I am quite willing to give up all the paths to gratification interdicted by society, but I am sure that society will reward me for this renunciation by opening for me—even after a certain delay—one of the permitted paths? One can plainly tell what these witticisms whisper, namely, that the wishes and desires of humans have a right to make themselves perceptible next to our pretentious and inconsiderate morality. And in our time, it has been said in emphatic and striking terms that this morality is merely the selfish precept of the few rich and mighty who can gratify their desires at any time without deferment. As long as the art of healing has not succeeded in safeguarding our lives, and as long as the social organizations do not do more towards making conditions more agreeable, just so long cannot the voice within us which is striving against the demands of morality be stifled. Every honest person finally makes this admission—at least to oneself. The decision in this conflict is possible only through the roundabout way of a new understanding. The qualities which are the most attractive before dinner sometimes become the least so in the evening. It is always a mystery what people see in each other. #RandolphHarris 1 of 7

One must be able to knit one’s life so closely to that of others, and to form such an intimate identification with others, that the shortening of one’s own term of life becomes surmountable; one should not unlawfully fulfill the demands of one’s own needs, but should leave them unfulfilled, because only the continuance of so many unfulfilled demands can develop the power to recast the social order. However, not all personal needs allow themselves to be displaced in such a manner and transferred to others, nor is there a universal and definite solution to conflict. A radio station that plays hip hop music and has a mostly heterosexual audience should not lure their listeners to a homosexual club because it will put everyone in danger. Were Niagara but a cataract of sand, would you still travel to see it? We know how to designate the witticisms just discussed; they are cynical witticism, and what they conceal are cynicisms. Among the institutions which cynical wit is wont to attack there is none more important and more completely protected by moral precepts, of the cynical jokes are directed against it. For no demand is more personal than that made upon sexual freedom, and nowhere has civilization attempted to exert a more stringent suppression than in the realm of sexuality. #RandolphHarris 2 of 7

A wife is like an umbrella, at worst one may also take a cab. We have already elucidated the complicated technique of this example; it is a puzzling and seemingly impossible comparison which, however, as we now see, is not in itself witty. It shows besides an allusion (cab = public conveyance), and as the strongest technical means it also shows an omission which serves to make it still more unintelligible. The comparison may be worked out in the following manner. A man marries in order to guard himself against the temptations of sensuality, but it then turns out that after all marriage does not afford sufficient gratification for one of stronger needs, just as one takes along an umbrella for protection against rain only to get wet in spite of it. In both causes one must search for a better protection; in one cause one must take a public cab, in the other, women procurable for money. Now that wit has almost entirely been replaced by cynicism. That marriage is not the organization which can satisfy a man’s Christian von Ehrenfels (contrast between certainty and uncertainty), or a Judge Lindsay, who is forced to it by the love of truth and the zeal of reform. The strength of this witticism lies in the fact that it has expressed the thought even though it had to be done through all sorts of roundabout ways. #RandolphHarris 3 of 7

There is something elevating in the possession of authority, however it may be abused. Primitive humans believed everything was controlled by some sort of spirit. If there was a storm, the reason must be that the gods were angry. If crops were bad, then the first-born son must be sacrificed to appease the gods. If the child was born deformed, it was because an evil spirit possessed him, and he must be killed. A person who was emotionally or physically ill must be possessed by a demon. People also assumed that forces or spirits controlled all their behavior. One could buy a witch’s services to invoke the spirits and increase his sexual prowess, capture a lover, or bring misfortune to an enemy. In most primitive cultures, even today, people assume that they have little choice in their own destiny, because it is controlled by good and evil spirits and by fate. Assumptions are idea which one holds to be true without any proof that they are true—things that are “taken for granted.” Turn me a prey to the wild beast, so I be never again the victim of man dressed in the in the gore-dripping robes of authority. #RandolphHarris 4 of 7

Shall we never make an attempt, because we do not always succeed? In some cultures, these assumptions are so strongly held that they can literally result in death. Anthropologists have reported observing such events in tribe where members were taught that if they violated certain (social scientists engaged in the study of humans) taboos they would die. Taboos are negative rules, the “thou shalt nots” of a society (from a Tongan word that means sacred, prohibited, inviolable). Inlanders all, the come from lanes and alleys, streets and avenues—north, east, south, and west. Yet here they all unite. Tell me, does the magnetic virtue of the needless of the compasses of all those ships attract them thither? Though you have kept company with a wolf, you have not learnt to how of him. That person and the other members of the tribe assumed that the taboo-breaker would die as a result. In fact, they began to act as though he were already dead. Imagine how you would feel if, even for a week, everyone acted as though you were about to die. The taboo-breaker assumed he must die. Everyone around him thought so, too. And in time he did. #RandolphHarris 5 of 7

If you were a member of that tribe, you might reach the logical conclusion that some external force or spirit had killed the taboo-breaker. One important way in which primitive humans tried to understand one’s World was through observation of one’s own experiences. However, many times one’s observations were based upon a limited awareness of oneself and the nature of the World. (Spirits control me and everything around me.) Although few of us believe in a taboo strong enough to cause death, our personal beliefs can influence us in ways almost that important. Humans have always assumed a causal World. For centuries, they believed their World and their being was controlled by spirits and demons. However, as one expanded one’s knowledge, humans began to question the demon-spirit model of causality. Humans began to exert control over their own environment—predicted when to plant crops, what seeds to use, the location of the best soil, and the best time to harvest. When their crops failed, instead of sacrificing their first-born child to appease the gods who had been assumed to cause the failure, they sought better seeds, or richer soil, or an increased water supply and tried again. #RandolphHarris 6 of 7

By changing what one knows about the World, humans change the World they know; and by changing the World in which one lives, humans change themselves. A patient whose hearing was defective consulted a physician who made the correct diagnosis, namely, that the patient probably drank too much whiskey and consequently becoming deaf. He advised him to desist from drinking and the patient promised to follow his advice. Some time thereafter the doctor met him on the street and inquired in a loud voice about his condition. “Thank you, Doctor,” was the reply, “there is no necessity for speaking so loudly, I have given up drinking whiskey and consequently I hear perfectly.” Some time afterwards they met again. The doctor again inquired into his condition in the usual voice, but noticed that he did not make himself audible. “It seems to me that you are deaf again because you have returned to drinking whiskey,” shouted the doctor in the patient’s ear. “Perhaps you are right,” answered the latter, “I have taken to drinking again, and I shall tell you why. As long as I did not drink I could hear, but all that I heard was not as good as the whiskey.” Technically, this joke is nothing more than an illustration. The jargon and the ability of the raconteur must aid in the production of laughter. However, behind it there lies the sad question, is not the man right in his choice? #RandolphHarris 7 of 7