Philosophical Fallacies: Ways of Erring

in Philosophical Exposition 1st ed. 2022

Edition Nicholas Rescher
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/philosophical-fallacies-ways-of-erring-in-philosophical
-exposition-1st-ed-2022-edition-nicholas-rescher/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Ways of Living Religion: Philosophical Investigations

into Religious Experience Christina M. Gschwandtner

https://ebookmass.com/product/ways-of-living-religion-
philosophical-investigations-into-religious-experience-christina-
m-gschwandtner/

The Philosophical Roots of Loneliness and Intimacy:

Political Narcissism and the Problem of Evil 1st ed.
2022 Edition Mijuskovic

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-philosophical-roots-of-
loneliness-and-intimacy-political-narcissism-and-the-problem-of-
evil-1st-ed-2022-edition-mijuskovic/

Collingwood on Philosophical Methodology 1st ed.

Edition Karim Dharamsi

https://ebookmass.com/product/collingwood-on-philosophical-
methodology-1st-ed-edition-karim-dharamsi/

Philosophical Foundations of Precedent (Philosophical

Foundations of Law) Timothy Endicott (Editor)

https://ebookmass.com/product/philosophical-foundations-of-
precedent-philosophical-foundations-of-law-timothy-endicott-
editor/
Philosophical Allusions in James Joyce's Finnegans Wake
Baines

https://ebookmass.com/product/philosophical-allusions-in-james-
joyces-finnegans-wake-baines/

The Philosophical Thought of Wang Chong 1st ed. Edition

Alexus Mcleod

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-philosophical-thought-of-wang-
chong-1st-ed-edition-alexus-mcleod/

Philosophical Perspectives on Land Reform in Southern

Africa 1st ed. Edition Erasmus Masitera

https://ebookmass.com/product/philosophical-perspectives-on-land-
reform-in-southern-africa-1st-ed-edition-erasmus-masitera/

Empirical Philosophical Investigations in Education and

Embodied Experience 1st ed. Edition Joacim Andersson

https://ebookmass.com/product/empirical-philosophical-
investigations-in-education-and-embodied-experience-1st-ed-
edition-joacim-andersson/

Kazantzakis’ Philosophical and Theological Thought 1st

ed. Edition Jerry H. Gill

https://ebookmass.com/product/kazantzakis-philosophical-and-
theological-thought-1st-ed-edition-jerry-h-gill/
Philosophical Fallacies
Ways of Erring in
Philosophical Exposition
n ic hol a s r e sc h e r
Philosophical Fallacies
 Nicholas Rescher

Philosophical Fallacies
Ways of Erring in Philosophical Exposition
Nicholas Rescher
Philosophy
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA, USA

ISBN 978-3-030-97173-1    ISBN 978-3-030-97174-8 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97174-8

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2022
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 For Patrick Grim
Collaborator par excellence
 Preface

Philosophers address large problems regarding mankind and our place in

the scheme of things, difficult issues where deliberations all too easily go
off track. And this is particularly so because the discipline tries to meet
almost unachievable high standards in its demand for the concurrent real-
ization of generality and precision. This renders certain various modes of
error—certain fallacies of reasoning—particularly tempting. The present
deliberations will endeavor to illustrate and clarify some of these.
Perhaps it was the bleakness of the yearlong isolation during the
2021–2021 pandemic that led me to contemplate the somber scene of
philosophical error; thereby, resulting in this book. But be this as it may, I
found the exercise instructive and hope that the reader will do so as well.
I am grateful to Estelle Burris for her patience and conscientious efforts
in preparing this material for the press and to the publisher’s reader for
cogent constructive commentary.

Pittsburgh, PA, USA Nicholas Rescher

May 2021

vii
 Contents

1 Error, Mistake, and Fallacy in Philosophizing  1

2 Classifying Philosophical Fallacies  9

3 Illustrating Philosophical Fallacies 27

4 The Fallacy of Respect Neglect 57

5 Fallacies Regarding Free Will 67

6 Totalization Fallacies 83

7 The Significance of Philosophical Fallacies101

Bibliography121

Index127

ix
 List of Displays

Display 2.1 The classification of fallacies 10

Display 2.2 Some infeasible inferential transits 20
Display 2.3 Philosophical fallacies 24
Display 3.1 The regress of idealization 30
Display 3.2 The common picture 39
Display 5.1 Timing issues 70
Display 5.2 Timing and determination 71
Display 5.3 Deliberating and probability: an example 73
Display 7.1 The ampliative approach 111
Display 7.2 The reductive approach 112
Display 7.3 A paradox of rational belief 114

xi
 CHAPTER 1

Error, Mistake, and Fallacy in Philosophizing

Philosophical Error
Aristotle said it well: “Man by nature desires to know.” For us, the absence
of information can be almost as distressing as that of food.
Philosophizing is a purposive enterprise that addresses the “big ques-
tions” of the human condition: man’s place in the universe and the proper
management of the obligations and opportunities of human life. It is a
venture in rational inquiry that begins with problems and seeks solutions.
And the big issues that preoccupy it relate to fundamentals of human con-
cern, being universal in dealing with humans at large rather than particular
groups thereof (farmers or doctors or Europeans or contemporaries of
Shakespeare). Philosophical deliberations must have a bearing—direct or
oblique—upon the key essentials of the human condition—knowledge
and truth, justice and morality, beauty and goodness, and the other “big
questions” about our place in the world’s scheme of things.
In philosophizing, we accordingly engage a range of issues of a scope in
generality and fundamentality that removes them beyond the range of our
ordinary idealizing and consciously available experience. But the more
deeply we enter into the range of matters remote from the course of com-
monly available experience the more uniform our claims become and the
more likely we are to fall into error. And these basic facts of (cognitive) life
put our ventures into philosophical speculation on a shaky and problem-
atic basis. In answering our philosophical questions, we have no

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 1

Switzerland AG 2022
N. Rescher, Philosophical Fallacies,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97174-8_1
2 N. RESCHER

alternative but to do the best we can in the full recognition of how that it
may well not be good enough. By the very nature of the enterprise, avoid-
ing loose and fallacious thinking is of the essence.
A fallacy is a mode of failure in substantiative reasoning. When an argu-
ment for a conclusion is fallacious, this truth shows and accounts for its
ineffectiveness. And what is crucial here is not the truth of the conclusion
but the cogency of its supportive argumentation.
When someone falls into error, some crucial questions arise: (1) why
did the individual fall into error?; what sort of motivation was at work?;
what led the agent to go wrong? This first is a matter of the MOTIVE or
RATIONALE for erring—if accounting or the occurrence of error. But
there is also another question, (2) What sort or error did the individual fall
into?; what sort of error is at issue?; what is wrong with what the agent
did? This is a matter of the MODE or MANNER of erring. Fallacy—our
present concern—has to do (only) with the second issue. This distinction
between motive and mode is critical. The manner of error may be a mis-
spelling or a slip of the tongue or a miscalculation. The motive for its
occurrence may be confusion or over-haste. These latter are explanations
for the error, and this is for the occurrence of fallacies. They are not them-
selves fallacies. They explain how it is that the agent comes to commit a
fallacy, but are not themselves the particular sorts of error is at issue with
the commitment of the fallacy.
Committing a fallacy is always a flaw in philosophical exposition. But
not all flaws are fallacies. Leaving significant matters hanging as unsepa-
rated loose ends in one’s position is a significant flaw—consequentially a
defect in philosophizing. But it is not a fallacy. For example, it is clear that
in matters of social-political policy and practice it may well be unavailable
to ask the individuals of the present to make a sacrifice and pay a priori to
enhance the safety and well-being of the populace of the future. But the
classical precept of “the greatest good of the greatest number” never really
confronted the crucial issue of how to count. But it occurred as a matter of
neglect more than of fallacious thinking. Were those at issue to be only
one’s living, breathing contemporaries, or were future generations to be
taken into account—and how many of them? This lack was inherently a
flaw and a significant failure in developing the position.
A philosophical fallacy is not a special kind of fallacy peculiar to philoso-
phizing and not encountered elsewhere. It is, rather, a general mode of
flaw in reasoning that happens to achieve particular prominence in philo-
sophical discussions.
 1 ERROR, MISTAKE, AND FALLACY IN PHILOSOPHIZING 3

The Rule of Reason

In philosophy, as elsewhere, there is a crucial difference between motiva-
tion and substantiation. A thinker may be ardent in the articulation and
defense of a position that he believes, almost instinctively, on the basis of
deep psychic resonance and ideological affinity. But this does not make
him a philosopher. For what matters here is not the agent’s motivation,
however, heartfelt and compelling, but substantiation grounding in rea-
sons why the rest of us should share this sentiment. Reasoning for doc-
trines rather than their psychic appeal is what matters and the commitment
to the counteraction of reason is the crux. Why reason? Because it is of our
very essence as rational creations. This last thing we would be willing to
sacrifice is our reason, which is as dear to us as life itself.
But as thinkers have realized since the days of Aristotle, reasoning
requires premisses and these must somehow be made available to reason
from without. But whence can they come? This is a matter of the thematic
range of deliberations at issue: in mathematics—intuition, in science—
observation; in grammar—communicative practice. And in philosophy—
the life experience of the wider community as reflected in; proverbial
wisdom, common sense, the consensus gentian, the “wisdom of crowd,”
as well as the expertise of science and scholarship, all these provide the
data that feed grist to philosophy’s mill. The coherent systematization of
human experience at large—cognitive, affective, social, and so on—is the
definitive task of philosophy.
Philosophizing is subject to two principal modes of error:

Errors of Reason: Inferential flaws in the articulation of conclusions to be

drawn from given premisses.
Errors of Judgment: Assumption flaws in the supposition, presuppositions,
and grounds of reasoning.

Evaluation in the former case lies in the range valid/invalid; in the latter it
lies in the range plausible/implausible. Philosophical cogency lies in draw-
ing valid (or appropriate) conclusions for plausible (or reasonable) prem-
isses. And here their acceptability is not absolute but basis relevant, and
depends on the experience-determined context of judgment plausibility
that is available to the agent. What is judgmentally acceptable to a contem-
porary of Socrates may well not be so for one of Kant.
4 N. RESCHER

However, this does not make for an indifferent relativism of anything

goes. There are facts it is impossible for someone to realize. (Rutherford’s
model of the atom was not available to the atomists of ancient Greece.)
And, on the other hand, there are no facts that are inexcusable for some-
one to ignore. (The micro-organisms unavailable to the ancients are
unavoidable for the moderns.) Doctrinal availability is generally a matter
of historical context.
What philosophy strives to develop is an informative and comprehen-
sive view of our position in reality’s stagesetting able to orient us—both as
individuals and as social groups—in dealing with our human and natural
environment. In sum, it seeks to provide the information needed to guide
us in life’s dealings and illustrates the opportunities at our disposal for
action in the realization of the desirable and the good.

Error Versus Mistake

Error consists in getting it wrong—for whatever reason. Mistake is culpa-
ble error—error the agent could and should have avoided. Fallacy is the
way of proceeding that leads the agent into error—the pathway to error.
(An entire chapter will subsequently be dedicated to one particular fallacy,
namely, the Fallacy of Respect Neglect.)
Philosophical error can take many forms: oversimplification, inappro-
priate presupposition, probabilistic analogy, and more. All of these can
occur both by innocent and venial unknowing/inadventure and by heed-
less and compatible and feckless misjudgment. This latter occurrence—
outright mistake in philosophy—is fortunately rather rare. There is, to be
sure, the change made against Arthur Schopenhauer (1787–1860) that his
bourgeois mode of life was inconsistent with his austere and acerbic teach-
ing. But here Schopenhauer sensibly replied that it was quite enough for
someone to explain the nature of a good life; that he himself should also
exemplify it would be asking too much. Such a discrepancy can be consid-
ered as rather uncharacteristic or even hypocritical, but it hardly discerns
characterization as erroneous. In large measure, the errors in which phi-
losophizing becomes entangled are not culpable mistakes of incompetence
or carelessness, but are aspirationally rooted in the systemic structure of
the philosophical enterprise, evoked by the nature of the problem situa-
tion that philosophy confronts.
 1 ERROR, MISTAKE, AND FALLACY IN PHILOSOPHIZING 5

Mistakes in Versus About Philosophy

It is important to distinguish between error in philosophizing and error
about philosophizing. The former consists of errors arising when mistaken
views are operative within philosophical doctrine, be exemplified by such
matters as inconsistency or oversimplification or failure to draw due
distinctions.
Mistaken views about philosophy arise regarding the objective of phi-
losophy, its limits or boundaries, and its methods or practices. This will
include misjudgments regarding the thematic range of the subject—for
example, by allocating to it domains which do not belong to philosophy.
One key error abut philosophy is to believe that it involves the view that
there is uniquely one appropriate and correct philosophy so that one sys-
tem should suit all thinkers. Such a position reflects a misunderstanding of
the nature of philosophy.
Philosophy is a particular sort of enterprise. It addresses “the big ques-
tions” regarding man’s place in the world’s scheme of things. Thus, there
can be mistakes about philosophy as well as mistakes in philosophizing.
Ethics and metaphysics are clearly in; numeretrics and methodology are
out. Philosophy is not opinion-mongering. It is not a venture in simply
varying doctrines and assuming affirmations on relevant topics. Philosophy
is an exercise in reasoning. To philosophize is not to present—to tell people
what to do or think. Its job is to explain: to expand not simply the what but
the why; to explain the reasons why the issues should be resolved as is. If you
dispense with reason-why explanation you dispense with philosophy itself.
Philosophizing admits to various sorts of mistakes, not only mistakes of
substance about its own nature but also mistakes of procedure. Both in
(mis-)reasoning but also in (mal-)exposition.
Thus, mistakes within philosophizing would be exemplified by such
matters as inconsistency or oversimplification or failure to draw due dis-
tinctions. The radical skeptic who claims to know for certain that nothing
can be known for certain is clearly in difficulty.
While people can make mistakes in philosophizing, there is no such
thing as a winning or erroneous philosophy as such. Granted, every phi-
losopher will think that those who disagree with his position are wrong.
But that sort of thing is in fact mere disagreement and does really qualify
as error. Mere disagreement does not qualify as error, it cannot be said
that when two philosophers answer a question differently, then at least one
of them must be wrong. In these matters, it can be the question that is
indecisive and not just the answer.
6 N. RESCHER

Error Versus Disagreement

The not-infrequent objection—“that’s just not doing proper philoso-
phy”—is accordingly one only available to those engaged in on the battle-
field of philosophy itself. The external analyst of the matter cannot operate
the destructive good and bad philosophizing. Of course, rhetorical mat-
ters—good and bad exposition, reasoning, presentation—are at his com-
mand. But good and bad issue-resolution is not. At this stage taking a
position within the scope of the subject itself becomes necessary. Errors of
exposition are one thing, errors of philosophizing another. To be sure,
from within a given philosophical position, a doctrine there is almost
invariably the idea that other variant positions and doctrines are false.
While people can make mistakes in philosophizing, there is no such
thing as a wrong or erroneous philosophy as such.
When there is philosophical disagreement on substantive matters, each
party—proceeding from its own doctrinal standpoint—will, naturally
enough, charge the other with being in error. And the so-regarded recipi-
ent will then, of course, simply shrug off such a charge with its counter-­
accusation. The recipient of such a charge will have to take the matter
more seriously as now there is a perceptible need for correction and repair.
Error—philosophical error included—comes in two forms. First, there
is an inadvertent and blameless error. The person who proceeds on the
basis of available information that happens to be wrong or the person
whose experience provides a misleading bias is blameless for any mistaken
resolution. Here, error is blameless and outside reprehension. By contrast,
there is the prospect of outright mistake, of insufficient heed to the correct
indications, of carelessness or incompetence. Here, we have an outright
mistake meriting the criticism that the agent “ought to have known bet-
ter.” Error of this more serious kind is fortunately rather rare in
philosophizing.
For example, the distinctions needed to avert confusion, of the infor-
mation needed to evade inappropriate presupposition needed to evade
inappropriate presuppositions may simply not have been available in the
state of knowledge of the day. The lack of the fallacy-averting information
may thus be due not to negligence, lack of effort, or unacceptance on the
agent’s part. The damaging ignorance can simply be an artifact of inacces-
sible information. In this matter as in others an agent cannot be repre-
hended for doing what cannot be helped in the circumstances. Is fallacious
reasoning blameworthy? Does a philosopher merit reproach and
 1 ERROR, MISTAKE, AND FALLACY IN PHILOSOPHIZING 7

reprehension for committing a fallacy in his reasoning? In the end, there is

one—and just one—exculpation for committing a fallacy, namely, excus-
able ignorance. For it is common that certain facts just were not accept-
able in the state of information obtaining at a given time.
The distinction between culpable and venial error is virtually important
for philosophy. When an idea or doctrine is first articulated, its defects or
shortcomings may well not be apparent. Only in the wake of further devel-
opment and critique may such defaults become apparent. The defects it
involves are, as such, certainly errors. But they are not mistakes and could
not have been avoided at the early stages. To say that a philosopher was in
error is simply a statement of descriptive fact. By contrast, to say was mis-
taken is a graver imputation of flawed workmanship. The history of phi-
losophy is a lack of errors. But outright mistakes are few and far between.
Only relation as we say of a philosopher that “he should have known
better.”
The important distinction between error and mistake is crucial to the
present deliberation Alike in matters of answering questions, solving prob-
lems, or seeking goals, error is simply a matter of getting it wrong—so
proceeding as it fails in creating the objection. Mistake, by contrast, is only
a certain sort of error, namely, culpable error, error that arises for some
improper proceeding on the agent’s part. With error as such there is no
alternative to responsibility, but such an attribution is inherent in mistakes,
which as such arises from some inappropriate proceeding on that agent’s
part. Mistakes are errors that the agent could and should have avoided.
Thus, when relevant information is simply not available to agents—after
all, they cannot be aware of discoveries as yet unmade—then one cannot
expect the corresponding distinctions or premisses to be taken into
account, and any correlative flaws will be unavoidable and thereby excus-
able/venial. We cannot say that the agent “should have known better” in
relation to that which he cannot possibly get to know. And so in philoso-
phy as elsewhere various fallacious reasonings must nevertheless be
accounted blameless. Error can be venial and excusable, but with mistakes
we have it that “the agent ought to have known better.” When an agent
takes the wrong fact in the route, he is in error; when he does so despite
good outcome to the contrary, he is mistaken.
Again, in the case of Distinction Failure, the agent may well have no
grounds in the prevailing conditions to think the distinction to be neces-
sary. On the other hand, if the fallacy is of flawed reasoning, such as post
8 N. RESCHER

hoc ergo propter hoc, then the mistake at issue is indeed culpable and the
agent “should have known better.”
When important distinctions were not drawn in his day, a philosopher
cannot be justly reprehensible for ignoring them. Whenever fallacies are
the result of understandable unknowing committing them can be excused.
Only when there is culpable ignorance—where it can reasonably be said
that the agent at issue “could and should have known better” is the resul-
tant fallacy discreditable. One cannot reasonably expect someone to
exceed the knowledge of their day, not hold them blameworthy for failing
to so do.
In philosophical exposition, a fallacy is something more serious than
just a flaw. For a flaw can be the failure to realize something positive, while
a fallacy is actually the realization of something negative. And yet, error—
as such—is not in and of itself a fallacy. Instead, a fallacy is a failed mode
of reasoning that results in error. Erroneous conclusion can be arrived at
without any fallacious reasoning at all, specifically when the reasoning—
while of itself perfectly correct and non-fallacious—is based on false prem-
isses. Even in the absence of fallacious reasoning philosophical deliberations
need not yield correct and tenable conclusions. Avoiding fallacies is a nec-
essary but not sufficient condition for good philosophizing.
 CHAPTER 2

Classifying Philosophical Fallacies

Fallacy
Philosophical fallacies fall within the larger theme of fallacies in general,
regarding which there is a large and diffuse logical and rhetorical litera-
ture.1 Logicians have traditionally classified fallacies in line with the tax-
onomy of Display 2.1. But within this broader context, there is a varied
assortment of modes of fallacy that are especially common in specifically
philosophical deliberation. It is these characteristically philosophical mis-
takes that will be presently at issue.

Inconsistency
Inconsistency and self-contradiction constitute the most serious of philo-
sophical failings. When a thesis or doctrine is at odds with itself—counter-­
indicated even on its own telling (such as a radical skepticism to the effect
that no philosophical thesis can reasonably be maintained)—we are clearly
in the presence of something unacceptable.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 9

Switzerland AG 2022
N. Rescher, Philosophical Fallacies,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97174-8_2
10 N. RESCHER

Formal: improper modes of inference

EXAMPLES: Denying the Antecedent, Affirming the Consequent

Substantive [Material]: improper modes of assertion

—interpretative: errors regarding meaning

EXAMPLES: shifting Equal Terms, Inadequate Distribution

—Presumptive: errors regarding acceptability

EXAMPLES: Erroneous Presupposition Begging the Question, Non sequitur

Display 2.1 The classification of fallacies

Unreasonable Demand
The Fallacy of Unreasonable Demand hinges on requiring something that
cannot possibly be realized. One major form of philosophical improbabil-
ity turns on the infinite regress of presuppositions. Thus, consider
the theses:

• The adequate explanation of events calls for explaining their causes

adequately.
• A case is not adequately explained until all of its cases are so explained.

Clearly, these structures render the explanations of events impossible from

the very start.
And an analogous situation prevails with respect to the thesis

• Accepting a conclusion is not justified until all of its processes become

acceptably justified. Entanglement in such infinite regress is among
the salient flaws of philosophizing.2

Infinite proceedings are just too much to ask for.

A Survey of Philosophical Fallacies

Display B gives a survey of the principal sort of fallacies communally
encountered in philosophical exposition.
The falling observations are in order in this context.
 2 CLASSIFYING PHILOSOPHICAL FALLACIES 11

• Philosophical fallacies so function that errors of omission can be

either innocent or culpable, as can errors of presumption; but errors
of logic are always culpable.
• Fallacies of presumption constitute efforts “to obtain by theft what
would by rights be the fruit of toil.” They are almost always culpable.
• Fallacies of logic are always culpable.
• Fallacies of omission and presumption may or may not be culpable,
although the former mainly are.

Failure to Heed Distinctions

Men and women differ. Granted, they are not different species—the one
from Mars and the other from Venus. But they differ biologically, socially,
behaviorally (?). And this is something philosophers can and should take
account of. But there are two crucially important respects in which men
and women do not differ. One is cognitively with respect to matters of
fact. The melting point of lead is the same for men as for women, as is the
atomic weight of measuring, and the square root of two. Matters of fact,
alike concrete and absurd, are the same for men as for women. There is no
male arithmetic or female physics—factual domains are the same for both.
The other crucially casting is ethics. Theft is uniformly reprehensible
for men and women, and kindness is uniformly virtuous. Moral virtues
and values do not admit of gender differentiation.
These considerations point to a characteristic fallacy in the philosophi-
cal treatment of gender issues. For her is it needful to heed and maintain
the essential difference between these issues where gender matters and
those where it does not. To proceed otherwise is a Failure to Heed to
Critical Distinction.

Contravening Common Sense

It is always difficult from a philosophical position to gain a fair hearing in
our antagonistic climate of opinion. But, of course, it would be fallacious
to reject a contention on grounds of unpopular rather than untenable
consequence.
The English philosopher Herbert Spencer thus rejected Kant’s theory
of space as absurd because it envisioned space as a mind-created thought-­
thing. As Spencer saw it, this violated the common-sense fact that minds
12 N. RESCHER

have to exist and function within space and thus cannot create that which
is the essential prerequisite for their own existence.3
Some philosophical dictums are so bizarre in the way of common-sense
combination that no one has even actually espoused them and their side
status is that of discussable hypotheses available for purpose of contrast.
Perhaps the most striking of these is solipsism, the theory that the only
existing person is one oneself, and that everyone else is simply a matter of
one’s illusions.
And a comparably bizarre hypothesis is that the entire world has come
into being only a matter of minutes ago, complete with fossils, eroded
stones, grown trees, adult people, minds with memories, and so on. The
consequences of such a position can always be ironed out through accom-
modating conjectures. But it can carry no conviction through absurdity in
contravening common sense.
The classic instance of a purported refutation via common sense is
afforded by Dr. Samuel Johnson’s attempted demolition of Bishop
Barclay’s idealism: he kicked a stone. His line of thought was straightfor-
ward: “If a stone were not solid and material, you just couldn’t kick it.
That’s just common sense.” To be sure, Barclay would not have been
intimidated. As he saw it the whole business—the stone, the foot, the kick-
ing, the whole business is simply an experiential episode. And as such—
that is, as an experience—it is all mental. As Barclay saw it, that too is
simply common sense.
Thus, the philosopher who propounds the rule that “All rules have
exceptions” saws off the very limb on which his own position hinges by
subjecting his claimed “all” to the concession of exceptions.
It is not difficult to find other examples of this sort of failing:

• Radical skepticism. Consider the thesis that there is no achieving

knowledge in philosophical matters: that in this field nothing can be
established as true. As metaphilosophy is a part of philosophy and all
theories about philosophy are themselves philosophical, this doctrine
saws off the limb that keeps itself aloft.
• Sophomore relativism. Consider the doctrine maintaining that every-
thing is simply a matter of opinion: there is just what you think to be
so and what I think, and that there is nothing whatever that should
and must be thought in common—alike by you and me and all the
rest. But this very thesis that “Nothing qualifies as communally
cogent” simply flies in the face of what it itself purports.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
M Y heart is with you, though I am absent. Dear fellow soldiers
under the captain of our salvation, consider your calling, and
approve yourselves men of resolution; be discouraged with no
difficulties of your present warfare. As for human affairs, I would
have you to be as you are, men of peace. I would have you armed,
not for resisting, God forbid; but for suffering only. You should resist,
to the uttermost, striving against sin. Here you must give no quarter!
For if you spare but one Agag, the life of your souls must go for the
life of your sin. God will not smile on that soul that smiles on sin, nor
have any peace with him, that is at peace with his enemy. Other
enemies you must forgive, and love, and pray for; but for these
spiritual enemies, all your affections, and all your prayers must be
engaged against them: yea, you must admit no parley: it is
dangerous to dispute with temptations. *Remember what Eve lost by
parleying with Satan: you must fly from temptations, and put them off
at first with a peremptory denial. If you will but hear the devil’s
arguments, and the flesh’s pleas, it is an hundred to one but you are
insnared. And for this present evil world, the Lord deliver you from it.
Surely you had need watch and be sober, or else this world is like to
undo you. I have often warned you not to build upon an external
happiness; and to promise yourselves nothing but hardship here: Oh
still remember your station; soldiers must not count upon rest, and
fullness, but hunger, and hardness. Labour to get right
apprehensions of the world. Do not think these things necessary.
One thing is needful: you may be happy in the want of all outward
comforts. Do not think yourselves undone, if brought to want or
poverty: study eternity, and you will see it to be little material to you,
whether you are poor or rich: you may have never such an
opportunity for your advantage in all your lives, as when you seem to
run the vessel upon the rocks. Set your enemies one against the
other; death against the world; no such way to get above the world,
as to put yourselves into the possession of death.
 *Look often upon the dust that you shall be reduced to, and
imagine you saw your bones tumbled out of your graves, as they are
like shortly to be, and men handling your skulls, and enquiring whose
is this? Tell me, of what account will the world be then? Put
yourselves often into your graves, and look out from thence upon the
world, and see what judgment you have of it. Must not you shortly be
forgot among the dead? Your places will know you no more, and
your memory will be no more among men, and then what will it profit
you to have lived in fashion and repute? One serious walk over a
church-yard, might make a man mortified to the world. Think upon
how many you tread; but ye know them not: no doubt they had their
estates, their friends, their businesses, and kept as much stir in the
world as others do now. But alas, what are they the better for all
this? Know you not that this must be your own case shortly? Oh the
unhappiness of man; how is he bewitched; and befooled, that he
should expend himself for that which he knows shall forever leave
him! Brethren, I beseech you lay no stress upon these perishing
things, but labour to be at a holy indifference about them: is it for one
that is in his wits to sell his God, his soul, for things he is not sure to
keep a day, and which he is sure after a few sleepings and wakings
more, to leave behind him for ever? Go, and talk with dying men,
and see what apprehensions they have of the world? If any should
come to these, and tell them here is such and such preferments for
you; you shall have such titles of honour and delights, if you will now
disown religion, do you think such a motion would be embraced?
Brethren, why should we not be wise in time! Why should we not
now be of the mind, of which we know we shall be all shortly? Woe
to them that will not be wise, till it be to no purpose! Woe to them
whose eyes nothing but death and judgment will open! Woe to them
that though they have been warned by others, and have heard the
world’s greatest darlings in death cry out of its vanity, yet would take
no warning; but must serve themselves too, for warnings to others.
Ah! my beloved, beware there be none among you, that will rather
part with their consciences than with their estates; that have secret
reserves to save themselves whole, when it comes to the pinch; and
not to be of the religion that will undo them in the world. Beware that
none of you have your hearts where your feet should be, and love
your mammon before your Maker.

May the Lord of Hosts be with you, and the God of Jacob your
refuge. Farewell my dear brethren, farewell, and be strong in the
Lord. I am

Your’s to serve you in the gospel,

whether by doing or suffering

JOS. ALLEINE.

From the common gaol at Ivelchester,

August 31, 1663.

L E T T E R VI.
To the beloved friends, the flock of Christ in Taunton,
salvation.

Most dearly beloved and longed for, my joy and crown:

I MUST say of you as David did of Jonathan, Very pleasant have
you been unto me, and your love to me is wonderful. And as I
have formerly taken great content in that my lot was cast among you,
so I rejoice in my present lot, that I am called to approve my love to
you by suffering for you; for you, I say; for you know I have not
sought your’s but you; and that for doing my duty to your souls, I am
here in these bonds, which I chearfully accept through the grace of
God that strengtheneth me: Oh! that your hands might be
strengthened, and your hearts encouraged in the Lord your God by
our sufferings! See to it, that you stand fast in the power of the holy
doctrine, which we have preached from the pulpit, preached at the
bar; preached from the prison: it is a gospel worth suffering for: see
that you follow after holiness, without which no man shall see God!
Oh the madness of the blind world, that they should put from them
the only plank upon which they can escape to heaven! Alas for them!
They know not what they do. What would not these foolish virgins
do, when it is too late, for a little of the oil of the wise! But let not any
of you be wise too late: look diligently, lest any man fail of the grace
of God. Beware that none of you be cheated through the
deceitfulness of your hearts, with counterfeit grace. There is never a
grace but hath its counterfeit; and there is nothing more common,
than to mistake counterfeit grace for true. And remember you are
undone for ever, if you should die in such a mistake. Not that I would
shake the confidence of any sound believer, whose graces are of the
right kind: build your confidence sure: see that you get the certain
marks of salvation, and make sure, by observing your own hearts,
that these marks be in you, and then you cannot be too confident.
But as you love your souls, take heed of a groundless confidence.
Take heed of being confident before you have tried. I would fain have
you all secured against the day of judgment; I would that the state of
your souls were all well settled: Oh how comfortably might you think
of any troubles, if you were but sure of your pardons! I beseech you,
whatever you neglect, look to this: I am afraid there are among you
that have not made your peace with God; that are not yet acquainted
with that great work of conversion: such I charge before the living
God, to speed to Christ, and without any more delay to put away
their iniquities, and deliver up themselves to Jesus Christ, that they
may be saved. It is not your profession or external duties, that will
save you: no, no, you must be converted or condemned. It is not
enough that you have some love to God’s ways and people, and are
willing to venture something for them; all this will not prove you
sound Christians: Have your hearts been changed? Have you been
soundly convinced of your sins? Of your damnable and undone
condition? And your utter inability to lick yourselves whole by your
own duties? Have you been brought to such a sense of sin, that
there is no sin, but you heartily abhor it? Are you brought to such a
sense of the beauty of holiness, and of the laws and ways of God,
that you desire to know the whole mind of God? Would you not
excuse yourselves by ignorance from any duty, and do not you allow
yourselves in the neglect of any thing conscience charges upon you
as a duty? Are your very hearts set upon the glorifying and enjoying
of God, as your greatest happiness? *Had you rather be the holiest
than be the richest and greatest in the world? And is your greatest
delight in the thoughts of your God, and in your conversings with
God in holy exercises! Is Christ more precious than all the world to
you? And are you willing upon the thorough consideration of the
strictness and holiness of his laws, to take them all for the rule of
your thoughts, words and actions, and though religion may be dear,
do you resolve, if God assist you, to go through with it, let the cost be
what it will? Happy the man that is in such a case. This is a Christian
indeed, and whatever you be and do short of this, all is unsound. But
you that bear in your souls the marks above-mentioned, upon you I
lay no other burden, but to hold fast, and make good your ground,
and to press forwards towards the mark. Thankfully acknowledge the
grace of God to your souls; and live rejoicingly in the hopes of the
glory of God; live daily in the praises of your Redeemer; and study
the worthiness, excellency, and glory of his attributes: let your souls
be much taken up in contemplating his glorious perfection, and
blessing yourselves in the goodly portion you have in him: live like
those that have a God, and then be disconsolate if you can: if there
be not more in an infinite God to comfort you, than in a prison, or
poverty or affliction to deject you, our preaching is vain and your faith
is vain. Let the thoughts of God be your daily repast: and never be
satisfied till your hearts run out as freely, naturally, unweariedly after
God, as others do after the world. Farewell my dear brethren, the
Lord God Almighty be a protection to you, and your exceeding great
reward; Farewell in the Lord.

I am,
Your’s in the bowels of the Lord Jesus,

JOS. ALLEINE.

From the common gaol, in Ivelchester,

September 11, 1663.

L E T T E R VII.
[How to shew love to ministers, and to live joyfully.]

To the most loving and dearly beloved, my Christian friends

in Taunton, grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father,
and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Most endeared brethren,

I HAVE received your moving letter, and could not look over such
tender expressions without some commotion. I may confidently
say, I spent more tears upon those lines, than ever you did ink. Your
deep sense of my labours I cannot but thankfully acknowledge, yet
withal, heartily confessing, that all was but what I owed to your
immortal souls; which God knows was very much short of my duty.
The omissions, imperfections, deadness, that accompanied my
duties I own, and the Lord humble me for them. But all that was of
God (and that was all that was good) be sure that you give to God
alone. To him I humbly ascribe both the will and the deed, to whom
alone be glory for ever.
 *My dear brethren, my business as I have often told you, is not to
turn your eyes to me, but to Christ: his spokesman I am, will you give
your hands, your names to him? Will you subscribe to his laws, and
consent to his offices, and be at defiance with all his enemies? This
do, and I have my errand. Who will follow Christ’s colours? Who will
come under his banner? This shall be the man that shall be my
friend; this is he that will oblige me for ever. Do these letters come to
no loose sinner? No ignorant sinner? No unsound professor? Would
they do me a kindness, as I believe they would? Then let them come
away to Christ! O sinner, be no more in love with darkness; stick no
longer in the skirts and outside of religion. Waver no more, halt no
farther, but strike in throughly with Jesus Christ; except nothing,
reserve nothing, but come throughly to the Lord, and follow him fully.
And then happy man thou shalt be, for thou wilt be made for ever;
and joyful man I shall be; for I shall save a soul from death. The
earnest beggings of a poor prisoner, use to move some bowels: hear
O friends, will you do nothing for a minister of Christ? Nothing for a
prisoner of Jesus Christ? Methinks I hear you answer, “Yea, what will
we not do? He shall never want while we have it; he shall need no
office of love, but we will run and ride to do it.” Yea, but this is not it
that I beg of you; will you gratify me indeed? Then come in, bow to
the name of Jesus; yea, let your souls bow, let all your powers do
him homage. Let that sacred name be graven into the substance of
your hearts. Let me freely speak for him, for he is worthy for whom
you shall do this thing; worthy to be beloved of you; worthy to have
your very hearts, worthy to be admired, adored, praised, served,
glorified to the uttermost by you, and every creature; worthy for
whom you should lay down all, leave all: can any thing be too much
for him? Can any thing be too good for him, or too great for him?
Come give up all, resign all, lay it at the feet of Jesus, offer all as a
sacrifice to him, see that you be universally the Lord’s; keep nothing
from him: I know through the goodness of God, that with many of
you this work is not yet to do. But this set solemn resignation to the
Lord is to be done more than once, and to be followed with an
answerable practice when it is done: see that you walk worthy of the
Lord; but how? In the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy
Ghost; let these two go together. So shall you adorn the doctrine of
God our Saviour, and experience the heavenly felicity of a Christian
life: cleave fast to Christ, never let go your hold; cling the faster,
because so many are labouring to loosen your hold. Hold fast your
integrity, hold fast the beginning of your confidence stedfast to the
end: If you do but keep your hold, and keep your way; all that the
world can do, and all that the powers of darkness can do, can never
do you harm. Keep your own vineyard with constant care and
watchfulness, and be sure that there be no inroad made upon your
consciences, that the enemy do not get between your souls and
God; and then let what will assail you without, you need not fear! Let
this be your daily exercise, to keep your consciences void of offence:
keep fair weather at home, however it be abroad. I would not only
that you should walk holily, but that you should walk comfortably. I
need say the less to this, because the fear of the Lord and the
comfort of the Holy Ghost, lie together. Oh the provision God hath
made for your continual comfort: dear brethren, do but understand
your own blessedness, happy men that you are, if you did but know
and consider it: who would count himself poor that hath all the
fullness of the Godhead for his. O Christians, live like yourselves,
live worthy of your portion, and your glorious prerogatives. That you
may walk worthy of your glorious hopes, and live answerable to the
mercies you have received, is the great desire of

Your souls fervent well-wisher in bonds.

JOS. ALLEINE.

From the prison at Ivelchester,

September 18, 1663.

L E T T E R VIII.
[Remember Christ crucified; and crucify sin.]
 To the faithful and well-beloved people, the servants of
Christ in Taunton, salvation.

Most dear Christians,

I AM by office a remembrancer, the Lord’s remembrancer for you,
and your remembrancer in the behalf of Christ. My business is
with the apostle, to stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance.
And who shall I remember you of, but your intercessor with the
Father, who hath you always in remembrance, appearing in the
presence of God for you? May his memory ever live in your hearts,
though mine should die; Oh, remember his love more than mine;
remember in what a case he found you, and yet nothing could divert
the purpose of his love from you: He loathed not your rags nor your
rottenness: he found you in loathsome filthiness, yet he pitied you.
His bowels were moved, and his compassions were kindled, when
one would have thought his wrath should have boiled and his
indignation have burned down to hell against you: he loathed not, but
loved you, and washed you from your sins in his own blood. Ah
polluted captives! Ah vile and putrid carcases! that ever the Holy
Jesus should his ownself wash you. Methinks I see him weeping
over you; and yet it was a more costly bath by which he cleansed
you. Ah sinners look upon the streaming blood flowing from his
blessed body, to fetch out the ingrained filthiness that you by sin had
contracted. Alas! What a horrid filthiness, that nothing but the blood
of the covenant could wash away! And what a love is Christ’s, that,
when a whole ocean could not wash nor purify us, would open every
vein of his heart to do the work! Look upon your crucified Lord: do
you not see a sacred stream flowing out of every member? Ah, how
those holy hands, those unerring feet do run a stream to purge us!
Alas, how the great drops of blood fall to the ground from his sacred
face in his bitter agony, to wash and beautify ours! How his wounded
heart and side twice pierced, first with love and pity, and then with
the soldier’s cruelty, pour out their healthful and saving floods upon
us? Lord! How do we forget such love as this? Ah monsters of
ingratitude, that can be unmindful of such a friend! Do we thus
requite him? Is this our kindness to such an obliging friend!
Christians, where are your affections? To what use do you put your
faculties? What have you memories for, but to remember him? What
have you the power of loving for, but that you should love him?
Wherefore serves joy or desire, but to long for him? And delightfully
embrace him? May your souls and all their powers be taken up with
him; may all the doors of your souls be set open to him. Here fix your
thoughts, terminate here your desires; here you may kindle your fire
when almost out. Brethren what will you do now for Jesus Christ?
Have you never a sacrifice to lay upon his altar? Come and I will
shew you what you shall do, let your hands be in the blood of your
sins, search them out with diligence, search your hearts and your
houses; whatever iniquities you find there, out with them, put them
far from your tabernacles; if you crucify them not, you are not
Jesus’s friends. *God forbid that there should be a lying tongue, or
any way of deceit in your shops: that his service should give place to
the world in your families. Far be it from any of you, my brethren, that
you should be careful to teach your children and servants the way of
your callings, and neglect to instruct them in the way of life. Is weekly
catechising in every one of your families? The Lord convince any of
you that may be guilty of this neglect: Oh, set up God in your
houses; and see that you be not slovenly in closet performances.
Beware of serving the Lord negligently; serve not the Lord with that
which costs you nothing: look to it that you content not yourselves
with a cheap and easy religion. Put your flesh to it: be well assured
that the religion that costs you nothing, will yield you nothing: Keep
up the life of religion in your family and closet duties. Fear nothing
like a customary and careless performance of God’s service. Judge
your ownselves whether lazy wishes, idle complaints, and yawning
prayers are like to carry you through the mighty difficulties that you
must get through, if ever you come to heaven. When you find
yourselves going on in a listless, heartless course, ask yourselves, is
this to take the kingdom of heaven by violence? See that you
sacrifice yourselves to the Lord, that now you live to Christ himself.
As Christ hath made over his life and death to you, so let it be your
care to live and die to him. Labour to look upon all your enjoyments
as Christ’s goods; upon your time, parts, strength, as his talents:
look upon yourselves only in the quality of servants and stewards,
that are to husband all these for your Lord’s advantage, and as those
that must give an account. And pray for me that I may take the
counsel that I give. I bless the Lord, I want nothing but the
opportunity of being serviceable to you: but I hope the Lord will make
my bonds for you, to be useful to your edification; if I may glorify
God, and serve you best by being here, I shall never wish to come
out. Finally brethren, farewell: be perfect, be of good comfort, be of
one mind, live in peace, and the God of love and peace shall be with
you. I am,

The ready servant of your faith and joy,

JOS. ALLEINE.

From the prison at Ivelchester,

October 14th, 1663.

L E T T E R IX.
[On daily self-examination.]

To the most beloved people, the flock of Christ in Taunton,

salvation.

Most dear brethren,

B RETHREN how stands it with you? Doth the main work go on?
do your souls prosper? This is my care; beware that you flag
not, that you faint not now in the evil day. I understand that your
dangers grow upon you. May your faith and courage grow much
more abundantly!
 Some of your enemies, I hear, are in great hopes to satisfy their
desires upon you. Well, be not discouraged my dear brethren, but
bless the Lord, who of his abundant mercy, hath so remarkably
preserved you so long beyond all expectation. Let it not be a strange
thing to you, if the Lord doth now call you to some difficulty: forsake
not the assembling of yourselves together, as the manner of some is.
I plainly see the coal of religion will soon go out, unless it have some
better helps to cherish it, than a carnal ministry, and lifeless
administration. Dear brethren, now is the time for you that fear the
Lord, to speak often one to another: manage your duties with what
prudence you can, but away with that carnal prudence, that will
decline duty to avoid danger.
 *I left you some helps for daily examination, I am jealous lest you
should grow slack, or slight, and careless in that duty. Let me ask
you in the name of the Lord, doth never a day pass you, but you
solemnly and seriously call yourselves to an account, what your
carriage hath been to God and men? Speak conscience? Is there
never an one within the hearing of this letter, that is a neglecter of
this duty? Doth every one of your consciences acquit you? Oh that
they did! Tell me, would not some of you be put shrewdly to it, if I
should ask you when you read, or thought over the questions that
were given you for your help? Would you not be put to a blush, to
give me an answer? And will you not be much more ashamed, that
God should find you tardy? Not that I would necessarily bind you up
to that very method; only till you have found a way more profitable, I
would desire you, yea, I cannot but charge you, to make daily use of
that. Awake conscience, and do thou fall upon that soul that thou
findest careless in this work, and never let him be at rest till thou
canst witness for him, that he is a daily and strict observer of himself,
and doth live in the constant practice of this duty. What! Shall neither
God’s charge nor your profit hold you to your work? Yet I may not
doubt, but some of you do daily perform this duty. The Lord
encourage you in it: yet give me leave to ask you what you have
gained? Are you grown more universally conscientious, more strict,
more humble, and more sensible of your many and great defects,
than you were before? If so blessed are you of the Lord; if otherwise,
this duty hath been but slightly performed by you. What can you say
to this question? Doth your care of your ways abate or increase, by
the constant use of this duty? If it abate, remember from whence you
are fallen, and repent; as good not to do it at all, as not to the
purpose.

The Lord God be a sun and a shield to you. My most dear love to
you all; fare you well in the Lord. I am,

Your embassador in bonds,

JOS. ALLEINE.
From the common gaol at Ivelchester,
October 20, 1663.

L E T T E R X.
[Motives and marks of growth.]

To the most loving and best beloved, the servants of Christ

in Taunton, grace and peace.

Most dear and tender friends:

W HOSE I am, and whom under God I desire to serve; to build

you up in holiness, and comfort, hath been through grace
my great ambition. This is that which I laboured for; this is that which
I suffer for: and in short, the end of all my applications to you, and to
God for you. How do your souls prosper? Are they in a thriving
case? What progress do you make in sanctification? Doth the house
of Saul grow weaker and weaker, and the house of David stronger
and stronger? Behold, I am jealous of you with a godly jealousy, lest
any of you should lose ground in these declining times: and therefore
cannot but be often calling upon you to look to your standing, and to
watch and hold fast, that no man take your crown. Ah! How surely
shall you reap in the end, if you faint not! Take heed therefore that
you lose not the things you have wrought, but as you have begun
well, so go on in the strength of Christ, and give diligence to the full
assurance of hope to the end.
 Do you need motives? 1. How much are you behind hand? Oh
the fair advantages that we have lost! What time, what sabbaths,
sermons, sacraments, are upon the matter lost? How much work
have we yet to do? Are you sure of heaven yet? Are you fit to die
yet? Surely they that are under so many great wants, had need to
set upon some more thriving courses.

Secondly, Consider what others have gained, whilst we it may be

sit down by the loss: Have we not met many vessels richly laden,
while our souls are empty? Oh, the golden prizes that some have
won? While we have folded the hands to sleep! Have not many of
our own standing in religion, left us far behind them?

*Thirdly, Consider you will all find little enough when you come to
die: The wise among the virgins have no oil to spare, at the coming
of the bridegroom; temptation and death will put all your graces to it.
How much ado have many had at last to put into this harbour! David
cries for respite, till he had recovered a little more strength.

Fourthly, Consider how short your time for gathering in probably

is? The Israelites gathered twice so much manna against the
sabbath as they did at other times, because at that time there was
no manna fell. Brethren, you know not how long you have to lay in
for. Do you ask for marks how you may know your souls to be in a
thriving case?

First, If your appetites be more strong. Do you thirst after God

and after grace, more than heretofore? Do your cares for and
desires after the world abate? And do you hunger and thirst after
righteousness? Whereas you were wont to come with an ill-will to
holy duties, do you come to them as an hungry stomach to its meat?

Secondly, If your pulses beat more even. Are you still off and on,
hot and cold? Or is there a more even spun thread of holiness
through your whole course? Do you make good the ground from
which you were formerly beaten off?
 *Thirdly, If you do look more to the carrying on together the duties
of both tables. Do you not only look to the keeping of your own
vineyards, but do you lay out yourselves for the good of others, and
are filled with zealous desires for their conversion and salvation? Do
you manage your talk and your trade, by the rules of religion?

*Do you eat and sleep by rule? Doth religion form and mould, and
direct your carriage towards husband, wife, parents, children,
masters, servants? Do you grow more universally conscientious? Is
piety more diffusive than ever with you? Doth it come more abroad
with you, out of your closets, into your houses, your shops, your
fields? Doth it journey with you, and buy and sell for you? Hath it the
casting voice in all you do?

Fourthly, If the duties of religion be more delightful to you. Do you

take more delight in the word than ever! Are you more in love with
secret prayer, and more abundant in it? Cannot you be content with
your ordinary seasons, but are ever and anon making extraordinary
visits to heaven? And upon all occasions turning aside, to talk with
God in some short ejaculations? Are you often darting up your soul
heavenwards? Is it meat and drink for you, to do the will of God? Do
you come off more freely with God, and answer his calls with more
readiness of mind?

*Fifthly, If you are more abundant in those duties which are most
displeasing to the flesh. Are you more earnest in mortification? Are
you more strict and severe than ever in the duty of daily self-
examination, and holy meditation? Do you hold the reins harder
upon the flesh than ever? Do you keep a stricter watch upon your
appetites? Do you set a stronger guard upon your tongues? Have
you a more jealous eye upon your hearts?

Sixthly, If you grow more vile in your own eyes. Do you grow
more out of love with men’s esteem, set less by it? Are you not
marvellous tender of being slighted? Can you rejoice to see others
preferred before you? Can you heartily value and love them that
think meanly of you?
 Seventhly, If you grow more quick of sense, more sensible of
divine influences, or withdrawings. Are you more afraid of sin than
ever? Are your sins a greater pain to you than heretofore? Are your
very infirmities your great afflictions? and the daily workings of
corruption a continual grief of mind to you?

I must conclude abruptly, commending you to God, and can only

tell you that I am,

Your’s in the Lord Jesus,

JOS. ALLEINE.

From the common gaol, in Ivelchester,

October 31, 1663.

L E T T E R XI.
To my dearly beloved, the inhabitants of Taunton, grace,
mercy, and peace from God our Father, and the
Lord Jesus Christ.

Most dearly beloved,

I HAVE been through mercy many years with you, and should be
willingly so many years a prisoner for you, so I might further
your salvation. I must again and again thank you for your abundant
affection to me, which I value as a great mercy, not in order to
myself, but in order to your benefit, that I may thereby be a more
likely instrument of your good. Surely, so much as I value your love,
yet had I rather be forsaken of you all, and buried in oblivion; so that
your eyes and hearts may be fixed on Christ, and sincerely engaged
to him. Brethren, I have not bespoken your affections for myself: O
that I might win your hearts to Christ. O that I might convert you to
him though you were diverted from me. *I should much rather chuse
to be hated of all, so this might be the means to have Christ set up
savingly in the hearts of you all. And indeed there is nothing great
but in order to God; nothing is considerable as it is terminated in us:
it matters not whether we are in riches or poverty, sickness or health,
in honour or disgrace, so Christ may be by us magnified in the
condition we are in. Welcome prison and poverty, welcome scorn
and envy, welcome pain or contempt, if by these God’s glory may be
promoted. What are we for, but for God? What doth the creature
signify separated from his God? Why just so much as the cypher
separated from his figure. We are nothing worth, but in reference to
God and his ends. Better were it that we had never been, than that
we should not be to him. Better that we were dead than we should
live, and not to him. Better that we had no understandings, than that
we should not know him. Better that we were blocks and brutes, than
that we should not use our reason for him. What are our interests,
unless they may be subservient to his interest? Or our reputation,
unless we may hereby glorify him?
 Do you love me? I know you do. But who is there, that will leave
his sins for me? With whom shall I prevail to give up himself in
strictness and self denial to the Lord? Who will be intreated by me to
set upon neglected duties, or reform accustomed sins? Oh wherein
may you rejoice me? In this, my brethren; in this you shall befriend
me, if you obey the voice of God by me, if you be prevailed with to
give yourselves up throughly to the Lord. Would you lighten my
burden? Would you make glad my heart? Let me hear of your
owning the ways and servants of the Lord in adversity, of your
patient continuing in the ways of holiness. O that I could but hear
that the prayerless souls, the prayerless families among you, were
now given to prayer! That the profane sinners were awakened, and
induced by the preaching of these bonds, to leave their
drunkenness, their loose company, their deceit and wantonness! Will
you not be made clean? When shall it once be? How long shall the
patience of God wait for you? How long shall the Lord Jesus stretch
out his hands toward you? O sinners, cast yourselves into his arms!
Why should you die? Why will you forsake your own mercy? Will you
perish when mercy woos you? Confess and forsake your sins, and
you shall find mercy. Will you sell your souls to perdition for a little
ease and delight in your flesh? Or a little of the gain of
unrighteousness? Why, these are the things that part between
sinners and Christ.