She was absolutely ablaze with an inner concentration power. Liberty, equality, fraternity—it should be acknowledged that, very often, those three words bring nothing to our mind except the picture on currency or the inscription on the front doors of public buildings. However, human beings are really free under three conditions: Economic freedom, intellectual freedom, and moral freedom. Economic freedom declares that mortals have an inalienable right to work. One has to have absolute right to the fruit of one’s work from which one should not part except freely. Work should also be understood as everything of value that one brings to society. Intellectual freedom dictates that a mortal cannot be really free if one has an ideal and philosophical attitude which makes it possible for one to have a coherent activity in life. One cannot, under pretext of hastening one’s economic or intellectual liberation, use means contrary to the ethics of the community. Last, moral freedom does not mean license. It would be easy to demonstrate that moral freedom is to be found only within strict observance of the group ethics freely accepted. Fraternity can blossom only in society. Selfishness is a dangerous and non-lasting way of helping oneself. Mortals cannot separate their true interest from those of society. One can help only by helping society. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20

We should become conscious that our own inclinations make us find an increase of joy with others. Solidarity is not only a task, it is a satisfaction and the best guarantee of security. Fraternity leads to mutual tolerance and to the determination never to separate. This makes it possible to take all decisions unanimously on a common minimum. Equality-we condemn those who declare demagogically that all people are equal. We can see that people are not equal in their life situations, and sometimes under other circumstances. People are not even viewed as equal under the law. Some people are given more clot than others and preferential treatment. For us equality of rights means to put at the disposal of everyone the means to fulfill oneself completely. It is important to devise a scheme in which active participation of everyone does not contradict a sufficiently centralized leadership; irrational authority has to be replaced by rational authority. There is an emphasis on the practice of life as against ideological differences. This emphasis enables people of the most varied and contradictory convictions to live together in humanity and tolerance without any danger of having to follow the right opinion proclaimed by the community. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20

Inasmuch as the work is not attractive technically, it is meaningful and attractive in its social aspect. Activity in the arts and science is an integral part of the total situation. Even during the Renaissance, the concept of imitations, or mimesis, involved the creation of representations that transcended mere appearance, that implied the sacred or spiritual essence of things. Various media develops a response to artists’ desire to imitate reality and express themselves more and more fluently. Some artists are interested in the ominous underside of contemporary culture that lurks as an ever present possibility in our lives. The goal is to portray psychological states that everyone experiences. Sometimes, like in Jane Dickson’s, Stairwell, 1984 one can almost feel the acid biting into the plate, as if the process itself is a metaphor for the pain and isolation of the figure learning forlornly over the bannister. Although it is printed in three colors, the roughness of the method’s surface serves to underscore the emotional turmoil and psychological isolation embodied in her subject matter. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20

The situation of alienation is overcome, work has become a meaningful expression of human energy, human solidarity is established without restriction of freedom—or danger of conformity. While many of the arrangements and principles of the communities can be questioned and argued about, it seems nevertheless that we have here one of the most convincing empirical examples of a productive life, and of possibilities which are generally looked upon as fantastic from the standpoint of our present-day life in Capitalism. The communities descried so far are, of course, not the only examples for the possibility of Capitalistic lifestyles with a humanitarian focus. They do, however, contribute to our knowledge of the possibilities of a new style of life. They also show that most of these communities are executed by people with a shrewd intelligence, and immensely practical sense. Undoubtedly, there have been many shortcomings in the principles and practice of these experiments, which must be recognized in order to be avoided. Many times people fail and it is in several cases essentially a symptom of the laziness of the mind and the inherent conviction that what has not been cannot be and will not be. The aim is to create a work situation which gives one a lifetime and energy to something which has meaning for the individual, in which one knows what one is doing, has an influence on what is being done, and feel untied with, rather than separated from, one’s fellow beings. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20

Another root of our malady is our loss of the sense of the worthy and dignity of the human being. When the individual is being swallowed up in the herd, and one is living by slave morality, it will de-humanize people and they will literally lose their identity as persons. However, this lose of the sense of self did not occur overnight. Many can recall the growing tendency to think of the self in superficial and oversimplified terms. Self-expression was supposed to be simply doing whatever popped into one’s head, as though the self were synonymous with any random impulse, and as though one’s decisions were to be made on the basis of a whom which might be a product of indigestion from a hurried lunch just as often as of one’s philosophy of life. To be yourself was then an excuse for relaxing into the lowest common denominator of inclination. To know one’s self was not thought to be especially difficult, and the problems of personality could be solved relatively easily by better adjustment. We were then congratulating ourselves that the child could be conditioned out of fear, superstition and other problem by techniques not essentially different from the way the dog’s saliva is conditioned to flow every time the dinner gong rings. These superficial views of the human situation were also furthered by the belief in automatic economic progress—we would all get richer and richer without too much struggles or suffering. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20

Practically everyone who gets their information for the media alone, without doing further research, shares the same oversimplified view of the human being and society. Science is advancing so rapidly that soon we will give people whatever temperament one desires, choleric or timid, strong or weakly gendered, merely by chemical injections into the body. However true this kind of push-button psychology is becoming a reality, it was the basis for the satire which Aldous Huxley have it in his Brave New World. People have become too confident in techniques and gadgets, not in the human being. The oversimplified, mechanical view of the self really betokens an underlying lack of belief in the dignity, complexity and freedom of the person. It is clear that the disbelief in the power and dignity of the person is becoming more openly accepted, for there appears a good deal of concrete evidence that the individual self is insignificant and that one’s personal choices do not matter. In the face of totalitarian democratic movements and controlled economic earthquakes like the housing shortage, we tend to feel smaller and smaller as persons. The individual self is dwarfed into as ineffectual a position as the proverbial grain of sand pushed around by ocean breakers. We move on as the wheel wills; one revolution registers all things, the rise and fall in pay and prices. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20

Most people now, therefore, are able to find good external reason for their belief that as selves they are insignificant and powerless. For how can one act, they well ask, in the face of the giant economic, political and social movements of the time? Authoritarianism in religion and science, let alone politics, is becoming increasingly accepted, not particularly because so many people explicitly believe in it but because they feel themselves individually powerless and anxious. So what else can one do, goes the reasoning, except follow the mass political leader (as happened in Europe) or follow the authority of customs, public opinion, and social expectations as is the tendency in this country? What is forgotten in such reasoning, is, of course, the fact that the loss of belief in the worth of the person is partly the cause of these mass social and political movements. Or, to put it more accurately, the loss of the self and the rise of collectivist movements, as we have pointed out, are both the result of the same underlying historical changes in our society. We need, therefore, to fight on both flanks—to oppose democratic totalitarianism and the other tendencies toward dehumanization of the person on one flank, and to recover our experience and belief in the worth and dignity of the person on the others. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20

A startling picture of the loss of the sense of self in our society is given in a short novel, The Stranger, by the contemporary French author Albert Camus. It is the story of a Frenchman who is extraordinary in no respect—indeed, he might well be called an average modern man. He experiences the death of his mother, goes to work and about the ordinary things of life, has an affair and experiences pleasures of the flesh, all without any clear decision or awareness on his part. He later shoots a man, and it is vague even in his own mind whether he shot by accident or in self-defense. He goes through a murder trial and is executed, all with a horrible sense of unreality, as though everything happened to him: he never acted himself. The book is pervaded by a vagueness and haze which is frustrating and shocking, like the similar haze which is frustrating and shocking, like the similar haze of indecisiveness in Kafka’s stories. Everything seems to take place in a dream, with the man never really related to the World or anything he does or to himself. He is a man without courage or despair, despite the outwardly tragic events, because he has no awareness of himself. At the end when he is awaiting execution he almost gets a glimmer of the realization, as expressed, say in the words of George Herbert, “A sick toss’d vessel, dashing on each thing…My God, I mean myself.” Almost, but not quite; there is not enough sense of himself for even that to break through. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20

The novel is haunting and subtly terrifying picture of the modern mortal who is truly a stranger to himself. Thus far the argument here has been that the character traits engendered by our socioeconomic system, for example, by our way of living, are pathogenic and eventually produce a sick person and, thus, a sick society. There is, however, a second argument from an entirely different viewpoint in favor of profound psychological changes in mortal as an alternative to economic and ecological catastrophe. It is raised in two reports that deal with the technological, economic, and population trends on a World scale. The only drastic economic and technological changes on a global level, according to a master plan, can avoid major and ultimately global catastrophe. Economic changes are possible only if fundamental changes in the values and attitude of mortals occur (in human character orientations), such as a new ethic and a new attitude toward nature. New society is possible only if, in the process of developing it, a new human being also develops, or in more modest terms, if a fundamental change occurs in contemporary mortal’s character structure. Our present social order makes us sick, and we are headed for an economic catastrophe unless we radically change our social system. #RandolphHarris 9 of 20

The need for profound human changes emerges not only as an ethical or religious demand, not only as a psychological demand arising from the pathogenic nature of our present social character, but also as a condition for the sheer survival of the human race. Right living is not longer only the fulfillment of an ethical or religious demand. For the first time in history the physical survival of the human race depends on a radical change of human heart. However, a change of the human heart is possible only to the extent that drastic economic and social changes occur that give the human heart the change for change and the courage and the vision to achieve it. The almost unbelievable fact is that besides what President Trump is doing, no serious effort is made to avert what looks like a final decree of fate. While in our private life nobody except a mad person would remain passive in view of a threat to our total existence, those who are in charge of public affairs do practically nothing, and those who have entrusted their fate to them let them continue to do nothing. How is it possible that the strongest of all instincts, that for survival, seems to have ceased to motivate us? One of the most obvious explanations is that the leaders undertake any actions that make it possible for them to pretend they are doing something effective to avoid a catastrophe: endless conferences, resolutions, disarmament talks, all give the impression that the problems are recognized and something is being done to resolve them. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20

Yet, while the appearance the people are listening, understanding and planning to take action to protect the citizens and their land, nothing of real importance happens; but both the leaders and the led anesthetize their consciences and their wish for survival by giving the appearance of knowing the road and marching in the right direction. Another explanation is that the selfishness the system generates makes leaders value personal success more highly than social responsibility. It is no longer shocking when political leaders and business executives make decisions that seem to be to their personal advantage, but at the same time are harmful and dangerous to the community. Indeed, if selfishness is one of the pillars of contemporary practical ethical, why should they act otherwise? They do not seem to know that greed (like submission) makes people stupid as far as the pursuit of even their own real interests is concerned, such as their interest in their own lives and the lives of their spouses and their children. At the same time, the general public is also selfishly concerned with their private affairs that they pay little attention to all that transcends the personal realm. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20

Yet another explanation for the deadening of our survival instincts is that the changes in living that would be required are so drastic that people prefer the future catastrophe to the sacrifice they would have to make now. Arthur Koestler’s description of an experience he had during the Spanish Civil War is a telling example of this widespread attitude: Arthur Koestler sat in the comfortable villa of a friend while the advance of Franco’s troops was reported; there was no doubt that they would arrive during the night, and very likely he would be shot; he could save his life by feeling, but the night was cold and rainy, the house, warm and cozy; so he stayed, was taken prisoner, and only by almost a miracle was his life saved many weeks later by the efforts of friendly journalists. This is also the kind of behavior that occurs in people who will risk dying rather than undergo an examination that could lead to the diagnosis of a grave illness requiring major surgery. And many of us have been there, we will wait months and sometimes even years before we find out what is going on with us because will think it will heal on its own, and it actually ends up getting worse. Aside from these explanations for fatal human passivity in matters of life and death, there is another. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20

Knowledge is another expression of the soul. The aura of mystical emanation which, in most people’s minds, surrounds the physicists or the psychiatrist or psychologist, is composed of both veneration and suspicion. It is a contemporary form of an age-old phenomenon believed in not only by primitive people but by all people down through history; that acquiring knowledge gives one a soul weapon over other people. If I have some special knowledge of you or your World which you do not know, I have power over you. This may be as simple as the fact that I know how something works and you do not; but basically, it is much more complex: it always skates on the edge of participation in the primitive belief that this knowledge gives me a special magical power. Some of the animosity against psychiatrists and psychologist and, specifically, against psychoanalysts (who have to challenge the demons, and it would be a wonder if they dd get off unscathed) arises from this deep-seated fear. Mortals in these professions, it is felt by many people, have a knowledge of life and death which others do not. Thus, there is a tendency to cling to them as gods one day and fight them as hated devils the next. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20

Knowledge is also our source of freedom and security. The truth shall set you free. However, in our emphasis on the gaining of knowledge, we have assumed that it was a one-way street—the more knowledge, the better; and we have forgotten this ambivalent, double character of knowledge, that it is also dangerous. We hear so much these days about knowledge bringing power, security, financial success, and so on, that we overlook the fact that the very word which refers to the acquiring of knowledge, “apprehend,” is also the word which means dread, “apprehension.” Looking in Webster’s, we find the definitions of apprehend: to perceive, to recognize the meaning of, to lay hold of with understanding; and the very next meaning is to anticipate with anxiety, dread of fear. And the same with “apprehension”: the first meaning, a grasp of the mind, is followed by the second, a distrust of fear of future evil. It cannot be an accident that woven into the very fabric of our language is the relationship between knowledge and the soul. “How dangerous it is to know,” we can say with Oedipus, “But I must know, no less.” It is dangerous to know, but it is more dangerous not to know. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20

It is the psychoanalyst who can afford to forget this least of all. Patients come for treatment ostensibly with open arms for revelations about themselves. However, woe to the therapist who takes this at face value! The whole meaning of resistance and repression testifies to the anxiety and pain accompanying these disclosures about one’s self. That is one reason why it is good that the patient pay for one’s sessions; is one will not take too much when one pays for it, one will take scarcely a thing given one gratis! This gives us a new approach to the concept of resistance and repression—they reveal in person an inescapable need to hide from the truth about oneself. It is perpetually a moot question: How much self-knowledge can a human being bear? Oedipus is the prototype of the person who gains knowledge about oneself and pays the ultimate price for it. He is well aware of the threatening quality of knowledge: “Oh, I am in dread to hear,” he cries, “but I must hear no less.” Tiresias tries to persuade him not to search: “How terrible it is to know when no good comes from knowing.” The issue in the drama is, Shall Oedipus know what he has done? Shall Oedipus know who he is and what his origins are? Everyone commits these acts, in fantasy if not in reality—and in reality by the vicarious means of war and organized violence which one’s nation gives one. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20

In actual fact, the only difference between Oedipus and the rest of humankind is that Oedipus faced and admitted what he had done despite all attempted persuasions to the contrary. Even Oedipus’ wife, Jocasta, joins in the general consensus that it is best that he remain in darkness; to show that she means this as a general principle of life, she attacks all the soothsayers and those who deal in myths or take the mysteries of the soul seriously: “Have no part of this craft,” she adjures her husband; dreams are not to be taken seriously and it is best to “live unthinking as a man may.” When the truth finally dawns on her (and it is important to keep in mind that she did not know this when she advised Oedipus not to seek his origins), she cries out desperately to her husband, “God keep you from the know of who you are!” However, Oedipus is a hero precisely because he will not let Tiresias or his wife or God or anyone else stand in the way of his knowledge about himself. He is the hero because he is man facing his own reality. Not that he does not cry out with the pain of it—he does, time and again. However, he repeats, “I will not stop till I have known the whole.” He also knows there are no false heroics “Curse on the man who took the cruel bonds from off my legs, as I lay in the field.” #RandolphHarris 16 of 20

Though he curses the childhood which brought him this fate, he confronts it directly, and destroys himself in the process: a relatively happy and successful king transformed into a blind, bad-tempered, old man exiled to Colonus. However, he knows. And this courage to know, be it noted, with all its destructive possibilities, is found in the same person who can answer the riddle of the sphinx, the one who knows what man is. Down through the ages, mortals have tried through their myths to tell each other of this connection between knowledge and the soul. In Goethe’s Faust, the hero has such an all-encompassing drive to possess knowledge that the sells his soul to Mephistopheles and counts the price light—which was Goethe’s, and the myth’s way of saying that to give in to such an infinite passion for knowledge is already to have become one of the devil’s World. Adam and Eve are thrown out of Eden because they, having eaten of the tree of good and evil, now have knowledge; and this makes them like the gods, immortal. The legend portrays the birth of human consciousness and states that consciousness carries the soul with it. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20

The myth of Prometheus has a parallel meaning: the god’s disclosing of the cultural arts to mortals—central in which is language—amounts to the setting of oneself against the other gods and incurring everlasting torment. Therefore, the more the soul is recognized, the more we shall be able to use the knowledge we acquire or our benefit and humankind’s. “O how great the plan of our God! For on the other hand, the paradise of God must deliver up the spirits of the righteous, and the grave deliver up the body of the righteous; and the spirit and the body is restored to itself again, and all mortals become incorruptible, and immortal, and they are living souls, having a perfect knowledge like unto us in the flesh, save it be that our knowledge shall be perfect,” reports 2 Nephi 9.13. The difficulty of understanding faith either as a matter of the intellect or as a matter of will, or of both in mutual support, has led to the interpretation of faith as emotion. This solution was, and partly is, supported from both the religious and the secular side. For the defenders of religion it was a retreat to a seemingly safe position after the battle about faith as a matter of knowledge or will had been lost. Religion is the feeling of unconditional dependence. Of course, feeling so defined does not mean in religion what it means in popular psychology. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20

Religion is not vague and changing, but as a definite content: unconditional dependence, a phrase related to what we have called ultimate concern. Nevertheless, the word feeling as induced many people to believe that faith is a matter of merely subjective emotions, without a content to be known and a demand to be obeyed. This interpretation of faith was readily accepted by representatives of science and ethics, because they took it as the best way to get rid of the interference from the side of religion in the process of scientific research and technical organization. If religion is mere feeling it is innocuous. The old conflicts between religion and culture are finished. Culture goes its way, directed by scientific knowledge, and religion is the private affair of every individual and a mere mirror of one’s emotional life. No claims for truth can be made by it. No competition wit science, history, psychology, politics is possible. Religion, put safely into the corner of subjective feelings, has lost its danger for mortal’s cultural activities. Neither of the two sides, the religious and the cultural, could keep this well-defined covenant of peace. Faith the state of ultimate concern claims the whole mortal and cannot be restricted to the subjectivity of mere feeling. It claims truth for its concern and commitment to it. It does not accept the situation in the corner of mere feeling. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20

If the whole mortal is grasped, all one’s functions are grasped. If this claim of religion is denied, religion itself is denied. It was not only religion which could not accept the restriction of faith to feeling. It was also not accepted by those who were especially interested in pushing religion into the emotional corner. Scientists, artist, moralists showed clearly that they also were ultimately concerned. Their concern expressed itself even in those creations in which they wanted most radically to deny religion. A keen analysis of most philosophical, scientific and ethical systems shows how much ultimate concern in present in them, even if they are leading in the fight against what they call religion. This show the limits of the emotionalist definition of faith. Certainly faith as an act of the whole personality has strong emotional elements within it. Emotion always expresses the involvement of the whole personality in an act of life or spirit. However, emotion is not the source of faith. Faith is definite in its direction and concrete in its content. Therefore, it claims truth and commitment. It is directed toward the unconditional, and appears in a concrete reality that demands and justifies such commitment. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20