Do Not Try Indulging in Overoptimistic Claptraps!

Leadership is a people process. The significant problems we face cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that created them. It calls for the application of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that allow each of us to successfully influence thins. We know what a person thinks not when one tells us what one thinks, but by one’s actions. In the twenty-first century it is not easy to comprehend the views that prevailed a few hundred years ago as to the nature of life and living creatures. Then as now every person, every day of one’s life, was bombarded by evidence for the orderly operation of cause and effect in biological phenomena. If the body was cut with a knife, blood would flow; if food was long withheld, weight would decrease; if the nostrils and mouth were tightly closed, death would result. Nevertheless, in the nonscientific intellectual climate that prevailed during the Middle Ages, such clear-cut evidence that living creatures, like inanimate objects, are controlled in at least some aspects of the behaviour by regular natural laws had little effect on popular ideas about biology. Vitalism in its most extreme form governed whatever thought there was on the subject. Living creatures, and especially humans, were thought to lie outside the realm of subject matter suitable for investigation and understanding; life and the living body were believed to be replete with mysteries that must forever lie beyond the comprehension of mortal humans. Not only was it therefore hopeless to try to make careful observations and deductions on life process, it was also, in some dark and frightening way, wrong to do so. Magic potions and incantations were employed to combat disease and injury, not just because nothing better was available but also because such techniques were clearly best suited to deal with the nonphysical mysteries believed to underlie the afflictions under treatment. It is likely that the gradual emergence of biology as a field of study and activity appropriate to its name—the science of life—would have commenced many years earlier than it did had it not been for the delaying effect of mystical belief in an unbridgeable chasm separating animate and inanimate processes. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21

Nevertheless, a start was finally made. It came in the early 1600s, when William Harvey made his observations and put forth his deductions upon the movements of the heart and blood. While every schoolboy learns William Harvey to be called “the father of modern biology.” Harvey’s great fame rests on two bases, one of one’s own making and the other a philosophic consequence of his discovery. Harvey’s first claim to fame was based on the thoroughly scientific method he employed in arriving at his conclusions. Not only had preceded him (unsound though many of them were), but her performed a long series of experiments of his own. He dissected and minutely described what he saw in dogs, pigs, serpents, frogs, fishes, slugs, oysters, lobsters, and insects. He watched fluid circulating in the transparent shrimp and the unhatched chick. He traced the arteries and veins of valves in both heart and blood vessels. He actually calculated the capacity of each ventricle and estimated the resulting rate of flow of the blood. He observed the results of obstructing the flow of blood in selected arteries and veins and performed other experiment to test his theories. In short, Harvey employed the same sequence of careful observation, hypothesis formation, testing of hypothesis by new observation, and modification of hypothesis to fit the new data that describes all modern scientific research. In the early seventeenth century this was unique in biological investigation. It was a tremendous departure from the mixture of unsupported speculation and religious mysticism that had permeated the work of most of Harvey’s predecessors. Although the introduction into biology of the scientific method was accomplishment enough to justify Harvey’s fame, the philosophic implications of his discovery were probably even more important to future of biology. For Harvey had shown that ordinary physical laws—in particular, those governing the pumping and flow of liquids—were capable of accounting for the functions performed by the heart, an organ that had previously clearly belonged in the realm of the unknowable. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21

Harvey’s explanation of the properties of the circulatory system constituted the first important evidence that the principles of physical science were relevant to at least some of the process underlying the phenomena of life. It would carry us too far afield to trace in detail the historical development of understanding the functions of the various organs of the body tht has followed the pioneering work of William Harvey. Suffice it to say that faith in the hypothesis that such functions can be understood through the applications of the principles of physics has not led to disappointment. In addition to knowledge that the heart is a pump, we now know that the lungs comprise a mechanism for the introduction of oxygen into the body’s chemical plant and for the extraction of gaseous waste products; we understand a great deal about the digestive process in the stomach and intestines; we can follow the transport of oxygen, food, waste products by the blood; the chemical purification activities of the kidneys and the liver are pretty well detailed; the glandular secretion of hormones and the resulting stimulation of specific chemical reactions in remote organs of the body are no longer the mystery they once were. The validity of our understanding of the functioning of the organs of the body is evidenced by spectacular recent developments in surgery. The employment of heart/lung machines to substitute for the natural organs during lengthy operations on the respiratory or circulatory system is one modern example. The surgical implantation into the body of battery-powered electronic pulse generations that supplement the inadequate muscle-contracting capabilities of a defective heart is another. The artificial kidney machines, which prolong indefinitely the lives of patients with defective kidneys by periodic chemical removals of the accumulated impurities in the blood, are yet another example of success of the mechanistic approach to body function. Most spectacular of all are the transplantation of organs into human patients from other humans or animals. Despite the great difficulties occasioned by the body’s rejection mechanism, which causes a chemical reaction that frequently attacks and destroys organic transplants from others individuals, the medical literature now includes numerous reports of successful transplants of kidneys from one human to another. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21

May be an image of furniture and living room

In 1953, the first successful first temporarily successful transplantation of a human kidney was performed by Dr. Jean Hamburger in Paris. A 16-ear-old boy received the kidney of his mother as living donor transplantation. In 1954, Dr. Joeseph E. Murray and his colleagues at Peter Bent Bingham Hospital in Boston performed that first truly successful kidney transplant from one twin to another. This was done without any immunosuppressive medication. Since then, kidney transplantation has become a rather standard procedure. In 1961, immunosuppression advancements allowed for the development of powerful immunosuppressives. They became widely available and, in combination, helped decreased the chance for kidney rejection. In the past patients had even lived for weeks after the implantation of kidneys from monkeys to substitute for their own nonfunctioning organs. There have been lung transplants in humans. In there 1950, there was also a report attesting to the current good state of good human health of a Brooklyn puppy more than six months after its heart had been replaced by a transplant from another, unrelated dog. Around this time, there was at least one cause on record of the transplantation of a heart in a human patient dying from failure of his own organ. Unfortunately, a human heart was not available for transplantation, and the heart of a monkey had to be used. It was inadequate and the patient died, but not for an hour or so. From the viewpoint of the patient the operations was clearly unsuccessful, but as an indication of the essential soundness of the modern understanding of the functions of the body and organs, even the temporarily successful operation of human’s circulatory system by the heart of a money must be considered to be an important accomplishment. We have dedicated this portion of the report as an inquiry into the adequacy of the purely physical laws of nature for explanation of the properties of living organisms, the successful interpretation of the functions of the body organs in terms of machinelike processes is of the greatest significance. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21

May be an image of furniture and kitchen

Our twenty-first century familiarity with current medical events such as those just cited can easily blind us to their philosophic importance. We should not forget that, before the thread of development initiated by Harvey’s pioneering work on the circulatory system, there was general belief in the essential inapplicability of physical principles to body processes. Today the population point of view is entirely different. With the possible exception of “mental” activities, most of us now would subscribe to the thesis that the essential functions of the parts of the body are all ultimately understandable in terms of the same physical las that govern the operations of inanimate machines. If we are to attain the goal of a physical interpretation of all life processes, this removal from the essential functions of the body organs of any claim of dependence on nonphysical explanation, important though it is, is only the first of many steps. As our next step, let us consider the material out of which living organisms are constructed to inquire whether non-physical, vitalistic principles are needed to account for their existence and properties. We shall commence by going back in history and tracing the development of understanding of the similarities and difference between organic and inorganic matter. With all the changes and challenges society faces, there has never been a greater need to determine our priorities, and within renewed focus, align our daily actions with our purpose or goals. When Plato said that the telos of man is “to become as much as possible similar to the God,” such a telos gives unconditional character to the more imperative. If, however, the telos is, as in the hedonistic school, the greatest possible amount of pleasure to be derived from life, no unconditional imperative is at work, but merely the very much conditioned advice to calculate well what amount of pain must be suffered in order to attain to the greatest possible amount of pleasure. Between these two extremes of the definition of man’s inner telos are several definitions which set a finite aim according to the formulation, but in which something unconditional with respect to the moral imperative shines through. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21

This is true of utilitarianism, in which the moral imperative demands work for “the greatest happiness of the greatest number.” Here pleasure is replaced by “happiness,” and above all, it is not the individual happiness, but that of the many, which is the aim. And the happiness of the many is not possible without self-restraint in the individual’s search for happiness. Therefore, a demand appears that cannot be derived from the merely natural trends of the individual, a demand that implies the acceptance of the other person as a person, and an unconditional element besides, whether acknowledged or not. The Epicurean deal with the problems of the telos and the moral imperative from another angle. They also use the term “happiness,” but for them happiness consists in the life of the spirit in community with friends, and in the creative participation in the cognitive and aesthetic values of their culture. The relationship to friends as well as to cultural creativity demands unconditional subjection to the norms and structures of friendship, knowledge, and beauty. Nearest to Plato’s definition of the human telos is Aristotle’s though that man’s highest aim is participation in the eternal divine self-intuition. This state can be fully reached only be entering the eternity through the “theoretical” life, the life of intuition. Wherever this state of participation is reached, there is eudaimonia, fulfillment under the guidance of a “good daimon,” a half-divine power. To reach this goal is an unconditional imperative. And since the practical virtues are the precondition for fulfillment through participation in the divine, they also have unconditional validity. We have used the Greek word eudaimonia (badly translated as “happiness”) in order to point out the moral aim as described in several ethical schools. Eudaimonia belongs to those words that have suffered a marked deterioration in meaning. Most responsible for this process were the Stoic and Christian polemics against Epicureanism, which often unjustly confused Epicureanism with hedonism. The word in itself means fulfillment with divine help, and consequent happiness. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21

This happiness does not exclude pleasures, but the pleasure is not the aim, nor is happiness itself the aim. It is the companion of fulfillment with divine help, and consequent happiness. This happiness does not exclude pleasure, but the pleasure is not the aim, nor is happiness itself the aim. It is the companion of fulfillment, reached together with it. If we derogate this concept of eudaimonia, we must also derogate the Christian hope for eternal blessedness. For, even though the Calvinist names the glory of God as the aim of one’s life, one experiences blessedness in fulfilling this aim and serving the glory of God. The same, of course, is true of theosis (“becoming Godlike”), fruitio Dei (“enjoying the intuition of the divine life”), or working for and participating in the “Kingdom of God” described as the aim of the individual human, of humankind, and the Universe. Happiness or blessedness as the emotional awareness of fulfillment is not in conflict with the unconditional, and therefore religious, character of the moral imperative. A conflict exists only when the function of self-transcendence in one’s finitude. However, this diminution of human to finite process has rather rarely occurred in the history of thought. Even highly secularized philosophers were conscious of the function of self-transcendence in human’s spirit, and consequently of dimension of the unconditional or the religious dimension. There are two concepts in the preceding discussion that have been frequently used without having been thoroughly discussed. The one is “conscience,” the channel through which the unconditional character of the moral imperative is experienced, and the other is the term “religious.” Regarding the concept of religion, I cannot restrict myself to the following summary: the fundamental concept of religion is the state of being grasped by an ultimate concern, by an infinite interest, by something one takes unconditionally seriously. It is in view of this concept that we have formulated the main proposition, namely, that there is a religious dimension in the moral imperative itself. Derived from the fundamental concept of religion is the traditional concept that religion is a particular expression, in symbols of thought and action, of such ultimate concern within a social group as, for example, a church. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21

May be an image of furniture and outdoors

If the moral imperative were derived from religion in the traditional sense of the word, secular ethics would have to sever any ties with religion, for it rejects direct dependence on any particular religion. If, however, the religious element is intrinsic to the moral imperative, no conflict is necessary. Babylonia had cloisters of wealth women—the naditus—dedicated to Sama, the Sun God. Though many cities had these convents, only the nadistus of Sippar were celibate. The naditu institution existed in the Old Babylonian era and peaked under Hammurapi and his son Samsuiluna (1792-1712 B.C.). In fact, Hammurapi had a personal stake in it, because his sister Iltani was a naditu. Naditus dedicated to Samas, as opposed to other gods, enjoyed the highest status of any nuns and, like the vestal virgins, had unusual economic clout for women Becoming a naditu was a family decision, never a question of religious vocation. First daughters were designated at birth as future naditus and were “raised to the god” until they entered the cloister. Naditus were initiated when they were about fifteen years old, always in the first three days of the Babylonian month of Tebet, our December-January. On the first and third days, offerings were made to Samas and his wife, Aja. Day two was a festival in memory of deceased naditus and ended with a banquet. On this day as well, a thread symbolic of her future union with the god Samas was placed on the naditu’s hand, and the cloister made her a bridal gift or food, drink, and silver. Additional ceremonies were performed for high-ranking naditus, such as the Princess Iltani, to obtain divine consent before the initiates could be consecrated. The initiation, like that of the vestal virgins, included important financial transaction between the naditu’s family and the cloister. The family provided an impressive dowry consisting of a portion of the father’s estate, jewelry, furniture, dishes, looms, cows, and sheep. One naditu also received nine slave girls, twenty-four gowns, forty-two headdresses, and even the shroud for her far-off funeral. Initiated naditus gained the legal authority to administer their own property or they could appoint their brothers to do so. A naditu whose dowry did not include property had the right to share her father’s estate equally with her brothers. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21

Oddly, many of the initiates could not enter the cloister until years later, when space became available. It was, in fact, unlike any other cloister. Instead of communal buildings, such as the Atrium Vestae, the naditus lived in individual houses within a walled compound. The houses were expensive, and though some naditus bought more than one, others had to be content with renting rooms. The cloister housed one hundred to two hundred naditus, and though they were not forbidden to leave, this rarely happened. Several male administrators also lived there, and male relatives visited. Nonetheless, the naditus were expected to maintain lifelong celibacy, though the penalty for lapses was less severe than it was for unchaste high priestesses or wives, who were executed. In fact, during Hammurapi’s reign, two naditus gave birth and were neither disgraced nor expelled from the cloister. Naditus who lived outside its walls, however, or who entered a tavern, were sentenced to death by burning. The daily life of a naditu was a mixture of religious and secular activities. She made twice-daily offerings, and on the twentieth of each month, a say sacred to Samas, she had to provide a heartier oblation of met and beer. She also participated in some of the seven annual festivals and in various religious banquets. A typical naditu also devoted much energy to managing her estate, trading in silver and barely, and renting out fields, orchards, houses shops, slaves, and oxen. One naditu, for instance supervised 117 employees. Many naditus were involved in cooperative ventures, and they often acquired lands adjacent to each other’s own and co-owned fields. Though the naditus were an economic force, their power and privileged status embittered some male business associates. After business had been transacted, it was not uncommon for these men to turn on the naditus and pummel them. Because the celibate naditus remained childless, they were permitted to adopt younger naditus or slave girls to care for them in their old age. This was an important consideration, for naditus were typically long-lived. The Princess Iltani, for instance, served for over sixty years before her gods invited her to a feast, the happy euphemism for a naditu’s death. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21

The cloistered naditus survived for over three centuries. Their dedication to Samas and Aja provided religious security for their families because of their intimate connection to these important deities. The secular benefits were equally significant. Their celibacy was a guarantee against the overpopulation that divided inherited Babylonian estates into puny strips. In return, the naditus were rewarded with status and privilege, and financial independence unique among Babylonian women. People have always believed—have seemed driven and determined, in the face of overwhelming countervailing evidence, to believe—that moral society as well as moral individua life is possible; that however rare or partial its actual achievement, it is in principle possible for individuals to live morally with the advantages of security, order, and opportunity provided by a powerful state, and for that state itself to behave morally with its constituent’s and with its neighbours. It was the accomplishment of Machiavelli, in a kind of Godel’s proof of political economy, to show that such is not the case, that the good and moral life within an orderly society is contingent on the amorality of the state that males in possible. When individuals come together to form a social entity, there must be a period during which the association is revocable; the individuals may find themselves subject to more constraint than they are willing to accept, and may opt out. This revocable period is the hinge of life or death for the social organism; for if the individuals disperse, the larger entity disappears. This larger entity, driven by its own will to power, will therefore do everything it can to end this period of revocability as quickly as possible; for so soon as the association achieves such specialization as to make it impossible for the parts to opt out and survive, at just that point the association becomes irrevocable, and the organism no longer in danger of perishing by virtue of the wiled dispersion of its components. Aggregates, therefore, always act to increase the dependence of member components. The aggregate wants to bring it about that when the aggregate itself is endangered, its components parts will have no choice but to remain loyal. My country is right or wrong. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21

When the mountain men came down out of the Rockies in the nineteenth century and took up life in the village, there was a period in which, if community constraints proved too onerous, they could pack back into the mountains and resume their isolated and independent existences. The present-day citizen of Denver or Butte or Taos has lost this option, is no longer capable of wilderness survival, and is held, moreover, by ties to the union or the grange, to the American Legion or the Rotary Club, and by Social Security, whence will come one’s pension. The aggregate is not satisfied, however, to have its component parts stick together only because they could not survive on their own. Such allegiance is halfhearted. (“We have a terrible president, the country is on a disastrous course, but I guess we have to rally behind him. We have no choice.”) The aggregate wants to generate patriotic fervour, to being it about that individuals lose sight of their separate lives, lose awareness of their ubiquitous conflict with the state, that their identification with the state expunge the purview of individual life with its joys and sorrows, its hopes, its ideals, and particularly its ability to criticize the state in terms of reason, of common sense, and of the discrepancy between the announced aims of the state and the actions the state is undertaking. The unison of Sieg Heil by the packed and disciplined masses at Nuremburg, that is what the state wants; or the faith of Nikolai Rostov, who in holy warlike exaltation charges forward alone, an embodiment of the Russian spirit, against the massed French forces at Austerlitz. Think not of what your country can do for you, said President Kennedy, but of what you can do for your country. There is, therefore, a constant struggle between the individual and the state. For the state would like to eat up all individual power, all independence, discretion, freedom, autonomy. The individual opposes this demand, insists that the state not take any more. In times of danger to the state, however, individual can be persuaded to relinquish additional bits of freedom, since the security of the individual rests ultimately with the security of the state. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21

In the state, knowing this, is always tempted to create crises that will justify arrogating to itself additional increments of the independence of its components. In this continuing struggle, the last century has witnesses a decisive shift in favor of the state. The Fascists and Communist movements since 1917 managed to appropriate vastly more power than citizens had ever in the past been willing to give up. The values of art, of individual conscience, of personal preference and belief, all presumably secure withing the private realm, have in our times been confiscated by the state. Nor is this a vicissitude; it is a tendency. A tendency made almost invincible by modern technology, which by virtue of its ever-increasing size, cost, complexity, and power, is, in this conflict, intrinsically on the side of the state. The nature of modern commerce and communication automatically empower the state at the expense of the individual. Television exerts a steady pressure on the private person to live in the public World, in the ambience of the aggregate, with the values and the assumptions of the aggregate, rather than in the private sphere. Whatever is being shown on the screen, whether debates or advertising or talk shows, the viewer is always being instructed on how to live in the public World, while the private World is being subtly and insidiously impugned, is being made to disappear. We in America like to think that our government is accountable. We are relieved when the president, though gaining power at an alarming rate, is reined by Congress or the courts. However, as we take comfort in the prudence of our constitutional checks and balances, we fail to note that nothing limits the action of the state as whole. If the president and Congress concur in an action then, thought it be a monstrous crime, we will do it. At no time has this nation been willing to subject itself to the authority of a World court. We are willing to given an accounting of our actions to the United Nations, but if that body brands our account as lies—as at times it is—we will ignore and go our own way. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21

May be an image of 1 person, sunglasses and jewelry

The deplorable state of the World today testifies silently to the widespread spiritual ignorance which is at the root of the trouble. Class hates class, group strives against group, selfishness is prevalent everywhere—this situation could only arise amongst creatures ignorant of the higher purpose on this Earth. Consequently, to help make available knowledge of the truth and to elevate moral character constitute the noble task to which nay human could devote oneself. The ways of arbitration—like the way of contractual treaties—for the purpose of avoiding war presupposes a loyal respect for promises and a level of simple honesty, an expression of obligations in deeds rather than oratory which, we know now from painful experience, does not exist in imperfect humanity. It is merely wishful dreaming to propose it as the practical alternative to war. The brutal realities of our situation have to be squarely seen without illusion. Nor is the bringing of the system of military naval and air defense to ever-increasing magnitude an effectual alternative. The same procedure is sure to be followed in the opposite camp. The result one day in some moment of emotional reaction to tragedy or of national cupidity will be an explosion of all these massed and concentrated engines of violence. Sloppy sentiments about human brotherhood are not t all needed to pad out the plain fact that all of us ought to work with goodwill for the general good. The dark possibility tht destroys our future can give place to a brighter one only when enough philosophically illumined people are to be found in each country. Nor need that be many—a few in each city would throw out enough influence to bring about this charge. It is the tragedy of our own age that philosophical thoughts should be classed with idle dreams when they are the most practical of all today. The present situation shows the utter failure of religion to control humans; it will never be more than a temporary palliative; TRUTH alone can solve all national and international problems as much as it solves the personal one. However, truth is based on intelligence and humankind’s intelligence still lags remarkably behind. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21

So the adepts contribute their little will come through evolution, and then humans will learn one’s personal responsibility for all deeds under the laws of re-embodiment and compensation; later one will learn that one cannot separate oneself from the ALL, that the same Mind runs though us all, and that humanity is just a big family wherein the older members are responsible for the welfare of the younger ones, the rich for the poorer, and so on. Universal compassion will then be the only right outlook for a properly educated humans. Where would the crude racial separatism or the equally crude hatred of the bourgeoisie be then? This divine consciousness dissolves intenerate prejudice and removes embittered passion. However, no human will can manufacture it. The World must acknowledge a higher authority than fleshly desire and evolve by self-striving beyond its present materiality before the Overself’s grace will confer such an exalted state. Without trying to indulge in overoptimistic claptrap, it may nevertheless be predicted that, as the twenty-first century advances, human life will change both physically and culturally in an astounding way. It is true that no particular war can possibly end all war. It is the untamed animal in humans which causes all their personal fights, tribal aggressions, and national wars. It is the spiritual nature of humans which urges them to live peaceably and harmoniously with one’s fellows. That humans can rid themselves of external bloodshed without troubling to rid themselves of its internal causes within oneself, is one of their intellectual-born illusions. It may be kept at a distance for a longer time than before but it cannot be kept there permanently while the passions of hatred, anger, and greed thrive in one’s heart. However, it is also true that one’s instruments of collective violence have now become so destructive, so terrible, and so cruel that their very results are forcing one to contemplate abandoning such violence altogether, and to turn towards peaceful discussion for the settlement of one’s disputes. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21

May be an image of furniture and bedroom

At the very simplest and most immediate level, why not create a cadre of professional and paraprofessional “life-organizers”? For example, we probably need fewer psychotherapist burrowing molelike into is and ego, and more people who can helps us, even in little ways, to pull our daily lives together. Among the most widely heard do-you-not-believe-it phrases in use today are: “Tomorrow I will get myself organized” or “I am getting my act together.” Yet structuring one’s life under today’s conditions of high social and technological turmoil is harder and harder to do. The breakup of normal Second Wave structures, the overchoice of lifestyles, schedules, and educational opportunities—all, as we have seen, increase the difficulty. For the less affluent, economic pressures impose high structure. For the middle class, and especially their children, the reverse is true. Why not recognize this fact? Some psychiatrists today perform a life-organizing function. Instead of years on the couch, they offer practical assistance in finding work, locating a girl or boyfriend, budgeting one’s money, following a diet, and so forth. We need many more such consultants, structure-providers, and we need feel no shame about seeking their services. In education, we need to begin paying attention to matters routinely ignored. We spend long hours trying to teach a variety of courses on, say, the structure of government or the structure of the amoeba. However, how much effort goes into studying the structure of everyday life—the way time is allocated, the personal uses of money, the places to go for help in a society exploding with complexity? We take for granted that young people already know their way around our social structure. In fact, most have only the dimmest image of the way the World of work or business is organized. Most students have no conception of the architecture of their own city’s economy, or the way the local bureaucracy operates, or the place to go to lodge a complaint against a merchant. Most do not even understand how their own schools—even universities—are structured, let alone how such structures are changing under the impact of the Fourth Wave. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21

May be an image of 1 person and standing

We also need to take a fresh look at structure-providing institutions—including cults. A sensible society should provide a spectrum of institutions, ranging from those that are free-form to those that are tightly structured. We need open classrooms as well as traditional schools. We need easy-come-easy-go organization as well as rigid monastic orders (secular as well as religious). Today the gap between the total structure offered by the cult and the seemingly total structutrelessness of daily life may well be too wide. If we find the complete subjugation demanded by many cults to be repellent, we should perhaps encourage the formation of what might be called “semi-cults” that lie somewhere between structureless freedom and tightly structured regimentation. Religious organizations, vegetarians, and other sects of groupings might actually be encouraged to form communities in which moderate to high structure is imposed on those who wish to live that way. These semi-cults might be licensed or monitored to assure that they do not engage in physical or mental violence, embezzlement, extortion, or other such practices, and could be set up so that people in need of external structure can join them for a six-month or one-year hitch—and then leave without pressure or recriminations. Some people might find it helpful to live within a semi-cult for a time, then return to the outside World, then plug back into the organization for a time, and so forth, alternating between the demands of high, imposed structure and the freedom offered by the larger society. Should this not be possible for them? Such semi-cults also suggest the need for secular organizations that lie somewhere between the freedom of civilian life and the discipline of the army. Why not a variety of civilian life and the discipline of the army. Why not a variety of civilian service corps, perhaps organized by cities, school systems, or even private companies to perform useful community service on a contract basis employing young people who might live together under strict disciplinary rules and be paid army-scale wages. (To bring these paychecks up to the prevailing minimum wage, corps members might receive supplementary vouchers good for university tuition or training.) #RandolphHarris 16 of 21

A “pollution crops,” a “public sanitation corps,” a “paramedic corps,” or a corps designed to assist the elderly—such organizations could yield high dividends for both community and individual. In addition to providing useful services and a degree of life-structure, such organization could also help bring much-needed meaning into the lives of their members—not some spurious mystical or political theology but the simple ideal of service to community. Beyond such measures, however, we shall need to integrate personal meaning with larger, more encompassing World views. It is not enough for people to understand (or think they understand) their own small contributions to society. Even if inarticulate, they must also have some sense of how they fit into the larger scheme of things. As the Fourth Wave arrives we will need to formulate sweeping new integrative World view—coherent syntheses, not merely blips—that tie things together. No single World view can ever capture the whole truth. Only by applying multiple and temporary metaphours can we gain a rounded (if still incomplete) picture of the World. However, to acknowledge this axiom is not the same as saying life is meaningless. Indeed, even if life is meaningless in some cosmic sense, we can and often do construct meaning, drawing it from decent social relations and picturing ourselves as part of a larger drama—the coherent unfolding of history. In building Fourth Wave civilization, therefore, we must go beyond the attack on loneliness. We must also begin providing a framework of order and purpose in life. For meaning, structure, and community are interrelated preconditions for a livable future. In working toward these ends, it will help to understand that the present agony of social isolation, the impersonality, structurelessness, and sense of meaninglessness from which so many people suffer are symptoms of the breakdown of the past rather than intimations of the future. It will not be enough, however, for us to change society. For as we shape Forth Wave civilization will in turn shape us. A new psycho-sphere is emerging that will fundamentally alter our character. And it is to this—the personality of the future—that we next turn. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21

May be an image of 2 people, people standing and suit

However, let us return to our theme of vocation and develop it a step further. Perhaps the young fellows really want to do something, that is, something worthwhile, for only a worthwhile achievement finishes a doing. A person rests when one has finished a real job. (The striking illustration of this is that, statistically, the best mental health used to be found among locomotive engineers, and is now found among air-line pilots! The task is useful, exacting, it sets in motion a big machine, and when it is over, it is done with.) If the object is important, it gives structure to many a day’s action and dreaming—one might even continue in school. Unfortunately our society balks us, for it simple does not take seriously the fact, or the possibility, that people want this; nor the philosophic truth that excepts in worthwhile activity there is no way to be happy. For instance, in a standard questionnaire for delinquents, by Milton Barron, in a hundred headings there do not appear the questions, “What do you want to be? What do you want to work at? What do you want to achieve?” (But Donald Taft’s Criminology, which Barron is adapting, has the sentence: “Absence of vocational interest at the age when it is normal…is tell-tale of a starved life.”) In despair, the fifteen-year-olds hand around and do nothing at all, neither work nor play. Without a worthwhile prospect, without a sense of justification, the made-play of the Police Athletic League is not interesting, it is not their own. They do not do their school work, for they are waiting to quit; and it is hard, as well shall see, for them to get part-time jobs. Indeed, the young fellows (not only delinquents) spend a vast amount of time doing nothing. They hang around together, but do not talk about any thing, nor even—if you watch their faces—do they passively take in the scene. Conversely, at the movies, where the real scene is by-passed, they watch with absorbed fantasy, and afterward sometimes mimic what they saw. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21

If there is nothing worthwhile, it is hard to do anything at all. When one does nothing, one is threatened by the question, is one nothing? To this insulting doubt, however, there is a lively response: a system of values centering around threatened grownupness and defensive conceit. This is the so-called “threatened masculinity,” not in the sense of being called a girl, but of being called, precisely, “boy,” the term of insult to some cultures. With this, there is an endless compulsion to prove potency and demand esteem. The boys do not talk about much of interest, but there is a vast amount of hot rhetoric to assert that oneself is “as good as anybody else,” no more useless, stupid, or cowardly. For instance, if they play a game, the interest in the game is weak: they are looking elsewhere when the ball is served, there are lapses in attention, they smoke cigarettes even while playing handball. The interest in victory is surprisingly weak: there is not much glow of self-esteem. However, the need for proof is overwhelming: “I won you, didn’ I? I won you last week too, didn’ I?” During childhood, they played games with fierce intensity, giving themselves as a sacrifice to the game, for play was the chief business of growth, finding and making themselves in the World. Now when they are too old merely to play, to what shall they give themselves with fierce intensity? They cannot play for recreation, since they have not been used up. The proving behaviour is endless. Since each activity is not interesting to begin with, its value does not deepen and it does not bear much repetition. Its value as proof quickly diminishes. In these circumstances, the inevitable tendency is to raise the ante of the compulsive useless activity that proves one is potent and not useless. (This analysis applies equally to these juveniles and to status-seeking junior executive in business firms and on Madison Avenue.) It is not surprising then, that, as Frederic Thrasher says in The Gang, “Other things being equal, the imaginative boy has an excellent chance to become the leaders of the gang. He has the power to make things interesting for them. He ‘thinks up things for us to do.’” At this point let us intervene and see what the Official Spokesmen say. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21

Come before the Father in prayer, wearing the breastplate of righteousness. Then you can stand in the throne room and say, “Father, I stand before You because of the righteousness of Your Son Jesus Christ. I come boldly before You without fear or condemnation or a sense of inferiority.” Someone may say, “You mean you think you are not inferior to God?” I did not say I was not. It is His righteousness that is not inferior. I am a partaker of that righteousness. (A Corinthians 5.21.) The Word says I am a joint-heir with Jesus. Do you think Jesus is inferior? We are the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus. God’s righteousness cannot be inferior or unworthy. When you put all this armour on, you will have on God’s clothes. When you stand before the devil to resist him, he thinks God is inside that armour and He really is. (John 14.23.) With God’s armour on, Satan does not see you; he sees God’s clothes. However, the minute you raise up your helmet and say, “I prayed, but it is not working out” or “I do not feel healed,” Satan knows that it is not God because He does not talk that way. Put on the prayer armour. Gird your loins with the Truth for this part holds all the armour in place. If you do not have the Truth, you are defeated going somewhere to happened! If you do not have the Truth, you do not know how to pray accurately. If you do not have the Truth, you will not know who you are in Christ Jesus. Prayer is your legal right to come to God’s throne, wearing the breastplate of righteousness and the helmet of salvation with your loins girt about with the Truth, your feet shod with the gospel of peace, holding up the shield of faith, and having the Sword of the Spirit in your mouth. “The heart of the wise teacheth one’s mouth,” reports Proverbs 16.23. Love animals: God has given them the rudiments of thought and joy untroubled. Do not trouble their joy, do not harass them, do not deprive them of their happiness, do not work against God’s intent. Humans, do not pride yourself on superiority to animals; they are without sin, and you, with your greatness, defile the Earth by your appearance on it, and leave the traced of your foulness after you—alas, it is true of almost every one of us! #RandolphHarris 20 of 21

O God, I thank thee for all the creatures thou hast made, so perfect in their kind—great animals like the elephant and the rhinoceros, humorous animals like the camel and the monkey, friendly ones like the dog and the cat, working ones like the horse and the ox, timid ones like the squirrel and the rabbit, majestic ones like the lion and the tiger, for birds with their songs. O Lord give us such love for Thy creation, that love may cast out fear, and all Thy creatures see in man their priest and friend, through Jesus Christ our Lord. I have blotted out as a thick cloud thy transgressions, and as a mist thy sins; return unto Me, for I have redeemed thee. Sing, O ye Heavens, for the Lord hath done it; shouted aloud, O depths of the Earth; break forth into singing, ye mountains and forest, and every tree therein; for the Lord hath redeemed Jacob, and doth glorify Himself in America. Our redeemer, the Lord of Hosts is His name, the Holy One of America. O America, that art saved by the Lord with an everlasting salvation, ye shall not be ashamed nor confused, World without end. And ye shall eat in plenty and be satisfied, and shall praise the name of the Lord your God, that hath dealt wondrously with you; and My people shall never be put to shame. And ye shall know that I am in the midst of America, and that I am the Lord your God, and there is none else; and My people shall never again be put to shame. For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace; the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands. Behold is my salvation; I trust Him and I will not be afraid, for the Lord God is my strength and song; and He is become my salvation. Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation. And in that day shall ye say: Give thanks unto the Lord, proclaim His name, declare His doings among the peoples, record that His name is exalted. Sing unto the Lord, for He hath done gloriously; let this be made known in all the Earth. Sing for joy, O inhabitants of America; for the great is the Holy One of America in your midst. And it shall be said on that say: Lo, this our God in whom we placed our hope that He might save us; this is the Lord for whom we have waited; we will be glad and rejoice in His salvation. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21

Cresleigh Homes

Get ready to be impressed by our inviting floor plan at Havenwood Cresleigh. Step into the kitchen of your dreams with a large island and butler’s pantry.

Experience pampering at its best in the primary suite with a walk-in closes, a large soaking tub, and expansive counter space with dual sinks.

The mere idea of a Cresleigh Home, the longing here for a Cresleigh Home, you will never know how slow the moments go till I am near to my Cresleigh Home. I see my Cresleigh Home in every flower, I see my Cresleigh Home in the stars above.