we will reason thus: If God permits an Action to be done, it is because he wants either Power or Inclination to hinder it; in saying he wants Power, we deny Him to be almighty; and if we say He wants Inclination or Will, it must be, either because He is not Good, or the Action is not evil, (for all Evil is contrary to the Essence of infinite Goodness.) The former is inconsistent with his before-given Attribute of Goodness, therefore the latter must be true.

It will be said, perhaps, that God permits evil Actions to be done, for wise Ends and Purposes. But this Objection destroys itself; for whatever an infinitely good God hath wise Ends in suffering to be, must be good, is thereby made good, and cannot be otherwise.

VI. If a Creature is made by God, it must depend upon God, and receive all its Power from Him; with which Power the Creature can do nothing contrary to the Will of God, because God is Almighty; what is not contrary to His Will, must be agreeable to it; what is agreeable to it, must be good, because He is Good; therefore a Creature can donothing but what is good.

This Proposition is much to the same Purpose with the former, but more particular; and its Conclusion is as just and evident. Tho’ a Creature may do many Actions which by his Fellow Creatures will be nam’d Evil,and which will naturally and necessarily cause or bring upon the Doer, certain Pains (which will likewise be call’d Punishments;) yet this Proposition proves, that he cannot act what will be in itself really Ill, or displeasing to God. And that the painful Consequences of his evil Actions (so call’d) are not, as indeed they ought not to be, Punishments or Unhappinesses, will be shewn hereafter.

Nevertheless, the late learned Author of The Religion of Nature,(which I send you herewith) has given us a Rule or Scheme, whereby to discover which of our Actions ought to be esteem’d and denominated good,and which evil: It is in short this, “Every Action which is done according to Truth, is good; and every Action contrary to Truth, is evil: To act according to Truth is to use and esteem every Thing as what it is, &c. Thus if Asteals a Horse from B, and rides away upon him, he uses him not as what he is in Truth, viz. the Property of another, but as his own, which is contrary to Truth, and therefore evil.” But, as this Gentleman himself says, (Sect. I. Prop. VI.) “In order to judge rightly what any Thing is, it must be consider’d, not only what it is in one Respect, but also what it may be in any other Respect; and the whole Description of the Thing ought to be taken in:” So in this Case it ought to be consider’d, that A is naturally acovetous Being, feeling an Uneasiness in the want of B’s Horse, which produces an Inclination for stealing him, stronger than his Fear of Punishment for so doing. This is Truthlikewise, and A acts according to it when he steals the Horse. Besides, if it is prov’d to be a Truth, that A has not Power over his own Actions, it will be indisputable that he acts according to Truth, and impossible he should do otherwise.

I would not be understood by this to encourage or defend Theft; ’tis only for the sake of the Argument, and will certainly have no ill Effect. The Order and Course of Things will not be affected by Reasoning of this Kind; and ’tis as just and necessary, and as much according to Truth, for B to dislike and punish the Theft of his Horse, as it is for A to steal him.

VII. If the Creature is thus limited in his Actions, being able to do only such Things as God would have him to do, and not being able to refuse doing what God would have done; then he can have no such Thing as Liberty, Free-will or Power to do or refrain an Action.

By Liberty is sometimes understood the Absence of Opposition; and in this Sense, indeed, all our Actions may be said to be the Effects of our Liberty:But it is a Liberty of the same Nature with the Fall of a heavy Body to the Ground; it has Liberty to fall, that is, it meets with nothing to hinder its Fall, but at the same Time it is necessitated to fall, and has no Power or Liberty to remain suspended.

But let us take the Argument in another View, and suppose ourselves to be, in the common sense of the Word, Free Agents. As Man is a Part of this great Machine, the Universe, his regular Acting is requisite to the regular moving of the whole. Among the many Things which lie before him to be done, he may, as he is at Libertyand his Choice influenc’d by nothing, (for so it must be, or he is not at Liberty) chuse any one, and refuse the rest. Now there is every Moment something best to be done, which is alone then good, and with respect to which, every Thing else is at that Time evil. In order to know which is best to be done, and which not, it is requisite that we should have at one View all the intricate Consequences of every Action with respect to the general Order and Scheme of the Universe, both present and future; but they are innumerable and incomprehensible by any Thing but Omnis-cience. As we cannot know these, we have but as one Chance to ten thousand, to hit on the right Action; we should then be perpetually blundering about in the Dark, and putting the Scheme in Disorder; for every wrong Action of a Part, is a Defect or Blemish in the Order of the Whole. Is it not necessary then, that our Actions should be over-rul’d and govern’d by an all-wise Providence? How exact and regular is every Thing in the natural World! How wisely in every Part contriv’d! We cannot here find the least Defect! Those who have study’d the mere animal and vegetable Creation, demonstrate that nothing can be more harmonious and beautiful! All the heavenly Bodies, the Stars and Planets, are regulated with the utmost Wisdom! And can we suppose less Care to be taken in the Order of the moralthan in the natural System? It is as if an ingenious Artificer, having fram’d a curious Machine or Clock, and put its many intricate Wheels and Powers in such a Dependance on one another, that the whole might move in the most exact Order and Regularity, had nevertheless plac’d in it several other Wheels endu’d with an independent Self-Motion, but ignorant of the general Interest of the Clock; and these would every now and then be moving wrong, disordering the true Movement, and making continual Work for the Mender; which might better be prevented, by depriving them of that Power of Self-Motion, and placing them in a Dependance on the regular Part of the Clock.

VIII. If there is no such Thing as Free-Will in Creatures, there can be neither Merit nor Demerit in Creatures.

IX. And therefore every Creature must be equally esteem’d by the Creator.

These Propositions appear to be the necessary Consequences of the former. And certainly no Reason can be given, why the Creator should prefer in his Esteem one Part of His Works to another, if with equal Wisdom and Goodness he design’d and created them all, since all Ill or Defect, as contrary to his Nature, is excluded by his Power. We will sum up the Argument thus, When the Creator first design’d the Universe, either it was His Will and Intention that all Things should exist and be in the Manner they are at this Time; or it was his Will they should be otherwise i.e. in a different Manner: To say it was His Will Things should be otherwise than they are, is to say Somewhat hath contradicted His Will, and broken His Measures, which is impossible because inconsistent with his Power; therefore we must allow that all Things exist now in a Manner agreeable to His Will, and in consequence of that are all equally Good, and therefore equally esteemed by Him.

I proceed now to shew, that as all the Works of the Creator are equally esteem’d by Him, so they are, as in Justice they ought to be, equally us’d."

 

From  https://franklinpapers.org

 


   
ReplyQuote
Share:

Sign In

Register

Reset Password

Please enter your username or email address, you will receive a link to create a new password via email.