from thinking that there is the least foundation from Experience, for the said[1] notion of Liberty, that he treats it as a chimera, and compares it to the magical power of the Fairies to transform things.
Lastly, The Journalists of Paris are very far from thinking Archbishop King’s notion of liberty to be matter of experience, when they say, That Dr. King, not satisfy’d with any of the former notions of Liberty, proposes a new notion; and carries indifference so far, as to maintain that pleasure is not the motive but the effect of the choice of the will; placet res quia eligitur, non eligitur quia placet, makes him frequently contradict himself[2].
So that upon the whole, the affair of experience, with relation to liberty, stands thus. Some give the name Liberty to actions, which when described, are plainly Actions that are necessary; Others, tho’ appealing to vulgar experience, yet inconsistently therewith, contradict the vulgar experience, by owning it to be an intricate matter, and treating it after an intricate manner; Others are driven into the defence of Liberty, by difficulties imagin’d
