 | 1802 - Страниц: 764
...Attributes of the Deity, collected from Lh: Appearances oj Nature. the watch, as well as for the stooe' why is it not as admissible in the second case, as in the first ? For tn.> reason, and for no other, vi/. n-1 when we come to-inspect the *iW' we perceive (what we could... | |
 | 1803 - Страниц: 572
...answer which I had before giten, that, for any thing I knew, the watch might have always been there. Yet why should not this answer serve for the watch, as...as in the first: For this reason, and for no other, viz. that when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive (what wt could not discover in the stone)... | |
 | 1803 - Страниц: 818
...not as adoiitóiblu in the second rase, as in the in . t ? For this reason, and tor no other, viz. that, when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive (what we <чшЦ not discover in the stone) that its seveiu parU are framed and put together fur purpose, cg... | |
 | 1807 - Страниц: 1012
...answer which I had before given, that, for anything I knew, the watch might have always been there. Yet why should not this answer serve for the watch, as...as in the first? For this reason, and for no other, viz. that when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive (what we could oot discover in the stone)... | |
 | Edmund Burke - 1807 - Страниц: 1004
...had before given, that, for any thing I knew, the watch might have always been there. Vet why shou]d not this answer serve for the watch, as well as for...in the first ? For this reason, and for no other, viz. that when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive (what we could not discover in the stone)... | |
 | Edmund Burke - 1807 - Страниц: 1014
...•which I had before given, that, for any thing I knew, the watch might пате always been there. Yet why should not this answer serve for the watch, as well as for the stone Î Why is it not as admissible in the second case, as in the first ? For this reason, and for no other,... | |
 | William Paley - 1810 - Страниц: 498
...which I had before given, that, for any thing I knew, the watch might have always been there. Yet, why should not this answer serve for the watch, as...in the first ? For this reason, and for no other, viz. that, when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive (what we could not discover in the stone)... | |
 | William Paley, William Hamilton Reid - 1810 - Страниц: 350
...answer "which I'hftd before 'given. Y:et Svhy should not this answer serve for the watch Ss well as' the stone ? Why is it not as admissible in the second case as in the first ? For this rra'ron^ and for no other, viz. that, when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive (what we could... | |
 | William Paley - 1811 - Страниц: 574
...answer which I had before given, that, for any thing I knew, the watch might have always been there. Yet why should not this answer serve for the watch as...the second case, as in the first ? For this reason, B and for no other, viz. that, when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive (what we could not discover... | |
 | Thomas Ridgley - 1814 - Страниц: 558
...before given, that, fnr aj>y thing I knew, the watch might have always been there. Vet, why shouid not this answer serve for the watch, as well as for...as admissible in the second case, as in the first? 1'or this reason, and for no other, viz. that, when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive (what... | |
| |
For this reason, and for no other, viz. that when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive (what we could not discover in the stone) that its several parts are framed and put together for a purpose... 
