A Discourse of Free-Thinking; Occasion'd by the Rise and Growth of a Sect Call'd Free-Thinkers

by Anthony Collins

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1713 edition. Excerpt: ... wicked, the other thinks the Goodness of the End will sanctify the most wicked Means. In a word, they both thake a Cloke of Religion for Covetousness, Ambition and Cruelty; They will both lye, - murder, robs and rebel, for holy Church and Religion; and there never yet was any Holy League, Covenant, or Association, to begin or carry on Rebellion, under the holy Pre-, tence of Religion, wherein the Ringleaders were not Atheists or Enthusiasts: and of the two b is hard to tell which hath done most mischief in Any Kjngdom. But the Enthusiast makes the more taking and plausible Hypocrite of the two; he can sooner melt into Tears, and more naturally counterfeit the spiritual Man among the Piople, and transform himself with a better grace into an Angel of Light. qthly. IT is objected, That the Priests are set apart to think freely for the Laity, and are to be relfd on, as Lawyers, Physicians, &c. are in their several Facultys. To this 1 answer, i. THAT no Man is excluded from studying Law or Phv sick, because there are several of those Professions, nor from following his own Judgment when he is sick or in Law; nor is there any reason why a Man, who is not a Doctor in Phyfick or a Serjeant at Law, may not understand as much Law and Phyfick as either of them. In like manner, the setting Men apart for the Study of Divinity, does not exclude .[. others others from the Study of Divinity, nor from following their Judgment about a Point in Divinity, nor from knowing as much Divinity as any Doctor in Divinity. And by consequence there is no necessity to rely on any Man's Judgment, either in Law, Phyfick, or Divinity. And this puts me in mind of a Passage in Mr. Le Clerc's; late Bibliotheque Choifie, Tom. 25. p. ijo. A Gentleman ask1 da Proprietor of...

40 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1713

About the author

Librarian 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.”

Reviews

[Prooost Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Anthony Collins wrote this in 1713, and published it anonymously, along with advice that his publisher also be anonymous.

Thus, sir, I have endeavored to execute your commands, and give you free leave to make any use you please of what I have written, with this limitation, that if you think so well of it as to commit it to the press, you would conceal your name, and let it go abroad without the credit of your approbation: For I think it virtue enough to endeavor to do good, only within the bounds of doing yourself no harm.

Anthony Collins published all of his works anonymously, probably to avoid prosecution.

Collins was no atheist. He lumped atheism and superstition together as things to be despised. He presents himself as a good Anglican, but advises his readers to use their reason to decide what to believe and how to live, rather than relying on received wisdom, especially from priests. He points out that priests don't agree on what the truth is, and that they also lie. He comes across as a Deist, which is how his contemporaries saw him, I believe. Reading this work made me wonder what other things Collins might have believed, that he thought wise to keep to himself.

[Matti Marin · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most important essays to read for anyone interested in learning about the origins of modern Freethought.