What passes for a culture in my head is really a bunch of commercials. The intuitive idea of justice as fairness is to think of the first principles of justice as themselves the object of an original agreement in a suitably defined initial situation. These principles are those which rational persons concerned to advance their interests would accept in this position of equality to settle the basic terms of their association. It must be shown, then, that the two principles of justice are the solution for the problem of choice presented by the original position. In order to do this, one must establish that, given the circumstances of the parties, and their knowledge, beliefs, and interest, an agreement on these principles is the best way for each person to secure one’s ends in view of the alternative available. Now obviously no one can obtain everything one wants; the mere existence of other persons prevents this. The absolutely best for any human is that everyone else should join with one in furthering one’s conception of the good whatever it turns out to be. Or failing this, that all others are required to act justly but that one is authorized to exempt oneself as one pleases. Since other persons will never agree to such terms of association these forms of egoism would be rejected. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21

The first principle of justice guarantees the right of each person to have the most extensive basic liberty compatible with the liberty of others. The second principle states that social and economic positions are to be to everyone’s advantage and open to all. These two principles of justice seem to be a reasonable proposal. In fact, I should like to show that these principles are everyone’s best reply, so to speak, to the corresponding demands of the others. In this sense, the choice of this conception of justice is the unique solution to the problem set by the original position. By arguing in this way one follows a procedure familiar in social theory. That is, a simplified situation is described in which rational individuals with certain ends and related to each other in certain ways are to choose among various courses of action in view of the knowledge of the circumstances. What these individuals will do is then derived by strictly deductive reasoning from these assumptions about their beliefs and interests, their situation and the options open to them. Their conduct is, in the phrase of Vilfredo Pareto (an Italian engineer, sociologist, economist, political scientist, and philosopher) the resultant of obstacles. In the theory of price, for example, the equilibrium of competitive markets is thought of as arising when many individuals each advancing one’s own interests gives way to each other what they can best part with in return for what they most desire. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21

Equilibrium is the result of agreements freely struck between willing traders. For each person it is the best situation that one can reach by free exchange consistent with the right and freedom of others to further their interests in the same way. It is for this reason that this state of affairs is an equilibrium, one that will persist in the absence of further changes in the circumstances. No one has any incentive to alter it. If a departure from this situation sets in motion tendencies which restore it, the equilibrium is stable. Of course, the fact that a situation is one of equilibrium, even a stable one, does not entail that it is right or just. It only means that given human’s estimate of their position, they act effectively to preserve it. Clearly a balance of hatred and hostility may be a stable equilibrium; each many think that any feasible change will be worse. The best that each can do for oneself may be a condition of lesser injustice rather than of greater good. The moral assessment of equilibrium situations depends upon the background circumstances which determine them. It is at this point that the conception of the original position embodies features peculiar to moral theory. For while the theory of price, say, tries to account for the movements of the market by assumptions about the actual tendencies at work, the philosophically favoured interpretation of the initial situation incorporates conditions which it is thought reasonable to impose on the choice of principles. By contrast with social theory, the aim is to characterize this situation so that the principles that would be chosen, whatever they turn out to be, are acceptable from a moral point of view. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21

The original position is defined in such a way that it is a status quo in which any agreements reached are fair. It is a state of affairs in which the parties are equally represented as moral persons and the outcome is not condition by arbitrary contingencies or the relative balance of social forces. Thus justice as fairness is able to use the idea of pure procedural justice from the beginning. It is clear, then, that the original position is a purely hypothetical situation. Nothing resembling it need ever take place, although we can by deliberately following the constraints it expresses simulate the reflections of the parties. The conception of the original position is not intended to explain human conduct except insofar as it tries to account for our moral judgments and helps to explain our having a sense of justice. Justice as fairness is a theory of our moral sentiments as manifested by our considered judgments in reflective equilibrium. These sentiments presumably affect our thought and action to some degree. So while the conception of the original position is part of the theory of conduct, it does not follow at all that there are actual situations that resemble it. What is necessary is that the principles that would be accepted play the requisite part in our moral reasoning and conduct. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21

The acceptance of these principles is not conjectured as a psychological law or probability. Ideally anyway, I should like to show that their acknowledgement is the only choice consistent with the full description of the original position. The argument aims eventually to be strictly deductive. To be sure, the persons in the original position have a certain psychology, since various assumptions are made about their beliefs and interests. These assumptions appear along with other premises in the description of this initial situation. However, clearly arguments from such premises can be fully deductive, as theories in politics and economics attest. We should strive for a kind of moral geometry with all the rigor which this name connotes. Unhappily the reasoning I shall give will fall far short of this, since it is highly intuitive throughout. Yet it is essential to have in mind the ideal one would like to achieve. There are many possible interpretations of the initial situation. This conception varies depending upon how the contracting parties are conceived, upon what their beliefs and interests are said to be, upon which alternatives are available to them, and so on. In this sense, there are many different contract theories. Justice as fairness is but one of these. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21

However, the question of justification is settled, as far as it can be, by showing that there is one interpretation of the initial situation which best expresses the conditions that are widely thought reasonable to impose on the choice of principles yet which, at the same time, leads to a conception that characterizes our considered judgments in reflective equilibrium. This most favoured, or standard, interpretation I shall refer to as the original position. We may conjecture that for each traditional conception of justice there exists an interpretation of the initial situation in which its principles are the preferred solution. Thus, for example, there are interpretations that lead to the classical as well as the average principle of utility. These variations of the initial situation will be mentioned as we go along. The procedure of contract theories provides, then, a general analytic method for the comparative study of conceptions of justice. One tries to set out the different conditions embodied in the contractual situation in which their principles would be chosen. In this way one formulates the various underlying assumptions on which these conceptions seem to depend. However, if one interpretation is philosophically most favoured, and if its principles characterize our considered judgments, we have a procedure for justification as well. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21

We cannot know at first whether such an interpretation exist, but at least we know what to look for. The popular picture of animal aggressiveness has been largely influenced by the concept of territorialism. The general public has been left with the implication that humans are dominated by an instinct for defense of their territory, inherited from one’s animal ancestors. This instinct is supposed to be one of the main sources of animal and human aggressiveness. Analogies are easily drawn, and the facile idea appeals to many that war is caused by the power of this same instinct. The idea, however, is quite erroneous for a number of reasons. In the first place there are many animal species for whom the concept of territoriality does not apply. Territoriality occurs only in higher animals such as the vertebrates and arthropods and even there in a spotty fashion. Still, the so-called territorial defense may be, after all, merely a fancy name for the reaction patterns to strangers, flavoured with anthropomorphism and nineteenth century Darwinism. Further and more systematic experimental explorations are necessary to decide this issue. It seems certain territories are selected mainly on the basis of properties to which the animals react innately. This makes all animals of the same species, or at least of the same population, select the same general type of habit. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21

However, the personal binding of a male to its own territory—a particular representative of the species’ breeding habitat—is the result of a learning process. In the description of primates we have seen how often there is an overlap of territory. If the observation of apes teaches us anything, it is that various groups of primates are quite tolerant and flexible with regard to their territory and simply do not offer a picture that would permit the analogy to a society, jealousy guarding its frontiers and forcibly preventing the entry of any “foreigner.” The assumption that territorialism is the basis for human aggressiveness is erroneous for still another reason. Defense of territory has the function of avoiding the serious fighting that would become necessary if the territory were invaded to such an extent as to generate crowding. Actually the threat behaviour in which territorial aggression manifests itself if the instinctively patterned way of upholding spatial equilibrium and peace. The instinctive equipment of the animal has the function that legal arrangements have in humans. Hence the instinct become obsolete when other symbolic ways are available to mark a territory and to warn: no trespassing. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21

It is also worth keeping in mind that, as we shall see later, most wars start for the purposes of gaining advantages of various kinds and not in defense against a threat to one’s territory—except in the ideology of the war makers.  Equally wrong impressions exist popularly about concept of dominance. In many species, but by no means in all, one finds that the group is organized hierarchically. The strongest male takes precedence in food, pleasures of the flesh, and grooming over other males on lower orders of the hierarchy. (One has more rarely drawn a parallel from this hierarchy to the “instinctive” roots for dictatorship than one has from territorialism to patriotism, although the logic would be the same. The reason for this different treatment lies probably in that it is less popular to construct an instinctive basis for dictatorship than for “patriotism.”) However, dominance, like territorialism, by no means exists in all animals and, again, not regularly in the vertebrates and mammals. With regard to dominance among the nonhuman primates we find a great difference between some of the monkey species like the baboons and macaques, in whom one finds rather well-developed and strict hierarchal systems, and the apes with whom dominance patters are much less strong. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21

Of mountain gorillas definite dominance inter-actions were observed 110 times. Dominance was most frequently asserted along narrow trails, when one animal claimed the right of way, or in the choice of sitting place, when the dominant animal supplanted the subordinate one. Gorillas showed their dominance with a minimum of actions. Usually an animal low in the rank order simply moved out of the way at the mere approach or brief stare of a high-ranking one. The most frequently noted gesture involving a bodily contact was a light tap with the back of the hand of a dominant individual against the body of a subordinate one. Although there was some evidence of differences in status between individual chimpanzees, dominance interactions formed a minute fraction of the observed chimpanzee behaviour. There was no evidence of a linear hierarchy of dominance among males or females; there were no observations of exclusive rights to receptive females; and there were no permanent leaders of groups. However, in a study of baboons, circumstantial evidence suggests that hierarchical behaviour is associated with environmental stress of various kinds and under stress it is the lower-ranking animal which first shows physiological symptoms (lower disease resistance, for example). #RandolphHarris 10 of 21

If it is subordinate behaviour that determines rank (rather than dominant behaviour as usually assumed), the stress factor can be seen as directly affecting all animals to difference degrees dependent on their construction, producing physiological and behavioral (submitting behaviour) changes at the same time, the latter in turn giving rise to a hierarchal social organization. The hierarchy appears to be maintained chiefly by subordinates’ behaviour pattern, and by the low—rather than the high-ranking animals. However, in the study of chimpanzees, we express some strong reservations. The view taken here is that dominance and subordination are simply conventional designations for the fact that chimpanzees often stand in the relationship to each other of intimidator and intimidated. Naturally, we would expect the larger, stronger, more boisterous, and more aggressive animals in any group (being intimidating to almost everyone else) to display a kind of generalized dominance status. Presumably this accounts for the fact that in the wild, mature males are generally dominant over adult females, and they, in turn, are dominant over adolescents and juveniles. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21

Apart from this observation, however, there is no indication that chimpanzee groups as a whole are organized hierarchically; not is there any convincing evidence of an autonomous drive for social supremacy. Chimpanzees are willful, impulsive, and greedy, certainly a sufficient basis for the development of dominance and subordination, without the participation od specialized social motives and needs. Dominance and subordination can thus be regarded as the natural by-product of social intercourse, and but one facet of the relationship between two individuals. For dominances, as far as it exists, the same comment applies which I have made with regard to territorialism. It functions to give peace and coherence to the group and to prevent friction that could lead to serious fighting. Human substitutes agreements, etiquette, and laws for the missing instinct. Animal dominance has been widely interpreted as a fierce “bossiness” of the leader who enjoys having power over the rest of the group. It is true that among monkeys, for instance, the authority of the leader is often based on the fear one engenders in the other. However, among the apes, as for instance the chimpanzee, it is often not fear of the retaliatory power of the strongest animal, but one’s competence in leading the group which establishes one’s authority. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21

As an example of this, mentioned earlier, it was reported about an old chimpanzee who retained his leadership because of his experience and wisdom, in spite of the fact that he was physically weak. He is what the youth refer to as an OG (original gangster), someone who was tough and strong and dominant in his youth and was to be feared, who is now greatly respected because he has a reputation for being someone to admire. Nevertheless, some of these OG’s can still tango with the strongest youth. Whatever the role of dominance in animals is, it seems to be pretty clear that the dominant animal must constantly merit one’s role—that is to say, show one’s greater physical strength, wisdom, energy, or whatever it is that makes one accepted as a leader. A very ingenious experiment with monkeys suggests that is the dominant animal loses one’s distinguishing qualities even momentarily, one’s commanding role ends. In human history, when dominance becomes institutionalized and no longer a function of personal competence as is still the case in many primitive societies, it is not necessary for the leader to be in constant possession of one’s outstanding qualities, in fact it is not even necessary that one has them. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21

The social system conditions people to see in title, the uniform, or whatever else it may be, the proof that the leader is competent, and as long as these symbols, supported by the whole system, are present, the average human does not even dare to ask oneself whether the emperor wear clothes. If human actions can be traced up, by a necessary chain, to the Deity, they can never be criminal; on account of the infinite perfection of that Being, from whom they are derived, and who can intend nothing but what is altogether good and laudable. Or, if they be criminal, we must retract the attribute of perfection, which we ascribe to the Deity, and must acknowledge one to be the ultimate author of guilt and moral turpitude in all His creatures. In ever period of its existence, there is an instructive and inspiring progression from an initial faith in God through Christ, with an accompanying initial hope, to a subsequent or higher-level hope that does not disappoint. The apostle Paul wrote this way because, in the progression of our experience, the Holy Spirit pours out into our own hearts the kind love God has. This important message needs to be studied in depth for any adequate understanding of spiritual formation in the Christian tradition, especially as it concerns feelings. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21

The initial faith Christ gives us our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand. This is the new birth into Christ’s kingdom. It puts an end to the war between me and God that has gone on most of my life and surrounds me with God’s gracious actions. Now, become of Christ’s death for me and his continuing graces, I know that God is good, and I am thrilled with the hope that God’s goodness and greatness will serve as the basis of my own existence as well as of everything else. Thus, we exult in hope of the glory of God. However, this opens the path for transformation of our character. I am also thrilled about my tribulations! I know that they will prove God’s power and faithfulness in love to me, and to trust him in all things becomes my settled character. Therefore we also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation beings perseverance; and perseverance, proven character. However, Godly character now brings about a different quality of hope. Character is a mater of our entire personality and life, which has now been transformed by the process of perseverance under God. Hope therefore now pervades our life as a whole. And this new and pervasive hope—which is an outgrowth of our initial hope of the glory of God, but now covers our entire life—does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21

Those ills, under which we labour, are, in reality, goods to the Universe; and to an enlarged view, which can comprehend the whole system of nature, every event becomes an object of joy and exultation. The characters, which engage our approbation, are chiefly such as contribute to the peace and security of human society; as the characters, which excite blame, are chiefly such as tend to public detriment and disturbance. The World is full of obscurities and perplexities, and we must not focus on difficulties because our enquiries with launch us into a boundless ocean of doubt, uncertainty, and contradiction! “And thus we can behold how false, and also the unsteadiness of the hearts of the children of humans; yes, we can see that the Lord in his great infinite goodness doth bless and prosper those who put their trust in him. Yea, and we may see at the very time when he doth prosper his people, yea, in the increase of their fields, their flocs and their herds, and in gold, and in sliver, and in all manner of precious things of every kind and art; sparing their lives, and delivering them out of the hands of their enemies; softening the hearts of the enemies that they should not declare wars against them; yea, and in fine, doing all things for the welfare and happiness of one’s people; yea, then is the time that they do harden their hearts, and do forget the Lord their God, and do trample under their feet the Holy One—yea, and this because of their ease, and the exceedingly great prosperity. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21

“And thus we see that except the Lord doth chasten his people with many afflictions, yes, except he doth visit them with death and with terror, and with famine and with all manner of pestilence, they will not remember him. O how foolish, and how vain, and how evil, and how devilish, and how quick to do iniquity, and how slow to do good, are the children of humans; yea, how quick to hearken unto the words of the evil one, and to set their hearts upon the vain things of the World! Yea, how quick to be lifted up in pride; yea, how quick to boast, and do all manner of that which is iniquity; and how slow are they to remember the Lord their God, and to give ear unto his counsels, yea, how slow to walk in wisdom’s paths! Behold, they do not desire that the Lord their God, who hath created them, should rule and reign over them; notwithstanding his great goodness and his mercy towards them, they do set at naught his counsels, and they do set at naught his counsels, and they will not that he should be their guide. O how great is the nothingness of the children of humans; yea, even they are less than the dust of the Earth. For behold the dust of the Earth moveth hither and thither, to the dividing asunder, at the command of our great and everlasting God. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21

“Yea, behold at his voice do the hills and the mountains tremble and quake. And by the power of his voice they are broken up, and become smooth, yea, even like unto a valley. Yea, by the power f his voice doth the whole Earth shake; yea, by the power of his voice do the foundations rock, even to the very center. Yea, and if he say unto the Earth—Move—it is moved. Yea, if he say unto the Earth—Thou shalt go back, that it lengthen out the day for many hours—it is done; and thus, according to his word the Earth goeth back, and it appeareth unto humans that the Sun standeth still; yea, and behold, this is so; for surely it is the Earth that moveth and not the Sun. And behold, also, if he say unto the waters of the great deep—Be thou dried up—it is done. Behold, if he say unto this mountain—Be thou raised up, and come over and fall upon that city, that it be buried up—behold it is done. And behold, if a human hide up a treasure in the Earth, and the Lord shall say—Let it be accursed, because of the iniquity of one who hath hid it up—behold, it shall be accursed. And if the Lord shall say—Be thou accursed, that no human shall find thee from this time henceforth and forever—behold, no human getteth it henceforth and forever. And behold, if the Lord shall say unto a human—Because of thine iniquities, thou shalt be accursed forever—it shall be done. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21

“And if the Lord shall say—Because of thine iniquities thou shalt be cut off from my presence—he will cause that is shall be so. And wo unto one to whom God shall say this, for it shall be unto one that will do iniquity, and one cannot be saved; therefore, for this cause, that humans might be saved, hath repentance been declared. Therefore, blessed are they who will repent and hearken unto the voice of the Lord their God; for these are they that shall be saved. And may God grant, in his great fulness, that humans might be brought unto repentance and good works, that they might be restored unto grace for grace, according to their works. And I would that all humans might be saved. However, we read that in the great and last day there are some who shall be cast out, yea, who shall be cast off from the presence of the Lord; yea, who shall be consigned to a state of endless misery, fulfilling the words which say: They that have done good shall have everlasting life; and they that have done evil shall have everlasting damnation. And thus it is. Amen,” reports Helaman 12.1-26. O God, merciful Father, Who art always more ready to hear than we to pray, as this race is set before us, please cast the light of Thy true to brighten our path. Thou hast ordained strength to protect our souls from assault and pain. Please keep us, we beseech Thee on the way of Thy commandments. May we so faithfully serve three. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21

May we show forth our thankfulness in all things and may our service be to perfect freedom. For Whom to serve is to reign, as Thee protects us from perils and dangers, from snares. In Thy true religion Thou hast blessed us with Godliness and continual kindness as Thee support us in all dangers, for it is by Thy help we may overcome the things which we suffer for our sins. Who alone canst order the unruly wills and affections of sinful humans, for Who makest the minds of faithful humans to be of one will. Please nourish us with all goodness. May we not be brought into the temptations of the World, the flesh and the devil, for infections of sin are of the devil. I am setting a place at my table for God. Blessed One, please come eat with me! I am setting a place at my table for God of my household. Blessed One, please come eat with me. I am setting a place at my table for the Ancestors, Blessed one, please come eat with me! I am setting a place at my table for the Holy Ghost, blessed One, please come eat with me. God of Earth and Sky, please eat with me, be my guest. I invite the Holy Ones to my table. Please come; sit with me, eat and drink with me. I offer you the hospitality of my home. You are always welcome here. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21

Prayers over food and drink are a special type of thanksgiving prayer. The connection between them is shown quite strongly in the North American Harvest festivals that have been given the name “Thanksgiving.” We should thank God and the food. Our eating is a constant reminder of one of the central mysteries of the connection between life—and our Heavenly Father. Our life depends on God, he provides us with our food, so we should be thankful, it is only proper. Thanksgiving is a special day because eating together draws people together, and thanking God brings us closer to Him. We sit down to the table of God where the company of Heaven meets, and we share with them our food. Blessed ones, please be our dining companions! May God’s great name be blessed forever. May Jesus Christ be blessed forever. Exalted and honoured be the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, whose glory transcends, yea, is beyond all praises, hymns and blessings that humans can render unto Him. May the prayers and supplications of the whole house of Israel be acceptable unto their Father in Heaven. May there be abundant peace from Heaven, and life for us and for all Israel. May He who establisheth peace in the Heavens, grant peace unto us and unto all Israel; and ye say, Amen. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21

Cresleigh Homes

Floating shelves are a great way to display your photos and knickknacks! They are stylish, sleek, and also kind of magical. If only we could float to our local coffee shop for a Pumpkin Spice Latte 🍁

Check out @HUBApts to learn all about their current move-in special! (Spoiler alert: it’s amazing.) https://sites.google.com/fpimgt.com/hubvirtualtours/home

#CresleighHomes