When a person is asked to make a speech, the first thing one has to decide is what to say. We live in a time when good faith of people is doubted more than ever before. Expressions throwing doubt on the trustworthiness of each other are bandied back and forth. They are based on what happened in the First World War when the nations experienced dishonesty, injustice, and inhumanity from one another. How can a new trust come about? And yet, it must. We cannot continue in this paralyzing mistrust. If we want to work our way out of the desperate situation in which we find ourselves, another spirit must enter into the people. It can only come if the awareness of its necessity suffices to give us strength to believe in its coming. They only possible way out of the present chaos is for us to adopt a World-view which will bring us once more under that control of the ideals of true civilization which are contained in it. Refuse to get bitter from the broken areas of your life! Let God heal where you have been hurt. If we simply provide them with advanced information about what lies ahead, self-evident as it may seem, in most situations we can help individuals adapt better. Anticipatory information allows a dramatic change in performance. The mental processing of advance data about any subject presumably cuts down on the amount of processing and the reaction time during the actual period of adaptation. Thought is action in rehearsal. Even more important than any specific bits of advance information, however, is the habit of anticipation. This conditioned ability to look ahead plays a key role in adaptation. #RandolphHarris 1 of 22

Indeed, one of the hidden clues to successful coping may well lie in the individual’s sense of the future. The people among us who keep up with change, who manage to adapt well, seem to have a richer, better developed sense of what lies ahead than those who cope poorly. Anticipating the future has become a habit to them. The chess player who anticipates the moves of one’s opponent, the executive who thinks in long range terms, the student who takes a quick glance at the table of contents before starting to read page one, all seem to fare better. People vary widely in the amount of thought they devote to the future, as distinct from the past and present. Some invest far more resources than others in projecting themselves forward—imagining, analyzing and evaluating future possibilities and probabilities. They also vary in how far they tend to project. Some habitually think in terms of the “deep future.” Other penetrate only into the “shallow future.” Some individuals, of course, project themselves so far into the future for such long periods that their anticipations become escapist fantasies. Far more common, however, are those individuals whose anticipations are so thin and short-range that they are continually surprised and flustered by change. The adaptive individual appears to be able to project oneself forward just the “right” distance in time, to examine and evaluate alternative course of action open to one before the need for final decision. #RandolphHarris 2 of 22

If our children are to adapt more successfully to rapid change, this distortion of tie must be ended. We must sensitize them to the possibilities and probabilities of tomorrow. We must enhance their sense of the future. Society has many built-in time spanners that help to link the present generation with the past. Our sense of the past is developed by contact with the older generation, by our knowledge of history, by the accumulated heritage of art, music, literature, and science passed down to us through the years. It is enhanced by immediate contact with the objects that surround us, each of which has a point of origin in the past, each of which provides us with a trace of identification with the past. No such time spanners enhance our sense of the future. We have no objects, no friends, no relatives, no work of art, no music or literature, that originate in the future. We have, as it were, no heritage of the future. Despite this, there are ways to send the human mind forward as well as backward. We need to begin by creating a stronger future-consciousness on the part of the public, and not just by means of Buck Rogers comic strips and TV shows like Sliders, or articles about the marvels of space travel or medical research. These make a contribution, but what is needed is a concentrated focus on the social and personal implications of the future, not merely on its technological characteristics. Instead of deriding the “crystal-ball gazer,” we need to encourage people, from childhood on, to speculate freely, even fancifully, not merely about what next week holds in store for them but about what the next generation holds in store for the entire human race. #RandolphHarris 3 of 22

We offer our children courses in history; why no also courses in “Future,” courses in which the possibilities and probabilities of the future are systematically explored, exactly as we now explore the social system of the Romans or the rise of the feudal manor? If we view it as a kind of sociology of the future, rather than as literature, science fiction has immense values as a mind-stretching force for the creation of the habit of anticipation. Our children should be studying Arthur C. Clarke, William Tenn, Robert Heinlein, Ray Bradybury and Robert Sheckely, not because these writers can tell them about rocket ships and time machines but, more important, because they can lead young minds through an imaginative exploration of the jungle of political, social, psychological, and ethical issues that will confront these children as adults. Science fiction should be required reading for Future I. Also, to sharpen the individual’s future-focused role image, students can be asked to write their own “future autobiographies” in which they picture themselves five, ten, or twenty years in the future. By submitting these to class discussion, by comparing different assumptions in them, contradictions in the child’s own projections can be identified and examined. At a time when the self is being broken into successive selves, this technique can be used to provide continuity for the individual. If children at fifteen, for example, are given the future autobiographies they themselves wrote at age twelve, they can see how maturation has altered their own image of the future. #RandolphHarris 4 of 22

When an individual is able to document and review how much they have matured, they can be helped to understand how their values, talents, skills, and knowledge have shaped their own possibilities. When millions share this passion about the future, we shall have a society far better equipped to meet the impact of change. To create such curiosity and awareness is a cardinal task of education. To create an education that will create this curiosity is perhaps the central mission of the age of information revolution in the schools. The past is here to stay, and we must learn about it and the future to remain in an equilibrium. In Heaven a law was broken. Sin originated in self-seeking. Lucifer, the covering cherub, desired to be first in Heaven. He sought to gain control of Heavenly beings, to draw them away from their Creator, and to win their homage to himself. Therefore one misrepresented God, attributing to Him the desire for self-exaltation. Wit his own evil characteristics, Satan sought to invest the loving Creator. Thus he deceived angels. Thus he deceived humans. He led them to doubt the word of God, and to distrust His goodness. Because God is a God of justice and terrible majesty, Satan caused them to look upon Him as severe and unforgiving. Thus he drew humans to join him in rebellion against God, and the night of woe settled down upon the World. The Earth was dark through misapprehension of God. That the gloomy shadows might be lightened, that the World might be brought back to God, Satan’s deceptive power was to be broken. #RandolphHarris 5 of 22

This could not be done by force. The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God’s government; God desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority. Only by love is love awakened. To know God is to love Him; His character must be manifested in contrast to the character of Satan. This work only one Being in all the Universe could do. Only He who knew the height and dept of the love of God could make it known. Upon the World’s dark night the Sun of Righteousness must rise with healing in His wings. The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam. It was revelation of the mystery which hath been kept in silence though times eternal. It was an unfolding of the principles that form eternal ages have been the foundation of God’s throne. From the beginning, God and Christ knew of the apostasy of Satan, and the fall of man through the deceptive power of the apostate. God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency. The psychic pollution of sin is matched by the industrial vomit that fills our skies and seas. Pesticides and herbicides filter into our foods. Twisted automobile carcasses, aluminum cans, non-returnable glass bottles and synthetic plastics form immense kitchen middens in our midst as more and more of our detritus resists decay. We do not even begin to know what to do with our radioactive waste—whether to pump them into the Earth, shoot them into outer space, or pour them into the oceans. #RandolphHarris 6 of 22

Our technological powers increase, but the side effect and potential hazards also escalate. We risk thermopollution of the oceans themselves, overheating them, destroying immeasurable quantities of marine life, perhaps even melting the polar icecaps. On land we concentrate such large masses of population in such small urban-technological islands, that we threaten to use up the air’s oxygen faster than it can be replaced, conjuring up the possibility of new Saharas where the cities are now. Through such disruptions of the natural ecology, we may literally, in the words of the biologist Dr. Barry commoner, be “destroying this planet as a suitable place for human habitation.” Sick societies need scapegoats. As the pressures of change impinge more heavily on the individual and the prevalence of future shock increases, this nightmarish outcome gains plausibility. It is significant that a slogan scrawled on a wall by striking students in Paris called for “death to the technocrats!” The incipient Worldwide movement for control of technology, however, must not be permitted to fall into the hands of irresponsible technophobes, nihilists and Rousseauian romantics. For the power of the technological drive is too great to be stopped by Luddite paroxysms. Worse yet, reckless attempts to halt technology will produce results quite as destructive as reckless attempts to advance it. Caught between these twin perils, we desperately need a movement for responsible technology. We need a broad political grouping rationally committed to further scientific research and technological advance—but on a selective basis only. #RandolphHarris 7 of 22

Instead of wasting its energies in denunciations of The Machines or in negativistic criticism of the space program, it should formulate a set of beneficial technological goals for the future. Radicals frequently accuse the “ruling class” or the “establishment” or simply “they” of controlling society in ways inimical to the welfare of the masses. Such accusations may have occasional point. Yet today we face an even more dangerous reality: many social ills are less the consequence of oppressive control than of oppressive lack of control. The horrifying truth is that, so far as much technology is concerned, no one is in charge. By the application of conscious technological policy—along with other measures—we can contour the culture of tomorrow. The automobile is widely believed to have changed the shape of our cities, shifted home ownership and retail trade patterns, altered customs involving pleasures of the flesh and loosened family ties. In the Middle East, the rapid spread of transistor radios is created with having contributed to the resurgence of Arab nationalism. The birth control pill, the computer, the Internet, the space explorations, as well as the invention and diffusion of such “soft” technologies as systems analysis, all have carried significant social changes in their wake. We can no longer afford to let such secondary social and cultural effects just “happen.” We must attempt to anticipate them in advance, estimating, to the possible, their nature, strength and timing. Where these effects are likely to be seriously damaging, we must also be prepared to block the new technology. It is as simple as that. #RandolphHarris 8 of 22

Technology cannot be permitted to rampage through the society. It is quite true that we can never know all the effects of any action, technological or otherwise. However, it is not true that we are helpless. Just as we may wish to create enclaves of the past where the rate of change is artificially slowed, or enclaves of the future in which individual can pre-sample future environments, we ay also wish to set aside, even subsidize, special high-novelty communities in which advance medications, power sources, vehicles, cosmetics, appliances, and other innovations are experimentally used and investigated. A corporation today will routinely field test a product to make sure it performs its primary function. The same company will market tests the product to ascertain whether it will sell. However, with rare exception, no one post-checks the consumer or the community to determine what the human side effects have been. Survival in the future may depend on our learning to do so. Here, then, is a pressing intellectual agenda for the social and physical sciences. We have taught ourselves to create and combine the most powerful of technologies. We have not taken pains to learn about their consequences. Today these consequences threaten to destroy us. We must learn, and learn fast. The challenge, however, is not solely intellectual; it is political as well. We need, in effect, a machinery for screening machines. A key political task of this decade will be to creature this machinery. #RandolphHarris 9 of 22

We must stop being afraid to exert systematic social control over technology. Responsibility for doing so much be shared by public agencies and the corporations and laboratories in which technological innovations are hatched. One step in the right direction would be to create a technological ombudsman—a public agency charged with receiving, investigating, and acting on complaints having to do with the irresponsible application of technology. It may be useful to recall that the problem of stability arises because a just scheme of cooperation may not be in equilibrium, much less stable. To be sure, from the standpoint of the original position, the principles of justice are collectively rational; if all comply with these principles, everyone may expect to improve one’s situation, at least in comparison with what one’s prospects would in the absence of any agreement. General egoism represents this no-agreement point. Nevertheless, from the perspective of any one human, both first-person and free-rider egoism represents this no-agreement point. Nevertheless, from the perspective of any one human, both first-person and free-rider egoism would be still better. Of course given the conditions of the original position neither of these options is a serious candidate. Yet , if one is so in inclined in everyday life, an individual can win even greater benefits for oneself by taking advantage of the cooperative efforts of others. Sufficiently many persons may be doing their share so that when special circumstances allow one not to contribute (perhaps one’s omission will not be found out), one gets the best of both Worlds: on these occasions anyway things proceed much as if free-rider egoism had been acknowledged. #RandolphHarris 10 of 22

Just arrangements may not be in equilibrium then because acting fairly is not in general each human’s best reply to the just conduct of one’s associates. To insure stability humans must have a sense of justice or a concern for those who would be disadvantaged by their defection, preferably both. When these sentiments are sufficiently strong to overrule the temptations to violate the rules, just schemes are stable. Meeting one’s duties and obligations is now regarded by each persons as the correct answer to the actions of others. One’s person as the correct answer to the actions of others. One’s rational plan of life regulated by one’s sense of justice leads to this conclusion. The question of stability is connected to that of the political obligation. One may think of this as a sovereign mechanism added to a system f cooperation which would be unstable without it. The general belief in the sovereign’s efficacy removes the two kinds of instability. Now it is evident how relations of friendships and mutual trust, and the public knowledge of a common and normally effective sense of justice, bring about the same result. For given these natural attitudes and the desire to do what is just, no one wishes to advance one’s interests unfairly to the disadvantage of others; this removes instability of the first kind. And since each recognizes that one must violate the rules to protect one’s legitimate interests; so instability of the second kind is likewise absent. Of course, some infractions will presumably occur, but when they do feelings of guilt arising from friendship and mutual trust and the sense of justice tend to restore the arrangement. #RandolphHarris 11 of 22

Moreover, a society regulated by a public sense of justice is inherently stable: other things equal, the forces making for stability increase (up to some limit) as time passes. This inherent stability is a consequence of the reciprocal relation between the three psychological laws. The more effective operation of one law strengthens that of the other two. For example, when the second law leads to stronger attachments, the sense of justice acquired by the third law is reinforced because of the greater concern for the beneficiaries of just institutions. And going the other way, a more effective sense of justice leads to a more secure intention to do one’s share, and the recognition of this fact arouses more intense feelings of friendship and trust. Again, it seems that with a firmer assurance of one’s own worth and a livelier capacity for fellow feeling brought about by more favourable conditions for the first law, the effects governed by the other two laws should be similarly enhanced. Conversely, persons who have developed a regulative sense of justice and are confident in their self-esteem are more likely to care for their children with the manifest intention. Thus all three psychological principles conspire together to support the institutions of a well-ordered society. There seems to be no doubt then that justice as fairness is a reasonably stable more conception. However, a decision in the original position depends on a comparison: other things equal, the preferred conception of justice is the most stable one. #RandolphHarris 12 of 22

Ideally we should compare the contract view with all its rivals in this respect, but as so often I shall only consider the principle of utility. In order to do this, it is useful to recall three elements that enter into the operation of the psychological laws: namely, an unconditional caring for our good, a clear awareness of the reasons for moral precepts and ideals (assisted by explanation and instruction, and the possibility of giving precise and convincing justifications), and the recognition that those complying with these precepts and ideals, and doing their part in social arrangements, both accept these norms and express in their life and character forms of human good which evoke our admiration and esteem. The resulting sense of justice is stronger the more these three elements are realized. The first enlivens the sense of our own worth strengthening the tendency to answer in kind, the second presents the moral conception so that it can be readily understood, and the third displays the adherence to it as attractive. The most stable conception of justice, therefore, is presumably one that is perspicuous to our reason, congruent with our good, and rooted not in abnegation but in affirmation of the self. Now several things suggest that the sense of justice corresponding to justice as fairness is stronger than the parallel sentiment inculcated by other conceptions. First of all, the unconditional concern of other persons and institutions for our good is far stronger to the contract view. The restrictions contained in the principle of justice guarantee everyone an equal liberty and assure us that our claims will not be neglected or overridden for the sake of a larger sum of benefits, even for the whole society. #RandolphHarris 13 of 22

We have only to keep in mind the various priority rules, and the meaning of the difference principles as rendered by its Kantian interpretation (persons are not to be treated as means at all) and its relation to the idea of fraternity. The effect of these aspects of justice as fairness is to heighten the operation of the reciprocity principle. As we have noted, a more unconditional caring for our good and a clearer refusal by others to take advantage of accident and happenstance, must strengthen our self-esteem; and this greater good must in turn lead to a closer affiliation with persons and institutions by way of an answer in kind. These effects are more intense than in the case of the utility principle, and so the resulting attachments should be stronger. We can confirm this suggestion by considering the well-ordered society paired with the principle of utility. In this case, the three psychological laws have to be altered. For example, the second law holds that persons tend to develop friendly feelings toward those who with evident intention do their part in cooperative schemes publicly known to maximize the sum of advantages, or the average well-being (which variant is used). In either case the resulting psychological law is not as plausible as before. For suppose that certain institutions are adopted on the public understanding that the greater advantages of some counterbalance the lesser losses of others. Why should the acceptance of the principle of utility (in either form) by the more fortunate inspire the less advantaged to have friendly feelings toward them? This response would seem in fact to be rather surprising, especially if those in a better situation have pressed their claims by maintaining that a greater sum (or average) of well-being would result from their satisfaction. #RandolphHarris 14 of 22

No reciprocity principle is at work in this case and the appeal to utility may simply arouse suspicion. The concern which is expressed for all persons by counting each as one (by weighing everyone’s utility equally) is weak compared to that conveyed by the principles of justice. Thus the attachments generated within a well-ordered society regulated by the utility criterion are likely to vary widely between one sector of society and another. If any desire to act justly (now defined by the utilitarian principle) with a corresponding loss in stability, some groups may acquire little. To be sure, in any kind of well-ordered society the strength of the sense of justice will not be the same in all social groups. Yet to insure that mutual ties bind the entire society, each and every member of it, one must adopt something like the two principles of justice. It is evident why the utilitarian stresses the capacity for sympathy. Those who do not benefit from the better situation of others must identify with the greater sum (or average) f satisfaction else they will not desire to follow the utility criterion. Now such altruistic inclinations no doubt exist. Yet they are likely to be les strong than those brought about by the three psychological laws formulated as reciprocity principles; and a marked capacity for sympathetic identification seems relatively rare. Therefore thee feelings provide less support for the basic structure in society. In addition, as we have seen, following the utilitarian conception tends to be destructive of the self-esteem of those who lose out, particularly when they are already less fortunate. #RandolphHarris 15 of 22

Now it is characteristic of the morality of authority wen conceived as a morality for the social order as a whole to demand self-sacrifice for the sake of a higher good and to deprecate the worth of the individual and lesser associations. The emptiness of the self is to be overcome in the service of larger ends. The emptiness of the self is to be overcome in the service of larger ends. This doctrine is likely to encourage self-hatred with its destructive consequences. Certainly utilitarianism does not go to this extreme, but there is bound to be a similar effect which further weakens the capacity for sympathy and distorts the development of affective ties. By contrast, in a social system regulated by justice as fairness, identification with the good of others, and an appreciation of what they do as an element in our own good, might be quite strong. However, this is possible only because of the mutuality already implicit in the principles of justice. With the constant assurance expressed these principles, persons will develop a secure sense of their own worth that forms the basis for the love of humankind. By appealing straightway to the capacity for sympathy as a foundation of just conduct in the absence of reciprocity, the principle of utility not only requires more than justice as fairness but depends upon weaker and less common inclinations. Two other elements affect the strength of the sense of justice: the clarity of the moral conception and the attractiveness of its ideals. The contract view is more congruent with our good than its rivals; and assuming this conclusion here, it lends further to the support to the preceding considerations. #RandolphHarris 16 of 22

The greater clarity of principles of justice was considered earlier. In comparisons with teleological doctrines, the principles of justice define a perspicuous conception. By contrast, the idea of maximizing the aggregate of well-being, or of attaining the greatest perfection, is vague and amorphous. It is easier to ascertain when the equal liberties are infringed and to establish discrepancies from the difference principle than it is to decide whether unequal treatment increases (and the various priority rules) offers them with greater sharpness to the intellect and there by secures heir hold on the mind. The explanations and reasons given for them are more easily understood and accepted; the conduct expected of us is more clearly defined by publicly acknowledge criteria. On all three counts, then, the contract view seems to possess greater stability. It is remarkable that Mill appears to agree with this conclusion. He notes that with the advance of civilization persons come more and more to recognize that society between human beings is manifestly impossible on any other basis than that the interests of all are to be consulted. The improvement in political institutions removes the opposition of interests and the barriers and inequalities that encourage individuals and classes to disregard one another’s claims. The natural end of this development is a state of the human mind in which each person has a feeling of unity with others. Mills maintains that when this state of mind is perfected, it leads the individual to desire for oneself only those things in the benefits of which others are included. One of a person’s natural wants is that there should be harmony between one’s feelings and those of one’s fellow citizens. One desires to know that one’s aims and theirs are not in opposition, that one is not setting oneself against their good but is furthering what they really wish for. #RandolphHarris 17 of 22

Now the desire Mill characterizes here is the desire to act upon the difference principle (or some similar criterion), and not a desire to act on the principle of utility. Mill does not notice the discrepancy; but he seems intuitively to recognize that a perfectly just society in which human’s aims are reconciled in ways acceptable to them all would be one that follows the notion of reciprocity expressed by the principles of justice. His remarks accord with the idea that a stable conception of justice which elicits human’s natural sentiments of unity and fellow feeling is more likely to incorporate these principles than the utilitarian standard. And this conclusion is borne out by Mill’s account of the roots of the sense of justice, for he believes that this sentiment arises not only from sympathy but also from the natural instinct of self-protection and the desire for security. This double origin suggests that, in his view, justice strikes a balance between altruism and the claims of self and therefore involves a notion of reciprocity. The contract doctrine achieves the same result, but it does so not by an ad hoc weighing of two competing tendencies, but by a theoretical construction which leads to the appropriate reciprocity principles as the conclusion. In arguing for the greater stability of the principles of justice I have assumed that certain psychological laws are true, or approximately so. I shall not pursue the question of stability beyond this point. We may note however that one might ask how is it that human beings have acquired a nature described by these psychological principles. #RandolphHarris 18 of 22

The theory of evolution would suggest that it is the outcome of natural selection; the capacity for a sense of justice and the oral feelings is an adaption of humankind to its place in nature. As ethologists maintain, the behaviour patterns of a species, and the psychological mechanisms of their acquisition, are just as much its characteristics as are the distinctive features of its bodily structures; and these patterns of behaviour have an evolution exactly as organs and bones do. It seems clear that for members of a species which lives instable social groups, the ability to comply with fair cooperative arrangements and to develop the sentiments necessary to support them is highly advantageous, especially when individuals have a long life and are dependent on one another. These conditions guarantee innumerable occasions when mutual justice consistently adhered to its beneficial to all parties. Biologists do not always distinguish between altruism and other kinds of moral conduct. Frequently behaviour is classified as either altruistic or egoistic. We can draw a distinction between altruism and reciprocal altruism (or what I should prefer to call simply reciprocity). The latter is the biological analogue of the cooperative virtues of fairness and good faith. The crucial question here, however, is whether the principles of justice are closer to the tendency of evolution than principle of utility. #RandolphHarris 19 of 22

Offhand it would seem if the selection is always f individual and of their genetic lines, and if the capacity for the various forms of moral behaviour has some genetic basis, then altruism in the strict sense would generally be limited to kin and the smaller face-to-face groups. In these causes the willingness to make considerable self-sacrifice would favour one’s descendants and tend to be selected. Turning to the other extreme, a society which had a strong propensity to supererogatory conduct in its relations with other societies would jeopardize the existence of its own distinctive culture and its members would risk domination. Therefore one might conjecture that the capacity to act from the more universal forms of rational benevolence is likely to be eliminated, whereas the capacity to follow the principles of justice and natural duty in relations between groups and individuals other than kin would be favoured. We can also see how the system of the moral feelings might evolve as inclinations supporting the natural duties and as stabilizing mechanisms for just schemes. If this is correct, then once again the principles of justice are more securely based. These remarks are not intended as justifying reasons for the contract view. The main grounds for the principles of justice have already been presented. At this point we are simply checking whether the conception already adopted is a feasible one and not so unstable that some other choice might be better. We are in the second part of the argument in which we ask if the acknowledgement previously made should be reconsidered. #RandolphHarris 20 of 22

I do not contend then that justice as fairness is the most stable conception of justice. The understanding required to answer this question is far beyond the primitive theory I have sketched. The conception agreed to need only be stable enough. The organized political, social, and religious associations of our time are at work to induce individual humans not to arrive at one’s convictions by one’s own thinking but to take as one’s own such convictions as they keep ready-mad for one. Any human who thinks for oneself and at the same time is spiritually free is to the associations something inconvenient and even uncanny. One does not offer sufficient guarantee that one will merge oneself in their organizations in the way they wish. All corporate bodies look today for their strength not so much to the spiritual worth of ideas they represent and to do that of the people who belong to them, as to the attainment of the highest possible degree of unity and exclusiveness. It is here that they expect to find their strongest power for offense and defense. The history of our time is characterized by a lack of reason which has no parallel in the past. Future historians will one day analyze this history in detail, and test by means of it their learning and their freedom from prejudice. However, for all future times there will be, as there is for today only one explanation, that we sought to live and to carry on with a civilization which has no ethical principle behind it. #RandolphHarris 21 of 22

Ethics are responsibility without limit towards all that lives. I still arrive, in order to laugh and to cry, in order to fear and to hope, the rhythm of my heart is the birth and death of all that are alive. I am the mayfly metamorphosing in the surface of the river, and I am the bird which, when spring comes, arrives in time to eat the mayfly. I am the frog swimming happily in the clear water of a pond, and I am also the grass-snake who, approaching in silence, feeds itself on the frog. My joy is like spring, so warm it makes flowers bloom in all walks of life. My pain is like a river of tears, so full it fills up the four oceans. Please call me by my true names, so I can hear all my cries and my laughs at once, so I can see that my joy and pain are one. Please call me by my true names, so I can wake up, and so the door of my heart can be left open, the door of compassion. May He who blessed our fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, bless the people of this congregation, and of all other congregations; them, their wives, their sons, their daughters and all their dear ones. May His blessings also vouchsafed unto those who dedicate the maintain Synagogues, unto those who enter therein to worship, and unto those who provide for the wayfarer, and are charitable to the poor. May He also bless those who faithfully devote themselves to the needs of the community and to the rebuilding of America. May the Holy One, blessed be He, remove from them all sickness, preserve them in health, forgive their sins, prosper the work of their hands and bestow blessings upon them and upon all America, their brethren, and let us say, Amen. #RandolphHarris 22 of 22

CRESLEIGH RIVERSIDE AT PLUMAS RANCH

MODEL NOW OPEN Plumas Lake, CA |

Now Selling!

Residence Two a spacious single story home with approximately 2,600 square feet of home thoughtfully designed to maximize every available foot of space. Three bedrooms, three bathrooms, and a three car garage all come included in this home. The layout if an entertainer’s dream with large kitchen and working island, dining room connected through the butler’s pantry, and a large great room overlooking the ample rear yard.

Best of all, each Cresleigh home comes fully equipped with an All Ready connected home! This smart home package comes included with your home and features great tools including: video door bell and digital deadbolt for the front door, connect home hub so you can set scenes and routines to make life just a little easier. Two smart switches and USB outlets are also included, plus we’ll gift you a Google Home Hub and Google Home Mini! https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-riverside-at-plumas-ranch/residence-2/

#CresleighHomes