What do you think?
Rate this book
A Discourse Concerning Ridicule And Irony In Writing: In A Letter To Nathanael Marshall
This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the original. Due to its age, it may contain imperfections such as marks, notations, marginalia and flawed pages. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions that are true to the original work.
80 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1729
2 people are currently reading
21 people want to read
About the author
Anthony Collins
141 books17 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.
Anthony Collins (21 June 1676 O.S. – 13 December 1729 O.S.), was an English philosopher.
In 1676, Anthony Collins, pronounced the "Goliath of freethinking" by Thomas Huxley, was born in Heston, England. Collins studied at Eton and King's College, Cambridge, and was a close friend of John Locke. He moved in a circle of leading freethinkers, including John Toland and Matthew Tindal. "An Essay Concerning the Use of Reason" was published (anonymously) in 1707, along with a letter addressing immateriality and the soul. A debate in 1708 with Samuel Clarke resulted in the publication of four pamphlets by each participant. In 1710, Collins wrote "Vindication of the Divine Attributes, in Some Remarks on Archbishop (King's) Sermon." The 1713 book, A Discourse of Freethinking, was Collins' most influential work, helping to popularize the term "freethought." Philosophical Inquiry Concerning Human Liberty, published in 1717, won the praise of Voltaire. The Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion (1724) rejected the claim that Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecies. Posthumously, two of his essays were published, including an article challenging religious authority. Although Collins left England for a time when debate heated up after the publication of A Discourse of Freethinking, the courteous scholar was debated and taken most seriously by leading religionists and Anglicans. Grounds, with its serious arguments against prophecy and its advancement of the scientific principle, provoked more than 30 books and essays by religionists trying to counter it. Collins, best described as a deist and materialist who opposed "priestcraft," at one time became county squire.
Joseph Smith in The Unreasonableness of Deism, or, the Certainty of a Divine Revelation (1720) called deists in general “the Wicked and Unhappy men we have to deal with.”
With respect to Collins’s controversy on “the soul,” T. H. Huxley said,
"I do not think anyone can read the letters which passed between Clarke and Collins without admitting that Collins, who writes with wonderful Power and closeness of reasoning, has by far the best of the argument, so far as the possible materiality of the soul goes; and that in this battle the Goliath of Freethinking overcame the champion of what was considered orthodoxy."
Berkeley, however, claimed that Collins had announced “that he was able to demonstrate the impossibility of God’s existence.”
Upon his death, the Earl of Egmont, John Percival, wrote: “Of Collins Esq. deceased December 1729 . . . [he] is a Speculative Atheist and has been for many years, as he owned to Archibald Hutchinson Esq. who told it to Dr. Dodd M.D. and to me.”
Anthony Collins (21 June 1676 O.S. – 13 December 1729 O.S.), was an English philosopher.
In 1676, Anthony Collins, pronounced the "Goliath of freethinking" by Thomas Huxley, was born in Heston, England. Collins studied at Eton and King's College, Cambridge, and was a close friend of John Locke. He moved in a circle of leading freethinkers, including John Toland and Matthew Tindal. "An Essay Concerning the Use of Reason" was published (anonymously) in 1707, along with a letter addressing immateriality and the soul. A debate in 1708 with Samuel Clarke resulted in the publication of four pamphlets by each participant. In 1710, Collins wrote "Vindication of the Divine Attributes, in Some Remarks on Archbishop (King's) Sermon." The 1713 book, A Discourse of Freethinking, was Collins' most influential work, helping to popularize the term "freethought." Philosophical Inquiry Concerning Human Liberty, published in 1717, won the praise of Voltaire. The Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion (1724) rejected the claim that Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecies. Posthumously, two of his essays were published, including an article challenging religious authority. Although Collins left England for a time when debate heated up after the publication of A Discourse of Freethinking, the courteous scholar was debated and taken most seriously by leading religionists and Anglicans. Grounds, with its serious arguments against prophecy and its advancement of the scientific principle, provoked more than 30 books and essays by religionists trying to counter it. Collins, best described as a deist and materialist who opposed "priestcraft," at one time became county squire.
Joseph Smith in The Unreasonableness of Deism, or, the Certainty of a Divine Revelation (1720) called deists in general “the Wicked and Unhappy men we have to deal with.”
With respect to Collins’s controversy on “the soul,” T. H. Huxley said,
"I do not think anyone can read the letters which passed between Clarke and Collins without admitting that Collins, who writes with wonderful Power and closeness of reasoning, has by far the best of the argument, so far as the possible materiality of the soul goes; and that in this battle the Goliath of Freethinking overcame the champion of what was considered orthodoxy."
Berkeley, however, claimed that Collins had announced “that he was able to demonstrate the impossibility of God’s existence.”
Upon his death, the Earl of Egmont, John Percival, wrote: “Of Collins Esq. deceased December 1729 . . . [he] is a Speculative Atheist and has been for many years, as he owned to Archibald Hutchinson Esq. who told it to Dr. Dodd M.D. and to me.”
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
July 6, 2022
With apologies to Shakespeare’s Hamlet and author Anthony Collin, A Discourse Concerning Ridicule and Irony in Writing (kindle Edition) sums out as a bit much. The writing style is almost modern in its directness and his case is built in a manner systematic and exhaustive. It is just a bit to exhaustive.
Anthony Collins spent his adult a free thinker and deist. He was known for his published correspondence with many of the religious leadership of England at a time when these same people could have used their position to have him jailed on moral grounds by the public censor. This discourse written just before his death in 1729 was a public reply to Anglican Reverend Dr. Nathanael Marshall. Dr, Marshal having been a target of Mr. Collins’ irony and ridicule was of the opinion that Collins should be so treated. The Reverend wanted the power of law behind his feeling that serious writing about established religion was allowable, overtly humorous or disrespectful speech should be actionable.
Charlie Hebdo for the 18th Century Christian.
The Discourse builds its argument for the case for free speech in a logical way to name all of those who speaking in the name of more traditional religions have used the same techniques he is under threat for using. Collins notes that the same people attacking his use of irony have themselves used it on him and each other. Further he has quotations from secondary sources listed by his targets in justification of the complainants writing and how prior and more senior Christian authors have used it in the past.
A rather elaborate web of “You do it too” and so did the writers you claim to respect. Or given the religious nature of this defense, “Let he who is without sin…”
The discourse is quite convincing just too much so. It does have some examples of humor, more so towards the end but…
It is possible that Collins felt genuinely threatened, or was conscious of the nearness of hisown death and so felt the need for an exhaustive argument. It may also be that a modern reader might find themselves in greater sympathy with his case than the writer had experienced in his lifetime. I did not need this much convincing.
Given the contemporary problems of on-line bullies, internet trolls and a general lack of respect in public and political discourse, one wonders if a contemporary Collins would rather offer a defense of civility?
Anthony Collins spent his adult a free thinker and deist. He was known for his published correspondence with many of the religious leadership of England at a time when these same people could have used their position to have him jailed on moral grounds by the public censor. This discourse written just before his death in 1729 was a public reply to Anglican Reverend Dr. Nathanael Marshall. Dr, Marshal having been a target of Mr. Collins’ irony and ridicule was of the opinion that Collins should be so treated. The Reverend wanted the power of law behind his feeling that serious writing about established religion was allowable, overtly humorous or disrespectful speech should be actionable.
Charlie Hebdo for the 18th Century Christian.
The Discourse builds its argument for the case for free speech in a logical way to name all of those who speaking in the name of more traditional religions have used the same techniques he is under threat for using. Collins notes that the same people attacking his use of irony have themselves used it on him and each other. Further he has quotations from secondary sources listed by his targets in justification of the complainants writing and how prior and more senior Christian authors have used it in the past.
A rather elaborate web of “You do it too” and so did the writers you claim to respect. Or given the religious nature of this defense, “Let he who is without sin…”
The discourse is quite convincing just too much so. It does have some examples of humor, more so towards the end but…
It is possible that Collins felt genuinely threatened, or was conscious of the nearness of hisown death and so felt the need for an exhaustive argument. It may also be that a modern reader might find themselves in greater sympathy with his case than the writer had experienced in his lifetime. I did not need this much convincing.
Given the contemporary problems of on-line bullies, internet trolls and a general lack of respect in public and political discourse, one wonders if a contemporary Collins would rather offer a defense of civility?
Displaying 1 of 1 review