 | 1808 - 500 pagina’s
...happened to be in that place, I mould hardly think of the anfwer which I had betore given that for any thing I knew the watch might have always been there. Yet why mould not this anfwer ferve for the watch, as well as for the ftone ? Why is it not as admiflible in... | |
 | 1802 - 764 pagina’s
...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 - 572 pagina’s
...happened to be in that place, I should hardly think of the answer which I had before giten, that, for any thing I knew, the watch might have always been there....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) that its several... | |
 | 1807 - 1012 pagina’s
...be in that place, I should hardly think of the answer which I had before given, that, for anything I knew, the watch might have always been there. Yet...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) that its several... | |
 | Edmund Burke - 1807 - 1004 pagina’s
...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...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) that its several... | |
 | Edmund Burke - 1807 - 1014 pagina’s
...think of the answer •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 - 498 pagina’s
...happened to be in that place, I should hardly think of the answer which I had before given, that, for any thing I knew, the watch might have always been there....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) that its several... | |
 | William Paley, William Hamilton Reid - 1810 - 350 pagina’s
...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... | |
 | Thomas Ridgley - 1814 - 558 pagina’s
...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... | |
 | Thomas Ridgley - 1814 - 554 pagina’s
...happened to be in that place, I should hardly think of the answer which I had before given, that, for any thing I knew, the watch might have always been there....should not this answer serve for the watch, as well asforthc stone? Why is it not as admis. *ble in the second case, as in the first? For this reason,... | |
| |
I knew, the watch might have always been there. Yet why should not this answer serve for the watch as well as for the stone... 
