In the development of the human race we find an ever increasing range of socialization; the original small group based on blood affinity gives way to ever larger groups based on a common language, a common social order, a common faith. The larger size of the group does not necessarily mean that the pathological qualities of narcissism are reduced. As was remarked earlier, the group narcissism of the “democrats” or the “fake news media” is as malignant as the extreme narcissism of a single person can be. Yet in general we find that in the process of socialization which leads to the formation of larger groups, the need for co-operation with many other and different people not connected among themselves by ties of blood, tends to counteract the narcissistic charge within the group. The same holds true in another respect, which we have in the past discussed in connection with benign individual narcissism: inasmuch as the large group (nation, state, or religion) makes it an object of its narcissistic pride to achieve something valuable in the fields of material, intellectual, or artistic production, the very process of work in such fields tends to lessen the narcissistic charge. The history of the Roman Catholic Church is one of many examples of the peculiar mixture of narcissism and the counteracting forces within a large group. The elements counteracting narcissism with the Catholic Church are, first of all, the concept of the universality of man and of a “catholic” religion which is no longer the religion of one particular tribe or nation. #RandolphHarris 1 of 16

Second, the idea of personal humility which follows from the idea of personal humility which follows from the idea of God and the denial of idols. The existence of God implies that no men can be God, that no individual can be omniscient or omnipotent. It thus sets a definite limit to man’s narcissistic self-idolatry. However, at the same time the Church has nourished an intense narcissism; believing that the Church is the only chance of salvation and that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, its members were able to develop an intense narcissism inasmuch as they were members of such an extraordinary institution. The same occurred in relation to God; while the omniscience and omnipotence of God should have led to man’s humility, often the individual identified himself with God and thus developed an extraordinary degree of narcissism in this process of identification. This same ambiguity between a narcissistic or an anti-narcissistic function has occurred in all the other great religions, for example, in Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, and Protestantism. I have mentioned the Catholic religion not only because it is a well-known example, but mainly because the Roman Catholic religion was the basis both for humanism and for violent and fanatical religious narcissism at one and the same historical period: the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The humanists with the Church and those outside spoke in the name of a humanism which was the fountainhead of Christianity. Nicholas of Cusa preached religious tolerance for all men (De pace fidei); Ficino taught that love is the fundamental force of all creation (De amore); Erasmus demanded mutual tolerance and a democratization of the Church. #RandolphHarris 2 of 16

Thomas More, the nonconformists, spoke and died for the principes of universalism and human solidarity; Postel, building on the foundations laid by Nichoals and Erasmus, spoke of global peace and World unity (De orbis terrae concordia); Siculo, following Pico della Mirandola, spoke enthusiastically of man’s dignity, of his reason and virtue, and of his capacity for self-perfection. These men, with many others growing from the soil of Christian humanism, spoke in the name of universality, brotherliness, dignity, and reason. They fought for tolerance and peace. Against them stood the forces of fanaticism on both sides; that of Luther and that of the Church. The humanists tried to avoid the catastrophe; eventually the fanatics on both sides won. Religious persecution and war, culminating in the disastrous Thirty Years’ War, were a blow to humanist development from which Europe has still not recovered (one cannot help thinking of the analogy of Stalinism, destroying socialist humanism three hundred years later). Looking back to the religious hatred of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, its irrationalities are clear. If compared with the general principals, both sides spoke in the name of God, of Jesus as the Christ, of love, and they differed only in points which were of secondary importance. Yet they hated each other, and each was passionately convinced that humanity ended at the frontiers of one’s own religious faith. #RandolphHarris 3 of 16

The essence of this overestimation of ones’ own position and the hate for all who differ from it I narcissism. “We” are admirable; “they” are despicable. “We” are good; “they” are evil. Any criticism of one’s own doctrine is a vicious and unbearable attack; criticism of the others’ position is a well-meant attempt to help them to return to the truth. From the Renaissance onward, the great contradictory forces, group narcissism and humanism, have each developed in its own way. Unfortunately the development of group narcissism has vastly outstripped that of humanism. While it seemed possible in the late Middle Ages and at the time of the Renaissance that Europe was prepare for the emergence of a political and religious humanism, this promise failed to materialize. New forms of group narcissism emerged, and dominated the following centuries. This group narcissism assumed manifold forms: religious, national, racial, political. Protestants against Catholics, French against Germans, White against Blacks, Aryans against non-Aryans, Communists against capitalists; different as the contents are, psychologically we deal with the same narcissistic phenomenon and its resulting fanaticism and destructiveness. There are other more harmless forms of group narcissism directed toward small groups like lodges, small religious sects, “the old school tie,” et cetera. While the degree of narcissism in these cases may not be less than in those of the larger groups, the narcissism is less dangerous simply because the groups involved have little power, and hence little capacity to cause harm. #RandolphHarris 4 of 16

While group narcissism grew, its counterpart—humanism—also developed. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries—from Spinoza, Leibniz, Rousseau, Herder, Kant, to Goethe and Marx—the thought developed that mankind is one, that each individual carries within oneself all of humanity, that there must be no privileged groups claiming that their privileges are based on their intrinsic superiority. The First World War was a severe blow to humanism, and gave rise to an increasing orgy of group narcissism: national hysteria in all the belligerent countries of the First World War, Hitler’s racialism, Stalin’s party idolization, Muslim and Hindu religious fanaticism, Western anti-Communist fanaticism. These various manifestations of group narcissism have brought the World to the abyss of total destruction. As reaction to this threat to humanity, a renaissance of humanism can be observed today in all countries and among the representatives of diverse ideologies; there are radical humanists among Catholic and Protestant theologians, among socialist and nonsocialist philosophers. Whether the danger of total destruction, the ideas of the neohumanists and the bonds created between all men by the new means of communication will be sufficient to stop the effects of group narcissism is a question which may determine the fate of mankind. #RandolphHarris 5 of 16

The growing intensity of group narcissism—only shifting from religious to national, racial, and party narcissism—is, indeed, a surprising phenomenon. First of all because of the development of the humanist forces since the Renaissance, which we discussed earlier. Furthermore, because of the evolution of scientific method requires objectivity and realism, it requires seeing the World as it is, and not distorted by one’s own desires and fears. It requires being humble toward the facts of reality, and renouncing all hopes of omnipotence and omniscience. The need for critical thought, experimentation, proof; the attitude of doubting—these are precisely the methods of thought which tend to counter act the narcissistic orientation. Undoubtedly the method of scientific thinking has had its effect on the development of contemporary neohumanism, and it is not accidental that most of the outstanding natural scientists of our day are humanists. However, the vast majority of men in the West, although they have “learned” the scientific method in school or at the university, never really have been touched by the method of scientific, critical thinking. Even most of the professionals in the field of the natural sciences have remained technicians, and have not acquired a scientific attitude. For the majority of the population, the scientific method they were taught has had even less significance. Although it may be said that higher education has tended to soften and to modify personal and group narcissism to some extent, it has not prevented most of the “educated” people from joining enthusiastically the national, racial, and political movements which are the expression of contemporary group narcissism. #RandolphHarris 6 of 16

It seems that, on the contrary, science has created a new object for narcissism—technique. Man’s narcissistic pride in being the creator of a formerly undreamed-of World of things, the discoverer of ratio, television, atomic power, space travel, and even in being the potential destroyer of the entire globe, ha given him a new object for narcissistic self-inflation. In studying this whole problem of the development of narcissism in modern history, one is reminded of Dr. Freud’s statement that Copernicus, Darwin, and he himself deeply wounded man’s narcissism by undermining his belief in his unique role in the universe and his consciousness as being an elementary and irreducible reality. However, while man’s narcissism has been wounded in this manner, it has not been as greatly reduced as would appear. He has reacted by transferring his narcissism to other objects: nation, race, political creed, technique. In view of these facts the question is bound to arise over and over again: why call these trends neurotic? What is really wrong with them? Granted that with some people certain trends are predominant, even have a measure of rigidity, while quite different trends determine the behaviour of others, are not these varieties of pursuits merely the expression of given differences among people of different sets of values, different ways of coping with life? It is not natural, for instance, that a tenderhearted person will put stock in affection and a stronger person in independence and leadership? To raise these questions is useful because it is not only of theoretical but eminently practical importance to recognize the difference between such basic human strivings and evaluations and their neurotic counterparts. #RandolphHarris 7 of 16

The objectives of the two types of strivings are similar, but their basis and meaning are entirely different. The difference is almost as great as between +7 and -7: in both case we have number 7, just as we use the same words, affection, reason, perfection, but the prefix changes character and value. The contrasts underlying the apparent similarities have already been touched on in the comparison of the employee and the child Clare, but a few more generalized comparisons may illuminate further the difference between normal and neurotic trends. If there is affection for them, a wish for affection from other is only a feeling of having something in common with them. The emphasis then will be not only on the friendliness received but also on the positive feelings one is capable of having for others and of showing them. However, the neurotic need for affection is devoid of the value of reciprocity. For the neurotic person one’s own feelings of affection counts as little as if one were surrounded by strange and dangerous animals. To be accurate, one does not even really want the others’ affection, but is merely concerned, keenly and strenuously, that they make no aggressive move against one. The singular value lying in mutual understanding, tolerance, concern, sympathy has no place in the relationship. Similarly, if this striving were strong and alive in all of us, the striving to perfect our gifts and our human faculties is certainly worth our best efforts, so much so that no doubt the World would be a better place to live in. However, the neurotic need for perfection, while it may be expressed in identical term, has lost this special value, because it represents an attempt to be or appear perfect without change. #RandolphHarris 8 of 16

There is no possibility of improvement, because finding areas within the self that would need change is frightening and therefore avoided. The only real concern is to juggle away any deficiency lest one be exposed to attacks, and to preserve the secret feeling of superiority over others. As in the neurotic need for affection, the person’s own active participation is lacking or impaired. Instead of being an active striving, this trend is a static insistence upon an illusory status quo. A last comparison: if put into the service of pursuits that are themselves important, regarding it as a meaningful force, all of us have a high regard for will power. However, the neurotic faith in the omnipotence of will is illusory, because it completely disregards the limitations that many defy even the most determined efforts. No amount of will power gets us out of a Sunday-afternoon traffic jam. Furthermore, if the proving of its effectiveness becomes an aim in itself, the virtue of will power is nullified. Any obstacle standing in the way of momentary impulses will drive the person in the grip of this neurotic trend into blind and frantic action, regardless of whether one really want the particular object. The tables are actually reversed: it is not that one has will power, but that it has one. These examples may suffice to show that the neurotic pursuits are almost a caricature of the human values they resemble. They lack freedom, spontaneity, and meaning. All too often they involve illusory elements. Their value is only subjective, and lies in the fact that they hold the more or less desperate promise of safety and of a solution for all problems. #RandolphHarris 9 of 16

And one further point should be emphasized: not only are the neurotic trends devoid of the human values that they mimic, but they do not even represent what the person wants. If one puts all one’s energies into the pursuit of social prestige or power, for example, one may believe that one really wants these goals; actually, as we have seen, one is merely driven to want them. It is as if one were flying in an airplane which one believes one is piloting, while actually the plane is directed by remote control. It remains to understand approximately how and to what extent the neurotic trends may determine the person’s character and influence one’s life. In the first place, these pursuits render it necessary for one to develop certain subsidiary attitudes, feelings, and types of behaviour. If one’s trend is toward unlimited independence, one will desire secrecy and seclusion, be wary of anything resembling an intrusion into one’s privacy, develop techniques for keeping others at a distance. If one’s trend is toward a constriction of life, one will be modest, undemanding, and ready to yield to anyone who is more aggressive than one. Also, the neurotic trends largely determine the image a person has of what one is or should be. All neurotic persons are markedly unstable in their self-evaluation, wavering between an inflated and a deflated image of themselves. When a neurotic trend is recognized it becomes possible to understand specifically the reasons why a particular person is aware of certain evaluations of oneself and represses others, why one is consciously or unconsciously exceedingly proud of certain attitudes or qualities and despises others for n discernible objective reason. #RandolphHarris 10 of 16

For example, if A has built up a protective belief in reason and foresight one will not only overrate what can be accomplished by reason in general, but also take a special pride in one’s power of reasoning, one’s judgment, one’s predictions. One’s notions of one’s superiority over others will then derive primarily from a conviction that one’s is a superior intelligence. And if B feels one cannot possibly stand on one’s own, but must have a “partner” who gives content and direction to one’s life, one is bound to overrate not only the power of love but also one’s own ability to love. One will mistake one’s need to hang on to another person for a particularly great ability to love, and will take a special pride in this illusory capacity. Finally, if C’s neurotic trend is to master any situation by one’s own efforts, to be self-sufficient at any price, one will take an excessive pride in being capable and self-reliant and in never needing anybody. The maintenance of these beliefs—A’s belief in one’s superior power of reasoning, B’s in one’s living nature, C’s in one’s competence to handle one’s affairs quite by oneself—becomes as compulsive as the neurotic trends the produced them. However, the pride taken in these qualities is sensitive and vulnerable, and for good reasons. Its foundation is none too solid. It is built on too narrow a basis and contains too many illusory elements. It is actually a pride in the qualities that are required in the service of the neurotic trends rather than in qualities actually existing. In actual fact B has very little ability to love, but one’s belief in this quality is indispensable lest one recognize the falseness of one’s pursuits. #RandolphHarris 11 of 16

If one harboured any doubt as to one’s loving nature one would have to recognize that in reality one searches not for someone to love but for someone who will devote one’s life exclusively to one, without one’s being able to give much in return. This would mean such a vital threat to one’s security that one would be bound to react to a criticism on this score with a mixture of panic and hostility one or the other prevailing. Similarly, A will react with extreme irritation to any doubt cast on one’s good judgment. C, on the other hand, whose pride lies in not needing anybody, must feel irritated at any suggestion that one cannot succeed without help or advice. The anxiety and hostility generated by such trespasses on the treasure image of self further impair a person’s relations to others, and thereby force one to adhere all the more strongly on one’s protective devices. We do not know about the psychology of primitive man in prehistoric time. Paleontology had reconstructed for us something of the physical circumstances of one’s existence. We know that he inhabited a harsh, uncertain and controllable World. We know that his puny physical capacities, unimplemented except for the crudest of tools and weapons, were arrayed against the violent powers of wind and water and against the brutish hostility of huge predators. Knowing these few, simple facts about prehistoric man and his environment, we can conjecture that he was totally occupied in a daily, all-engaging pursuit of security of limb and maintenance of life. In his earliest and certainly in any precommunal states, he had little time for introspection reverie and for the diagnostic question, “Am I unhappy?” #RandolphHarris 12 of 16

Many primitive men were certainly confronted by environments that demanded constant hard work and continued vigilance. Perhaps there is a psychological “zero point” at which a physically uncontrolled environment demands so much immediate and direct coping behaviour as to prohibit the development of a neurosis. And perhaps there are life situations in which the persistent threat of real danger to life militates against consideration of those possible and lesser fears which are the core of much neurotic anxiety. We know, for example, that during the period of the blitzkrieg assault upon London in World War II, and in the days of England’s greatest danger, there was a trend toward decreased frequency of visits to the neuropyychiatric clinics. To the degree that neuroses as we know them require some opportunity for self-sensitization it is unlikely that our prelinguistic ancestors had the time to develop them. It requires only the assumption of individual differences in stress tolerance and of extreme and frequent stress, however, to presume that primitive man was subject to sever mental breakdowns. These probably were disruptions of his adjustive integration that occurred in circumstances which repeatedly aroused violent fear or presented extreme deprivations. We have no basis on which to estimate with what frequency our most primitive forebears fell victim to mental illness. There are those who like to think that over the centuries there has been an increase in the incidence of personality disorder which is related to the growing complexity and speed of modern life. #RandolphHarris 13 of 16

There are those who like to think that over the centuries there has been an increase in the incidence of personality disorder which is related to the growing complexity and speed of modern life. These persons are inclined perhaps to think that primitive man was relatively free from psychic stress because one’s needs were simple and one’s problems few. However, his needs and problems were severe and recurrent, and permitted only temporary solution, and his resource were negligible. It may be that true neurosis (as distinguished from “total insanity”) requires the nourishment of introspection and self-consciousness. Perhaps it is only when man can both look within oneself and toward a future beyond the next moment, only when one can think of other people and how they perceive and evaluate him, that neurotic conflict can arise. Such weighing of self and others requires both time and the freedom from immediate task which are a common luxury of technologically advanced cultures. We may surmise that man’s thought has evolved from exclusive preoccupation with the immediate physical environment, from concern with food, clothing, shelter, and safety from the elements and from attack, then to concern with those extended environmental phenomena of sunrises and snowfalls, of moon and stars and seasons, and then finally to one’s relationship to the Universe and to one’s fellow man. The way to refuse, and what to refuse, is of primary importance in the hour of conflict. As we have seen, the believer needs to maintain an acute attitude, and, when necessary, the expression of refusal continually and persistently. This presupposes, of course, one’s standing in faith upon the foundation of one’s identification in death with Christ at Calvary. #RandolphHarris 14 of 16

In the hour of conflict, lest there might have been new ground given to evil spirits unknowingly—by accepting something from them, or believing some lie they have suggested to the mind—the believer should refuse all the possible things whereby they may have gained a new footing. The believer oneself will know, from one’s past experience, most of the ways by which the deceiving spirits have hitherto gained advantage over one; and one will instinctively turn to the points of refusal which have been of the most service to one in ones fight to freedom. The refusing in this way takes ground from them in many directions. The wider the scope covered by the act and attitude of refusal, the more thoroughly is the believer separating oneself from the deceiving spirits—who can only hold their ground by the consent of one’s will. By refusing all one once accepted from them one can become comparatively clear of ground given to them, so far as one’s choice and attitude is concerned. Theonomy does not exit in the tranquility of a vacuum, but mut be fought for in the area of time and space. However, even the partial achievement of theonomy, ambiguous and fragmentary as it may be, serves, in turn, as a point of reference for gauging the rhythm of history: History comes from and moves toward periods of theonomy, id est, periods in which the conditioned is open to the unconditional without claiming to be unconditioned itself. Theonomy unites the absolute and the relative element in the interpretation of history, the demand that everything relative become the vehicle of the absolute and the insight that nothing relative can ever become absolute itself. #RandolphHarris 15 of 16

These partial victories of theonomy are the inner-historical side of the Kingdom of God. However, its transcendent side, total realization of theonomy, is beyond temporality. Theonomy is not utopia. By specifying the transcendent goal of history as essentialization, this is the most meaningful statement of the content of theonomy. Perfect theonomy is universal essentialization. In Eternal Life the potentialities of man’s creative spirit are fulfilled. Man’s essence, along with the essences of all creatures, becomes fully transparent to the eternal ground of being. God and man are reunited. There are assertions that are valid only under a certain condition; this condition is that they stem not from experience but from pure reason. Thus, the question is: What is the ground of our belief in the truth of such assertions? No, what cases it? But the source of a belief, of a strong conviction, is a psychological problem; and it is often a very limited and narrow experience that bring about such a belief! It already presupposes that there are not only “data a posteriori” but also “data a priori”—“prior to experience.” Necessity and universal validity can never be given by experience: so, why should we think that they are present without experience at all? There are no individual judgments! An individual judgment is never “true,” never knowledge; only in connection, in relation to many judgments is there any guarantee. What distinguishes true from false beliefs? What is knowledge? He “knows” it, that is Heavenly! Necessity and universal validity can never be given by experience! Hence independently of experience, prior to all experience. Any insight that occurs a priori, hence independently of all experience, is from mere reason, a pure form of knowledge! #RandolphHarris 16 of 16

CRESLEIGH HAVENWOOD

Lincoln, CA | from the high $600s

Now Selling!

No appointment needed! Cresleigh Havenwood features four distinct floor plans ranging from 2,293 – 3,377 square feet and offering up to five bedrooms.  Each plan has been thoughtfully designed and includes great features such as single story homes, guest suites, optional offices, garage workshops, and more! Get the most out of your new home with Cresleigh’s All Ready smart home featuring all the connectivity needed to keep your house running. Best of all, each Cresleigh home comes with owned solar included! 

Located off of Virginiatown Road and McCourtney Road, residents of the 83 homesites of Cresleigh Havenwood will benefit from a brand new neighborhood in the charming City of Lincoln. Palo Verde Park, is  just down the street and there’s plenty of recreation to take part in all around town. https://cresleigh.com/havenwood/

#CresleighHomes