A jury consist of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer. Music is the glue which has kept this generation from falling apart in the face of incredible adult blindness and ignorance and evilness. It is the new educational system for reform and the medium for revolution. Being an entertainer, especially in times like these, is really a public service. I care about life, but, too, I care about Justice. If I cannot have both, then I choose Justice. I care about life, but then are things that I care about more than life. For that reason, I will not seek life improperly. It has seemed to many philosophers, and it appears to be supported by the convictions of common sense, that we distinguish as a matter of principle between the claims of liberty and right on the one had and the desirability of increasing aggregate social welfare on the other; and that we give a certain priority, if not absolute weight, to the former. Each member of society is thought to have an inviolability founded on justice or, as some say, on natural right, which even the welfare of everyone else cannot override. Justice denies that loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others. The reasoning which balances the gains and losses of different persons as if they were one person is excluded. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23

Therefore in a just society the basic liberties are taken for granted and the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests. Justice as fairness attempts to account for these common sense convictions concerning the priority of justice by showing that they are the consequence of principles which would be chosen in the original position. These judgments reflect the rational preferences and the initial equality of the contacting parties. Although the utilitarian recognizes that, strictly speaking, one’s doctrine conflicts with these sentiments of justice, one maintains that common sense precepts of justice and notions of natural right have but a subordinate validity as secondary rules; they arise from the fact that under the conditions of civilized society there is great social utility in following them for the most part and in permitting violations only under exceptional circumstances. Even the excessive zeal which we are apt to affirm these precepts and to appeal to these rights is itself granted a certain usefulness, since it counterbalances a natural human tendency to violate them in ways not sanctioned by utility. Once we understand this, the apparent disparity between the utilitarian principle and the strength of these persuasions of justice is no longer difficult. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23

Thus while the contract doctrine accepts our convictions about the priority of justice as on the whole sound, utilitarianism seeks to account for them as a socially useful illusion. A second contrast is that whereas the utilitarian extends to society the principle of choice for one human, justice as fairness, being a contract view, assumes that the principles of social choice, and so the principles of justice, are themselves the object of an original agreement. There is no reason to suppose that the principles which should regulate an association of humans is simply an extension of the principle of choice for one human. On the contrary: if we assume that the correct regulative principle for anything depends on the nature of that thing, and that the plurality of distinct persons with separate systems of ends is an essential feature of human societies, we should not expect the principles of social choice to be utilitarian. To be sure, it has not been shown by anything said so far that the parties in the original position would not choose the principle of utility to define the terms of social cooperation. This is a difficult question which we shall examine later on. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23

It is perfectly possible, from all that one knows at this point, that some form of the principle of utility would be adopted, and therefore that contract theory leads eventually to a deeper and more roundabout justification of utilitarianism. In fact a derivation of this kind is sometimes suggested by Betham and Edgeworth, although it is not developed by them in any systematic way and to my knowledge it is not found in Sidgwick. For the present I shall simply assume that the persons in the original position would reject the utility principle and that they would adopt instead, for the kinds of reasons previously sketched, the two principles of justice already mentioned. In any case, from the standpoint of contract theory one cannot arrive at a principle of social choice merely by extending the principle of rational prudence to the system of desires constructed by the impartial spectator. To do this is not to take seriously the plurality and distinctness of individuals, nor to recognize as the basic of justice that to which humans would consent. Here we may not a curious anomaly. It is customary to think of utilitarianism as individualistic, and certainly there are good reasons for this. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23

The utilitarians were strong defenders of liberty and freedom of thought, and they held that the good of society is constituted by the advantages enjoyed by individuals. Yet utilitarianism is not individualistic, at least when arrived at by the more natural courses of reflection, in that by conflating all systems of desires, it applies to society the principle of choice for one human. And thus we see that the second contrast is related to the first, since it is this conflation, and the principle based upon it, which subjects the rights secured by justice to the calculus of social interests. The last contrast that I shall mention now is that utilitarianism is a teleological theory whereas justice as fairness is not. By definition, then, the latter is a deontological theory, one that either does not specify the good independently from the right, or does not interpret the right as maximizing the good. (It should be noted that deontological theories are defined as non-teleological ones, not as views that characterize the rightness of institutions and acts independently from their consequences. All ethical doctrines worth our attention take consequences into account in judging rightness. One which did not would simply be irrational, crazy.) #RandolphHarris 5 of 23

Justice as fairness is a deontological theory in the second way. For if it is assumed that the persons in the original position would choose a principle of equal liberty and restrict economic and social inequalities to those in everyone’s interests, there is no reason to think that just institutions will maximize the good. (Here I suppose with utilitarianism that the good is defined as the satisfaction of rational desire.) Of course, it is not impossible that the most good is produced but it would be a coincidence. The question of attaining the greatest new balance of satisfaction never arises in justice as fairness; this maximum principle is not used at all. There is a further point in this connection. In utilitarianism the satisfaction of any desire has some value in itself which must be taken into account in deciding what is right. In calculating the greatest balance of satisfaction it does not matter, expect indirectly, what the desires are for. We are to arrange institutions so as to obtain the greatest sum of satisfactions; we ask no questions about their source or quality but only how their satisfaction would affect the total of well-being. Social welfare depends directly and solely upon the levels of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the individuals. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23

Thus if humans take a certain pleasure in discriminating against one another, in subjecting others to a lesser liberty as a means of enhancing their self-respect, then the satisfaction of these desires must be weighed in our deliberations according to their intensity, or whatever, along with other desires. If society decides to deny them fulfillment, or to suppress them, it is because they tend to be socially destructive and a greater welfare can be achieved in other ways. In justice as fairness, on the other hand, persons accept in advance a principle of equal liberty and they do this without a knowledge of their more particular ends. They implicitly agree, therefore, to conform their conceptions of their good to what the principles of justice require, or at least not press claims which directly violate them. An individual who finds that one enjoys seeing others in positions of lesser liberty understands that one has no claim whatever to this enjoyment. The pleasure one takes in other’s deprivations is wrong in itself: it is a satisfaction which requires the violation of a principle to which one would agree in the original position. The principles of right, and so of justice, put limits on which satisfactions have value; they impose restrictions on what are reasonable conceptions of one’s good. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23

In drawing up plans and in deciding on aspirations humans are to take these constraints into account. Hence in justice as fairness one does not take human’s propensities and inclinations as given, whatever they are, and then seek the best way to fulfill them. Rather, their desires and aspirations are restricted from the outset by the principles of justice which specify the boundaries that human’s systems of ends must respect. We can express this by saying that in justice as fairness the concept of right is prior to that of good. A just social system defines the scope within which individuals must develop their aims, and it provides a framework of rights and opportunities and the means of satisfaction within and by the use of which these ends maybe equitably pursued. The priority of justice is accounted for, in part, by holding that the interests requiring the violation of justice have no value. Having no merit in the first place, they cannot override its claims. This priority of the right over the good in justice as fairness turns out to be a central feature of the conception. It imposes certain criteria on the design of the basic structure as a whole; these arrangements must not tend to generate propensities and attitudes contrary to the two principles of justice (that is, to certain principles which are given from the first a definite content) and they must ensure that just institutions are stable. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23

Thus certain initial bounds are placed upon what is good and what forms of character are morally worthy, and so upon what kinds of persons people should be. Now any theory of justice will set up some limits of this kind, namely, those that are required if its first principles are to be satisfied given the circumstances. Utilitarianism excludes those desires and propensities which if encouraged or permitted would, in view of the situation, lead to a lesser net balance of satisfaction. However, this restriction is largely formal, and in the absence of fairly detailed knowledge of the circumstances it does not give much indication of what these desires and propensities are. This is not, by itself, an objection to utilitarianism. It is simply a feature of utilitarian doctrines that it relies very heavily upon the natural facts and contingencies of human life in determining what forms of moral character are to be encouraged in a just society. The moral ideal of justice as fairness is more deeply embedded in the first principles of the ethical theory. This is characteristic of natural rights views (the contractarian tradition) in comparison with the theory of utility. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23

In setting forth these contrasts between justice as fairness and utilitarianism, I have had in mind only the classical doctrine. This is the view of Bentham and Sidgwick and of the utilitarian economists Edgeworth and Pigou. The kind of utilitarianism espoused by Hume would not serve my purpose; indeed, it is not strictly speaking utilitarian. In his well-known arguments against Locke’s contract theory, for example, Hume maintains that the principles of fidelity and allegiance both have the same foundation in utility, and therefore that nothing is gained from basing political obligation on an original contract. Locke’s doctrine represents, for Hume, an unnecessary shuffle: one might as well appeal directly to utility. However, all Hume seems to mean by utility is the general interests and necessities of society. The principles of fidelity and allegiance derive from utility in the sense that the maintenance of the social order is impossible unless these principles are generally respected. However, then Hume assumes that each human stands to gain, as judged by one’s long-term advantage, when law and government conform to the precepts founded on utility. No mention is made of the gains of some outweighing the disadvantages of others. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23

For Hume, then, utility seems to be identical with some form of the common good; institutions satisfy its demands when they are to everyone’s interests, at least in the long run. Now if this interpretation of Hume is correct, there is offhand no conflict with the priority of justice and no incompatibility with Locke’s contract doctrine. For the role of equal rights in Locke is precisely to ensure that the only permissible departures from the state of nature are those which respect these rights and serve the common interest. It is clear that all the transformations from the state of nature which Locke approves of satisfy this condition and are such that rational humans concerned to advance their ends could consent to them in a state of equality. Hume nowhere disputes the propriety of these constraints. His critique of Locke’s contract doctrine never denies, or even seems to recognize, its fundamental contention. The merit of the classical view as formulated by Bentham, Edgeworth, and Sidgwick is that it clearly recognizes what is at stake, namely the relative priority of the principles of justice and of the rights derived from these principles. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23

The question is whether the imposition of disadvantages on a few can be outweighed by a greater sum of advantages enjoyed by others; or whether the weight of justice requires an equal liberty for all and permits only those economic and social inequalities which are to each person’s interest. Implicit in the contrasts between classical utilitarianism and justice as fairness is a difference in the underlying conceptions of society. In the one we think of a well-ordered society as a scheme of cooperation for reciprocal advantage regulated by principles which persons would choose in an initial situation that is fair, in the other as the efficient administration of social resources to maximize the satisfaction of the system of desire constructed by the impartial spectator from the many individual systems of desires accepted as given. The comparison with classical utilitarianism in its more natural derivation brings out this contrast. B-values are not needs in the same sense that food, shelter, or companionship are. B-values are “metaneeds” and that indicates that they are the ultimate level of needs. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23

There is a distinction between ordinary need motivation and the motives of self-actualizing people, which is called metamotivation. Metamotivation is characterized by expressive rather than coping behaviour and is associated by B-values. The values of self-actualizing people include truth, goodness, beauty, wholeness or the transcendence of dichotomies, aliveness or spontaneity, uniqueness, perfection, completion, justice and order, simplicity, richness or totality, effortlessness, playfulness or humour, and self-sufficiency or autonomy. B-values are found at the end of so many different investigative roads, that the suspicion arises that there is something in common between these different paths, exempli gratia, education, art, religion, psychotherapy, peak-experiences, science, mathematics, et cetera. If this turns out to be so, we may perhaps add as another road to final values, the “cause,” the mission, the vocation, that is to say, the “work” of self-actualizing people. This introjection means that the self has enlarged to include aspects of the World and that therefore the distinction between self and not-self (outside, other) has been transcended. These B-value or metamotives are not longer only intrapsychic or organismic. They are equally inner and outer. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23

The metaneeds, insofar as they are inner, and the requiredness of all that is outside the person move toward becoming indistinguishable, that is, toward fusion. Certainly simple selfishness is transcended here and has to be defined at higher levels. For instance, we know that it is possible for a person to get more pleasure (selfish? Unselfish?) out of food through having one’s child eat it than through eating it with one’s own mouth. One’s self has enlarged enough to include one’s child. Hurt one’s child and you hurt him. Clearly the self can no loner be identified with the biological entity which is applied with blood from his heart along his blood vessels. They psychological self can obviously be bigger than its own body. There are other important consequences of this incorporation of values into the self. For instance, you can love justice and truth in the World or in a person out there. You can be made happier as your friends move toward truth and justice, and sadder as they move away from it. This is easy to understand. However, supposing you see yourself moving successfully toward truth, justice, beauty, and virtue? Then of course you may find that, in a peculiar kind of detachment and objectivity toward oneself, for which our culture has no place, you will be loving and admiring yourself, in the kind of healthy self-love that many Christians experience. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23

You can respect yourself, admire yourself, take tender care of yourself, reward yourself, feel virtuous, love-worthy, respect-worthy. You may then treat yourself with the responsibility and otherness that, for instance, a pregnant woman does, whose self now has to be defined to include not-self. So also may a person with a great talent protect it and oneself as if one were a carrier of something which is simultaneously oneself and not oneself. One may become one’s own guardian, so to speak. Less evolved persons seems to use their work more often for achieving gratification of lower basic needs, of neurotic needs, as a means to an end, out of habit, or as a response to cultural expectations, et cetera. However, it is probable that these are differences of degree. Perhaps all human beings are (potentially) metamotivated to a degree. The conventional categories of career, profession, or work may serve as channels of many other kinds of motivations, not to mention sheer habit or convention or functional autonomy. They may satisfy or seek vainly to satisfy any or all of the basic needs as well as various neurotic needs. They may be a channel for “acting out” or for “defensive” activities as well as for real gratifications. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23

All these various habits, determinants, motives, and metamotives are acing simultaneously in a very complex pattern which is centered more toward one kind of motivation or determinedness than the others. This is to say that the most highly developed persons we know are metamotivated to a much higher degree, and are basic-need-motivated to a lesser degree than average or diminished people are. Hail to you, mighty One of Heaven from ancient times till now your splendor endures. We, your children, call out to you again; as in the childhood of our race, we acknowledge our debts. God of light and love, we praise you. Not forgetting one, not leaving any out, we send our prayers to all of you. Listen to our words; you will find them sweet. Your children pray to you here. Sitting in anticipation of their coming, I open my mind to make their way smooth. May God hear what I say and answer me, blessing me with His presence. “And it came to pass that they did go forth, and began to preach the word of God unto the people, entering into their synagogues, and into their houses; yea, and even they did preach the word in their streets. And it came to pass that after much labour among them, they began to have success among the poor class of people; for behold, they were cast out of the synagogues because of the coarseness of their apparel. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23

“Therefore they were not permitted to enter into their synagogues to worship God, being esteemed by their brethren as dross; therefore they were poor as to things of the World; and also they were poor in heart. Now, as Alma was teaching and speaking unto the people upon the hill Onidah, here came a great multitude unto him, who were those of whom we have been speaking, of whom were poor in heart, because of their poverty as to the things of the World. And they came unto Alma; and the one who was the foremost among them said unto him; Behold, what shall these my brethren do, for they are despised of all humans because of their poverty, yea, and more especially by our priests; for they have cast us out of our synagogues which we have laboured abundantly to build with our own hands; and they have exceeding poverty; and we have no place to worship our God; and behold, what shall we do? And now when Alma heard this, he turned him about, his face immediately towards him, and he beheld with great joy; for he beheld with great joy; for he beheld that their afflictions had truly humbled them, and that they were in a preparation to hear the word. Therefore he did say no more to the other multitude; but he stretched forth his hand, and cried unto those whom he beheld, who were truly penitent, and said unto them: I behold that ye are lowly in heart; and if so, blessed are ye. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23

“Behold thy brother hath said, What shall we do?—for we are cast out of our synagogues, that we cannot worship our God. Behold I say unto you, do ye suppose that ye cannot worship God save it be in your synagogues only? And moreover, I would ask, do ye suppose that ye must not worship God only once in a week? I say unto you, it is well that ye are cast out of your synagogues, that ye may be humble, and that ye may learn wisdom; for it is necessary that ye should learn wisdom; for it is because that ye are cast out, that ye are despised of your brethren because of your exceeding poverty, that ye are brought to a lowliness of heart; for ye are necessarily brought to be humble. And now, because ye are compelled to be humble blessed are ye; for a human sometimes, if one is compelled to be humble, seeketh repentance; and now surely, whosoever repenteth shall find mercy; and one that findeth mercy and endureth to the end the same shall be saved. And now, as I said unto you, that because ye were compelled to be humble ye were blessed, do ye not suppose that they are more blessed who truly humble themselves because of the word? Yea, one that truly humbleth oneself, and pepenteth of one’s sins, and endureth to the end, the same shall be blessed than they who are compelled to be humble because of their exceeding poverty. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23

“Therefore, blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or rather, in other words, blessed is one that believeth in the word of God, and is baptized without stubbornness of heart, yea, without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe. Yea, there are many who do say: If thou wilt show unto us a sign from Heaven, then we shall know of a surety; then we shall believe. Now I ask, is this faith? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for if a human knoweth a thing one hath no cause to believe, for one knoweth it. And now, how much more cursed is one that knoweth the will of God and doeth it not, than one that only believeth, or only hath cause to believe, and falleth into transgression? Now of his thing ye must judge. Behold, I say unto you, that it is on the one hand even as it is on the other; and it shall be unto every human according to one’s work And now as I said concerning faith—faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true. And now, behold, I say unto you, and I would that ye should remember, that God is merciful unto all who believe on his name; therefore he desireth, in the first place, that ye should believe, yea, even on his word. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23

“And now, he imparteth his word by angels unto humans, yea, not only men but women also. Now this is not all; little children do have words given unto them many times, which confound the wise and the learned. And now, my beloved brethren, as ye have desired to know of me what ye shall do because ye are afflicted and cast out—now I do not desire that ye should suppose that I mean to judge you only according to that which is true. For I do no mean that ye all of you have been compelled to humble yourselves; for I verily believe that there are some among you who would humble themselves, let them be in whatsoever circumstances they might. Now, as I said concerning faith—that it was not a perfect knowledge—even so it is with my words. Ye cannot know of their surety at first, unto perfection, any more than faith is a perfect knowledge. However, behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in your, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words. Now, we will compare the word unto a seed. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23

 “Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves—It must needs be that this is a good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me. Now behold, would not this increase your faith? I say unto you, Yea; nevertheless it hath not grown up to a perfect knowledge. However, behold, as the seed swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, then you must needs say that the seed is good; for behold it swelleth, and sprouteth, and begineth to grow. And now, behold, will not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith: for ye will say I know that this is a good seed; for behold it sprouteth and beginneth to grow. And now, behold, are ye sure that this is a good seed? I say unto you. Yea; for every seed bringeth forth unto its own likeness. Therefore, if a seed growth it is good, but if it growth not, behold it is not good, therefore it is cast away. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23

“And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good. And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; ad this is because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and you, Yea, because it is light; and whatsoever is light, is good, because it is discernible, therefore ye must know that it is good; and now behold, after ye have tasted this light is your knowledge perfect? Behold I say unto you, Nay; neither must ye lay aside your faith, for ye have only exercised your faith to plant the seed that ye might try the experiment to know if the seed was good. And behold, as the tree begineth to grow, ye will say: Let us nourish it with great care, that it may get root, that it may grow up, and bring forth fruit unto us. And now behold, if ye nourish it with much care it will get root, and grow up, ad bring forth fruit. However, if ye neglect the tree, and take no thought for its nourishment, behold it will not get any root; and when the heat of the Sun cometh and scorcheth it, because it hath no root it withers away, and ye pluck it up and cast it out. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23

“Now, this is not because the seed was not good, neither is it because the fruit thereof would not be desirable; but it is because your ground is barren, and ye will not nourish the tree, therefore ye cannot have the fruit thereof. And thus, if ye will not nourish the word, looking forward with an eye of faith to the fruit thereof, ye can never pluck of the fruit of the tree of life. However, if ye will nourish the word, yea, nourish the tree as it beginneth to grow, by your faith with great diligence, and with patience, looking forward to the fruit thereof, it shall take root; and behold it shall be a tree springing up unto everlasting life. And because of your diligence and your faith and your patience with the word in nourishing it, that it may take root in you, behold, by and by ye shall pluck the fruit thereof, which is most precious, which is sweet above all that is sweet, and which is white above all that is white, yea, and pure above all that is pure; and ye shall feast upon this fruit even until ye are filled, that ye hunger not, neither shall ye thirst. Then, my brethren, ye shall reap the rewards of your faith, and your diligence, and patience, and long-suffering, waiting for the tree to bring forth fruit unto you,” reports Alma 32.1-43. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23

Cresleigh Homes

A must-have on every home hunter’s list? Dual vanities. 😄 The homes at #PlumasRanch have Owner’s Suites that come with a spacious bathroom—aka, you will never fight over counter space again.

Please accept my hospitality, Holy Ones; by my guests at this feast. Renew the ancient bonds, continually recreated. As I give, so will you, for that is how true friends act. Great company of God, I welcome you. https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-riverside-at-plumas-ranch/

#CresleighHomes