Mind is like an ocean. The surface layers of the mind function actively while the deeper levels remain silent. We assume that persons in the original position, which is designed to be a fair and impartial point of view that is to be adopted in our reasoning about fundamental principles of justice, are rational. In choosing between principles each tries as best one can to advance one’s interests. However, we also have assumed that the parties do not know their conception of good. This means that while they know that they have some rational plan of life, they do not know the details of this plan, the particular ends and interests which it is calculated to promote. How, then, can they decide which conceptions of justice are most to their advantage? Or must we suppose that they are reduced to mere guessing? People assume that they would prefer more primary social goods rather than less. Primary social goods generally include rights, liberties, opportunities, income, and wealth. Of course, it may turn out, once the veil of ignorance is removed, that some of them for religious or other reasons may not, in fact, want more of these goods. The veil of ignorance is a method of determining the morality of issues. #RandolphHarris 1 of 25

The veil of ignorance asks a decision-maker to make a choice about social or moral issues and assumes that they have enough information to know the consequences of their possible decisions for everyone but would not know, or would not take into account, which person they are. The theory contents that not knowing one’s ultimate position in society would lead to the creation of a just system, as the decision-maker would not want to make decisions which benefit a certain group as the expense of another, because the decision-maker could theoretically end up in either group. However, from the standpoint of the original position, it is rational for the parties to suppose that they do want a larger share, since in any case they are not compelled to accept more if they do not wish to, nor does a person suffer from a greater liberty. Thus even though the parties are deprived of information about their particular ends, they have enough knowledge to rank the alternatives. They know that in general they must try to protect their liberties, widen their opportunities, and enlarge their means for promoting their aims whatever these are. Guided by the theory of the good and the general facts of moral psychology, their deliberations are no longer guesswork. #RandolphHarris 2 of 25

The primary goods are the all-purpose social means that are necessary to the exercise and development of the moral powers and to pursue a wide variety of conceptions of the good. Justice is a good-for the just person in a just society and life in a just society is good. Therefore, the theory of good states that any rational person should want, whatever one’s rational plan of life is. Rational people can make a rational decision in the ordinary sense. The concept of rationality invoked here, with the exception of one essential feature, is the stand one familiar in social theory. Thus in the usual way, a rational person is thought to have a coherent set of preferences between the options open to one. One ranks these options according to how well they further one’s purposes; one follows the plan which will satisfy more of one’s desires rather than less, and which has the greater chance of being successfully executed. The special assumption made here is that a rational individual does not suffer from envy. If only others have less as well, one is not ready to accept a loss for oneself. #RandolphHarris 3 of 25

One is not downcast by the knowledge or perception that others have a larger index of primary social goods. Or at least this is true as long as he differences between oneself and others do not exceed certain limits, and one does not believe that the existing inequalities are founded on injustice or are the result of letting chance work itself out for no compensating social purpose. The assumption that the parties are not moved by envy raises certain questions. Perhaps we should also assume that they are not liable to various other feelings such as shame and humiliation. Now a satisfactory account of justice will eventually have to deal with these matters, too, but for the present I shall leave these complications aside. Another objection to our procedure is that it is too unrealistic. Certainly humans are afflicted with these feelings. How can a conception of justice ignore this fact? I shall meet this problem by diving the argument for the principles of justice into two parts. In the first part, the principles are derived on the supposition that envy does not exist; while in the second, we consider whether the conception arrived at is feasible in view of the circumstances of human life. One reason for this procedure is that envy tends to make everyone worse off. #RandolphHarris 4 of 25

In this sense envy is collectively disadvantageous because of the tendency it has to make condition acrimonious. Presuming its absence amounts to supposing that in the choice of principles humans should think of themselves as having their own plan of life which is sufficient for itself. They have a secure sense of their own worthy so that they have no desire to abandon any of their aims provided others have less means to further theirs. I shall work out a conception of justice on this stipulation to see what happens. Later I shall try to show that when the principles adopted are put into practice, they lead to social arrangements in which envy and other destructive feelings are not likely to be strong. The conception of justice eliminated the conditions that give rise to disruptive attitudes. It is, therefore, inherently stable. The assumption of mutually disinterested rationality, then, comes to this: the persons in the original position try to acknowledge principles which advance their system of ends as far as possible. They do this by attempting to win for themselves the highest index of primary social goods, since this enables them to promote their conception of the good most effectively whatever it turns out to be. #RandolphHarris 5 of 25

The parties do not seek to confer benefits or to impose injuries on one another; they are not moved by affection or rancor. Nor do they try to gain relative to each other; they are not envious or vain. Put in terms of a game, we might say: they strive for as high an absolute score as possible. They do not wish a high or a low score for their opponents, nor do they seek to maximize or minimize the difference between their success and those of others. The idea of a game does not really apply, since the parties are not concerned to win but to get as many points as possible judged by their own system of ends. There is one further assumption to guarantee strict compliance. The parties are presumed to be capable of a sense of justice and this fact is public knowledge among them. This condition is to insure the integrity of the agreement made in the original position. It odes mean that in their deliberations the parties apply some particular conception of justice, for this would defeat the point of the motivation assumption. Rather, it means that the parties can rely on each other to understand and to act in accordance with whatever principles are finally agreed to. #RandolphHarris 6 of 25

Once principles are acknowledged the parties can depend on one another to conform to them. In reaching an agreement, then, they know that their undertaking is not in vain: their capacity for a sense of justice insures that the principles chosen will be respected. It is essential to observe, however, that this assumption still permits the consideration of human’s capacity to act on the various conception of justice. The general facts of human psychology and the principles of moral learning are relevant matters for the parties to examine. If a conception of justice is unlikely to generate it own support, or lacks stability, this fact must not be overlooked. For then a different conception of justice might be preferred. The assumption only says that the parties have a capacity for justice in a purely formal sense: taking everything relevant into account, including the general facts of moral psychology, the parties will adhere to the principles eventually chosen. They are rational in that they will not enter into agreements they know they cannot keep, or can do so only with great difficulty. Along with other considerations, they count the strains of commitment. #RandolphHarris 7 of 25

Thus in assessing conceptions of justice the persons in the original position are to assume that the one they adopt will be strictly complied with. The consequences of the agreement are to be worked out on this basis. With the preceding remarks about rationality and motivation of the parties the description of the original position is for the most part complete. We can summarize this description with the following list of elements of the initial situation and their variation. (The asterisks mark the interpretations that constitute the original position.) 1. The Nature of the Parities: *a. continuing persons (family heads, or genetic lines), b. single individuals, c. associations (states, churches, or other corporate bodies). 2. Subject of Justice: *a. basic structure of society, b. rules of corporate associations, c. law of nations. 3. Presentation of Alternatives: *a. shorter (or longer) list, b. general characterization of the possibilities. 4. Time of Entry: *a. any time (during age of reason) for living persons, b. all actual persons (those alive at some time) simultaneously, c. all possible persons simultaneously. 5. Circumstances of Justice: *a Hume’s conditions of moderate scarcity, b. the above plus further extremes. 6. Formal conditions on Principles: *a. generality, universality, publicity, ordering, and finality, b. the above less publicity, say. #RandolphHarris 8 of 25

7. Knowledge and Beliefs: *a. veil of ignorance, b. full information, c. partial knowledge. 8. Motivation of the Parties: *a. mutual disinterestedness (limited altruism), b. elements of social solidarity and good will, c. perfect altruism. 9. Rationality: *a. taking effective means to ends wit unified expectations and objective interpretation of probability, b. as above but without unified expectation and using the principle of insufficient reason. 10. Agreement Condition: *a. unanimity in perpetuity, b. majority acceptance, or whatever, for limited period. 11. Compliance Condition: *a. strict compliance, b. partial compliance in various degree. 12. No Agreement Point: *a. general egoism, b. the state of nature. We can turn now to the choice of principles. However, first I shall mention a few misunderstandings to be avoided. First of all, we must keep in mind that the parties in the original position are theoretically defined individuals. The grounds for their consent are set out by the description of the contractual situation and the preference for primacy goods. Thus to say that the principles of justice would be adopted is to say how these persons would decide being moved in ways our account describes. #RandolphHarris 9 of 25

Of course, when we try to conduct ourselves in moral argument as its constraints require, we will presumably find that our deliberations and judgments are influenced by our special inclinations and attitudes. Surely it will prove difficult to correct for our various preopensites and aversions in striving to adhere to the conditions of this idealized situation. However, none of the affects the contention that in the original position rational persons so characterized would make a certain decision. This proposition belongs to the theory of justice. It is another question how well human beings can assume this role in regulating their practical reasoning. Since the persons in the original position are assumed to take no interest in one another’s interests (although they may have a concern for third parties), it may be thought that justice as fairness is itself an egotistic theory. It is not, of course, one of the three forms of egoism mentioned earlier, but some may think, as Schopenhauer thought of Kant’s doctrine, that it is the egoistic nevertheless. Now this is a misconception. For the fact that in the original position the parties are characterized as not interested in one another’s concerns does not entail that persons in ordinary life who hold the principles that would be agreed to are similarly disinterested in one another. #RandolphHarris 10 of 25

Clearly the two principles of justice and the principles of obligation and natural duty require us to consider the rights and claims of others. And the sense of justice is a normally effective desire to comply with these restrictions. The motivation of the persons in the original position must not be confused wit the motivation of persons in everyday life who accept the principles that would be chosen and who have the corresponding sense of justice. In practical affairs an individual does have a knowledge of one’s situation and one can, if one wises, exploit contingencies to one’s advantage. Should one’s sense of justice move one to act on the principles of right that would be adopted in the original position, one’s desires and aims are surely not egoistic. One voluntarily takes on the limitations expressed by this interpretation of the moral point of view. This conclusion is supported by a further reflection. Once we consider the idea of a contract theory it is tempting to think that it will not yield the principles we want unless the parties are to some degree at least moved by benevolence, or an interest in one another’s interests. Perry, as I mentioned before, thinks of the right standards and decisions as those promoting the ends reached by reflective agreement under circumstances making for impartiality and good will. #RandolphHarris 11 of 25

Now the combination of mutual disinterest and the veil of ignorance achieves the same purpose as benevolence. For this combination of conditions forces each person in the original position to take the good of others into account. In justice as fairness, then, the effects of good will are brought about by several conditions working jointly. The feeling that this conception of justice is egoistic is an illusion fostered by looking at but one of the elements of the original position. Furthermore, this pair of assumptions has enormous advantages over that of benevolence plus knowledge. As I have noted, the latter is so complex that no definite theory at all can be worked out. Not only are the complications caused by so much information insurmountable, but the motivational assumption requires clarification. For example, what is the relative strength of benevolent desires? The combination of mutual disinterestedness plus the veil of ignorance has the merits of simplicity and clarity while at the same time insuring the effects of what are at first sight morally more attractive assumptions. #RandolphHarris 12 of 25

And if it is asked why one should not postulate benevolence with the veil of ignorance, the answer is that there is no need for so strong a condition. Moreover, I would defeat the purpose of grounding the theory of justice on weak stipulation, as well as being incongruous with the circumstances of justice. Finally, if the parties are conceived as themselves making proposals, they have n incentive to suggest pointless or arbitrary principles. For example, none would urge that special privileges be given to those exactly six feet talk or born on a sunny day. Nor would any one put forward the principle that basic rights should depend on the colour of one’s skin or the texture of one’s hair. No one can tell whether such principles would be to one’s advantage. Furthermore, each such principle is a limitation of one’s liberty of action, and such restrictions are not to be accepted without a reason. Certainly we might imagine peculiar circumstances in which these characteristics are relevant. Those born on a sunny day might be blessed with a happy temperament, and for some position of authority this might be a qualifying attribute. However, such distinctions would never be proposed in first principles, for these must have some rational connection with the advancement of human interests broadly defined. #RandolphHarris 13 of 25

The rationality of the parities and their situation in the original position guarantees that ethical principles and conceptions of justice have this general content. Inevitably, then, racial and gender discrimination presupposes that some hold a favoured place in the social system which they are willing to exploit to their advantage. From the standpoint of persons similarly situated in an initial situation which is fair, the principles of explicit racist doctrines are not only unjust. They are irrational. For this reason we could say that they are not moral conceptions at all, but simply means of suppression. They have no place on a reasonable list of traditional conceptions of justice. Of course, this contention is not all a matter of definition. It is rather a consequence of the conditions characterizing the original position, especially the condition of the rationality of the parities and the veil of ignorance. That conceptions of right have a certain content and exclude arbitrary and pointless principles is, therefore, an inference from the theory. The way of discipleship means that there is to be constant endeavour to live in the master’s mental atmosphere. Of course this can be done very feebly and only occasionally at first. Success depends not only on the pressure of perseverance but also on the sensitivity to thought-transference. #RandolphHarris 14 of 25

The aspirant who comes into the presence of someone who functions on a high moral and spiritual or philosophical level—and feels the attraction, charm, spell, influence, or force of one’s personality—can, after a sufficient time or association, be stimulated in development quite markedly. It is the case not only of benefiting by the other human’s words and copying one’s example, but also of directly experiencing the telepathic working of mind upon mind. If they believe in the genuineness and reality of telepathy—as they must if they believe philosophy at all—then they must accept our declaration that inner communion renders unnecessary the outer communion, that the sense of inner presence of the guide renders unnecessary one’s letters, visits, and other external signs. We know hat the mind can both project and receive thoughts. Telepathy becomes more and more a scientifically recognized fact. Where affinity harmony and preparation exist, the spiritual guide can project calming, uplifting, and spiritualizing mental waves to the spiritual aspirant. The silent wordless and unprepared hypnosis of a subject is factual pointer to the understanding of the silent wordless and telepathic influence of a disciple by one’s guide. #RandolphHarris 15 of 25

As the power of suggestion becomes dynamic in the hypnotist, so its higher octave, the power of grace, becomes dynamic in the spiritual guide. The mental waves can be transmitted from master to disciple, that spiritual peace can be reflected from the mind of one to the mind of the other, is not merely a new theory but really an old practice. It has been known and done in the Old World for thousands of years. The master’s work is carried on by word-of-mouth, by written statement, and by personal example. However, it cannot end with these methods, for they are all external ones. So it is continued by telepathic impulses, by inspirational impact, and by mental osmosis. These are internal ones. Such communication between the teacher and student might be called “Telementation.” Now I no longer believe that there are dimensions of personality that exist “in-themselves.” Id, ego, super-ego; self-concept, self-ideal, public selves; traits; derives and needs—these are the terms in which we have long thought of and described “personality”: “This individual is highly authoritarian or egalitarian; one has a strong ego or a weak one; one’s Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI is the most widely used and researched clinical assessment tool used by mental health professionals to help diagnose mental health disorders) scores are thus and such, et cetera.” #RandolphHaris 16 of 25

This way of conceptualizing a person, whether as a whole or just some part of one, is no longer relevant or valid for me. After having tried out psychoanalytic, trait-theory, self-theory, and other kinds of theoretical models of humans, I have opted for a model that is no model or is a meta-model. It is one implicit in the philosophical tradition of existential phenomenology. According to this perspective, humans are the being that in one’s being, one being is in question. One’s being is inextricably linked with the World one experiences as real. Other people are part of this World. The being one discloses, shows to me, when I am in one mode of my being—impersonality, formality, and distant, reserved, playing the role of hard-nosed scientist—is different from the being one will show me when I am with one in the mode of invitational dialogue. One’s experience of one’s being and the being that one disclosed will differ with the context. One’s being-for-me will differ from one’s-being-for-oneself, one’s being-for-one’s bird, one’s teacher, one’s mother, the experimenter who studies one, and the guru whose help one may seek to transcend one’s personality traits or structure. There is a problem here: to dimensionalize and discover hierarchy here, a hierarchy of being. I suspect it is measurable objectively and subjectively in terms of “degrees of freedom.” #RandolphHarr is 17 of 25

That is, a person may experience one’s being-for-one’s-bird as a freer, more authentic and expressive being than one’s being-for-one’s boss, or one’s spouse. A person chooses all modes and manifestations of one’s being. One cannot choose the initial impact on one’s experiential field of a shout, a blow, a promise, a sunset, a caress—all these things just affect one. However, one can effect various actions upon one’s experience once it has happened. One can blot it out, reconstrue it, project it, distort it, try to preserve it, or let it flow. One’s personality-for-others and one’s personality-for-oneself can embody a resolve to confine one’s experience and action to the limits of a procrustean mold. One can regard one’s experience as being without value and importance or as rich in value. If so, one is impersonating a robot; and one may experience oneself as such. A person can choose what of one’s experience one will disclose in words our behaviour (behaviour is meaningful disclosure too) to whoever is nearby. Indeed, we have begun to explore what one chooses to disclose to others, in words, behavior, or even in physiological messages; under what conditions; and to which others. #RandolphHarris 18 of 25

In light of this research, I now suspect and challenge the validity (or at least generalizability) of all published psychology, including the psychology of human learning and of human personality. I suspect their validity, because the original data (which after all are disclosures) may have been gathered under conditions in which the person being studied neither knew nor trusted the experimenter to whom one showed one’s learning or traits. The experimenter does not know what experience of the subjects is embodied in the subjects’ behaviour. What the psychological scientist calls “data” is actually one mode in which the subjects disclose part of their being. There is a growing body of empirical data now to confirm the assertion that a person’s being for psychologist A may differ from one’s being for psychologist B. Perhaps we should subtitle each report of research: “S’s disclosure of learning, of traits, et cetera, for Dr. So-and-So.” In what follows, we shall actually be talking more about interpersonal conditions of independent learning, then about personality factors. The capacity to “go out of one’s mind” (to transcend one’s personality) seems to be one of the necessary conditions for independent learning, for learning-for-oneself. #RandolphHarris 19 of 25

And so we are interested in who is able to invite a person out of one’s mind: who are the “psychedelic people,” and who is willing to accept the invitation? There may be a stable trait that could be isolated, that we might call “transcendence-readiness,” or “readiness to leave one’s personality.” Perhaps it persists in people, beyond childhood, through failures on the part of the commissars to get the child fully socialized. This is referred to as resistance to enculturation as one of the general traits of self-actualizing subjects, in whom peak experiences are not a rare occurrence. The peak experience, of course, entails a leaving of one’s mind, one’s usual personality. “Now behold, I will show unto you that they did not establish a king over the land; but in this same year, yea, the thirtieth year, they did destroy upon the judgment-seat, yea, did murder the chief judge of the land. And the people were divided one against another; and they did separate one from another into tribes, every human according to one’s family and one’s kindred and friends; and thus they did destroy the government of the land. And every tribe did appoint a chief or a leader over them; and thus they became tribes and leaders of tribes. Now behold, there was no man among them save he had much family and many kindreds and friends; therefore their tribes became exceedingly great. #RandolphHarris 20 of 25

“Now all this was done, and there were no wars as yet among them; and all this iniquity had come upon the people because they did yield themselves unto the power of Satan. And the regulations of the government were destroyed, because of the secret combination of friends and kindreds of those who murdered the prophets. Ans they did cause a great contention in the land, insomuch that the more righteous part of the people had nearly become wicked; yea, there were but a few righteous humans among them. And thus six years had not passed away since the more part of the people had turned from their righteousness, like the dog to his vomit, or like the sow to her wallowing in the mire. Now this secret combination, which had brought so great iniquity upon the people, did gather themselves together, and did place at their head a man whom they did call Jacob; and they did call him their king; therefore he became a king over this wicked band; and he was one of the chiefest who has given his voice against the prophets who testified of Jesus. And it came to pass that they were not so strong in number as the tribes of the people, who were untied together save it were their leaders did establish their laws, every one according to one’s tribe. #RandolphHarris 21 of 25

“Nevertheless they were enemies; notwithstanding they were not a righteous people, yet they were united in the hated of those who had entered into a covenant to destroy the government. Therefore, Jacob seeing that their enemies were re numerous than they, he being the kind of the band, therefore he commanded his people that they should take their light into the northernmost part of the land, and there build up unto themselves a kingdom, until they were joined by dissenters, (for he flattered them that there would be many dissenters) and they become sufficiently strong to content with the tribes of the people’ and they did so. And so speedy was their march that it could not be impeded until they have gone forth out of the reach of the people. And thus ended the thirtieth year; and thus were the affairs of the people Nephi. And it came to pass in the thirty and first year that there were divided into tribes, every human according to one’s family, kindred and friends; nevertheless they had come to an agreement that they would not go to war one with another; but they were not untied as to their laws, and their manner of government, for they were established according to the minds of those who were their chiefs and their leaders. #RandolphHarris 22 of 25

“However, they did establish very strict laws that one tribe should not trespass against another, insomuch that in some degree they had peace in the land; nevertheless, their hearts were turned from the Lord their God, and they did stone the prophets and did cast them out from among them. And it came to pass that Nephi—having been visited by Angels and also the voice of the Lord, therefore having seen Angels, and being eye-witness, and having had power given unto him that he might know concerning the ministry of Christ, and also being eye-witness to their quick return from righteousness unto their wickedness and abominations; therefore, being grieved from the hardness of their hearts and the blindness of their minds—went forth among them in that same year, and began to testify, boldly, repentance, and remission of sins through faith on the Lord Jesus Christ. And he did minister many things unto them; and all of them cannot be written, and a part of them would not suffice, therefore they are not written in this book. And Nephi did minister with power and with great authority. And it came to pass that they were angry with him, even because he had great power than they, for it were not possible that they could disbelieve his words, for so great was his faith on the Lord Jesus Christ that Angels did minister unto him daily. #RandolphHarris 23 of 25

“And in the name of Jesus did he cast out devils and unclean spirits; and even his brother did he raise from the dead, after he had been stoned and suffered death by the people. And the people saw it, and did witness of it, and were angry with him because of his power; and he did also do many more miracles, in the sight of the people, in the name of Jesus. And it came to pass that the thirty and first year did pass away, and there were but a few who were converted unto the Lord; but as many as were converted did truly signify unto the people that they had been visited by the power and Spirit of God, which was in Jesus Christ, in whom they believed. And as many as had devils cast out from them, and were healed of their sickness and their infirmities, did truly manifest unto the people that they had been wrought upon by the Spirit of God, and had been healed; and they did show forth signs also and did do some miracles among the people. Thus passed away the thirty and second year also. And Nephi did cry unto the people in the commencement of the thirty and third year; and he did preach unto them repentance and remission of sins. Now I would have you to remember also, that there were none who were brought unto repentance were not baptized with water. #RandolphHarris 24 of 25

“Therefore, there were ordained of Nephi, men unto this ministry that all such as should come unto them should be baptized with water, and this as a witness and a testimony before God, and unto the people, that they had repented and received a remission of their sins. And there were many in the commencement of this year that were baptized unto repentance; and thus the more part of the year did pass away,” reports 3 Nephi 7.1-26. Hail to You, God, as you rise the Sun in the East, scattering before You the terrors of the night as a shark among fish. No mere shark you are, though: a young Divine Being, roaring through the sky, blazing eagerly int the tasks of the day. Enshrine me, young Lord; suit me for the task ahead. O Lord, open Thou my lips and my mouth shall declare Thy praise. Praised art Thou, O Lord our God and Gd of our fathers, God of Abraham, God of Isaac, and God of Jacob, mighty, revered and exalted God. Thou bestowest lovingkindness and possesses all things. Mindful of the patriarchs’ love for Thee, Thou wilt in Thy love bring a redeemer to their children’s children for the sake of Thy name. O King, Thou Helper, Redeemer and Shield, be Thou praised, O Lord, Shield of Abraham. Thou, O Lord, art mighty forever. Thou callest the dead to immortal life for Thou art mighty in deliverance. #RandolphHarris 25 of 25

Cresleigh Homes

You do not need to glance at that yin-yang painting to know that this #BrightonStation Residence 2 features harmonious, feel-good designs. 😍

Head to our website to view virtual tours of the homes at #CresleighRanch. Link in bio. https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/residence-2/

Charming style and well-designed, contemporary touches, with some traditional appeal, all beautifully illuminated by large window displays. The gourmet, well-equipped kitchen features a center island with breakfast bar for casual dining, ample counter and cabinet space, and a convenient butler’s pantry, and spacious walk-in pantry. 

#CresleighHomes