Home » boy (Page 15)
Category Archives: boy
Waiting for the Angel to Stir the Water, I Realized I am Almost a God the Creator—The World I See is My World!
The faces of the past are like leaves that settle to the ground, they may the Earth rich and thick, so that new fruit will come forth every Summer. Radio and television have contributed greatly to the demise of the art of conversation. Scientist have attempted to pin down the difference between the effects of radio and television and have not as yet been able to turn up any solid results. It seems to me that neither radio nor television is an agent of dialogue. They work indirectly. In both of them there is someone on the giving end and someone on the receiving end. There can be no contradictions, no back talk. When the radio or TV is turned on, conversation stops. Radio and TV can create the impression of conversation, but they cannot really make it come about. That, I think, is a privilege reserved for living human beings. The crucial issue is whether radio and television invite us, stimulate us, challenge us to converse or whether they are inimical to the conditions that make conversation possible. However, in that regard radio seems less harmful to me than television. Television encourages passivity, a comfortable consumer mentality, more than any other medium. It is the most successful means we have ever developed to help us “pass time.” However, real conversation demands time. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23
If we pass our time and kill our time, conversation cannot flourish. Radio, if I am seeing things rig, does not exert so strong an attraction. It promotes and demands more alertness, more imagination. It could be, if it wanted to be, an inexhaustible source of material for conversation. It cannot offer conversation itself, but it can offer the stuff of conversation. It can point us toward other, more basic and direct means of communication, calling our attention, say, to the uniqueness and delight of face-to-face conversation. In many cases, when people turn on the radio, they are still free. However, when an individual turns on the TV and there is a program that interests them, they become addicted to them and do not want to move from in front of the screen. With the assistance of radio technology, one can listen to a conversation somewhat in the same way that they listen to someone else speaking on the telephone, and to be honest, it can be much better than the gibberish and chatter coming out of most people’s mouths because there is a topic that is meant to keep people interested. What we hear on the radio is not, of course, as personal as a telephone conversation, but we take both the telephone and radio in stride. We are not fascinated by them, and so I can truly say that we are free either to listen to the radio or not listen to it. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23
My reaction to television is quite different. With television I lose a bit of my freedom. The minute the set is turned on and I see the picture on it, I experience what I would hesitate to call a compulsion but what is certainly a strong impulse or inclination to watch, even if I know intellectually that the program is utter drivel. I do not means to say that everything on television is drivel, some of it is very fascinating and highlights lifestyles we may be interested in, or inform of about myths we what to know about, some people even use television shows like a book club and discuss them so they forego sin by gossiping about real life people. People feel drawn to watch TV because it transports them to other realities they want to explore. Television holds a fascination far greater than that of radio. It exerts a kind of psychological spell that cannot be explained in terms of the content of any particular program. I have often asked myself what this fascination is, and I think it is rooted in some very profound level of our nature: By merely pressing a button, we can summon another World into our living rooms. That appeals to profound magical instincts. With television I become a kind of god. I can get rid of the reality I actually live with, and in its place I can create a new reality that appears when I press the button. #RandolpHarris 3 of 23
I am almost God the Creator. The World I see is my World. That reminds me of a story that not only illustrates this point vividly but also has the advantage of being true. A father and his six-year-old son were riding in the family car on a rainy, stormy day. They had a flat tire and had to stop to change it. Given the weather, that was a thoroughly unpleasant task, and the boy said to his father, “Daddy, can we not change to a different channel?” that is the way the child saw the World. If this one does not suit me, I will switch to another one. My wife recently read a novel by a Polish author and then told me a story, which I found utterly intriguing. The novel tells about the son of a very wealthy and eccentric man. The body grows up in his parental house but in total isolation. All he has available to him is a television set. He leaves it on all day, and he thinks that what he sees on it is reality (acute television intoxication). The young man never says a word, cannot say a word, because he knows nothing. All he can do is watch, because for him the World is nothing but a television show. However, precisely because he says nothing and because he eventually winds up in the house of one of the most powerful men in America, people think he must be terribly important. Pretty soon everyone knows his name, and in the end he is nominated for president because he never says anything and has not any opinions at all. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23
This story illustrates just what I have been talking about. Reality and what we see in television have become one, and I think that this experience of being able to press a button and makes another World become a reality is—as you have said—a profound, atavistic experience and one that we find incredibly seductive. That is why television has no need, as it were, to offer anything “good.” Its appeal lies in the very nature of the medium. People are drawn to it the way they are to shooting star or to any other exciting spectacle—where they can remain spectators and are in no way prepared to take any action themselves. The flip side of this illusion of power (that can be had by pressing a button) is, then, total passivity. With radio, the possibility still remains that listening can be a kind of response, a predisposition to activity that should not be confused with merely waiting for enlightenment. Television has brought about drastic changes in our listening habits. Now that television has gotten people of the habit of attending to anything fully and closely, we can no longer assume that we have our listeners’ attention. Television has reduced radio to a more modest role. Indeed, radio hardly qualifies as a mass medium any more—a situation for which we should perhaps be grateful. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23
Should not radio therefore be defining new tasks for itself that will take into account these differences we have been discussing here? I know that South German Radio has offered an extensive series of programs covering subjects ordinarily treated in university courses. The language has been somewhat simpler perhaps, but that is all to the good. (If instructors used simpler language to convey more content, it would be an improvement in our university courses.) This, it seems to me, is an admirable task for radio and one in which it can fill a significant educational role. It is remarkable with how little concentration people think, live, and work these days. Work is so fragmented and shattered that concentration is usually only mechanical and partial. We rarely encounter that full concentration that involves the whole person. A worker on an assembly line who has to tighten the same screw over and over again needs a certain kind of concentration is usually only mechanical and partial. We rarely encounter that full concentration that involves the whole person. A worker on an assembly line who has to tighten the same screw over and over again needs a certain kind of concentration to keep up one’s pace, but this type of concentration is capable of listening without one’s thoughts wandering off; one will not try to do five things at once because one cannot find any one thing that really satisfies one. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23
And, of course, without concentration we cannot accomplish anything. Everything we do without concentration will have little value. If concentration is lacking, our activities will not provide us or anyone else with satisfaction. That holds true for all of us, not just for great artist or scientist. I now turn to the notion of reflective equilibrium. The need for this idea arises as follows. According to the provisional aim of mortal philosophy, one might says that justice as fairness is the hypothesis that the principles which would be chosen in the original position are identical with those that match our considered judgments and so these principles describe our sense of justice. However, this interpretation is clearly oversimplified. In describing our sense of justice an allowance must be made for the likelihood that considered judgments are no doubt subject to certain irregularities and distortions despite the fact that they are rendered under favourable circumstances. When a person is presented with an intuitively appealing account of one’s sense of justice (one, say, which embodies various reasonable and natural presumptions), one may well revise one’s judgments to conform to its principles even though the theory does not fit one’s existing judgments exactly. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23
One is especially likely to do this if one can find an explanation for the deviations which undermines one’s confidence in one’s original judgments and if the conception presented yields a judgment which one finds one can now accept. From the standpoint of moral philosophy, the best account of a person’s sense of justice is not the one which fits one’s judgments prior to one’s examining any conception of justice, but rather the one which matches one’s judgments in reflective equilibrium. As we have seen, this state is one reached after a person has weighed various proposed conceptions and one has either revised one’s judgments to accord with one of them or held fast to one’s initial convictions (and the corresponding conception). The notion of reflective equilibrium introduces some complications that call for comment. For one thing, it is a notion characteristic of the study of principles which govern actions shaped by self-examination. Moral philosophy is Socratic: we may wan to change our present considered judgments once their regulative principles are brought to light. And we may want to do this even though these principles are a perfect fit. A knowledge of these principles may suggest further reflections that lead us to revise our judgments. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23
This feature is not peculiar though to moral philosophy, or to the study of other philosophical principles such as those of induction and scientific method. For example, while we may not expect a substantial revision of our sense of correct grammar in view of a linguistic theory the principles of which seem especially natural to us, such as change is not inconceivable, and no doubt our sense of grammaticalness may be affected to some degree anyway by this knowledge. However, these is a contrast, say, with physics. To take an extreme case, if we have an accurate account of motions of the Heavenly bodies that we do not find appealing, we cannot alter these motions to conform to a more attractive theory. It is simply good fortune that the principles of celestial mechanics have their intellectual beauty. There are, however, several interpretations of reflective equilibrium. For the nation varies depending upon whether one is to be presented with only those descriptions which more or less match one’s existing judgments except for minor discrepancies, or whether one is to be presented with all possible descriptions to which one might plausibly conform one’s judgements together with all relevant philosophical arguments for them. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23
In the first case we would be describing a person’s sense of justice more or less as it is although allowing for the smoothing out of certain irregularities; in the second case a person’s sense of justice may or may not undergo a radical shift. Clearly it is the second kind of reflective equilibrium that one is concerned with in moral philosophy. To be sure, it is doubtful where one can ever reach this state. For even if the idea of all possible descriptions and of all philosophically relevant arguments is well-defined (which is a questionable one), we cannot examine each of them. The most we can do is to study the conceptions of justice known to us through the tradition of moral philosophy and any further ones that occur to us, and then to consider these. This is pretty much what I shall do, since in presenting justice as fairness I shall compare its principles and arguments with a few other familiar views. In light of these remarks, justice as fairness can be understood as saying that the two principles previously mentioned would be chosen in the original position in preference to other traditional conceptions of justice, for example, those of utility and perfection; and that these principles give a better match with our considered judgments on reflection than these recognized alternatives. Thus justice as fairness moves us closer to the philosophical ideal; it does not, of course, achieve it. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23
This explanation of reflective equilibrium suggests straightway a number of further questions. For example, does a reflective equilibrium (in the sense of the philosophical ideal) exist? If s, is it unique? Even if it is unique, can it be reached? Perhaps the judgments from which we begin, or the course of reflection itself (or both), affect the resting point, if any, that we eventually achieve. It would be useless, however, to speculate about these matters here. They are far beyond our reach. I shall not even ask whether the principles that characterize one person’s considered judgments are the same as those that characterize another’s. I shall take for granted that these principles are either approximately the same for persons whose judgments are in reflective equilibrium, or if not, that their judgments divide along a few lines represented by the family of traditional doctrines that I shall discuss. (Indeed, one person may find oneself torn between opposing conceptions at the same time.) If human’s conceptions of justice finally turn out to differ, the ways in which they do is a matter of first importance. Of course we cannot know how these conceptions vary, or even whether they do, until we have a better account of their structure. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23
And this we now lack, even in the case of one human, or homogeneous group of humans. Here too there is likely to be a similarity with linguistics: if we can describe one person’s sense of grammar we shall surely know many things about the general structure of language. Similarly, if we should be able to characterize one (educated) person’s sense of justice, we would have a good beginning toward a theory of justice. We may suppose that everyone has in oneself the whole form of a moral conception. So for the purposes of this essay, the views of the reader and the author are the only ones that count. The opinions of others are useful only to clear our own heads. I wish to stress that a theory of justice is precisely that, namely, theory. It is a theory of the moral sentiments (to recall an eighteenth-century title) setting out the principles governing our moral powers, or, more specifically, our sense of justice. These is a definite if limited class of facts against which conjectured principles can be checked, namely, our considered judgments in reflective equilibrium. A theory of justice is subject to the same rules of method as other theories. Definitions and analyses of meaning do not have a special place: definition is but one device used in setting up the general structure of theory. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23
Once the whole framework is worked out, definitions have no distinct status and stand or fall with the theory itself. In any case, it is obviously impossible to develop a substantive theory of justice founded solely on truths of logic and definition. The analysis of moral concepts and the a priori, however traditionally understood, is too slender a basis. Moral philosophy must be free to use contingent assumptions and general facts as it pleases. There is no other way to give an account of our considered judgments in reflective equilibrium. This is the conception of the subject adopted by most classical British writers through Sidgwick. I see no reason to depart from it. I believe that his view goes back in its essentials to Aristotle’s procedure in the Nicomachean Ethics. And Sidgwick thought of the history of moral philosophy as a series of attempts to state in full breadth and clearness those primary intuitions of Reason, by the scientific application of which the common moral thought of humankind may be at once systematized and corrected. He takes for granted that philosophical reflection will lead to revisions in our considered judgments, and although there are elements of epistemological intuitionism in his doctrine, these are not given much weight when unsupported by systematic considerations. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23
Moreover, if we can find an accurate account of our moral conceptions, then questions of meaning and justification may prove much easier to answer. Indeed some of them may no longer be real questions at all. Note, for example, the extraordinary deepening of our understanding of the meaning and justification of statements in logical and mathematics made possible by developments since Frege and Cantor. A knowledge of the fundamental structures of logic ad set theory and their relation to mathematics has transformed the philosophy of these subjects in a way that conceptual analysis and linguistic investigations never could. One has only to observe the effect of the division of theories into those which are decidable and complete, undecidable yet complete, and neither complete no decidable. The problem of meaning and truth in logic and mathematics is profoundly altered by the discovery of logical systems illustrating these concepts. Once the substantive content of moral conceptions is better understood, a similar transformation may occur. It is possible that convincing answers to questions of the meaning of justification or moral judgments can be found in no other way. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23
I wish, then, to stress the central place of the study of out substantive moral conceptions. However, the corollary to recognizing their complexity is accepting the fact that our present theories are primitive and have great defect. We need to be tolerant of simplifications if they reveal and approximate the general outlines of our judgments. Objections by way of counterexamples are to be made with care, since these may tell us only what we know already, namely that our theory is wrong somewhere. The important thing is to find out how often and how far it is wrong. All theories are presumably mistaken in places. The real question at any given time is which of the views already proposed is the best approximation overall. To ascertain this some grasp of the structure of rival theories is surely necessary. It is for this reason that I have tried to classify and to discuss conceptions of justice by reference to their basic intuitive ideas, since these disclose the main difference between them. In presenting justice as fairness I shall contrast it with utilitarianism. I do this for various reasons, partly as an expository device, partly because the several variants of the utilitarian view have long dominated our philosophical tradition and continue to do so. And this dominance has been maintained despite the persistent misgivings that utilitarianism so easily arouses. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23
The explanation for this peculiar state of affairs lies, I believe, in the fact that no constructive alternative theory has been advanced which has the comparable virtues of clarity and system and which at the same time allays these doubts. Intuitionism is not constructive, perfectionism is unacceptable. My conjecture is that the contract doctrine properly worked out can fill this gap. I think justice as fairness an endeavor in this direction. Of course the contract theory as I shall present it is subject to the strictures that we have just noted. It is no exception to the primitiveness that marks existing moral theories. It is disheartening, for example, how little can now be said about priority rules; and while a lexical ordering may serve fairly well for some important cases, I assume that it will not be completely satisfactory. Nevertheless, we are free to use simplifying devices, and this I have often done. We should view a theory of justice as a guiding framework designed to focus our moral sensibilities and to put before our intuitive capacities more limited and manageable questions for judgment. The principles of justice identify certain considerations as morally relevant and the priority rules indicate the appropriate precedence when these conflict, while the conception of the original position defines the underlying idea which is to inform our deliberations. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23
If the scheme as a whole seems on reflection to clarify and to order our thoughts, and if it tends t reduce disagreements and to bring divergent convictions more in line, then it has done all that one may reasonably ask. Understood as parts of a framework that does indeed seem to help, the numerous simplifications may be regarded as provisionally justified. However, achieving this new vision of oneself—of who one would be—must not be presumed to be a mere snap of the fingers. It will require genuine openness to radical change in oneself, careful and creative instruction, and abundant supplies of divine grace. For most people all of this only comes to them after they reach the lowest level of their lives or the worst point of a decline, and discover the total hopelessness of being who they are. Most people cannot envision who they would be without the fears, angers, lusts, power ploys, and woundedness with which they have lived so long. They identify with their habit-worn feelings. When Jesus said to the man by the pool of Bethesda, waiting for the angel to stir the waters, “Wilt thou be made whole?” he was not just passing the time of day (John 5.6). #RandolphHarris 17 of 23
We are not told how old he was, but this man had been in his impotent condition for thirty-eight years! If made whole, he would have to deal with a career change of immense proportions. To all his relatives and acquaintances he would no longer be “the one whom we take to the pool every day to wait for the angel.” He would now be…What? Who? How would he identify himself? How would be now relate to others and they to him? He might even have to get a job. Doing what? However, really, this man’s problems was nothing compared to an individual undergoing the transformation of his feelings (emotions, sensations, desires) from those he learned in the home, school, and playground as he grew up to those that characterize the inner beings of Jesus Christ. He is not no to be one who will spend hours watching TV, listening to the radio, fantasizing sensual indulgence or revenge, or who will try to dominate or injure others in attitude, word, or deed. He will no repay evil for evil—push for push, blow for blow, taunt for taunt, hatred for hatred, contempt for contempt. He will not be always on the hunt to satisfy his lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and pride of life (1 John 2.16). #RandolphHarris 18 of 23
No wonder he has no real ideal who he will be; and he must content himself with the mere identity: “apprentice of Jesus.” That is the starting point from which his new identity will emerge, and it is in fact powerful enough to bear the load. “Behold, now it came to pass that the people of Nephi were exceedingly rejoiced, because the Lord had again delivered them out of the hands of their enemies; therefore they gave thanks unto the Lord their God; yea, and they did fast much and pray much, and they did worship God; yea, and they did fast much and pray much, and they did worship God with exceedingly great joy. And it came to pass in the nineteenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi, that Alma came unto his son Helaman and said unto him: Believest thou the words which I spake unto thee concerning those records which have been kept? And Helaman said unto him: Yea, I believe. And Alma said again: Believest thou in Jesus Christ, who shall come? And he said: Yea, I believe all the words which thou has spoken. And Alma said unto him again: Will ye keep my commandments? And he said: Yea, I will keep thy commandments with all my heart. Then Alma said unto him: Blessed art thou; and the Lord shall prosper thee in this land. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23
“However, behold, I have somewhat to prophesy unto thee; but what I prophesy unto thee ye shall not make known; yea, what I prophesy unto thee shall not be made known, even until the prophecy is fulfilled; therefore write the words which I shall say. And these are the words: Behold, I perceive that this very people, the Nephites, according to the spirit of revelation which is in me four hundred years from the time that Jesus Christ shall manifest himself unto them, shall dwindle in unbelief. Yea, and then shall they see wars and pestilences, yea, famines and bloodshed, even until the people of Nephi shall become extinct—yea, and this because they shall dwindle in unbelief and fall into the works of darkness, and lasciviousness, and all manner of iniquities; yea, I say unto you, that because they shall sin against so great light and knowledge, yea, I say unto you, that from that day, even the fourth generation shall not pass away before this great iniquity shall come. And when that great day cometh, behold, the time very soon cometh that those who are now, or the seed of those who are no numbered among the people of Nephi, shall no more be numbered among the people of Nephi. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23
“However, whosoever remaineth, and is not destroyed in that great and dreadful say, shall be numbered among the Lamanites, and shall become like unto them, all, save it be a few who shall be called the disciples of the Lord; and them shall the Lamanites pursue even until they shall become extinct. And now, because of iniquity, this prophecy shall be fulfilled. And now it came to pass that after Alma had said these things to Helaman, he blessed him, and also his other sons; and he also blessed the Earth for the righteous sake. And he said: Thus saith the Lord God—Cursed shall be the land, yea, this land, unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, unto destruction, which do wickedly, when they are fully ripe; and as I have said so shall it be; for this is the cursing and the blessing of God upon the land, for the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance. And now, when Alma has said these words he blessed the church, yea, all those who should stand fast in the faith from that time henceforth. And when Alma had done this he departed out of the land of Zarahemla, as if to go into the land of Melek. And it came to pass that he was never heard of more; as to his death or burial we know not of. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23
“Behold, this we know, that he was a righteous man; and the saying when abroad in the church that he was taken up by the Spirit, or buried by the hand of the Lord, even as Moses. However, behold, the scripture saith the Lord took Moses unto himself; and we suppose that he has also received Alma in the spirit, unto himself; therefore, for this cause we know nothing concerning his death and burial. And now it came to pass in the commencement of the nineteenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi, that Helaman went forth among the people to declare the word unto them. For behold, because of their wars with the Lamanites and the many little dissensions and disturbances which had been among the people, it became expedient that the word of God should be declared among them, yea, and that a regulation should be made throughout the church. Therefore, Helaman and his brethren went forth to establish the church again in all the land, yea, in every city throughout all the land which was possessed by the people of Nephi. And it came to pass that they did appoint priests and teachers throughout all the land, over all the churches. And now it came to pass that after Helaman and his brethren had appointed priests and teachers over the churches that there arose a dissension among them, and they would not give heed to the words of Helaman and his brethren. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23
“However, they grew proud, being lifted up in their hearts, because of their exceedingly great riches; therefore they grew rich in their own eyes, and would not give heed to their words, to walk uprightly before God,” reports Alma 45.1-24. Most High, from all directions about me, the spirits are praying. The spirits of east and south are praying. The spirits of west and north are praying. The spirits below and above are praying. The spirits are praying with me. We all together are praying to you, Ancient one. Please open Heaven’s door. Looking out at my yard, I see a leaf falling from a tree, and I raise a prayer of awe for God who caused such a marvel to me. This is a sign of the necessity of Grace, the Fatherly tenderness of God, the might of the all-prevailing Name; which are never weak, never diluted, never drawling, never ill-arranged, never provocation to listlessness; which exhibit an exquisite skill of antithesis and a rhythmical harmony which he ear is loth to lose. With a marvellous flexibility, my Lord, thank you for accepting all of your children with all of the different conditions of the human spirit. This is an example of a rich variety of construction, subject to a general law of threefold division. We give glory to God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23
Cresleigh Homes
Did quarantine have you deep-cleaning anything and everything? Take your new organizational skills to a whole new level with all the storage space at #MillsStation Residence 1! 🤓
Home Sites 17 & 77 are available in this floor plan. Give us a call at 916-333-1919 to set up a tour, or take a virtual tour on our website! Link in bio https://cresleigh.com/mills-station/residence-1/
Lives Have Been Elevated and Lives Have Been Cast Down by Human Speech!
Life is an answered question, but let us believe in the dignity and importance of the question. All laws being founded on rewards and punishments, it is supposed as a fundamental principle, that these motives have a regular and uniform influence on the mind, and both produce the god and prevent the evil actions. We may give to this influence what name we please; but, as it is usually conjoined with the action, it must be esteemed a cause, and be looked upon as an instance of that necessity, which we would here establish. The only proper object of hatred or vengeance, is a person or creature, endowed with thought and consciousness; and when any criminal or injurious actions excite that passion, it is only by their relation to the person, or connexion with one. Actions are, by their very nature, temporary and perishing; and where they proceed not from some case in the character and disposition of the person who performed them, they can neither redound to one’s honour, if good; nor infamy, if evil. The actions themselves may be blameable; they may be contrary to all the rules of morality and religion: However, the person is not answerable for them; and as they proceeded from nothing in one, that is durable and constant, and leave nothing of that nature behind them, it is impossible one can, upon their account, become the object of punishment or vengeance. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21
According to the principle, therefore, which denies necessity, and consequently causes, a human is as pure and untainted, after having committed the most horrid crime, as at the first moment of one’s birth, nor is one’s character any wise concerned in one’s actions; since they are not derived from it, and the wickedness of the one can never be used as a proof of the depravity of the other. Humans are not blamed for such actions, as they perform ignorantly and casually, whatever may be the consequences. Why? but because the principles of these actions are only momentary, and terminate in them alone. Humans are less blamed for such actions as they perform hastily and unpremeditatly, than for such as proceed from deliberation. For what reason? but because a hasty temper, though a constant cause of principle in the mind, operates only by intervals, and infects not the whole character. Again, repentance wipes off every crime, if attended with a reformation of life and manners. How is this to be accounted for? but by asserting, that actions render a person criminal, merely as they are proofs of criminal principles in the mind; and when, by an alteration of these principles, they cease to be just proofs, they likewise cease to be criminal. However, expect upon the doctrine of necessity, they never were just proofs, and consequently never were criminal. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21
When any opinion leads to absurdities, it is certainly false; but it is not certain than an opinion is false, because it is of dangerous consequence. By liberty, then, we can only mean a power of acting or not acting, according to the determinations of the will; that is, if we choose to remain at rest, we may; if we choose to move, we also may. We believe that our actions are subject to our own will, on most occasions; and imagine we believe, that the will itself is subject to nothing, because, when by a denial of it we are provoked to try, we believe, that it moves easily every way, and produces an image of itself, even on that side, on which it did not settle. This image, or faint motion, we persuade ourselves, could, at that time, have been completed into the thing itself; because, should that be denied, we find, upon a second trial, that, at present, it can. We consider not, that the fantastical desire of showing liberty, is here the motive of our actions. And it seems certain, that, however we may imagine we feel a liberty within ourselves, a spectator can commonly infer our actions from our motives and character; and even where one cannot, one concludes in general, that one might, were one perfectly acquainted with every circumstance of our situation and temper, and the most secret springs of our complexion and disposition. Now this is the very essence of necessity, according to the foregoing doctrine. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21
It seems a proposition, which will not admit of much dispute, that all our ideas are nothing but copies of our impressions, or, in other words, that it is impossible for us to think of anything, which we have not antecedently felt, either by our external or internal senses. I have endeavoured to explain and prove this proposition, and have expressed my hopes, that, by a proper application of it, humans many reach a greater clearness and precision in philosophical reasoning, than that they have hitherto been able to attain. Complex ideas may, perhaps, be well known by definition, which is nothing but an enumeration of those parts or simple ideas, that compose them. However, when we have pushed up definitions to the most simple ideas, and find still some ambiguity and obscurity; what resources are we then possessed of? By what invention can we throw light upon these ideas, and render them altogether precise and determinate to our intellectual view? Procedure the impressions or original, sentiments, from which these ideas are copied. These impressions are all strong and sensible. They admit not of ambiguity. They are not only places in a full light themselves, but many throws light on their correspondent ideas, which lie in obscurity. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21
And by this means, we may, perhaps, attain a new microscope or species of optics, by which, in the moral sciences, the most minute, and most simple ideas may be so enlarged as to fall readily under our apprehension, and be equally known with the grossest and most sensible ideas, that can be the object of our enquiry. To be fully acquainted, therefore, with the idea of power of necessary connexion, let us examine its impression; and in order to find the impression with greater certainty, let us search for it in all the courses, from which it may possible be derived. It may be said, that we are every moment conscious of internal power; while we feel, that, by the simple command of our will, we can move the organs of our body, or direct the faculties of our mind. An act of volition produces motion in our limbs, or raises a new idea in our imagination. This influence of the will we know by consciousness. Hence we acquire the idea of power or energy; and are certain, that we ourselves and all other intelligent beings are possessed of power. This idea, then, is an idea of reflection, since it arises from reflecting on the operations of our own mind, and on the command which is exercised by will, both over the organs of the body and faculties of the soul. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21
This influence, we may observe, is a fact, which, like all other natural events, can be known only by experience, and can never be foreseen from any apparent energy or power in the cause, which connects it with the effect, and renders the one an infallible consequence of the other. The motion f our body follows upon the command of our will. Of this we are every moment conscious. However, the means, by which this effected; the energy, by which the will performs so extraordinary an operation; of this we are so far from being immediately conscious, that it must for ever escape our most diligent enquiry. For first; is there any principle in all nature more mysterious than the union of soul with body; by which a supposed spiritual substance acquires such an influence over a material one, that the most refined thought is able to actuate the grossest matter? Were we empowered, by a secret wish, to remove mountains, or control the planets in their orbit; this extensive authority would not be more extraordinary, nor more beyond our comprehension. However, if by conscious we perceived any power or energy in the will, we must know the secret union of the soul and body, and the nature of both these substances; by which the one is able to operate, in so many instances, upon the other. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21
However, consciousness never deceives. Consequently, we are ever conscious any power. We learn the influence of our will from experience alone. And experience only teaches us, how one event constantly follows another; without instructing us in the secret connexion, which binds them together, and renders them inseparable. Interest in the truth is at the heart of our conversation. Our word “conversation” derives from the same Latin root as “conversion” does, and the possibility of a conversation, of a “turning around,” is always inherent in any true conversation, for when we converse we take part in a game in which exchange, not victory, is the goal, an intellectual game in which no one stars and everyone wins. So much for the preliminaries. We are witnessing the quiet demise of the art of letter writing. Can we still rescue the art of conversation? I fear we cannot, and I find that—to put it mildly—a great pity. I would even go a step further and call it a dreadful shame, for it is symptomatic of a defect in our culture that is no only regrettable but may also prove lethal. Perhaps I can put what I mean this way: We find ourselves giving more and more of our time and energy to things that have a point, that produce results. And when all is said and done, what are those results? Money, perhaps, or fame or a promotion. We hardly ever consider doing something any more that has no purpose. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21
We have forgotten that it is possible, even desirable and, above all, pleasurable to do something without a specific goal in mind. One of life’s greatest pleasures is to make use of our powers not to attain a goal but for the sake of an activity itself. Take love, for example. Love has no purpose, though many people might say: Of course it does! It is love, they say, that enables us to satisfy our pleasures of the flesh, marry, have children, and live a normal, middle-class or upper middle-class life. That is the purpose of love. And that is why love is so rare these days, love without goals, love in which the only thing of importance is that act of loving itself. In this kind of love it is being and not consuming that plays the key role. It is human self-expression, the full play of our human capacities. However, in a culture like ours, which is exclusively oriented to external goals like success, production, and consumption, we can easily lose sight of that kind of love. It fades so far into the distance that we can hardly even imagine it as a reality any more. Conversation has become either a commodity or a way of doing battle If the conversational battle takes place in the presence of a large audience, then it assumes the quality of a gladiatorial contest. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21
The participants go for each other’s throats, and each one tries to destroy the other. Or they converse merely to show how clever or superior they are. Or they converse to prove to themselves that they are in the right once again. Conversation is a way of demonstrating to themselves that what they happen to think is indeed correct. They go into conversation determined not to admit any new thoughts into their minds. They have their opinion. Each knows what the other will say. Let me give you a little example of what I mean. Suppose two people are on their way home together, two colleagues of mine, two psychoanalysts, and one of them says, “I am kind of tired.” And the other replies, “Me, too.” Now that many sound like a rather banal exchange, but it is not necessarily, for if these two people do the same kind of work, then they know just what the other’s tiredness is like, and so they have engaged in genuine, human communication: “We are both tired, and we have each let the other know how tired we are.” That is much more of a conversation than when two intellectuals start throwing big words around in a discussion of the latest theory about this or that. They are simply holding two separate monologues and do not touch each other at all. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21
The art of conversation and joy in conversation (conversation in the sense of being open, being together, usually takes verbal form, but it can also take the form of movement in dancing; there are many ways to converse)—these things will become possible again only if major changes take place in our culture, that is, only if we can rid ourselves of our monomaniacal, goal-oriented way of life. We need to cultivate attitudes that recognize the expression and full realization of human potential as the only worthwhile goals in life. To put it in the simplest possible terms: What matters is being as opposed to having, to just using and consuming and getting ahead. We have much more free time than we used to have (in many cases, as a society people have more leisure time, but a minority of the people have no free time at all), and therefore more opportunity for conversation. However, the more the external circumstances of our lives encourage it, the less internal inclination toward it we seem to have. There is too much that interferes with that being together that keeps a community sane and healthy; there are too many gadgets and Facebook and machines that get in our way. It seems that a very specific and pervasive attitude prevents us from engaging in what we have been calling “conversation” here. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21
And now with COVID-19, people are afraid to talk to each other, they will not hug each other nor shake hands, they are prohibited by law from going to church or the hair salon, and schools. Many people can no longer gather in large groups, even in their own homes, so society is becoming anti-social out of fear and the fear is being enforced by state and local governments in the forms of fines, jail time, and other penalties. However, even before COVID-19 was instilling fear in society, I think we could even say that many people (probably the great majority) are afraid of being left alone with each other without some plan of action, without a radio, or Smart TV, without a subject to discuss, without an agenda. They are afraid and feel totally lost. They have no idea what to say to each other. I do not know if this is holds true in Germany or Japan or China, but in the United States of America it is customary never to invite a single individual or just one other couple to your home. You always have to have more guests, because it can be embarrassing if you are only four. In a small company you have to work hard to keep things from being boring, unless you plan to play all your old Motown records. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21
If you have a party of six, you still will not have any real conversation, but you will at least avoid painful lulls in the chatter. Somebody will always have something to say. When one person runs out of subjects, someone else can step in. It is a kind of double concert. The music never stops, but no real conversation takes. Place. Victorian times where different, houses were sectioned off into many rooms and often times had a front parlor, near the foyer, to great guest, and another parlor in the back of the house for family. People also had intimate and meaning conversations because traveling was more complicated and communication in general was. So the Victorians enjoyed their intimate gathers and their conversations were as deep as diary entries. In modern times, homes are built for entertainment. The many of the homes have an open concept, which allows for connection of the main living areas and there is even an upstairs lobby in many of the new homes where people can gather out in the open. Many of the new homes made by Cresleigh are designed for entertainment, multi-generational living, spaces where people can come together and communicate in groups. However, in modern times, I suspect a lot of people think that if a form of entertainment does not cost anything it cannot be very satisfying. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21
Industry propaganda has trained us all to think that happiness comes from objects that we can buy, and very few of us are ready to believe any more that we can live and live very happily without all that stuff. That is a great change from the last, as we have discussed. One hundred and fifty years ago people bought very few things for their entertainment, even people with comfortable middle-class incomes. There was no radio, or Smart TV; there were no cars and no Facebook. However, there was conversation. People even built séance rooms to converse with “spirits.” Of course, if you look upon conversation as a means of “diversion,” hen your conversation will be mere twaddle. Real conversation does not “divert.” It requires concentration, a gather of our powers, not a scattering of them. If a person is not alive within oneself, then one’s conversation cannot be very lively either. However, if they were not afraid to step out of themselves, to show who they really are, to cast off the crutches they think they need to keep from tumbling down to nothingness, if they were not afraid to be alone with themselves and others, there are many people who could be much livelier. The power or energy by which this is effected, like that in other natural events, is unknown and inconceivable. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21
We are conscious of a power or energy in our own minds, when, by an act or command of our will, we raise up a new idea, fix the mind to the contemplation of it, turn it on all sides, and at last dismiss I for some other idea, when we think that we have surveyed it with sufficient accuracy. When we know a power, we know that very circumstance in the cause, by which it is enabled to produce the effect: For these are supposed to be synonymous. We must, therefore, know both the cause and effect, and the relation between them. However, we do not pretend to be acquitted with the nature of the human soul and the nature of an idea, or the aptitude of the one to produce the other. This is a real creation; a production of something out of nothing; Which implies a power so great, that may seem, at first sight, beyond the reach of any being, less than infinite. At least it must be owned, that such a power is not felt, nor known, nor even conceivable by the mind. We only feel the event, namely, the existence of an idea, consequent to a command of the will: But the manner, in which this operation is performed; the power, by which it is produced; is entirely beyond our comprehension. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21
The command of the mind over itself is limited, as well as its command over the body; and these limits are not known by reason, or any acquaintance with the nature of cause and effect; but only experience and observation, as in all other natural events and in the operation of external objects. Our authority over our sentiments and passions is much weaker than that over our ideas; and even the latter authority is circumscribed within very narrow boundaries. Will any one pretend to assign the ultimate reason of these boundaries, or show why the power is deficient in one case not in another. This self-command is very different at different ties. A human in health possesses more of it, than one languishing with sickness. We are more master of our thought in the morning than in the evening: Fasting, than after a full meal. Can we give any reason for these variations, except experience? Where then is the power, of which we pretend to be conscious? Is there not here, either in a spiritual or material substance, or both, some secret mechanism or structure of parts, upon which the effect depends, and which, being entirely unknown to us, renders the power or energy of the will equally unknown and incomprehensible? #RandolphHarris 15 of 21
Volition is surely an act of the mind, with which we are sufficiently acquainted. Reflect upon it. Consider it on all sides. Do you find anything in it like this creative power, by which it raises from nothing a new idea, and with a kind of FIAT, imitates the omnipotence of its Maker, if I may be allowed so to speak, who called forth into existence all the various scenes of nature? So far from being conscious of this energy in the will, it requires as certain experience, as that of which we are possessed, to convince us, that such extraordinary effects do ever result from a simple act of volition. The tongue, so tiny, is immensely powerful. Four reporters, good old body, having a few beers in a Denver bar in 1899, provided the specious spark that ignited the infamous Boxer Rebellion. The tongue is indeed mightier than generals and their armies. It can fuel our lives so they become fiery furnaces, or it can cool our lives with the soothing wind of the Spirit. It can be forged by Hell, or it can be a tool of Heaven. Offered to God on the altar, the tongue has awesome power for god. It can proclaim the life-changing message of salvation: “And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, ‘How beautiful are the feet of those who good news!’” reports Romans 10.14-15. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21
The tongue has power for sanctification as we share God’s Word: “Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth,” reports John 17.17. It has power for healing: “For when we came into Macedonia, this body of ours had no rest, but we were harassed at every turn—conflict on the outside, fears within. However, God, who comforts the downcast, comforts us by the coming of Titus, and not only by his coming but also by the comfort you had given him. He told us about your longing for me, your deep sorrow, your ardent concern for me, so that my joy was greater than ever,” reports 2 Corinthians 7.5-7. The tongue has power for worship: “Though Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that confess his name,” reports Hebrews 13.15. Humans, it is up to us. No sweat, no sanctification! First, we must ask God t cauterize our lips, confessing as Isaiah did, “Woe to me! I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty” reports Isaiah 6.5. Then we need to submit to the cleansing touch: “Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, ‘who shall I send? And who will go for us?’ And I said, ‘Here am I. Send me,’” reports Isaiah 6.8. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21
Isaiah’s outline as a spiritual exercise, performed with all one’s heart, will work wonders in our lives. Let us all do this today! In conjunction, there must also be an ongoing prayerfulness regarding the use of our tongues—regular, detailed prayer. This, coupled with the first step, will work a spiritual miracle. We must also resolve to discipline ourselves regarding the use of the tongue, making solemn resolutions such as the following: to perpetually and loving speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4.15). To refrain from being party to or a conduit for gossip (Proverbs 16.28; 17.9; 26.20). To refrain from insincere flatter (Proverbs 26.28). To refrain from running down another (James 4.11). To refrain from degrading humour (Ephesians 5.4). To refrain from sarcasm (Proverbs 26.24-25). To memorize Scriptures which teacher the proper use of the tongue (speech). Human, discipline your tongue for the purpose of Godliness! “Who keeps the tongue doth keep one’s soul.” A flaming spear out of the chaos Dear Lord in Heaven, come to your people and be a skillful hand against the chaos. God, please come to your people and be a mind keenly ordered amidst the chaos. God, please come to your people as a faithful protector through all the chaos. God, please come to your people as we are lost in the expanse of limitless space containing infinite numbers of stars but filled with emptiness. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21
We cast ourselves into your measureless darkness, confident that you will come if only we wait. Though the night may be long, we will still wait for you, God, offering our patience in sacrifice to win your presence. “And now, my son, I have somewhat to say concerning the restoration of which has been spoken; for behold, some have wrestled the scriptures, and have gone far astray because of this thing. And I perceive that thy mind has been worried also concerning this thing. However, behold, I will explain it unto thee. I say unto thee, my son, that the plan of restoration is requisite with the justice of God; for it is requisite that all things should be restored to their proper order. Behold, it is requisite and just, according to the power and resurrection of Christ, that the soul of humans should be restored to its body, and that every part of the body should be restored to itself. And it is requisite with the justice of God that humans should be judged according to their works; and if their works were good in this life, and the desires of their hearts were good, that they should also, at the last day, be restored unto that which is good. And if their works are evil they shall be restored unto them for evil. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21
Therefore, all things shall be restored to their proper order, every thing to its natural frame—mortality raised to immortality, corruption to incorruption—raised to endless happiness to inherit the kingdom of God, or to endless misery to inherit the kingdom of the devil, the one on one hand, the other on the other—the one raised to happiness according to one’s desires of happiness, or good according to one’s desires of good; and the other to evil according to one’s desires of evil; for as one has desired to do evil all the day long even so shall one have one’s reward of evil when the night cometh. And so it is on the other hand. If one hath repented of one’s sins, and desired righteousness until the end of one’s days, even so one shall be rewarded unto righteousness. These are they that are redeemed of the Lord; yea, these are they that are taken out, that are delivered from that endless night of darkness; and thus they stand or fall; for behold, they are their own judges, whether to do good or do evil. Now, the decrees of God are unalterable; therefore, the way is prepared that whosoever will may walk therein and be saved. And now behold, my son, do not risk one more offense against your God upon those points of doctrine, which ye have hitherto risked to commit sin. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21
“Do not suppose, because it has been spoken concerning restoration, that ye shall be restored from sin to happiness. Behold, I say unto you, wickedness never was happiness. And now, my son, all humans that are, in a carnal state, are in he gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity; they are without God in the World, and they have gone contrary to the nature of God; therefore, they are in a state contrary to the nature of happiness. And now behold, is the meaning of the word restoration to take a thing of a natural state and place it in an unnatural state, or to place it in a state opposite to its nature? O, my son, this is not the case; but the meaning of the word restoration is to bring back again evil for evil, or carnal for carnal, or devilish for devilish—good for that which is righteous; just for that which is just; merciful for that which is merciful. Therefore, my son, see that you are merciful unto your brethren; deal justly, judge righteously, and do good continually; and if ye do all these things then shall ye receive your reward; yea, ye shall have mercy restored unto you again; ye shall have justice restored unto you again; ye shall have a righteous judgment restored unto you again; and you shall have good rewarded unto you again. For that which ye do send out shall return unto you again, and be restored; therefore, the word restoration more fully condemneth the sinner, and justifieth one not at all,” reports Alma 41.1-15. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21
Cresleigh Homes
Time to explore more #CresleighHomes! Our blog today takes a look at #Bluffs, the cul-de-sac community located at #PlumasRanch! Click the link in our bio to give it a read. 👍 https://cresleigh.com/blog/
On the edge of sight I can see a wonder: The Lord in all His glory. If I send swift thoughts racing after Him, I cannot overtake Him; His careful steps keep ahead of my impetuous racing. I call out to God: “Father, for the sake of the one who loves you, I beg you to stop.” He comes to a halt and I can approach. God says, “If you had done that first, it would have been better.” I remember, and call to God in love, and wait for Him to stop for me. May God, who pressed out, is life, is power, may God whose roaring calls us to the ritual, to drink, may God, granting gifts, filling us with immortality, may God, King of the Universe, be praised in His prayer. May God, hear me, come to join me in this rite. May my words draw God hither.
Pills are the Cure All—If there is Nothing We can Swallow, then there is No Help!
Had I gone the way of the World and not gotten to know God or accepted Him as a part of my life, I think that I would have been a very belligerent individual, full of hate and bitterness. I reject the idea that pleasures of the flesh are the mainspring of all human behaviour. Humans are supposed to instead focus on God, salvation, and interpersonal relationships; what goes on among people, how they influence each other and react to each other, on the makeup of the field that is created when human beings live together. Interestingly enough, psychoanalysts have concentrated their attention on schizophrenia, which they do not basically regard as an illness in the usual sense of the word. They see it instead as the result of personal experience, of interpersonal relationships that have had clearly drastic consequences but essentially add up to no more than another psychological problem like any other psychological problem. The relationship of schizophrenia as an individual illness to the social situation has its roots not only in the family but also within the society. The claim that analysis has no healing effects whatsoever is, in my opinion, untenable. It is not substantiated by my own forty years of experience as an analyst or by the experience of many of my colleagues. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23
We should also keep in mind here that in many cases analysts are not as competent as they should be (no profession is immune to that) and that the selection of patients is often not fortunate. Attempts are often made to analyze patient for whom the method is not suitable. The truth is that analysis has cured many people of their symptoms, and it has helped many others achieve clarity about themselves for the first time, has helped them be more honest with themselves, to be somewhat freer, to live closer to reality. That is in itself an extremely worthwhile achievement and one that is often grossly undervalued. There are, of course, certain trends of the times that partially account for the turn against analysis. Many people believe that medicine is the only thing that is of real help. If there is nothing we can swallow, then there is no help. Pills are the cure all. Another prevailing view is that we ought to be able to cure everything overnight. Many people are unwilling to come terms with the fact that life is not simple, requires rational thought, and worst of all they do not deal with their own resistance. Misguided individuals “feel” everything should be made simple; everything should be made easy. That is the trend of the times. People “feel” we should be able just to swallow everything as easily as we can a pill. And if learning something requires effort, then it is not worth learning. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23
There is a story that can illustrate what I mean here. A young and goes to an elegant new community called Cresleigh Ranch, tours and studies the model homes for a long time, and says to the sales representative, “I am sorry, but you do not have anything I like.” Then he gets up and leaves. Two weeks later he comes back, the sales representative asks—very politely, because this is a high-class community and an architectural marvel—why he could not find anything he liked last time. The young man replies, “Oh, I could have found something all right, but my analyst told me I should practice being assertive.” With that method we can learn to be more sure of ourselves, can learn how to appear more confident, how to lose our fear of sale associates, and so on. However, what we do not learn is why we are so insecure. We remain ignorant of the fact—and here we touch on the theme of transference again—that we tend to regard everyone else as an authority, as a father figure. Even if the method does yield some quick results in the housing development and we feel a little more self-confident, we still have not gotten to the root causes of our insecurity at all, and behind our new façade we remain the same insecure people we always were. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23
Indeed, our situation is even worse than it was, for we are no longer aware that we are insecure. And why are we insecure? Not because we are afraid of authority but because we are not fully developed human beings, because we lack the strength of our convictions, because we have remained small children who hope others will help us, because we have not grown up, because we are full of self-doubt, and so on. The methods of behaviouristic therapy cannot help in cases like that. All they do is sweep the dirt under the rug—ignore, deny or conceal from themselves and public view or knowledge something that is embarrassing, unappealing, or damaging to one’s reputation. For example, the senator has been accused of trying to sweep his former drug use under the rug. You need to stop sweeping your problems under the rug. However, not all criticism of psychoanalysis is unjustified. I would like to mention a few objections to it that I consider quite sound. Psychoanalysis can often degenerate into mere chatter. Dr. Freud’s idea of free association is in part responsible for this. In encouraging the patient to say anything that occurred to one, Dr. Freud assumed that the patient would say those things that came from one’s depths, things that were genuine and of real importance. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23
However, in many analyses patients simply babble away and run down their husbands for the hundredth time or complain about everything their awful parents did to them. Nothing comes of that. They go over the same ground again and again. However—someone is listening. The patient feels tat the fact of someone listening helps somehow had that one’s situation will eventually improve. However, tat kind of talk along never changed anyone or anything. It is not what Dr. Freud had in mind. His method involved discovery and struggle against resistance. Dr. Freud never assumed that we could achieve anything, much less solve difficult psychic problems, without expending effort. Without effort we cannot attain any of our goals in life, no matter what the advertisements may claim to the contrary. Anyone who fears effort, anyone who backs off from frustration and possibly even pain will never get anywhere, especially not in analysis. Analysis is hard work, and analysts who gloss that over harm their own cause. Another failing in many analyses is emphasizing intellectualization over emotion. The patient theorizes endlessly about the significance of the time his grandmother hit him for saying he was too full for a slice of her old fashioned, gooey, buttery, supremely sweet chess pie or some other incident. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23
And if one has an especially strong academic streak, one may develop highly complicated theories; one may construct theory upon theory; but one will feel nothing. One does not feel one’s inability to love, one’s isolation from others. One’s resistance makes all that inaccessible to one. And so analysis may fall in step with the times in giving precedence to cerebral humans, the purely rational human being. We expect intelligence to take care of everything; emotion is only useless ballast that we ignore as much as possible. And finally I would like to say that there are too many people who think they have to run to a psychoanalyst the minute they encounter the least little difficulty in their lives. They do not even try to cope with their problems themselves. Only if they find that their own best effort has still left them unable to understand and improve their situations themselves, then people should go to a psychoanalyst. Analysis remains the best therapy for a number of disorders having to do with excessive preoccupation with self or, in other words, with narcissism, which in turn results in an inability to relate to others. No other method is as effective and fruitful for treating flight into illusion, stalled psychic growth, symptoms like compulsive washing, and any number of other symptoms of an obsessive or compulsive nature. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23
Psychoanalysis also serves another function that is at least as important as its curative one. It can assist in promoting psychic growth and self-realization. I am sorry to say that only a small minority seem to be interested in psychic growth these days. Most people have an entirely different goal, which is to own more and consume more. When they reach twenty, they assume that their growth is complete, and from then on they direct all their energies to making the best possible use of this completed machine. As they see it, if they were to change it would work to their disadvantage; for if a person changes then one no longer fits the pattern that one and others expect one to fit. If one changes, how can one know whether one will still hold the same opinions ten years from now that one holds now? And how would a change like that affect one’s ability to get ahead? Most people do not want to grow and change, do not want to realize themselves. They want to hang onto the options they have, exploit them, “capitalize” on them. There are, of course, exceptions to that rule. There are counter-movements, particularly in the United States of America. Even if we own and enjoy all manner of things, we can still be unhappy, life can still be meaningless, we can remain depressed and anxious, and many people have come to realize that. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23
The trouble with our age is all signpost and no destination. “What meaning can life have,” we ask ourselves, “if our only purpose in it is to buy a somewhat more expensive car the next time around?” People have seen how their parents or grandparents sacrificed their entire lives to the acquisition of the things they thought they wanted. With varying degree of clarity, this minority has rediscovered a piece of ancient wisdom: Humans do not live by bread alone; possessions and power do not guarantee happiness but tend instead to create anxiety and tension. These people want to pursue a different goal. They want to be more rather than have more. They want to be more rational, to rid themselves of illusions, and to change social conditions that can be maintained only with the assistances of illusion. That longing often takes rather Old World forms, such Eastern Religion, for yoga, for Zen Buddhism, and so on. However, many enthusiasts who approach them tend to be naïve. They are taken in by the advertising fakirs who pass themselves off as holy people and by all manner of groups that claim they know how to cultivate human sensitivity. Here, I feel, psychoanalysis has an important mission. It can help us understand ourselves, perceive our own reality, free ourselves from illusion, understand ourselves, too, from the grip of anxiety and green. It can make us capable of perceiving the World differently. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23
Once we can forget the self as the prime focus of our interest and once we experience ourselves as acting, feeling, nonalienated human beings, then the World becomes the prime focus of our interest, our concern, our creative energies. We can practice those attitudes. And psychoanalysis can help us in this practice, because it is a method that helps us experience ourselves as we really are, helps us experience who we are, where we stand, where we are going. It is therefore advisable to work with a psychoanalyst who understand those connections and does not think the purpose of analysis is to help people adjust ad conform. However, that kind of analysis should not go on too long; overly extensive analysis often creates dependencies. Once a patient has learned enough to make use of the tools oneself, one should begin analyzing oneself. And that is a lifelong task that we carry on until the day we die. We can best practice self-analysis the first thing each morning, combining it with the kind of breathing and concentration exercises used in Buddhist meditation. The important thing is to step back from the bustle of life, to come to ourselves, to stop reacting constantly to stimuli, to make ourselves “empty” so that we can become active within ourselves. Anyone who attempts this will, I think, experience a deepening of one’s capacity to feel; one will experience “healing,” a recovery of health, not in the medical sense but in a profound, human sense. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23
However, this process requires patience, and patience is certainly not a commodity we have in great abundance. To any and all who want to make the attempt, though, I wish the best of luck. In ordinary life, a course of action is ordered by authority, and unless it outrages us, we tend to obey the order, follow the rule. Although people may mutter, it appears that, in general, everyone accepts the regulation. All the complex reactions are hidden. However, in a workshop community, where persons feel a sense of their own worth and a freedom to express themselves, the complexities become evident. Sometimes life can be cumbersome, complicated, irritating, frustrating and arriving at a decision may be difficult. After all, does the wish of everyone have to be considered. And the silent answer of the group is that, yes every person is worthy, every person’s views and feelings have a right to be considered. When one observes this process at work, its awesome nature becomes increasingly apparent. The desires of every participant are taken into account, so that no one feels left out. Slowly, beautifully painstakingly, a decision is crafted to take care of each person. A solution is reached by a process that considers each individual’s contribution—respecting it, weighing it, and incorporating it into the final plan. The sagacity of the group is extraordinary. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23
The process seems slow, and participants complain about “the time we are wasting.” However, the larger wisdom of the group recognizes the value of the process, since it is continually knitting together a community in which every soft voice, every subtle feeling has its respected place. Another important characteristic of the community-forming process, as I have observed it, is its transcendence, or spirituality. These are words that, in earlier years, I would never have used. However, the overarching wisdom of the group, the presence of an almost telepathic communication, the sense of the existence of “something greater,” seems to all for such terms. As in other instances, a participant expressed, eloquently, these thoughts. She writes, some time after the completion of a workshop: “I found it to be a profound spiritual experience. I felt that oneness of spirit in the community. We breathed together, felt together, even spoke for one another. I felt the power of the “life force” that infuses each of us—whatever that is. I felt its presence without the usual barricades of “me-ness” or “you-ness”—it was like a meditative experience when I feel myself as a center of consciousness, very much a part of the broader, universal consciousness. And yet with that extraordinary sense of oneness, the separateness of each person present has never been more clearly preserved. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23
When a person is drowning, it may be better for one to try to swim than to thrash around waiting for divine intervention. The vocabulary to describe motivations must be hierarchical, especially since metamotivations (growth-motivations) must be characterized differently from basic needs (deficiency-needs). This difference between intrinsic values and our attitudes toward these values also generates a hierarchical vocabulary for motives (using this word most generally and inclusively). In another place I have called attention to the levels of gratification, pleasures, or happiness corresponding to the hierarchy of needs to metaneeds. In addition to this, we must keep in mind that the concept of “gratification” itself is transcended at the level of metamotives or growth-motives, where satisfaction can be endless. So also for the concept of happiness which can also be altogether transcended at the highest levels. It may then easily become a kind of cosmic sadness or soberness or non-emotional contemplation. At the lowest basic need levels we can certainly talk of being driven and of desperately craving, striving, or needing, when, exempli gratia, cut off from oxygen or experiencing great pain. As we go on up the hierarchy of basic needs, words like desiring, wishing, or preferring, choosing, wanting become more appropriate. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23
However, at the highest levels, id est, of metamotivation, all these words become subjectively inadequate, and such words as yearning for, devoted to, aspiring to, loving, adorning, admiring, worshipping, being drawn to or fascinated by, describe the metamotivated feelings more accurately. The B-values call to behavioural expression or “celebration” as well as inducing subjective states. Celebration is an act of expressing respect or reverence for that which one needs or honours. Its essence is to call attention to the sublime or solemn aspects of living. To celebrate is to share in a greater joy, to participate in an eternal drama. It is well to notice that the highest values are not only receptively enjoyed and contemplated, but that they often also lead to expressive and behavioral responses, which of course would be easier to investigate than subjective states. God’s grace is sufficient for our weakness. Christ’s worth does cover our unworthiness, and the Holy Spirit does make us effective in spite of our inadequacy. This is the glorious paradox of living by grace. When we discover we are weak in ourselves, we find we are strong in Christ. When we regard ourselves as less than the least of all God’s people, we are given some immense privilege of serving in the Kingdom. When we almost despair over our inadequacy, we find the Holy Spirit giving us unusual ability. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23
We shake our heads in amazement and say with Isaiah, “Lord, all that we have accomplished you have done for us,” reports Isaiah 26.12. The contrast between human weakness and divine power is vividly illustrated in Isaiah 41.14-15. This particular passage is set in the context of a lengthy message of encouragement to the downtrodden nation of Israel. Verses 14-15 read: “Do not be afraid, O worm Jacob, O little Israel, for I myself will help you,” declares the LORD, your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel. “See, I will make you into a threshing sledge, new and sharp, with many teeth. You will thresh the mountains and crush them, and reduce the hills to chaff.” God addresses the nation as “O worm Jacob, O little Israel.” The designation worm is not used by God in a disparaging sense, but rather calls attention to the weakness and helplessness of the nation, as does the term “O little Israel.” The metaphor of a worm is well chosen to express their weakness, because few things are more helpless and exposed to being trodden under foot than a worm. However, the humbling designation as a worm and as little serves only to magnify the greatness of the encouragement of God gives the nation: “Do not be afraid,” “I myself will help you,” and “I will make you into a threshing sledge, new and sharp, with many teeth.” #RandolphHarris 14 of 23
The promise of the overall passage is that Israel, weak and down trodden though she may be, will in due time prevail over her enemies because the Lord Himself will help her. He will not only help her, He will make Israel herself into a threshing sledge that devours her enemies. The ancient threshing machine was a sledge of thick planks armed with iron or sharpened stones as teeth to thresh the grain. God promises that, just as the threshing sledge breaks up the heads of grain, so “worm” Jacob will devour her enemies. The imagery of the passage is a study in contrast between the weakness of Israel and the mighty acts she will perform with God’s help. The image presented [of the threshing sledge] is the strange but strong one of a down-trodden worm reducing hills to powder, the essential idea being that of a weak and helpless object overcoming the most disproportionate obstacles, by strength derived from another. That is a picture of God at work: a weak and helpless object overcoming disproportionate obstacles by strength derived from another. God makes us weak, or rather He allows us to become painfully conscious of our weakness, in order to make us strong with His strength. Some years ago when God opened up for me a wider Bible teaching and writing ministry, I felt drawn to Isaiah 41.14-15. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23
Even though the promise was given to the nation of Israel, I sensed God was allowing me to make a personal application, that He would indeed make me into a threshing sledge, a harvesting instrument in His hand. However, I also sense that God required, as a condition of the promise, that I accept the description of “worm Jacob, little Israel,” not in a denigrating sense, but as a realization of my own personal weakness and helplessness. I go back to that condition and promise almost every time I teach the word of God or sit down to write. I do not do this in the sense of rubbing a good luck charm, but rather to acknowledge my own inability to accomplish anything for God and to lay hold of His promise to give me the power to minister for Him. God seems to keep saying to me, “As long as you are willing to acknowledge you are weak and helpless as a worm, I will make you strong and powerful like a threshing sledge, with new, sharp teeth.” The gracious paradox of divine strength working through human weakness as taught in Scripture has been recognized through the centuries by the great teachers of the church. The respected Puritan theologian John Owen, for example said, “Yet the duties God requires of us are not in proportion to the strength we possess in ourselves. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23
“Rather, the duties are proportional to the resources available to us in Christ. We do not have the ability in ourselves to accomplish the least of God’s tasks. This is the law of grace. When we recognize it is impossible for us to perform a duty in our own strength, we will discover the secret of its accomplishment. However, alas, this is a secret we often fail to discover.” In the earlier stages of their relation, the disciple needs to attach oneself more and more closely to the Master. One is still learning what the quest is, still weak-willed, uncertain, and undeveloped. However, in the later stages one should release one’s hold on the master, discipline one’s feelings, and let go of what has become so dear to one. For now one should increasingly depend on making for oneself the direct contact with one’s higher Self. One should constantly look forward to the time when one will be independent enough to steer one’s own course. It is not meant that one should be left with nothing but one’s ignorance and weakness to guide one, nor that one should face all one’s perplexities by oneself, but that one should face many or most of them as one can and that one should carry to the teacher many occasionally intervene to help on one’s own initiative but only if and when one deems it desirable and necessary to do so. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23
In this way the object will be fulfilled of leading the disciple to increasingly correct thinking and more careful behaviour. It is naturally strongly repugnant to a developed mind to allow another to have such great power over one’s own, whereas it is strongly attractive to an undeveloped one. Dear Lord in Heaven, may our prayers be the road on which You come from your celestial home. May our words be food for your shining Ultimate Driving Machine as it carries You to us. Please enter this space, guided by what we speak: Please come to those who are faithful to You, please come to those who do not neglect their duties to you, please come to those who are not stingy with offerings. God please come to us. “Now my son, here is somewhat more I would say unto thee; for I perceive that thy mind is worried concerning the resurrection of the dead. Behold, I say unto you, that there is no resurrection—or, I would say, in other words, that this mortal does not put on immortality, this corruption does not put on incorruption—until after the coming of Christ. Behold, he bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead. However, behold, my son, the resurrection is not yet. Now, I unfold unto you a mystery; nevertheless, there are many mysteries which are kept, that no one knoweth them save God himself. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23
“However, I show unto you one thing which I have inquired diligently of God that I might know—that is concerning the resurrection. Behold, there is a time appointed that all shall come forth from the dead. Now when this time cometh no one knows; but God knoweth the time which is appointed. Now, whether there shall be one time, or a second time, or a third time, that humans shall come forth from the dead, it mattereth not; for God knoweth all these things; and it sufficeth me to know that this is the case—that there is a time appointed that all shall rise from the dead. Now there must needs be a space betwixt the time of death and the time of the resurrection. And now I would inquire what becometh of the souls of humans from this time of death to the time appointed for the resurrection? Now whether there is more than one time appointed for human to rise it mattereth not; for all do not die at once, and this mattereth not; all is as one day with God, and time only is measures unto humans. Therefore, there is a time appointed unto humans that they shall rise from the dead; and there is a space between the time death and the resurrection. And now, concerning this space of time, what becometh of the souls of humans is the thing which I have inquired diligently of the Lord to know; and this is the thing of which I do know. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23
“And when the time cometh when all shall rise, then shall they know what God knoweth all the times which are appointed unto humans. Now, concerning the state of the soul between death and the resurrection—Behold, it has been made known unto me by an angel, that the spirits of all humans, as soon as they are departed from this mortal boy, yea, the spirits of all humans, whether they be good or evil, are taken home to that God who gave them life. And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness, which is called paradise, a state of rest, a state of peace, where they shall rest from all their redoubles and from all care, and sorrow. And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of the wicked, yes, who are evil—for behold, they have no part nor portion of the Spirit of the Lord; for behold, they chose evil works rather than good; therefore the spirit of the devil did enter into them, and take possession of their house—and these shall be cast out into outer darkness; there shall be weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth, and this because of their own iniquity, being led captive by the will of the devil. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23
“Now this is the state of the souls of the wicked, yea, in darkness, and a state of awful, fearful looking for the fiery indignation of the wrath of God upon them; thus they remain in this state, as well as the righteous in paradise, until the time of their resurrection. Now, there are some that have understood that this state of happiness and this state of misery of the soul, before the resurrection, was a first resurrection. Yes, I admit it may be termed a resurrection, the raising of the spirit or the soul and their consignation to happiness or misery, according to the words which have been spoken. And behold, again it hath been spoken, that there is a first resurrection, a resurrection of all those who have been, or who are, or who shall be, down to the resurrection of Christ from the dead. Now, we do not suppose that this first resurrection of the souls and their consignation to happiness or misery. Ye cannot suppose that this is what it meaneth. Behold, I say unto you, Nay; but it meaneth the reuniting of the soul with the body, of those from the days of Adam down to the resurrection of Christ. Now, whether the souls and the bodies of those whom has been spoken shall all be reunited at once, the wicked as well as the righteous, I do not say; let it suffice, that I say that they all come forth; or in order words, their resurrection cometh to pass before the resurrection of those who die after the resurrection of Christ. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23
“Now, my son, I do not say that their resurrection cometh at the resurrection of Christ; but behold, I give it as my opinion, that the souls and the bodies are reunited, of the righteous, at the resurrection of Christ, and his ascension into Heaven. However, whether it be at his resurrection or after, I do not say; but this much I say, that there is a space between death and the resurrection of the body, and a state of the soul in happiness or in misery until the time which is appointed of God that the dead shall come forth, and be reunited, both soul and body, and be brought to stand before God, and be judged according to their works. Yea, this bringeth about the restoration of those things of which has been spoken by the mouths of the prophets. The soul shall be restored to the body, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame. And now, my son, this is the restoration of which has been spoken by the mouths of the prophets—and the shall the righteous shine forth in the kingdom of God. However, behold, an awful death cometh upon the wicked; for they die as to things pertaining to things of righteousness; for they are unclean, and no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of God. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23
“However, they are cast out, and consigned to partake of the fruits of their labours or their works, which have been evil; and they drink the dregs of a bitter cup,” reports Alma 40.1-26. Egyptian monks proposed to themselves—namely, to preserve that vigilant and fortified attention of mind, which in prayer is very necessary, from being wasted or dulled through continuance, if their prayers were few or long; for which purpose both to solicit God more earnestly or frequent address, and to avoid temptations of Satan drawing them into lassitude and weariness—they resolved that their prayers should be many and brief, like darts cast forth with energy. I stand here on the summit of your high mountain, and think of you. Surrounded by the sky, lifted up into the sky itself, the awesome clarity of your focused vision comes closer to me and I am more aware, myself, of your law’s urgings. Dear Lord in Heaven, Lord of all that is right, of all that is just, of all that should be; God and king of the World, of all who live and all that is, God, please advise me; please make the right path open beneath my feet, please make my eyesight clear, that I may always see as far as I do from the top of this mountain of yours. Your outstretched enfolding arms offer cattle, pour out rich milk, that we might, like children, grow in prosperity. Leading cows you come to your worshippers, who, pouring golden butter, come to you. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23
HUB Apartments
Luxury Apartments in the Heart of Folsom, CA | 230 Units, Walking Distance from Intel | Now Leasing! Apply Online Today. https://sites.google.com/fpimgt.com/hubvirtualtours/home
How many amenities can you spot from here? 👀💙 @HUBApts offers high-quality living in the “hub” of everything you love about #Folsom. Head to their profile to learn more!
All that Can be Said is, that Two People Happened to Hit on the Same Thought!
When the satisfaction or the security of another person becomes as significant to one as one’s own satisfaction or security, then the state of love exists. Under no other circumstances is a state of love present, regardless of the popular usage of the word. Now, when you think about the power of feeling, one thing quickly becomes clear. No one can succeed in mastering feeling in one’s life who tries to simply take them directly; without hesitation and resist or redirect them by “willpower” in the moment of choice. To adopt that strategy is to radically misunderstand how life and the human will work, or—more likely—it is to have actually decided, deep down, to lose the battle and give in. This is one of the major areas of self-deception in the human heart. The very “giving in” can be among the most exhilarating feelings know to humans, though it can also be one of complete despair and defeat. Those who continue to be mastered by their feelings—whether it is anger, fear, pleasures of the flesh, desire for food or “looking god,” the residues of woundedness, or whatever—are typically persons who in their heart of hearts believe that their feelings must be satisfied. They have long chosen the strategy of selectively resisting their feelings instead of that of not having them—of simply changing or replacing them. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21
Of course this is just another way of describing the ruined person, the one who makes oneself “god” in one’s World. To such persons, the idea that they should not honour their feelings is an insult. “Their god is their belly,” it will be recalled. They are enslaved to their feelings—hence “human bondage”—and have no place to stand in dealing with them. Jesus was referring to this situation when he said that “everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin,” reports John 8.34. By contrast, the person who happily let God be God does have a place to stand in dealing with feelings—even in extreme cases such as despair over loved ones or excruciating pain or voluptuous pleasure. They have the resources to do what they do not want to do and do what they want. They know and deeply accept the fact that their feelings, of whatever kind, do not have to be fulfilled. They send little time grieving over non-fulfillment. And with respect to feelings that are inherently injurious and wrong, their strategy is not one of resisting them in the moment of choice but of living in such a way that they do not have such feelings at all, or at least do not have them in a degree that makes it hard to decide against the when appropriate. Those who let God be God get off the conveyer belt of emotion and desire when it starts to move toward the buzz saw of sin. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21
As one lets God be God, one does not wait until the conveyer belt is moving so fast toward sin that they cannot get office of it. Their aim is not to avoid sin, but to avoid temptation—the inclination to sin. They plan their path accordingly. In the presence of the facilitative attitude created by staff and by many participants, individuals gradually begin to hear one another, and then slowly to understand and to respect. The atmosphere becomes a working atmosphere, both in the large and the small groups, as people begin to delve into themselves and their relationships. As this working process goes more deeply, it can bring great personal pain and distress. Nearly always, the pain has to do with insights into self, or with the fright caused by a change in the self-concept, or with distress over changing relationships. The same woman who ,at the end of the workshop, was able to write poetically of her growth, wrote this while involved in the process: “Clutching, crawling, frightened crying deeply now, my hurting, bleeding hands, are scaling down the walls of jagged, deadly fear, into some scary put, descending steeper, down in search of someone lost, whose life I value most, and plunging, need to save.” #RandolphHarris 3 of 21
Another passage, taken from a participant’s diary, reflect the gradual, painful discover of an understanding which relieves the tension. “I feel so torn. Part of me is proud for handling the situation this morning with Lillian and Billy in what I think was a good way, yet I am annoyed with myself for allowing it to tear me apart. I am scared, too, because it all seems so unfinished. My whole body aches with unbearable tension as tears stream down my face. I rush down the hall to the room where our group meeting is held. I barge in and tell the group why I am late, of emotional overload that I feel, of the exhaustion. ‘I am not even recuperated from yesterday and already today has been heavy. I can truly appreciate the toll it must take on you who do counseling full time!’ Then Dallas says, ‘You must learn to take care of your own needs, Jessica. A sense of peace floods over me as I hear his words. How gentle and healing. That is all I really need to hear at this time.” So there are, in the group, experiences of frustration, distrust, anger, envy and despair. In the individual there are the personal experiences of suffering though change, of being unable to cope with ambiguity, of fear, of loneliness, of self-depreciation. The pain of leaving those you grow to love is only the prelude to an understanding of yourself and others. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21
However, both the group and the individual experience these sufferings as part of a process in which they are involved and in which they somehow trust—even if they could, at the moment, give no rational reason for doing so. As the workshop proceeds, there is a shift in the basis of value choices made by participants. Values that are based on authority, that derive from sources external to the person, end to be diminished. Values hat are experiences tend to be enhanced. What the person has experienced tend to be enhanced. What the person has been told is good and valuable, whether by parents, church, state, or political party, tends to be questioned. Those behaviours or ways of being that are experienced as satisfying and meaningful tend to be reinforced. The criteria for making value judgments come more and more to lie in the person, not in a book, a teacher, or a set of dogmas. The locus of evaluation is in the person, not outside. Thus, the individual comes to live increasingly by a set of standards that have an internal, personal basis. Because one is aware that these standards are based on ever changing experience, they are held more tentatively, less rigidly. They are not carved in stone, but written by the human heart. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21
Life in today’s World can be at times so complicated and the challenges so overwhelming as to be beyond our individual capacity to resolve them. We all need help from the Lord. Yet there are many individuals who do not know how to receive their help. They feel their urgent pleas for help have often gone unattended. How can that be when He Himself has said, “Ask, and ye shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened unto you”? reports Doctrines and Covenants 4.7. It is evident that the Lord intends that we do our part. However, what specifically, are we to do? No one would expect to receive a result from physical law without obeying it. Spiritual law is the same. As much as we want help, we must expect to follow the spiritual law that controls that help. Spiritual law is not mysterious. It is something that we can understand. The scriptures define it in significant detail. “Do ye not remember the things which the Lord hath said?—If ye will not harden your hearts, and ask me in faith, believing that ye shall receive, with diligence in keeping my commandments, surely these things shall be make know unto you,” reports 1 Nephi 15.11. The Lord has the power to bless us at any time. Yet we see that to count on His help, we must consistently obey His commandments. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21
Our churches speak of Him day after day, Sunday after Sunday or Saturday after Saturday, some more in terms of the Heavenly king of glory. They call Him Jesus Christ, forgetting, and making us forget, what it means to say: Jesus is the Christ. The most incredible and humanly impossible event—a wandering Jewish Rabbi is the Christ—has become natural to us. Let us at least sometimes remind ourselves and our people that Jesus Christ means Jesus Who is said to be the Christ. Let us ask ourselves and others from time to time whether we can seriously agree with Peter’s ecstatic exclamation, whether we are likewise overwhelmed by the mystery of this Man. And if we cannot answer affirmatively should we not least be silent, in order to preserve the mystery of the words, instead of destroying their meaning by our common talk? And He proceeded to teach them that the Son of Humans must endure much suffering, must be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, must be killed, and after three days rise again. He spoke of this quite freely. The moment in which Peter called Him the Christ, Jesus prophesied His suffering and death. He began to reveal the mystery of His Messianic destiny. It was contrary to everything that the people expected, that the visionaries dreamt, and that the disciples hoped for. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21
He was to be rejected by the political authorities of the nation, whose king the Christ was supposed to be. He was to be rejected by the religious authorities of selected people whose leader the Christ was supposed to become. He was supposed to be rejected by the cultural authorities of that tradition which was supposed to overcome all pagan tradition through the Christ. He was to suffer—He Who was expected to transform all suffering into blessedness. He was to die—He Who was supposed to appear in divine glory. Jesus did not deny His Messianic vocation. In the symbolic words concerning the “rising after three days,” He indicated that His rejection and His death would not be a defeat, but rather the necessary steps to His becoming the Christ. He was to be the Christ only as a suffering and dying Christ. Only such is He the Christ, or, as He called Himself more mysteriously, the Son of Humans. Peter took Him and began to reprove Him for His words. However, Jesus turned to him, ad looking at His disciples, rebuked Peter, saying, “Get behind me, you Satan. Your outlook is not God’s but human’s.” Nobody in Jesus’ time would have doubted the fact that God sent suffering and martyrdom even to the righteous. The Old Testament proved that on every page. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21
Therefore, it was not that fact which has made the history of the Passion the most important part of the whole Gospel. It was not the value of suffering and the value of an heroic death, which have given the power to the picture of the Crucified. There have been many pictures of creative suffering and of heroic death in human history. However, none of them can be compared with the picture of Jesus’ death. Something unique happened in His suffering and death. It was, and is, a divine mystery, humanly unintelligible, divinely necessary. Therefore, when Peter, shocked and overwhelmed by sorrow and love, tried to prevent Him from going to Jerusalem, Jesus considered his pleading a satanic temptation. It would have destroyed His Messianic character. As the Christ, He would have to suffer and die. The real Christ was not in power and glory. The Christ had to suffer and die, because whenever the Divine appears in all Its depth, It cannot be endured by humans. It must be pushed away by the political powers, the religious authorities, and the bearers of cultural tradition. In the picture of the Crucified, we look at the rejection of the Divine by humanity. We see that, in this rejection, not the lowest, but the highest representatives of humankind are judged. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21
Whenever the Divine appears, It is a radical attack on everything that is good in humans, and therefore humans must repel It, must push It away, must crucify It. Whenever the Divine manifests Itself as the new reality, It must be rejected by the representatives of the old reality. For the Divine does not complete the human; It revolts against the human. Because of that, the human must defend itself against It, must reject It, and must try to destroy It. Yet the Divine is rejected, It takes the rejection upon Itself. It accepts our crucifixion, our pushing away, the defence of ourselves against It. It accepts our refusal to accept, and thus conquers us. That is the center of the mystery of the Christ Who would not die, and Who would come in glory to impose upon us His power, His wisdom, His morality, and His piety. He would be able to break our resistance by His strength, by His wonderful government, by His infallible wisdom, and by His irresistible perfection. However, He would not be able to win our hearts. He would bring a new law, and would impose it upon us by His all-powerful and all-perfect Personality. His power would break our freedom; His glory would overwhelm us like a burning blinding Sun; our very humanity would be swallowed in His Divinity. One of Luther’s most profound insights was that God made Himself small for us in Christ. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21
In becoming the Christ, He left us our freedom and our humanity. He showed us His Heart, so that our heats could be won. When we look at the misery of our World, its evil and its sin, especially in these days which see to mark the end of a World period, we long for divine interference, so that the World and its daemonic rulers might be overcome. We long for a king of peace within history, or for a king of glory above history. We long for a Christ of power. Yet if He were to come and transform us and our World, we should have to pay the one price which we could not pay: we would have to lose our freedom, our humanity, and our spiritual dignity. Perhaps we should be happier; but we should also be lower beings, our present misery, struggle, and despair notwithstanding. We should be more like blessed animals than humans made in the image of God. Those who dream of a better life and try to avoid the Cross as a way, and those who hope for a Christ and attempt to exclude the Crucified, have no knowledge of the mystery of God and of humans. They are the ones who must expect others with a greater power to transform the World, others with a greater wisdom to change our hearts. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21
However, even the greatest in power and wisdom could not more fully reveal the Heart of God and the heart of humans than the Crucified has done already. Those things have been revealed once for all. “It is finished.” In the face of the Crucified all the “more” and all the “less,” all progress and all approximation, are meaningless. Therefore, we can say of Him alone: He is the new reality; He is the end; He is the Messiah. To the Crucified alone we can say: “Thou art the Christ.” The Saviour taught: “Remember that without faith you can do nothing; therefore ask in faith. Trifle not with these things; do not ask for that which you ought not,” reports Doctrine and Covenants 8.10. There is another reason why the mind warrants special emphasis. Of all the soul’s faculties, the mind is the one that ponders, contains, and judges truth and falsity. The mind places me in contact with the external World, and when functioning properly it conforms itself to the name of the object of thought itself. The ingrained habits of thought that are formed will conform to the order of the thing being studied. What we study determines what kind of habits are to be formed. That is why Paul urged us to center on things that are true, honourable, just, pure, lovely and gracious. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21
To understand this, let us consider two features of the mind: intentionality and internal structure. The intentionality of the mind. Intentionality refers to the “of-ness” or “about-ness” of our mental states. We have a thought of God, a hope for a new Ultimate Driving Machine, a belief about the media. The mind points beyond itself to the objects we use our minds to contemplate Because of intentionality, thought puts us in contact with the external World. For example, if I am in Tokyo, Japan, I can be in direct contact with London by thinking about it. My mind is directed on London, and it makes contact with this object of thought. After all, I am not thinking about the word “London” (unless someone asks me to spell it) or something else; I am thinking about London itself. The internal structure of the mind—when we come to understand something, the mind develops a conceptualization of the thing so understood. If I come to understand the workings of an Ultimate Driving Machine, my mind will possess a conceptualization of those workings. If my understanding is accurate, the conceptualization in my mind will conform to the Ultimate Driving Machine itself. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21
If my mind develops a conceptualization of morality, then there will be an order in my mind that locates the role of virtue and character in the overall moral life. If accurate, this conception of the role of virtue will conform to the nature of true morality that actually exists outside my mind. If my conceptualizations are false, I will fail to grasp the object as it really is. However, if my mind conforms to the nature of the object itself, I will not only grasp it truly but also gain a certain power that comes from a correct understanding of reality. Just as electricity was real but its power unavailable to us until Ben Franklin’s discovery opened our minds to grasp the true nature of electricity, so the power of the spiritual life is real but unavailable to us if we do not understand the true nature of prayer, fasting, and so forth. This is why truth is so powerful. It allows us to cooperate with reality, whether spiritual or physical, and tap into its power. As we learn to think correctly about God, specific scriptural teachings, the soul, or other important aspects of a Christian Worldview, we are placed in touch with God and those realities. And we thereby gain access to the power available to us to live in the kingdom of God. The blessing resolves those things which are beyond our own capacity to influence either personally or with the help of others. Yet we must do our part for the blessing to be realized. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21
We must strive to be worthy and to exercise the requisite faith to do what we are able. Where it is intended that others help, we must use that hep also. It is through the combination of our doing what is within our power to accomplish and the power of the Lord that the blessing is realized. The B-values are not the same as our personal attitudes toward these values, nor our emotional reactions to them. The B-values induce in us a kind of “requiredness feeling” and also a feeling of unworthiness. The B-vales had better be differentiated from our human attitudes toward these B-values, at least to the extent that it is possible for so difficult a task. A listing of such attitudes toward ultimate values (or reality) included: love, awe, adoration, humility, reverence, unworthiness, wonder, amazement, marveling, exaltation, gratitude, fear, joy, et cetera. These are clearly emotional-cognitive reasons within a person witnessing something not the same as oneself, or at least verbally separable. Of course, the more the person fuses with the World in great peak or mystic experiences, the less of these intra-self reactions there would be and the more the self would be lost as a separable entity. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21
Ideas are types existing in the Divine Mind. However, God has the proper types of all things that He knows; and therefore He has ideas of all things known by Him. As ideas are principles of the knowledge of things and of their generation, an idea has this twofold office, as it exists in the mind of God. So far as the idea is the principle of the making of things, it may be called an “exemplar,” and belongs to practical knowledge. However, so far as it is a principle of knowledge, it is properly called a “type,” and may belong to speculative knowledge also. As an exemplar, therefore, it has respect to everything made by God in any period of time; whereas as a principle of knowledge it has respect to all things known by God, even thought they never come to be in time; and to all things that He knowns according to their proper type, in so far as they are known by Him in a speculative manner. Evil is known by God not through its own type, but through a type of good. Evil, therefore, has no idea in God, either in so far as an idea is an “exemplar” nor as a “type.” God has no practical knowledge, except virtually, of things which neither are, nor will be, nor have been. Hence, with respect to these there is no idea in God in so far as idea signifies an “exemplar” but only in so far as it denotes “type.” #RandolphHarris 16 of 21
We hold matter to be created by God, though not apart from form, matter has its idea in God; but not apart from the idea of the composite; for matter in itself can neither exist nor be known. “And now, my son, I have somewhat more to say unto thee than what to said unto your brother; for behold, have ye not observed the steadiness of thy brother, his faithfulness, and his diligence in keeping the commandments of God? Behold, has he not set a good example for thee? For thou didst not give so much heed unto my words as did thy brother, among the people of Zoramites. Now this is what I have against thee; thou didst go on unto boasting in thy strength and thy wisdom. And this is not all, my son. Thou didst do that which was grievous unto me; for thou didst forsake the ministry, and did go over into the land of Siron among the borders of the Lamanites, after the harlot Isabel. Yes, she did steal away the hearts of many; but this was no excuse for thee, my son. Thou shouldest have tended to the ministry wherewith thou wast entrusted. Know ye not, my son, that these things are an abomination in the sight of the Lord; yea, most abominable above all sins save it be the shedding of innocent blood or denying the Holy Ghost. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21
“For behold, if ye deny the Holy Ghost when it once has had place in you, and ye know that ye deny it, behold, this is a sin which is unpardonable; yea, and whosoever murdereth against the light and knowledge of God, it is not easy for one to obtain forgiveness; yea, I say unto you, my son, that it is not easy for one to obtain forgiveness. And now, my son, I would to God that ye had not been guilty of so great a crime. I would not dwell upon your crimes, to harrow up your soul, if it were not for your good. However, behold, ye cannot hide your crimes from God; and expect ye repent they will stand as a testimony against you at the last day. Now my son, I would that ye should repent and forsake your sins, and go no more after the lusts of your eyes, but cross yourself in all these things; for except ye do this ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. Oh, remember, and take it upon you, and cross yourself in these things. And I command you to take it upon you to counsel with your elder brothers in your undertakings; for behold, thou art in thy youth, and ye stand in need to be nourished by your brothers. And give heed to their counsel. Suffer not yourself to be led away by any vain or foolish thing; suffer not the devil to lead away your heart again after those wicked harlots. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21
“Behold, O my son, how great iniquity ye brought upon the Zoramites; for when they say your conduct they would not believe in my words. And now the Spirit of the Lord doth say unto me: Command thy children to do good, lest they lead away the hearts of many people to destruction; therefore I command you, my son, in the fear of God, that ye refrain from your iniquities; that ye turn to the Lord with all your mind, might, and strength, that ye lead away the hearts of no more to do wickedly; but rather return unto them, and acknowledge your faults and that wrong which ye have done. Seek not after riches nor the vain things of this World; for behold, you cannot carry them with you. And now, my son, I would say somewhat unto you concerning the coming of Christ. Behold, I say unto you, that it is he that surely shall come to take away the sins of the World; yea, he cometh to declare glad tidings of salvation unto his people. And now, my son, this was the ministry unto which ye were called, to declare these glad tidings unto this people, to prepare their minds; or rather that salvation might come unto them, that they may prepare the minds of their children to hear the word at the time of his coming. And now I will ease your mind somewhat on this subject. Behold, you marvel why these things should be know so long beforehand. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21
“Behold, I say unto you, is not a soul at this time as precious unto God as a soul will be at the time of this coming? It is not as necessary that the plan of redemption should be made known unto this people as well as unto their children? It is not as easy at this time for the Lord to send his angel to declare these glad tidings unto us as unto our children, or as after the time of his coming,” reports Alma 39.1-19. If the Master had no patience with his disciples, he and they would soon part. If he had no belief in their eventual evolution, he and they would never join. If a human hitched the Ultimate Driving Machine of one’s spiritual effort to the star of a competent and worthy spiritual guide, it is nonsensical to object that one surrenders one’s freedom whenever one surrenders one’s own personal judgment to the guide’s or even whenever one obeys a command from the guide. For who chose the guide? One, oneself. By the exercise of what faculty did one make such a choice? By the exercise of free will. Therefore the initial act was a free choice. It was also the most important one because it was causal, all one’s other acts as a disciple being merely its effects, however long be the chain which extends from it. It is because one respects the larger wisdom of the guide and trusts one’s disinterestedness that the disciple follows one in thought and practice, not because one has become a puppet. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21
The aspirant who believe that one can come to a master for a few days or works and glean the teaching will glean only a sample of it. It will take one all one’s life not only to receive what a master knows but to be adjured worthy of and ready for it. If one lacks this patience and humility, one will fall into self-deception. It requires long continued communication between pupil and teacher in joint purist of the object they are seeking to understand, and then suddenly, just as light flashes forth when a fire is kindled, this wisdom is born in the mind and henceforth nourishes itself. Two such individuals as Master and student are linked together by ancient ties. Much many remain to be done in the future as it was in the past. If, in a previous incarnation, the student attained a higher phase of development than at present, this must again be achieved before results can appear in consciousness. In such a case one should work especially hard to make progress. God, I speak your name, Emptier of cauldrons, your child calls you: into the past through the mists over the border between our Worlds my words go flying straight to you. God, I speak your name, Maker of borders, your child calls you: out of the past through the mists over the border between our Worlds travel the trackway, straight to me. God, hear my words and receive my gift. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21
Cresleigh Homes
When your canvas is as beautiful as this one, inspiration isn’t hard to find! 🤩
At #BrightonStation the possibilities are endless. We have Home Sites 47 & 88 available in this Residence 1 floor plan! Head to our website to learn more. Link in bio. https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/residence-2/
Lord, God of the Heavens, inhabiting spirit of good will, please bring joy to those who come together there. Please bind us together in the spirit of Godliness. You who fill your devotees with ecstasy pouring yourself unreservedly through their hearts, I ask you for your presence here today that our gathering might be properly blessed. #CresleighHomes
The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth is Certainly Quite Inadequate!
God has never explained to humans the secret of physical birth—then why should we hesitate to accept the birth of the spiritual human? Both come from God. “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of the life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any human have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21
“However, if the Spirit of one that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, one that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we say, Abba, Father. The spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God…Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And one that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is in the mind of the spirit, because one maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God,” reports Romans 8.1-16, 26-27. This sounds difficult to our modern ears, strange and almost unintelligible. Words like “spirit” and “flesh,” “sin” and “law,” “life” and “death,” in their various combinations, appear to us as philosophical abstractions, rather than as concrete descriptions of Christian experience. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21
For Paul, however, they express the most real and the most concrete experience of his life. This eighth chapter of his letter to the Christians in Rome is like a hymn praising, in ecstatic words, the new reality which has appeared to him, which was revealed in history and had transformed his whole existence. Paul calls this new being “Christ,” in so far as it has first become visible in Jesus the Christ. And he calls it “Spirit,” in so far as it is a reality in the spirit of every Christian, and in the spirit which constitutes the assembly of Christians in every place and time. Both names designate the same reality. Christ is the Spirit, and the Spirit is the Spirit of Christ. A Christian is one who participates in this new reality, that is, one who has the Spirit. “If any human have not the Spirit of Christ, one is none of one’s life.” To be a Christian means to have the Spirit, and any description of Christianity must be a description of the manifestations of the Spirit. Let us follow the description that Paul gives us of the Spirit; and let us compare our own experience with it. In so doing we may discover both how far away we are from the experience of Paul, and, at the same time, how similar our experience is to his. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21
These strange words of his may reveal more to us about our lives than anything our contemporaries may think and write about the nature of humans, their lives, and this destiny. “The Spirit Himself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God.” These words imply that our spirit is unable to give us such assurance. Our spirit, that is, our natural mind, our though, our will, our emotions, the whole of our interior life, cannot give us the certainty that we are the children of God. This does not mean that Paul depreciates human nature and spirit. On the contrary in speaking of our spirit, he acknowledges the creativity of humans, their similarity to God Who is Spirit, their ability to be free oneself, and to liberate all nature, from vanity and the bondage of corruption by one’s own liberation. “For we are also his offspring,” he told the Athenians in his famous speech on the Areopagus, thus confirming their own philosophers. Paul thinks as highly of humans as any modern could do. A famous Renaissance philosopher describes, in lyrical words, the position of humans at the center of nature, one’s infinity and creativity, the unity and fulfillment in one of all natural powers. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21
Paul would agree. However, Paul knew something more than the Greek philosophers knew, something which the Renaissance philosophers had forgotten, namely, that human spirit is bound to human flesh, and that human flesh is hostile to God. “Human flesh” does not mean human body. Human’s body, according to Paul, can become a temple of the Spirit. However, “human flesh” means the natural human inclinations, human’s desires, their needs, their way of thinking, the aim of their will, the character of their feeling, in so far as it is separated from the Spirit and is hostile to it. “Flesh” is the distortion of human nature, the abuse of its creativity—the abuse, first of all, f its infinity, in the service of its unlimited desire and its unlimited will to power. This desire, of which we know something through recent psychology, and this will to power, of which we have learned much from modern sociology, are rooted in our individual existence in time and space, in body and flesh. This is what Paul calls the power of distorted flesh. He describes the will of flesh with a profundity which cannot be equalled. “The carnal mind (mind of the flesh) is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be!” #RandolphHarris 5 of 21
If we receive a law which we must acknowledge and which, on the other hand, we cannot fulfill, our soul inevitably develops hatred against one who has given the law. The father, being the representative of the law which stands against the child’s desire, necessarily becomes the object of the unconscious hate, which may become conscious and may appear with tremendous force. If the law against its unordered and unrestricted desire were felt by the child to be arbitrary and unjustified, this would not be so. However, it is felt to be justified. It has become part of the child’s “super-ego,” as recent psychology would say; or, in the language of traditional ethics, it has become a demand of one’s conscious. Because the law given by the father is good, and the child cannot help recognizing this, and therefore because the law is inescapable, the child must hate the father; for he seems to be the cause of the torturing split in the child’s soul. That is the situation of humans before God. The natural human hates God and regards Him as the enemy, because He represents for humans the law which one cannot reach, against which one struggles, and which at the same time, one must acknowledge as good and true. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21
There is no difference, at this point, between the theist and the atheist. Atheism is only a form of enmity against God, namely, that God Who represents the law, and, with the law, the split and the despair and the meaninglessness of our existence. The atheist as well as the theist hates to be confronted with what one ought to be, with the ultimate meaning and good which one cannot deny and yet which one cannot reach. The atheist gives other names to God, Whom one hates, but one cannot escape Him, any more than one can escape one’s hatred of Him. This is the reason Paul does not say: “Our own spirit witnesses to us that we are the children of God.” Our own spirit only witnesses that we are his enemies! Always when Christianity speaks of God and of our loving God in our daily life, it should remember that. The majesty of God is challenged, when we make Him the loving Father before we have recognized Him as the condemning law, Whom we hate in the depths of our hearts. “The Spirit beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God.” Something new has come, a new reality, a new being, a Spirit distinguished from our spirit, yet able to make itself understood to our spirit, beyond us and yet in us. The whole message of Christianity is contained in this statement. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21
Christianity overcomes law and despair by the certainty that we are the children of God. There is nothing higher than this. For although we are in the flesh and under the law and in the cleavage of our existence, we are, at the same time, in the Spirit and in the fulfillment and unity with the ultimate meaning of our life. This paradox, for Paul, is the astonishing and, humanly speaking, the incredible content of Christianity. This certainty gave him the impulse to preach his message to the whole World, and to conquer it. It gave him the power to break with his caste and his nation, and to take upon himself an abundant among of suffering and struggle, and finally, martyrdom. Christ has overcome the law, the system of command which makes us slaves because we cannot escape it, and which throws us into despair because it makes us enemies of our own destiny and our own ultimate good. Having this certainty that we are the children of God means, for Paul, “having the Spirit.” Out of this certainty follows everything that makes Christian existence what it is. First of all, it gives us the power to cry, “Abba, Father!” that is the power to pray the Lord’s prayer. Only one who has the Spirit has the power to say “Father” to God. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21
The mind plays an important role in determining what a person is able to see, will, feel, and desire. If this is true, then intellectual development can pay rich dividends in the changes that result in one’s other faculties. In order to focus our thoughts about this topic, let us consider the mind’s role in the process of seeing. Philosophers distinguish three different kinds of seeing. Consider an ordinary case of seeing a dog. First, there is simple seeing: having the dog directly present to you in your visual field and noticing the dog. You do not need to have a concept of what a dog is to see one. For example, a little child could see a dog without having a concept of what a dog is supposed to be. In fact, you do not even need to be thinking about a dog to see it. I could see a dog while looking out my window as I ponder the topic of this essay. Even though I would not be thinking about the dog, I could still see it and, later, recall from memory the dog’s colour. In simple seeing, a person sees merely by means of the soul’s faculty of sight. Second, there is seeing as. Here I see an object as being something or other. I may see the dog as a dog. I may even see the dog as a cat if the lighting is poor and I have been led to believe that only cats, but no dogs, live in the area. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21
I can see the dog as my neighbour’s favourite pet. An act of seeing as involves classifying the object of sight as an example of a mental concept, and concepts are located in the mind. Thus, an act of seeing as requires both the faculties of sight and mind working together. When I see a dog as a dog, I must have some concept of what it is to be a dog and apply this concept to the object I am seeing. I could not see a dog as a dog the first time I saw one since I would not have the relevant concept yet. Likewise, to see a dog as my neighbour’s favourite pet, I need the concept of a neighbour, a pet, and being a favourite. Third, there is seeing that. Here one judges with the mind that some perceptual belief is true. If I see that the dog is my neighbour’s favourite pet, I judge that this belief is true of the object I am seeing. If I merely see the dog as my neighbour’s favourite pet, I do not really have to think this is true. I may just be playing with different concept in my mind. I may be thinking, What would it be like to see his dog as my neighbour’s favourite pet? even though I do not think it really is. A developed mind helps us see, but how? Simple seeing only involves the faculty of sight. However, seeing as and seeing that involves the mind. This is why the more one knows, the more one can see. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21
A doctor and I can look at the same skin condition (a case of simple seeing), but he observes more than I do because his mind is filled with medical concepts and beliefs I do not have, which enable him or her to notice things I fail to observe. One can see the sore as a basal cell or as a squamous cell carcinoma—that is, he or she can look at the skin area in both ways to be in a position to look for the right things, so that one can identify it, or “see it as,” a basal cell. I cannot do this because my mind lacks the relevant intellectual categories the doctor possesses. I can stare at the same sore all day long and not see what the doctor sees. Consider another example. Last week the news covered a march on Washington in favour of children’s rights. A congresswoman made the following argument: “Governments should honour children’s rights. Therefore, just as the government should vouchsafe a child’s right not to be molested and stalked, so it should do so for a child’s right to government-sponsored day care.” Now, what is wrong with this argument as it stands? Do you see what I see in this piece of reasoning? If I pace a mental distinction in your mind, it may help your seeing: the distinction between negative and positive rights. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21
A negative right is a right to be protected from some sort of harm. Negative rights place a duty on the government to keep others from doing something to me. A positive right is a right to have something provided for me. Positive rights place a duty on the government to force others (for instance by taxation) to do something for me. For example, if health care is a negative right, the government must see to it that I can get whatever health care I can afford by my own labour unhindered by unfair limitations based on race, creed, or gender. However, if health care is a positive right, the government has a duty to raise the taxes sufficient to provide me with health care. In the congresswoman’s argument about children’s rights, she fails to make this distinction. Moreover, many people believe that New Testament teaching on the state implies that it is responsible for protecting negative rights, not for providing positive ones. The issue here is not that these people (conservatives) are correct in this regard (though I think they). The issue is that, for a long time, the distinction between negative and positive rights has been recognized, and many informed political philosophers have raised arguments against positive rights. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21
This conflict means that a person cannot simply assert that because the government should guard a child’s negative right to be protected against abuse, it is also the government’s duty to provide day care for children. A person could read the congresswoman’s statement several times and not see this issue is he or she did not have the intellectual concepts and beliefs already in mind. This example illustrates the way knowledge helps one see things unavailable to one who has not developed his or her intellect in the relevant area of study. We often read the Bible, hear the news, listen to a sermon, or talk to friends, yet we do not get much out of it. One central reason for this may be our lack of knowledge and intellectual growth. The more you know, the more you see and hear because your mind brings more to the task of “seeing as” or “seeing that.” In fact, the more you know about extrabiblical matters, the more you will see in the Bible. Why? Because you will see distinctions in the Bible or connections between Scripture and an issues in another area of life that would not be possible without the concepts and categories placed in the mind’s structure by gaining the relevant knowledge in those extrabiblical areas of thought. Thus, general intellectual development can enrich life and contribute to Bible study and spiritual formation. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21
There is a closely related reason why intellectual development can enhance spiritual development: The mind forms habits and falls into ruts. One day at a chapel meeting, a missions professor showed a film clip of a foreign culture unfamiliar to most of us. He asked us to write down everything we noticed. He then showed the clip a second time and asked us to repeat the exercise. Everyone in the chapel meeting compared his or her first and second lists and, in every cause, they were virtually identical! The professor’s lesson: our minds get into ruts in which we tend to look for things we have already seen in order to validate our earlier perceptions. We seldom look at things from entirely fresh perspectives! If we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that we get into ruts in our thinking and develop habits of thought that can grow stale after a while. This is where renewing the mind comes in. A life of study can give us a constant source of new categories and beliefs that will lead to fresh new insights and stave off intellectual boredom. Many people become bored with Bible precisely because their overall intellectual growth is stagnant. They cannot get new insights from Scripture because they bring the same old categories to Bible study and look to validate their old habits of thought. How does the mind interact with other parts of the person? Space forbids me to develop in depth the mind’s role in shaping our willing feeling, and desiring. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21
However, it should be easy to apply our discussion of the mind’s role in seeing to these other areas of human functioning. If I do not know what or how it works, I cannot choose to do something. If I do not believe it is good, valuable, and desirable, I cannot desire something. If my thoughts and beliefs about someone run in the opposite direction, I cannot feel tender toward that person. It is true that the other faculties of the soul affect the mind too. And an overall strategy for personal growth should work on developing and integrating every facet of human personality under Christ’s lordship. Still, I think the mind stands out for special emphasis because it is so neglected today by many Christians. The contemporary Christian mind is starved, and as a result we have small, impoverished souls. The hierarchy of basic needs is prepotent to the metaneeds. Basic needs and metaneeds are in the same hierarchical-integration, id est, on the same continuum, in the same realm of discourse. They have the same basic characteristic of being “needed” (necessary, good for the person) in the sense that their deprivation produces “illness” and diminution, and that their “ingestion” fosters growth toward full humanness, toward greater happiness and joy, toward psychological “success,” toward more peak-experiences, and in general toward living more often at the level of being. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21
That is, the metaneeds are all biologically desirable, and all foster biological success. And yet, they are also different in definable ways. First of all, it is clear that the whole hierarchy of the basic needs is prepotent to the metaneeds, or, to say it in another way, the metaneeds are postpotent (less urgent or demanding, weaker) to the basic needs. I intend this as a generalized statistical statement because I find some single individuals in whom a special-talent or a unique sensitivity makes truth or beauty or goodness, for that single person, more important and more pressing than some basic need. Secondly, the basic needs can be called deficiency-needs, having the various characteristics already described for deficiency-needs, while the metaneeds seems rather to have the special characteristics described for “growth-motivations.” The metaneeds are equally potent among themselves on the average—id est, I cannot detect a generalized hierarchy of prepotency. However, in any given individual, they may be and often are hierarchically arranged according to idiosyncratic talents and constitutional differences. The metaneeds (or B-values, or B-facts) so far as I can many out are not arranged in a hierarchy of prepotency, but seem, all of the, to be equally potent on the average. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21
Another way of saying this, a phrasing that is useful for other purposes, is that each individual seems to have one’s own priorities or hierarchy or prepotency, in accordance with one’s own talents temperament skills, capacities, et cetera. Beauty is more important than truth to one person, but for one’s brother it may be the other way about with equal statistical likelihood. It looks as if any intrinsic or B-value is fully defined by most or all of the other B-values. Perhaps they form a unity of some sort, with each specific B-value being simply the whole seen from another angle. That is, truth, to be fully and completely defined, must be beautiful, good, perfect, just, simple, orderly, lawful, alive, comprehensive, unitary, dichotomy-transcending, effortless, and amusing. (The formula, “The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” is certainly quite inadequate.) Beauty, fully defined, must be true, good perfect, alive, simple, et cetera. He it is who appears suddenly; he does not give me time to prepare. And how would I prepare, anyway, against one such as him? Nothing can withstand him, if that be his wish: he is the unconquered one, the victor, inexorably advancing. Lord of Radiance, I wait for you. I will not resist. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21
Come like a blasting wind; even then I will be here with mind open before you, even then I will be here with heart open before you, even then I will be here with hands open before you, awaiting your arrival. “Now it came to pass that after Amulek had made an end of these words, they withdraw themselves from the multitude and came over int the land in Jershon. Yea, and the rest of the brethren, after they had preached the word unto the Zoramites, also came over into the land of Jershon. And it came to pass that after the more popular part of the Zoramites had consulted together concerning the words which had been preached unto them, they were angry because of the word, for it did destroy their craft; therefore they would not hearken unto the words. And they sent and gathered together throughout all the land all the people, and consulted with them concerning the words which had been spoken. Now their rulers and their priests and their teachers did not let the people know concerning their desires; therefore they found out privily the minds of all the people. And it came to pass that after they had found out the minds of all the people, those who were in favour of the words which had been spoken by Alma and his brethren were cast out of the land; and they were many; and they came over also into the land of Jershon. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21
“And it came to pass that Alma and his brethren did minister unto them. Now the people of the Zoramites were angry with the people of Ammon who were in Jershon, and the chief ruler of the Zoramites, being a very wicked man, sent over unto the people of Ammon desiring them that they should cast out of their land all those who came over from them into their land. And he breathed out many threatenings against them. And now the people of Ammon did not fear their words; therefore they did not cast them out, but they did receive all the poor of the Zoramites that came over unto them; and they did nourish them, and did clothe them, and did give unto them lands for their inheritance; and they did administer unto them according to their wants. Now this did stir up the Zoramites to anger against the people of Ammon, and they began to mix with the Lamanites and to stir them up also to anger against them. And thus the Zoramites and the Lamanites began to make preparations for war against the people of Ammon, and also against the Nephites. And thus ended the seventeenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21
And the people of Ammon departed out of the land of Jershon, and came over into the land of Melek, and gave place in the land of Melek, and gave place in the land of Jershon for the armies of the Nephites, that they might content with the armies of the Lamanites and the armies of the Zoramites; and thus commenced a war betwixt the Lamanites and the Nephites, in the eighteenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi. And the people of Ammon departed out of the land of Jershon, and came over into the land of Melek, and gave place in the land of Jershon for the armies of the Nephites, that they might contend with the armies of the Zoramites; and thus commenced a war betwixt the Lamanites and the Nephites, in the eighteenth year of the reign or the judges; and an account shall be given of their war hereafter. And Alma, and Ammon, and their brethren, and also the two sons of Alma returned to the land of Zarahemla, after having been instruments in the hands of God of brining many of the Zoramites to repentance; and as many as were brought to repentance were driven out of their land; but they have lands for their inheritance in the land of Jershon, and they have taken up arms to defend themselves, and their wives, and children, and their lands. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21
“Now Alma, being grieved for the iniquity of his people, yea for the wars, and the bloodsheds, and the contentions which were among them; and having been to declare the word, or sent to declare the word, among all the people in every city; and seeing that the hearts of the people began to wax hard, and that they began to be offended because of the strictness of the word, his heart was exceedingly sorrowful. Therefore, he caused that his sons should be gathered together, that he might give unto them every one his charge, separately, concerning the things pertaining unto righteousness. And we have an account of his commandments, which he gave unto them according to his own record,” reports Alma 35.1-17. You who created light, both human and divine. You accompanied by angels and the Holy Ghost: both powerful and spiritual. You who sit upon the threshold: both in and out. You are the Lord of Heavens and Earth, to you I pray. I am here, Lord, beneath your over-reaching dome, calling to you from the World so far below you. I send my words up to you, building a road on which you might descend. See them there, glowing in the air, the straight road leading to me. Come to me, I ask, guiding yourself by my prayer, come without error, and without delay, to me. Between us there is a bond, strengthened by the thread of my prayer. Come to me, who worship you. Come, answer my prayer. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21
Cresleigh Homes
Buying a home can be a confusing experience for many. Today’s blog tackles closing costs: what are they, and what can you do to make the process go as smoothly as possible. Check it out at the link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/blog/
Tell me, Lord what your message is for me. I have tried to decide for some time just what it is that you have to teach me. Now, at the end of my resources, I finally do what I should have done first: ask yourself. Please speak to me, Lord, and I will listen. https://cresleigh.com/mills-station/residence-4/virtual-tour/
The Fate of Unborn Millions Will Now Depend, Under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this Nation!
I am not of your World. I have spent all my life in prison when I was a child. I was an orphan and too ugly to be adopted. Now I am too beautiful to be set free. I am Earth. I am pro-eternal life and I want us all to end up in Heaven together someday. Every society faces not merely a succession of probable futures, but an array of possible futures, and a conflict over preferable futures. If both rich and poor are giving up life itself and yet both are deeply dissatisfied, even suffering, they will never feel paid enough for their lot in life: what has gone on is not a trade or exchange, but a sacrifice. Social and structural institutions including Law, economy, government/state, family, communities and community organizations, and social groups, among others, provide the space in which we institute popular, secular, religious, and personal notions of justice. Governance and Law are often bureaucracies and institutions that are formed to represent and uphold particular notions on justice. It is, therefore, not coincidental that much civil disobedience is aimed at these state institutions. Often, these institutions support, constrict, and conflict with personal ideologies about justice. Just as with ideas about political and social institutions, theorists of justice have grappled with many ways that economies both reinforce oppression and domination, as well as liberation. #RandolphHarris 1 of 24
Justice is not just the province of states or institutions or structures, but rather a feature of our everyday lives. We live with justice, and contend with the question of justice. With each act of kindness, compassion, love, caring, and empathy, we create and regenerate these in our everyday lives with others. The study of justice is misleading because rather than focusing on justice we frequent are forced to engage with the study of injustice instead. Justice is not so much a problem to be “solved” as it is a set of questions or issues that we live with and struggle with. By providing you with a vision of the World that has many intersecting, overlapping forms of domination and oppressions, we often raise more questions than we can answer, but we encourage further inquiry with the many visions of justice. It is a fact of great analytic importance that life is complicated. That life is complicated may seem a banal formulation of the obvious, but it is actually a significant theory. Dimension dealing with power relations that characterize any society are never as transparently clear as the names we give to them suggest. Power can be invisible, it can be fantastic, it can be dull and routine, it can be grand and obvious. #RandolphHarris 2 of 24
Power can reach you by a pay check being deposited in your bank account, it can speak the language of your own thoughts and desires. It can feel like a remote control, it can exhilarate like liberation. It can travel through time and it can drown you in the present. It is dense and superficial, it can cause bodily injury, and it can injury you without seemingly ever touching you. It causes dreams to live and dreams to die. It is systematic and it is particularistic. We can and must can it by names like racism, for example, but also we need to understand that power arrives in forms that can range from blatant supremacy of one’s culture, formal education, the decision to buy a home, or it can even be life being looked at without fear. Our ability to speak is just one aspect of the evolutionary drive to create a more accurate World in our heads. Being an intellectual creates a lot of questions and no answers. You can fill your life up with ideas and still go home lonely. All you really have that really matters are feelings. Complex personhood means that all people, albeit in specific forms, are beset by contradiction, remember and forget, and recognize and misrecognize themselves and others. #RandolphHarris 3 of 24
Complex personhood means that people suffer graciously and selfishly too, get stuck in what symptomizes their troubles and also transform themselves. Complex personhood means that even those who haunt the dominant society are haunted too by things they sometimes have names for and sometimes do not. Complex personhood means that groups of people will act together, that they will vehemently disagree with and sometimes harm each other, and that they do both at the same time and expect the rest of us to figure it our for ourselves, intervening and withdrawing as the situation requires. At the very least, complex personhood is about conferring the respect on others that comes from presuming that life and people’s lives are straightforward and full of enormously complex meaning. Understanding that life is complex may allow us to see deep into the heart and soul of American life and culture, to track events, stories, anonymous and history-making actions to their destiny, to the point where we might catch a glimpse of the vast networking of society and imagine otherwise. Civilization can be defined at once by the basic questions it asks and by those it does not ask. We should not give some real thought to the possibility of reforming our technology in the directions of smallness, simplicity, and nonviolence. #RandolphHarris 4 of 24
Most significantly theoretical thinking and intellectual largesse are the activities most denied to those who are powerless. Denied because the powerless are not presumed to posses the “mind” that could produce generalizable imaginations for all of us; denied because the division between mental and manual labour takes all kinds of forms, including this one; denied because this privilege belongs to those to whom the institutions of higher learning belong. The denial, in itself, would be reason enough for me to agree that, at the very least, it is an act of historical reparation to invite some folks to spend a lot of time doing what is often considered “useless” intellectual work. Of course, you see I do not think it is useless, but its economy of use is a different and not necessarily tied to immediate service work for others. One of the goals of the society I would rather live in consists in making available to all the pleasures (and challenges and the range of other emotions and outcomes) of thinking, of learning, of reading aimlessly of “wasting” your time by filling your head with “useless stuff,” as I was always described to be as a kid. Why? Because knowledge in its own right, of all kinds, is a great gift of culture and something too long hoarded and manipulated and forcibly withheld from people. #RandolphHarris 5 of 24
Giving away knowledge without having to earn it seems like a good idea to me. However, it has been frowned upon because if people do not earn the knowledge, they may misuse it. A lawyer with a briefcase can steal more than a hundred people with guns. I shall think of intuitionism in a more general way than is customary: namely, as the doctrine that there is an irreducible family of first principles which have to be weighed against one another by asking ourselves which balance, in our considered judgment, is the most just. Once we reach a certain level of generality, the intuitionist maintains that there exist no higher-order constructive criteria for determining the proper emphasis for the competing principles of justice. While the complexity of the moral facts requires a number of distinct principles, there is no single standard that account for them or assigns them their weights. Intuitionist theories, then, have two features: first, they consist of a plurality of first principles which may conflict to give contrary directives in particular types of cases; and second, they include no explicit method, no priority rules, for weighing these principles against one another: we are simply to strike a balance by intuition, by what seems to us most nearly right. #RandolphHarris 6 of 24
Or if there are priority rules, these are thought to be more or less trivial and of no substantial assistance in reaching a judgement. Various other contentions are commonly associated with intuitionism, for example, that the concepts of the right and the good are unanalyzable, that moral principles when suitably formulated express self-evident propositions about legitimate moral claims, and so on. However, I shall leave these matters aside. These characteristic epistemological doctrines are not a necessary part of intuitionism as I understand it. If we were to speak of intuitionism in this broad sense as pluralism, perhaps it would be better. Still, s conception of justice can be pluralistic without requiring us to weigh its principles by intuition. It may contain the requisite priority rules. To emphasize the direct appeal to our considered judgment in the balancing of principles, it seems appropriate to think of intuitionism in this more general fashion. How far such a view is committed to certain epistemological theories is a separate question. Now so understood, there are many kinds of intuitionism. Not only are our everyday notions of this type but so perhaps are most philosophical doctrines. One way of distinguishing between intuitionist views is by the level of generality of their principles. #RandolphHarris 7 of 24
Common sense intuitionism takes the form of groups of rather specific precepts, each group applying to a particular problem of justice. There is a group of precepts which applies to the question of fair wages, another to that of taxation, still another to punishment, and so on. In arriving at the notion of a fair wage, say, we are to balance somehow various competing criteria, for example, the claims of skill, training, effort, responsibility, and hazards of the job, as well as to make some allowance for need. No one presumably would decide by any one of these precepts alone, and some compromise between them must be struck. The determination of wages by existing institutions also represents, in effect, a particular weighting of these claims. This weighting, however, is normally influenced by the demands of different social interests and so by relative positions of power and influence. It may not, therefore, conform to any one’s conception of a fair wage. This is particularly likely to be true since persons with different interests are likely to stress the criteria which advance their ends. Those with more ability and education are prone to emphasize the claims of skill and training, whereas those lacking these advantages urge the claim of need. #RandolphHarris 8 of 24
However, not only are our everyday ideas of justice influenced by our own situation, they are also strongly coloured by custom and current expectations. And by what criteria are we to judge the justice of custom itself and the legitimacy of these expectations? To reach some measure of understanding and agreement which goes beyond a mere de facto resolution of competing interests and a reliance on existing conventions and established expectations, it is necessary to move to amore general scheme for determining the balance of precepts, or at least for confining it within narrower limits. Thus we can consider the problems of justice by reference to certain end of social policy. Yet this approach also is likely to rely on intuition, since it normally takes the form of balancing various economic and social objectives. For example, suppose that allocative efficiency, full employment, a larger national income, and its more equal distribution are accepted as social ends. Then, given the desired weighting of these aims, and the existing institutional setup, the precepts of fair wages, just taxation, and so on will receive their due emphasis. In order to achieve greater efficiency and equity, one may follow a policy which has the effect of stressing skill and effort in the payment of wages, leaving the precept of need to be handled in some other fashion, perhaps by welfare transfers. #RandolphHarris 9 of 24
An intuitionism of social ends provides a basis for deciding whether the determination of fair wages makes sense in view of the taxes to be imposed. How we weigh the precepts in one group is adjusted to how we weigh them in another. In this way we have managed to introduce a certain coherence in our judgments of justice; we have moved beyond the narrow de facto compromise of interests to a wider view. Of course we are still left with an appeal to intuition in the balancing of the higher order ends of policy themselves. Different weightings for these are not by any means trivial variations but often correspond to profoundly opposed political convictions. The principles of philosophical conceptions are of the most general kind. Not only are they intended to account for the ends of social policy, but the emphasis assigned to these principles should correspondingly determine the balance of these ends. For purposes of illustration, let us discuss a rather simply yet familiar conception based on the aggregative-distributive dichotomy. It has two principles: the basic structure of society is to be designed first to produce the most good in the sense of the greatest net balance of satisfaction, and second to distribute satisfactions equally. Both principles have, of course, ceteris paribus clauses. #RandolphHarris 10 of 24
The first principle, the principle of utility, acts in this case as a standard of efficiency, urging us to produce as large a total as we can, other things equal; whereas the second principle serves as a standard of justice constraining the pursuit of aggregate well-being and evening out of the distribution of advantages. This conception is intuitionist because no priority rule is provided for determining how these two principles are to be balanced against each other. Widely different weights are consistent with accepting these principles. No doubt it is natural to make certain assumptions about how most people would in fact balance them. For one thing, at different combinations of total satisfaction and degrees of equality, we presumably would give these principles different weights. For example, if there is a large total satisfaction but it is unequally distributed, we would probably think it more urgent to increase equality than if the large aggregate well-being were already rather evenly shared. This can be put more formally by using the economist’s device of indifference curves. #RandolphHarris 11 of 24
Assume that we can measure the extent to which particular arrangements of the basic structure satisfy these principles; and represent total satisfaction on the positive X-axis and equality on the positive Y-axis. (The latter may be supposed to have an upper bound at perfect equality.) The extent to which an arrangement of the basic structure fulfills these principles can now be represented by a point in the plane. Now clearly a point which is northeast of another is better arrangement: it is superior on both counts. For example, the point B: is better than the point A in figure 1. Indifference curves are formed by connecting points judged equally just. Thus curve I in figure 1 consists of the points rated equally with point A which lies on that curve; curve II consists of the points ranked along with point B, and so on. We may assume that these curves slope downward to the right and also that they do not intersect, otherwise the judgment they represent would be inconsistent. The slope of the curve at any point expresses the relative weights of equality and total satisfaction at the combination the point represents; the changing slope along an indifference curve shows how the relative urgency of the principles shifts as they are more or less satisfied. #RandolphHarris 12 of 24
Thus, moving along either of the indifference curves in figure 1, we see that as equality decreases a larger and larger increase in the sum of satisfactions is required to compensate for a further decrease in equality. Moreover, very different weightings are consistent with these principles. Let figure 2 represent the judgments of two different persons. The solid lines depict the judgments of the one who gives a relatively strong weight to total welfare. Thus while the first person ranks arrangement D equal with C, the second judges D superior. This conception of justice imposes no limitations on what are the correct weightings; and therefore it allows different persons to arrive at a different balance of principles. Nevertheless such an intuitionist conception, it is were to fit our considered judgments on reflection, would be by no means without importance. At least would single out the criteria which are significant, the apparent axes, so to speak, of our considered judgments of social justice. The intuitionists hopes that once these axes, or principles, are identified, humans will in fact balance them more or less similarly, at least when they are impartial and not moved by an excessive attention to their own interests. Or if this is not so, then at least they can agree to some scheme whereby their assignment of weights can be compromised. #RandolphHarris 13 of 24
It is essential to observe that the intuitionist does not deny that we can describe how we balance competing principles, or how any one human does so, supposing that we weigh them differently. The intuitionists grants the possibility that these weights can be depicted by indifference curves. Knowing the description of these weight, the judgments which will be made can be foreseen. In this sense these judgments have a consistent and definite structure. Of course, it may be claimed that in the assignment of weights we are guided, without being aware of it, by certain further standards or by how best to realize a certain end. Perhaps the weights we assign are those which would result if we were to apply these standards or to pursue this end. Admittedly any given balancing of principles is subjects to interpretation in this way. However, the intuitionist claims that, in fact, there is no such interpretation. One contends that there exists no expressible ethical conception which underlies these weights. A geometrical figure or a mathematical function may describe them, but there are no constructive moral criteria that establish their reasonableness. Intuitionism holds that in our judgments of socials justice we must eventually reach a plurality of first principles in regard to which we can only say that it seems to us more correct to balance them this way rather than that. #RandolphHarris 14 of 24
Now there is nothing intrinsically irrational about this intuitionist doctrine. Indeed, it may be true. We cannot take for granted that there must be a complete derivation of our judgments of social justice from recognizable ethical principles. The intuitionist believes to the contrary that the complexity of the moral facts defines our efforts to give a full account to our judgments and necessitates a plurality of competing principles. One contends that attempts to go beyond these principles either reduce to triviality, as when it is said that social justice is to give every human one’s due, or else lead to falsehood and oversimplification, as when one settles everything by the principle of utility. The only way therefore to dispute intuitionism is to set forth the recognizably ethical criteria that account for the weights which, in our considered judgments, we think appropriate to give to the plurality of principles. A refutation of intuitionism consists in presenting the short of constructive criteria that are said not to exist. To be sure, the notion of a recognizably ethical principle is vague, although it is easy to give many examples drawn from tradition and common sense. However, it is pointless to discuss this matter in the abstract. The intuitionist and one’s critic will have to settle this question once the latter has put forward one’s more systematic account. #RandolphHarris 15 of 24
It may be asked whether intuitionistic theories are teleological or deontological. They may be of either kind, and any ethical view is bound to rely on intuition to some degree at many points. For example, one could maintain, as Moore did, that personal affection and human understanding, the creation and the contemplation of beauty, and gaining and appreciation of knowledge are the chief good things, along with pleasure. And one might also maintain (as Moore did not) that these are the sole intrinsic goods. Since these values are specified independently from the right, we have a teleological theory of a perfectionist type if the right is defined as maximizing the good. Yet in estimating what yields the most good, the theory may hold that these values have to be balanced against each other by intuition: it may say that there are no substantive criteria for guidance here. Often, however, intuitionist theories are deontological. In the definitive presentation of Ross, the distribution of good things according to moral worth (distributive justice) is included among the goods to be advanced; and while the principle to produce the most good ranks as a first principle, it is but one such principle which must be balanced by intuition against the claims of the other prima facie principles. #RandolphHarris 16 of 24
The distinctive feature, then, of intuitionistic views is not their being teleological or deontological, but the especially prominent place that they give to the appeal to our intuitive capacities unguided by constructive and recognizably ethical criteria. Intuitionism denies that there exists any useful and explicit solution to the priority problem. The full definition of the person or of human nature must then include intrinsic values, as part of human nature. If we then try to define the deepest, most authentic, most constitutionally based aspects of the real self, of the indemnity, or of the authentic person, we find that in order to be comprehensive we must include not only the person’s constitution and temperament, not only anatomy, psychology, neurology, and endocrinology, not only one’s capacities, one’s biological style, not only one’s basic instinctoid needs, but also the B-values, which are also one’s B-values. These intrinsic values are instinctoid in nature, id est, they are needed (a) to avoid illness and (b) to achieve fullest humanness or growth. The “illnesses” resulting from deprivation of intrinsic values (metaneeds) we may call metapathologies. The “highest” values, the spiritual life, the highest aspirations of humankind are therefore proper subjects for scientific study and research. They are in the World of nature. #RandolphHarris 17 of 24
These “illnesses” (which come from deprivation of the B-values or metaneeds or B-facts) are new and have not yet been described as such id est, as pathologies, except unwittingly, or by implication, or in a very general and inclusive way, not yet teased apart into researchable form. In general they have been discussed through the centuries by religionists, historians, and philosophers under the rubric of spiritual or religious shortcomings, rather than by physicians, scientists, or psychologists under the rubric of psychiatric or psychological or biological “illnesses” or stuntings or diminutions. To some extent also there is some overlap with sociological and political disturbances, “social pathologies,” and the like. I will call these “illnesses” (or, better, diminutions of humanness) “metapathologies” and define them as the consequences of deprivation of the B-values either in general or of specific B-values. The metapathologies of the affluent and indulged young come partly from deprivation of intrinsic values, frustrated “idealism,” from disillusionment with a society they see (mistakenly) motivated only by lower or animal material needs. My hypothesis is that this behaviour can be a fusion of continued search for something to believe in, combined with anger at being disappointed. (I sometimes see in a particular young man total despair or hopelessness about even the existence of such values.) #RandolphHarris 18 of 24
Of course, this frustrated idealism and occasional hopelessness is partially due to the influence and ubiquity of stupidly limited theories of motivation all over the World. Leaving aside behaviouristic and positivistic theories—or rather non-theories—as simple refusals even to see the problem, id est, a kind of psychoanalytic denial. Then what is available to the idealistic young man and woman? Not only does the whole of official nineteenth-century science and orthodox academic psychology offer one nothing, but also the major motivation theories by which most humans live can lead one only to depression or cynicism. The Freudians, at least in their official writings (though not in good therapeutic practice), are still reductionistic about all higher human values. The deepest and most real motivations are seen to be dangerous and nasty, while the highest human values and virtues are essentially fake, being not what they seem to be, but camouflaged versions of the “deep, dark, and dirty.” Our social scientist are just as disappointing in the main. A total cultural determinism is still the official, orthodox doctrine of many or most of the sociologists and anthropologists. This doctrine not only denies intrinsic higher motivations, but comes perilously close sometimes to denying “human nature” itself. #RandolphHarris 19 of 24
The economists, not only in the West but also in the East, are essentially materialist. We must say harshly of the “science” of economics that it is generally the skilled, exact, technological application of a total false theory of human needs and values, a theory which recognizes only the existence of lower needs or material needs. How could young people not be disappointed and disillusioned? What else could be the result of getting all the material and animal gratifications and then not being happy, as they were led to expect, not only by the theorists, but also by the conventional wisdom of parents and teachers, and the insistent gray lies of the advertisers? What happens the to the “eternal verities”? to the ultimate truths? Most sections of society agree in handing them over to the churches and to dogmatic, institutionalized, conventionalized religious organizations. However, this is also a denial of high human nature! It says in effect that the youngster who is looking for something will definitely not find it in human nature itself. One must look for ultimates to a non-human, non-natural source, a source which is definitely mistrusted or rejected altogether by many intelligent young people today. #RandolphHarris 20 of 24
“Now after Alma had spoken these words, they are sent forth unto him desiring to know whether they could believe in one God, that they might obtain this fruit of which he had spoken, or how they should plant the seed, or the word of which he had spoken, which he said must be planted in their hearts; or in what manner they should begin to exercise their faith. And Alma said unto them: Behold, ye have said that ye could not worship your God because ye are cast out of your synagogues. However, behold, I say unto you, if ye suppose that ye cannot worship God, ye do greatly err, and ye ought to search the scriptures; if ye supposed that they have taught you this, ye do not understand them. Do ye remember to have read what Zenos, the prophet of the old, has said concerning prayer or worship? For he said: Thou art merciful, O God, for thou hast heard my prayer, even when I was in the wilderness; yea, thou wast merciful when I prayed concerning those who were mine enemies, and thou didst turn them to me. Yea, O God, and thou wast merciful unto me when I did cry unto thee in my field; when I did cry unto thee in my prayer, and thou didst hear me. And again, O God, when I did turn to my house thou didst hear me in prayer. And when I did turn unto my closet, O Lord, and prayed unto thee, thou didst hear me. #RandolphHarris 21 of 24
“Yea, thou art merciful unto thy children when they cry unto thee, to be heard of thee and not of humans, and thou wilt hear them. Yea, O God, thou hast been merciful unto me, and heard my cries in the midst of thy congregations. Yea, and thou hast also heard me when I have been cast out and have been despised by mine enemies; yea, thou didst hear my cries, and wast angry with mine enemies, and thou didst visit them in thine anger with speedy destruction. And thou didst hear me because of mine afflictions and my sincerity; and it is because of thy Son that thou hast been thus merciful unto me, therefore I will cry unto thee in all mine afflictions, for in thee is my joy; for thou hast turned thy judgments away from me, because of thy Son. And now Alma said unto them: Do ye believe what Zenos said; for, behold he said: Thou hast turned away thy judgments because of thy Son. Now behold, my brethren, I would ask if ye have read the scriptures? If ye have, how can ye disbelieve on the Son of God? For it is no written that Zenos alone spake of these things—for behold, he said: Thou angry, O Lord, with this people, because they will not understand thy mercies which though hast bestowed upon them because of thy Son. And now, my brethren, ye see that a second prophet of old has testified of the Son of God, an because the people would not understand this words they stoned him to death. #RandolphHarris 22 of 24
“However, behold, this is no all; these are not the only ones who have spoken concerning the son of God. Behold, he was spoken of by Moses; yea, and behold a type was raised up in the wilderness, that whosoever would look upon it might live. And many did look and live. However, few understood the meaning of those things, and this because of the hardness of their hearts. However, there were many who were hardened that they would not look, therefore they perished. Now the reason they would not look is because they did not believe that it would heal them. O my brethren, if ye could be healed by merely casting about your eyes that ye might be healed, would ye not behold quickly, or would ye rather harden your hearts in unbelief, and be slothful, that ye would not cast about your eyes, that might perish? If so, who shall come upon you; but if not so, then cast about your eyes, and begin to believe in the Son of God, that we will come to redeem his people, and that he shall suffer and die to atone for their sins; and that he shall rise again from the dead, which shall bring to pass the resurrection, that all humans shall stand before him, to be judged at the last and judgment day, according to their works. #RandolphHarris 23 of 24
“And now, my brethren, I desire that ye shall plant this word in your hearts, and as it beginneth to swell even so nourish it by your faith. And behold, it will become a tree, springing up in you unto everlasting life. And then may God grant unto you that your burdens may be light, through the joy of his Son. And even all this can ye do if ye will. Amen,” reports Alma 33.1-23. I call to the Holy Ones with open hands asking that they come, that they grant me their presence. Mighty and Shining One, worthy of worship, I stand before you with welcoming words. Come to me that we might feast together again. With this small flame I send a message—it is my burning beacon fire. May you see it, Shining Ones, and draw near to me. Filled with holy power of God send to those they love I rise up in ecstasy, taken by them to the Land of Blessings. Fill me, carry me, lift me in glory; welcome me to your home. I pour out this libation to you, as has been done since ancient times. Come and accept your due. Can you hear my prayers as they go up in your honour? I am the one who wait for you, praising you, even in your absence. Do not withhold yourself from me, from one who brings you gifts, from one who awaits you patiently. #RandolphHarris 24 of 24
Cresleigh Homes
A view like this one is sure to Brighton your day! 😉 #BrightonStation residents enjoy fully customizable backyards so you can create the hangout of your dreams! https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/
Find Out What Happens and Why it Matters—This Generation Has a Rendezvous With Destiny!
A jury consist of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer. Music is the glue which has kept this generation from falling apart in the face of incredible adult blindness and ignorance and evilness. It is the new educational system for reform and the medium for revolution. Being an entertainer, especially in times like these, is really a public service. I care about life, but, too, I care about Justice. If I cannot have both, then I choose Justice. I care about life, but then are things that I care about more than life. For that reason, I will not seek life improperly. It has seemed to many philosophers, and it appears to be supported by the convictions of common sense, that we distinguish as a matter of principle between the claims of liberty and right on the one had and the desirability of increasing aggregate social welfare on the other; and that we give a certain priority, if not absolute weight, to the former. Each member of society is thought to have an inviolability founded on justice or, as some say, on natural right, which even the welfare of everyone else cannot override. Justice denies that loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others. The reasoning which balances the gains and losses of different persons as if they were one person is excluded. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23
Therefore in a just society the basic liberties are taken for granted and the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests. Justice as fairness attempts to account for these common sense convictions concerning the priority of justice by showing that they are the consequence of principles which would be chosen in the original position. These judgments reflect the rational preferences and the initial equality of the contacting parties. Although the utilitarian recognizes that, strictly speaking, one’s doctrine conflicts with these sentiments of justice, one maintains that common sense precepts of justice and notions of natural right have but a subordinate validity as secondary rules; they arise from the fact that under the conditions of civilized society there is great social utility in following them for the most part and in permitting violations only under exceptional circumstances. Even the excessive zeal which we are apt to affirm these precepts and to appeal to these rights is itself granted a certain usefulness, since it counterbalances a natural human tendency to violate them in ways not sanctioned by utility. Once we understand this, the apparent disparity between the utilitarian principle and the strength of these persuasions of justice is no longer difficult. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23
Thus while the contract doctrine accepts our convictions about the priority of justice as on the whole sound, utilitarianism seeks to account for them as a socially useful illusion. A second contrast is that whereas the utilitarian extends to society the principle of choice for one human, justice as fairness, being a contract view, assumes that the principles of social choice, and so the principles of justice, are themselves the object of an original agreement. There is no reason to suppose that the principles which should regulate an association of humans is simply an extension of the principle of choice for one human. On the contrary: if we assume that the correct regulative principle for anything depends on the nature of that thing, and that the plurality of distinct persons with separate systems of ends is an essential feature of human societies, we should not expect the principles of social choice to be utilitarian. To be sure, it has not been shown by anything said so far that the parties in the original position would not choose the principle of utility to define the terms of social cooperation. This is a difficult question which we shall examine later on. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23
It is perfectly possible, from all that one knows at this point, that some form of the principle of utility would be adopted, and therefore that contract theory leads eventually to a deeper and more roundabout justification of utilitarianism. In fact a derivation of this kind is sometimes suggested by Betham and Edgeworth, although it is not developed by them in any systematic way and to my knowledge it is not found in Sidgwick. For the present I shall simply assume that the persons in the original position would reject the utility principle and that they would adopt instead, for the kinds of reasons previously sketched, the two principles of justice already mentioned. In any case, from the standpoint of contract theory one cannot arrive at a principle of social choice merely by extending the principle of rational prudence to the system of desires constructed by the impartial spectator. To do this is not to take seriously the plurality and distinctness of individuals, nor to recognize as the basic of justice that to which humans would consent. Here we may not a curious anomaly. It is customary to think of utilitarianism as individualistic, and certainly there are good reasons for this. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23
The utilitarians were strong defenders of liberty and freedom of thought, and they held that the good of society is constituted by the advantages enjoyed by individuals. Yet utilitarianism is not individualistic, at least when arrived at by the more natural courses of reflection, in that by conflating all systems of desires, it applies to society the principle of choice for one human. And thus we see that the second contrast is related to the first, since it is this conflation, and the principle based upon it, which subjects the rights secured by justice to the calculus of social interests. The last contrast that I shall mention now is that utilitarianism is a teleological theory whereas justice as fairness is not. By definition, then, the latter is a deontological theory, one that either does not specify the good independently from the right, or does not interpret the right as maximizing the good. (It should be noted that deontological theories are defined as non-teleological ones, not as views that characterize the rightness of institutions and acts independently from their consequences. All ethical doctrines worth our attention take consequences into account in judging rightness. One which did not would simply be irrational, crazy.) #RandolphHarris 5 of 23
Justice as fairness is a deontological theory in the second way. For if it is assumed that the persons in the original position would choose a principle of equal liberty and restrict economic and social inequalities to those in everyone’s interests, there is no reason to think that just institutions will maximize the good. (Here I suppose with utilitarianism that the good is defined as the satisfaction of rational desire.) Of course, it is not impossible that the most good is produced but it would be a coincidence. The question of attaining the greatest new balance of satisfaction never arises in justice as fairness; this maximum principle is not used at all. There is a further point in this connection. In utilitarianism the satisfaction of any desire has some value in itself which must be taken into account in deciding what is right. In calculating the greatest balance of satisfaction it does not matter, expect indirectly, what the desires are for. We are to arrange institutions so as to obtain the greatest sum of satisfactions; we ask no questions about their source or quality but only how their satisfaction would affect the total of well-being. Social welfare depends directly and solely upon the levels of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the individuals. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23
Thus if humans take a certain pleasure in discriminating against one another, in subjecting others to a lesser liberty as a means of enhancing their self-respect, then the satisfaction of these desires must be weighed in our deliberations according to their intensity, or whatever, along with other desires. If society decides to deny them fulfillment, or to suppress them, it is because they tend to be socially destructive and a greater welfare can be achieved in other ways. In justice as fairness, on the other hand, persons accept in advance a principle of equal liberty and they do this without a knowledge of their more particular ends. They implicitly agree, therefore, to conform their conceptions of their good to what the principles of justice require, or at least not press claims which directly violate them. An individual who finds that one enjoys seeing others in positions of lesser liberty understands that one has no claim whatever to this enjoyment. The pleasure one takes in other’s deprivations is wrong in itself: it is a satisfaction which requires the violation of a principle to which one would agree in the original position. The principles of right, and so of justice, put limits on which satisfactions have value; they impose restrictions on what are reasonable conceptions of one’s good. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23
In drawing up plans and in deciding on aspirations humans are to take these constraints into account. Hence in justice as fairness one does not take human’s propensities and inclinations as given, whatever they are, and then seek the best way to fulfill them. Rather, their desires and aspirations are restricted from the outset by the principles of justice which specify the boundaries that human’s systems of ends must respect. We can express this by saying that in justice as fairness the concept of right is prior to that of good. A just social system defines the scope within which individuals must develop their aims, and it provides a framework of rights and opportunities and the means of satisfaction within and by the use of which these ends maybe equitably pursued. The priority of justice is accounted for, in part, by holding that the interests requiring the violation of justice have no value. Having no merit in the first place, they cannot override its claims. This priority of the right over the good in justice as fairness turns out to be a central feature of the conception. It imposes certain criteria on the design of the basic structure as a whole; these arrangements must not tend to generate propensities and attitudes contrary to the two principles of justice (that is, to certain principles which are given from the first a definite content) and they must ensure that just institutions are stable. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23
Thus certain initial bounds are placed upon what is good and what forms of character are morally worthy, and so upon what kinds of persons people should be. Now any theory of justice will set up some limits of this kind, namely, those that are required if its first principles are to be satisfied given the circumstances. Utilitarianism excludes those desires and propensities which if encouraged or permitted would, in view of the situation, lead to a lesser net balance of satisfaction. However, this restriction is largely formal, and in the absence of fairly detailed knowledge of the circumstances it does not give much indication of what these desires and propensities are. This is not, by itself, an objection to utilitarianism. It is simply a feature of utilitarian doctrines that it relies very heavily upon the natural facts and contingencies of human life in determining what forms of moral character are to be encouraged in a just society. The moral ideal of justice as fairness is more deeply embedded in the first principles of the ethical theory. This is characteristic of natural rights views (the contractarian tradition) in comparison with the theory of utility. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23
In setting forth these contrasts between justice as fairness and utilitarianism, I have had in mind only the classical doctrine. This is the view of Bentham and Sidgwick and of the utilitarian economists Edgeworth and Pigou. The kind of utilitarianism espoused by Hume would not serve my purpose; indeed, it is not strictly speaking utilitarian. In his well-known arguments against Locke’s contract theory, for example, Hume maintains that the principles of fidelity and allegiance both have the same foundation in utility, and therefore that nothing is gained from basing political obligation on an original contract. Locke’s doctrine represents, for Hume, an unnecessary shuffle: one might as well appeal directly to utility. However, all Hume seems to mean by utility is the general interests and necessities of society. The principles of fidelity and allegiance derive from utility in the sense that the maintenance of the social order is impossible unless these principles are generally respected. However, then Hume assumes that each human stands to gain, as judged by one’s long-term advantage, when law and government conform to the precepts founded on utility. No mention is made of the gains of some outweighing the disadvantages of others. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23
For Hume, then, utility seems to be identical with some form of the common good; institutions satisfy its demands when they are to everyone’s interests, at least in the long run. Now if this interpretation of Hume is correct, there is offhand no conflict with the priority of justice and no incompatibility with Locke’s contract doctrine. For the role of equal rights in Locke is precisely to ensure that the only permissible departures from the state of nature are those which respect these rights and serve the common interest. It is clear that all the transformations from the state of nature which Locke approves of satisfy this condition and are such that rational humans concerned to advance their ends could consent to them in a state of equality. Hume nowhere disputes the propriety of these constraints. His critique of Locke’s contract doctrine never denies, or even seems to recognize, its fundamental contention. The merit of the classical view as formulated by Bentham, Edgeworth, and Sidgwick is that it clearly recognizes what is at stake, namely the relative priority of the principles of justice and of the rights derived from these principles. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23
The question is whether the imposition of disadvantages on a few can be outweighed by a greater sum of advantages enjoyed by others; or whether the weight of justice requires an equal liberty for all and permits only those economic and social inequalities which are to each person’s interest. Implicit in the contrasts between classical utilitarianism and justice as fairness is a difference in the underlying conceptions of society. In the one we think of a well-ordered society as a scheme of cooperation for reciprocal advantage regulated by principles which persons would choose in an initial situation that is fair, in the other as the efficient administration of social resources to maximize the satisfaction of the system of desire constructed by the impartial spectator from the many individual systems of desires accepted as given. The comparison with classical utilitarianism in its more natural derivation brings out this contrast. B-values are not needs in the same sense that food, shelter, or companionship are. B-values are “metaneeds” and that indicates that they are the ultimate level of needs. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23
There is a distinction between ordinary need motivation and the motives of self-actualizing people, which is called metamotivation. Metamotivation is characterized by expressive rather than coping behaviour and is associated by B-values. The values of self-actualizing people include truth, goodness, beauty, wholeness or the transcendence of dichotomies, aliveness or spontaneity, uniqueness, perfection, completion, justice and order, simplicity, richness or totality, effortlessness, playfulness or humour, and self-sufficiency or autonomy. B-values are found at the end of so many different investigative roads, that the suspicion arises that there is something in common between these different paths, exempli gratia, education, art, religion, psychotherapy, peak-experiences, science, mathematics, et cetera. If this turns out to be so, we may perhaps add as another road to final values, the “cause,” the mission, the vocation, that is to say, the “work” of self-actualizing people. This introjection means that the self has enlarged to include aspects of the World and that therefore the distinction between self and not-self (outside, other) has been transcended. These B-value or metamotives are not longer only intrapsychic or organismic. They are equally inner and outer. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23
The metaneeds, insofar as they are inner, and the requiredness of all that is outside the person move toward becoming indistinguishable, that is, toward fusion. Certainly simple selfishness is transcended here and has to be defined at higher levels. For instance, we know that it is possible for a person to get more pleasure (selfish? Unselfish?) out of food through having one’s child eat it than through eating it with one’s own mouth. One’s self has enlarged enough to include one’s child. Hurt one’s child and you hurt him. Clearly the self can no loner be identified with the biological entity which is applied with blood from his heart along his blood vessels. They psychological self can obviously be bigger than its own body. There are other important consequences of this incorporation of values into the self. For instance, you can love justice and truth in the World or in a person out there. You can be made happier as your friends move toward truth and justice, and sadder as they move away from it. This is easy to understand. However, supposing you see yourself moving successfully toward truth, justice, beauty, and virtue? Then of course you may find that, in a peculiar kind of detachment and objectivity toward oneself, for which our culture has no place, you will be loving and admiring yourself, in the kind of healthy self-love that many Christians experience. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23
You can respect yourself, admire yourself, take tender care of yourself, reward yourself, feel virtuous, love-worthy, respect-worthy. You may then treat yourself with the responsibility and otherness that, for instance, a pregnant woman does, whose self now has to be defined to include not-self. So also may a person with a great talent protect it and oneself as if one were a carrier of something which is simultaneously oneself and not oneself. One may become one’s own guardian, so to speak. Less evolved persons seems to use their work more often for achieving gratification of lower basic needs, of neurotic needs, as a means to an end, out of habit, or as a response to cultural expectations, et cetera. However, it is probable that these are differences of degree. Perhaps all human beings are (potentially) metamotivated to a degree. The conventional categories of career, profession, or work may serve as channels of many other kinds of motivations, not to mention sheer habit or convention or functional autonomy. They may satisfy or seek vainly to satisfy any or all of the basic needs as well as various neurotic needs. They may be a channel for “acting out” or for “defensive” activities as well as for real gratifications. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23
All these various habits, determinants, motives, and metamotives are acing simultaneously in a very complex pattern which is centered more toward one kind of motivation or determinedness than the others. This is to say that the most highly developed persons we know are metamotivated to a much higher degree, and are basic-need-motivated to a lesser degree than average or diminished people are. Hail to you, mighty One of Heaven from ancient times till now your splendor endures. We, your children, call out to you again; as in the childhood of our race, we acknowledge our debts. God of light and love, we praise you. Not forgetting one, not leaving any out, we send our prayers to all of you. Listen to our words; you will find them sweet. Your children pray to you here. Sitting in anticipation of their coming, I open my mind to make their way smooth. May God hear what I say and answer me, blessing me with His presence. “And it came to pass that they did go forth, and began to preach the word of God unto the people, entering into their synagogues, and into their houses; yea, and even they did preach the word in their streets. And it came to pass that after much labour among them, they began to have success among the poor class of people; for behold, they were cast out of the synagogues because of the coarseness of their apparel. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23
“Therefore they were not permitted to enter into their synagogues to worship God, being esteemed by their brethren as dross; therefore they were poor as to things of the World; and also they were poor in heart. Now, as Alma was teaching and speaking unto the people upon the hill Onidah, here came a great multitude unto him, who were those of whom we have been speaking, of whom were poor in heart, because of their poverty as to the things of the World. And they came unto Alma; and the one who was the foremost among them said unto him; Behold, what shall these my brethren do, for they are despised of all humans because of their poverty, yea, and more especially by our priests; for they have cast us out of our synagogues which we have laboured abundantly to build with our own hands; and they have exceeding poverty; and we have no place to worship our God; and behold, what shall we do? And now when Alma heard this, he turned him about, his face immediately towards him, and he beheld with great joy; for he beheld with great joy; for he beheld that their afflictions had truly humbled them, and that they were in a preparation to hear the word. Therefore he did say no more to the other multitude; but he stretched forth his hand, and cried unto those whom he beheld, who were truly penitent, and said unto them: I behold that ye are lowly in heart; and if so, blessed are ye. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23
“Behold thy brother hath said, What shall we do?—for we are cast out of our synagogues, that we cannot worship our God. Behold I say unto you, do ye suppose that ye cannot worship God save it be in your synagogues only? And moreover, I would ask, do ye suppose that ye must not worship God only once in a week? I say unto you, it is well that ye are cast out of your synagogues, that ye may be humble, and that ye may learn wisdom; for it is necessary that ye should learn wisdom; for it is because that ye are cast out, that ye are despised of your brethren because of your exceeding poverty, that ye are brought to a lowliness of heart; for ye are necessarily brought to be humble. And now, because ye are compelled to be humble blessed are ye; for a human sometimes, if one is compelled to be humble, seeketh repentance; and now surely, whosoever repenteth shall find mercy; and one that findeth mercy and endureth to the end the same shall be saved. And now, as I said unto you, that because ye were compelled to be humble ye were blessed, do ye not suppose that they are more blessed who truly humble themselves because of the word? Yea, one that truly humbleth oneself, and pepenteth of one’s sins, and endureth to the end, the same shall be blessed than they who are compelled to be humble because of their exceeding poverty. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23
“Therefore, blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or rather, in other words, blessed is one that believeth in the word of God, and is baptized without stubbornness of heart, yea, without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe. Yea, there are many who do say: If thou wilt show unto us a sign from Heaven, then we shall know of a surety; then we shall believe. Now I ask, is this faith? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for if a human knoweth a thing one hath no cause to believe, for one knoweth it. And now, how much more cursed is one that knoweth the will of God and doeth it not, than one that only believeth, or only hath cause to believe, and falleth into transgression? Now of his thing ye must judge. Behold, I say unto you, that it is on the one hand even as it is on the other; and it shall be unto every human according to one’s work And now as I said concerning faith—faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true. And now, behold, I say unto you, and I would that ye should remember, that God is merciful unto all who believe on his name; therefore he desireth, in the first place, that ye should believe, yea, even on his word. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23
“And now, he imparteth his word by angels unto humans, yea, not only men but women also. Now this is not all; little children do have words given unto them many times, which confound the wise and the learned. And now, my beloved brethren, as ye have desired to know of me what ye shall do because ye are afflicted and cast out—now I do not desire that ye should suppose that I mean to judge you only according to that which is true. For I do no mean that ye all of you have been compelled to humble yourselves; for I verily believe that there are some among you who would humble themselves, let them be in whatsoever circumstances they might. Now, as I said concerning faith—that it was not a perfect knowledge—even so it is with my words. Ye cannot know of their surety at first, unto perfection, any more than faith is a perfect knowledge. However, behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in your, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words. Now, we will compare the word unto a seed. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23
“Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves—It must needs be that this is a good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me. Now behold, would not this increase your faith? I say unto you, Yea; nevertheless it hath not grown up to a perfect knowledge. However, behold, as the seed swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, then you must needs say that the seed is good; for behold it swelleth, and sprouteth, and begineth to grow. And now, behold, will not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith: for ye will say I know that this is a good seed; for behold it sprouteth and beginneth to grow. And now, behold, are ye sure that this is a good seed? I say unto you. Yea; for every seed bringeth forth unto its own likeness. Therefore, if a seed growth it is good, but if it growth not, behold it is not good, therefore it is cast away. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23
“And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good. And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; ad this is because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and you, Yea, because it is light; and whatsoever is light, is good, because it is discernible, therefore ye must know that it is good; and now behold, after ye have tasted this light is your knowledge perfect? Behold I say unto you, Nay; neither must ye lay aside your faith, for ye have only exercised your faith to plant the seed that ye might try the experiment to know if the seed was good. And behold, as the tree begineth to grow, ye will say: Let us nourish it with great care, that it may get root, that it may grow up, and bring forth fruit unto us. And now behold, if ye nourish it with much care it will get root, and grow up, ad bring forth fruit. However, if ye neglect the tree, and take no thought for its nourishment, behold it will not get any root; and when the heat of the Sun cometh and scorcheth it, because it hath no root it withers away, and ye pluck it up and cast it out. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23
“Now, this is not because the seed was not good, neither is it because the fruit thereof would not be desirable; but it is because your ground is barren, and ye will not nourish the tree, therefore ye cannot have the fruit thereof. And thus, if ye will not nourish the word, looking forward with an eye of faith to the fruit thereof, ye can never pluck of the fruit of the tree of life. However, if ye will nourish the word, yea, nourish the tree as it beginneth to grow, by your faith with great diligence, and with patience, looking forward to the fruit thereof, it shall take root; and behold it shall be a tree springing up unto everlasting life. And because of your diligence and your faith and your patience with the word in nourishing it, that it may take root in you, behold, by and by ye shall pluck the fruit thereof, which is most precious, which is sweet above all that is sweet, and which is white above all that is white, yea, and pure above all that is pure; and ye shall feast upon this fruit even until ye are filled, that ye hunger not, neither shall ye thirst. Then, my brethren, ye shall reap the rewards of your faith, and your diligence, and patience, and long-suffering, waiting for the tree to bring forth fruit unto you,” reports Alma 32.1-43. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23
Cresleigh Homes
A must-have on every home hunter’s list? Dual vanities. 😄 The homes at #PlumasRanch have Owner’s Suites that come with a spacious bathroom—aka, you will never fight over counter space again.
Please accept my hospitality, Holy Ones; by my guests at this feast. Renew the ancient bonds, continually recreated. As I give, so will you, for that is how true friends act. Great company of God, I welcome you. https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-riverside-at-plumas-ranch/
A Great City is that which has the Greatest Men and Women!
I can get a better grasp of what is going on in the World from one good Washington dinner party than from all the background information piled on my desk. The concept of a team allows us to think of performances that are given by one or more than one performer; it also covers another case. It has been suggested that a performer may be taken in by one’s own act, convinced at the moment that the impression of reality which one fosters is the one and only reality. In such cases the performer comes to be one’s own audience; one comes to be performer and observer of the same show. Presumably one intracepts or incorporates the standards one attempts to maintain in the presence of others so that one’s conscience requires one to act in a socially proper way. It will have been necessary for the individual in one’s audience capacity the discreditable facts that one has had to learn about the performance; in everyday teams, there will be things one knows, or has known, that one will not be able to tell oneself. This intricate maneuver of self-delusion constantly occurs; psychoanalysts have provided us with the beautiful field data of this kind, under the headings of repressions and dissociation. #RandolphHarris 1 of 26
Individualistic modes of thought tend to treat processes such as self-deception and insincerity as characterological weaknesses generated within the deep recesses of the individual personality. It might be better to start from outside the individual and work inward than to star from inside the individual and work out. We may say that the starting point for all that is to come later consist of the individual performer maintaining a definition of the situation before the audience. The individual automatically becomes insincere when one adheres to the obligation of maintaining a working consensus and participates in different routines or performs a given part before different audiences. Self-deception can be seen as something that results when two different roles, performer and audience, come to be compressed into the same individual. Perhaps here we have a source of what has been called “self-destantiation,” namely, that process by which a person comes to feel estranged from oneself. When a performer guides one’s private activity in accordance with incorporated moral standards, one may associate these standards with a reference group of some kind, thus creating a non-present audience for this activity. This possibility leads us to consider a further one. #RandolphHarris 2 of 26
The individual may privately maintain standards of behaviour which one does not personally believe in, maintaining these standards because of a lively belief that an unseen audience is present who will punish deviation from these standards. In other words, an individual may be one’s own audience or may imagine an audience to be present. (In all of this we see the analytical difference between the concept of a team and that of an individual performer.) This should make us go on to see that a team may stage a performance of an audience that is not present n the flesh to witness the show. Some people live lives of isolation and loneliness in modern society. This loneliness can develop to a tragic point. There are many ways of looking at loneliness. The first is the estrangement of humans from oneself, from one’s experiencing organism. In this fundamental rift, the experiencing organism senses one meaning in experience, but the conscious self clings rigidly to another, since that is the way it has found love and acceptance from others. Thus, we have potentially fatal division, with most behavior being regulated in terms of meanings perceived in awareness, but with other meanings sensed by the physiological organism being denied and ignored because of an inability to communicate freely within oneself. #RandolphHarris 3 of 26
The other element in our loneliness is the lack of any relationship in which we communicate our real experiencing—and hence our real self—to another. When there is no relationship in which we are able to communicate both aspects of our divided self—our conscious façade and our deeper level of experiencing—then we feel the loneliness of not being in real touch with any other human being. Is this loneliness contemporary only? Perhaps. In earlier times, the individual also distrusted or ignored one’s experiencing in order to keep the regard of significant others. However, the façade one adopted, the meaning one now felt one had found in one’s experiences, became a unified and strongly supportive set of beliefs and meanings. One’s whole social group tended to perceive life and experience in the same way, so that while one had unwittingly given up one’s deepest self, at leas one had taken on a consistent, respected, approved self by which one could live. An early Puritan, for example, must have experienced much inward strain as one denied vast areas of one’s organismic experiencing. It is doubtful, however, if one experienced as much isolation and aloneness as our client today. #RandolphHarris 4 of 26
Modern humans, like the members of earlier and more homogeneous groups, deserts one’s own experiencing to take on the way of being that will being love. However, he façade one adopts is taken over only from parents or a few others, and one is continually exposed to the knowledge that although that façade is approved by some, others see life in very different fashions. There is no security in any single façade. Hence, to a degree probably unknow before, modern humans experiences one’s loneliness, one’s cut-off-ness, one’s isolation both from one’s own deeper being and from others. Some people become estranged from themselves, who initially start off as with promise because their parent’s feelings conflict with their own. There was a young lady who was engaged to a young man, but her father wished for her to break the engagement off. There was a lack of protest on her part, probably because she adopted her father’s feelings as if they were her own. If we put this episode in schematic form, her realization would be something like this: “I thought my feelings meant that I was in love. I felt I was doing the beneficial and meaningful thing to get engaged. However, my engagement was not a meaningful commitment. I cannot be guided by what I experience. To do so would be to act wrongly, and to lose my father’s love. #RandolphHarris 5 of 26
Within a few weeks of developing an Electra Complex, the young lady starts eating too much and growing above average weight—the first appearance of what was to become her major symptom. It I perhaps indicative of the beginnings of her lack of trust in herself that she begins to diet only when teased by her companions. She feels an increasing need to live her life in terms of the expectations of others, since her own impulses are unreliable. It is not difficult to see why she begins to despise herself shortly after this time, and even to perceive death as a “glorious woman.” After all, she is an untrustworthy organism, a misleading cluster of experiencings, deserving to be despised. Her diary reports “shadows of doubts and of dread,” which soon translate into dread of getting fat. Nor is it surprising that she is frightened at the “evil spirits” in her—the unaccepted and denied feelings that haunt her. I am sure this was not the first real estrangement between her self and her underlying feelings, but there seems little doubt that it was a deeply significant one. It went a long way in destroying her confidence in herself as a being capable of autonomy. Even though her good spirits return, and she has happy periods, she has given up a part of herself and introjected as her own feelings of her father. #RandolphHarris 6 of 26
During this period she is full of fluctuations. She wants to do something great; she hopes for a social revolution; she works very hard as a student; she established reading rooms for children. However, at times she is “a timid, Earthly worm”; she longs for death and has her tutor reread the sentence, “The good die young.” Occasionally, “life had triumphed again.” She has an “unpleasant affair with a teacher.” She has a “breakdown.” She is very overconcerned with her weight. When she is twenty-four, there is another point at which she even more fully loses confidence in herself. Though she still is unsure enough or herself to need her old governess with her, she is nevertheless happy in her studies. “The diary breathes joy of life and sensuality.” She falls in love with a student. This was evidently a deep commitment, judging by its lasting and pervasive qualities. She becomes engaged, but again her parents insist that her experiencing is erroneous. They demand a temporary separation. So to her it must deem that the relationship is not real, is not wise, is better given up. Once more, she distrusts and disregards her own experience and introjects her parents’ feelings. She gives up the relationship and, with it, any trust in herself as capable of wise self-direction. Only the experience of others can be trusted. At this time, she turns to her doctor for help. #RandolphHarris 7 of 26
Had she rebelled at this point, had she possessed the strength to fight for her own experiencing of her own World, she would have been true to her deeper feelings and would, quite literally, have saved her potentially autonomous self. However, instead of rebellion there is only a terrible depression and a hatred of her body, which is obviously a totally untrustworthy organism for dealing with life. The extent to which she has surrendered her self is indicated by her tragic dieting. As she says later, “Something in me rebels against becoming fat. Rebels against becoming healthy, having plump red cheeks, becoming a simple, robust woman, as corresponds to my true nature.” In other words, if she were to trust her own feelings, desires, experiences, she would become a robust, plump, young woman and marry the student she loves. However, her feelings have been proven completely unreliable, her desires and experiences totally untrustworthy guides. So she must not only deny her feelings for loved one; she also must starve and coerce her body into a form approved by others but completely opposite from her own tendencies. She has lost, completely, her trust in her own experiencing as the basis for living. #RandolphHarris 8 of 26
She finds her employee to be a possible mate, and this choice for her is approved by her family. They plan to marry. However, for more years, until age twenty-eight, she vacillates between her employee and the student she has loved. She goes to see the student and breaks off with him, leaving, in her words, an “open wound.” We know nothing of the content of this most crucial interaction, but I would speculate that her psychological life hung in the balance here. Should she trust her own experiencing and choose the person she loves, or should she choose her employee? Her won feelings are cooler toward the employee, but for him she should feel all the approved feelings she is supposed to feel. I suspect that she realized dimly that is she chose the student, she would be choosing the uncharted path of autonomous selfhood. If she chose her employee, she would be living the life expected of her by others, but it would be a safe and approved pretense. She chooses her employee and married him, thus renouncing still further any trust in herself. By the age of thirty-two, she is totally obsessed with the idea that she must make herself thin. To this end she starves herself and takes sixty laxative pills a day! Not surprisingly, she has little strength. #RandolphHarris 9 of 26
She tires psychoanalysis but she feels she is not helped. She says, “I analyzed with my mind, but everything remained theory”; and, “The analyst can give me discernment, but not healing.” However, when the analysis is broken off by circumstances, she becomes worse. During this period she speaks of her ideal love, the student. She says to her husband in a letter, “At that time you were the life I was ready to accept and to give up my ideal for. But it was…a forced resolve.” She appears to be trying desperately to have the feelings that others want her to have, but she has to force herself. From here on, the estrangement within herself leads to more estrangement and to more and more feelings of isolation from others. It is not surprising that her first attempt at suicide comes at a point when her second analyst, working with her in the hospital to which she was sent, repeats the now familiar pattern. Her husband is not allowed to be by herself because he is deemed to not be helpful, as he would destroy any lingering confidence she might have in herself as a self-directing person. Several analysts and psychiatrist diagnose her and argue over what is a correct diagnosis for her. They consider things like sever obsessive neurosis combined with manic-depressive oscillations, psychopathic constitutions progressively unfolding. While others say she is not schizophrenic, because there is no mental defect. #RandolphHarris 10 of 26
However, two other doctors agree that she is suffering from progressive schizophrenic psychosis (schizophrenia simplex). They see little hope for her and say, “It was clear that a release from the institution meant certain suicide.” The young woman is aware of a number of these discussions, and she became to see herself not as a person, but as some strange abnormal mechanism, completely out of her control, going its own way to destruction. One looks in vain through all these diagnoses for any trance of recognition that the doctors were dealing with a human person! It is not hard to understand her words: “I confronted myself as a strange person. I am afraid of myself.” Or, at another time: “On this one point I am insane—I am perishing in the struggle against my nature. Fate wanted to have me fat and strong, but I want to be thin and delicate.” Indeed, she is perishing in the struggle with her nature. Her organism wants to be healthy and strong, but the introjected “I”—the false self she has taken on to please others—wants to be, as she says at one point, thing and “intellectual.” The wise doctors, in spite of the risk of suicide come to the conclusion: “No definitely reliable therapy is possible. We therefore resolved to give in to the patient’s demand for discharge.” #RandolphHarris 11 of 26
She left the hospital. Three days later, she seemed well and happy, ate well for the first time in years, and then tool a lethal dose of poison. She was thirty-three. Her epitaph might well be her own words: “I feel myself, quite passively, the stage on which two hostile forces are mangling each other.” What went fatally wrong in the life of this young lady? She was made to feel that her own experiencing was invalid, erroneous, wrong, and unsound, and that what she should be feeling was something quite different. Unfortunately for her, her love for her parents, especially her father, was so strong that she surrendered her own capacity for trusting her experience and substituted theirs, or his. She gave up being her self, and is completely dependent on what others think. She has no way of knowing what she feels or what her opinion is. This is the loneliest state of all—an almost complete separation from one’s autonomous organism. The greatest weakness in her treatment was that no one involved seems to have related to her as a person—a person worthy of respect, a person capable of autonomous choice, a person whose inner experiencing is precious resources to be drawn upon and trusted. Rather, she seems to have been dealt with as an object. She is simply following the pattern which has already isolated her—distrusting her own experiencing and trying to believe and feel what she should feel, what the expect tells her she feels. #RandolphHarris 12 of 26
Her parents and the two analysts and the physicians never seem to have respected her enough to hear her deeply. They did not deal with her as a person capable of meeting life, a person whose experiencing is trustworthy, whose inner feelings are worthy of acceptance. How, then could she listen to herself or respect the experiencing going on within her? “I am isolated. I sit in a glass ball, I see people through a glass wall. I scream, but they do not hear me.” What a desperate cry for a relationship between two persons. She never experienced healing through meeting. There was no one who could meet her, accept her, as she was. This was a tragic case. One should feel angry at the tragic waste of a human being. A person needs to be taught that it is okay to experience love and resentment toward family members. They need to discover it is okay to both fear independent living and to be eager for independent living. It is okay to listen to your heart about gender identity, body image, intelligence, and social ideas. And that it is okay to eat, but it is also a good idea to get a fitness trainer and talk to a nutritionist. So many people are afraid of themselves, but they are ways to be the person you want to be and do some of the things you want to do, and achieve your dreams and goals. Little by little, we have to learn to experience our feelings and some of them are frightening indeed. #RandolphHarris 13 of 26
To explore and experience both the risk and the excitement of being an independent person is one of those fearful elements in life. As one experiences these different hidden facets of oneself, one would find oneself changing. This time the changed self that emerged would be based on one’s organismic reactions, one’s inner experiencing, and not on the values and expectations of others. One does not have to struggle against one’s nature, against one’s feelings. Rather, one will find that when one can be open to all one’s experiencing—both one’s inner experiencing, and one’s experiencing of the demands and attitudes of others—one would have a basis by which to live. If one can learn to be open and listen sensitively for life’s meaning, it would provide a constructive guide for one’s behaviour and for one’s life. This is not to say that this process would be smooth or comfortable. To be a person—sometimes opposing one’s parents, sometimes standing against social pressures, often choosing to act even though uncertain of the outcome—this is painful, costly, sometimes even terrifying. However, it is very precious: to be oneself is worth a high price. It also has many other valuable aspects. #RandolphHarris 14 of 26
In a therapeutic relationship, where all of oneself is accepted, one can discover that it is safe to communicate oneself more completely. There is no need to be lonely and isolated, there are others who can understand and share the meaning of one’s experience. During this process is usually when a person makes friends with oneself—and learns that one’s body, feelings, and desires are not enemy aliens but friendly constructive parts of oneself. It is unnecessary to utter, I am perishing in the struggle against my nature.” One will be in a good and communicative relationship with oneself. One will also have found it safe to be oneself full in a relationship. As a consequence, one will find oneself relating with more of oneself to others, and again discovering that it is not dangerously unsafe, but rather far more satisfying, to be one’s real self in relating to others. It is by a process that the glass wall would dissolve. One will go on to find that life is adventurous, often painful. It will be a never ending puzzlement to discover the behaviour that would best harmonize with one’s complex and contradictory feelings. However, one will be vital and real and in relationship to oneself and others. One would have resolved for oneself the great loneliness of contemporary humans. #RandolphHarris 15 of 26
In every respect in which we make an object of the person—whether by diagnosing one, analyzing one, or perceiving one impersonally in a case history—we stand in way of our therapeutic goal. To make an object of a person has been helpful in treating physical ills; it has no been successful in treating psychological ills. We are deeply helpful only when we relate as persons, when we risk ourselves as persons in the relationship, when we experience the other person as a person in one’s own right. Only then is there a meeting at a depth that dissolves the pain of aloneness in both client and therapist. “For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit,” reports Romans 14.17. Feelings are a primary blessing and a primary problem for human life. We cannot live without them and we can hardly live with them. Hence they are also central for spiritual formation in the Christian tradition. “Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desire,” reports Galatians 5.24. In the restoration of the individual God, feelings too must be renovated: old ones removed in many cases, or at least thoroughly modified, and new ones installed or at least heightened into a new prominence. #RandolphHarris 16 of 26
Our first inquiry as we greet people for the day is likely to be, “How are you feeling today?” Rarely will it be, “how are you thinking?” Feelings live on the front row of our lives like unruly children clamoring for attention. They presume on their justification in being whatever they are—unlike a thought, which by nature is open to challenge and invites the question, “Why?” The term “feeling” indicated a kind of “contact,” a “touch,” that is at once blind and powerful—in allure as well as in revulsion. A “touching” scene is one that evokes feelings, that “touches” us. In feelings we really know that something is “there,” and solidly so. However, it is and why it is remains obscure—though hauntingly present. This aspect of “blind power” has famously led to the description of emotions as “human bondage.” However, the quality of blind power equally extends to mere sensations or desires, which as well as emotions, can be simply overwhelming. The attraction of feeling to human minds is so great that we project it into angels. One of the most common themes found in literary and artistic portrayals of angels is how they desire to feel what human beings feel and, mainly, what they are capable of feeling because they have flesh bodies. #RandolphHarris 17 of 26
Of course, the idea is, angels would have irreversibly given up their angel status to have what they desire, and as the stories go, they sometimes do give it up. However, there is also an element of responsibility at work here. Angels protect of because they know they have more power than we do, and this gives them a certain responsibility. They will help us, because they know it is right for them to do so. And if prayer is a conversation with divine beings, it is only right that we should occasionally let them speak, too. I sit still, that my motion may not hide your presence. I do not speak, that my words may hide your voice. I will still my thoughts, that my thinking might not block your arrival. God of old, long have you waited, seemingly forgotten and outgrown, waiting with patience born of wisdom, for your children to remember you and to come to you with open hearts. Awake, come, that day is here. One more we thank you, once more the old songs rise, once more the dance steps are traced, once more your name is spoken. Never more will the altars be unattended. Never again the time of waiting. Your children look to you once again and pledge to you their faith. The author of the “Cathedral” likes the thoughts which the Sunday Collect brings to, “healthful founts in Elim green, casting a freshness over the week.” #RandolphHarris 18 of 26
Nor is it a small advantage which the Collect-type of prayer secures to any community that adopts it, that it answers the end which, as Hooker, quoting S. Augustine, tells us, the Egyptian monks proposed to themselves—namely, to preserve “that vigilant and erect attention of monks proposed to themselves—namely, to preserve “the vigilant and erect attention of mind, which in prayer is very necessary, from being wasted or dulled through continuance, if their prayers were few or long:” for which the purpose,–or, as Cassin expressed it, “both to solicit God more earnestly by frequent addresses, and to avoid the temptations of Satan drawing them into lassitude and weariness,”—they resolved that their prayers should be man and brief, like darts cast forth with energy. This is doubtless chiefly realized by many. “Now it came to pass that after the end of Korihor, Alma having received tidings that the Zoramites were perverting the ways of the Lord, and that Zorman, who was their leader, was leading the hearts of the people to bow down to dumb idols, his heart again began to sicken because of the iniquity of the people. For it was the cause of great sorrow to Alma to know of iniquity among his people; therefore his heart was exceedingly sorrowful because of the separation of the Zoramites from the Nephites. #RandolphHarris 19 of 26
“Now the Zoramites had gathered themselves together in a land which was east of the land of Zarahemla, which lay nearly bordering upon the seashore, which was south of the land of Jershon, which also bordered upon the wilderness south, which wilderness was full of the Lamanites. Now the Nephites greatly feared that the Zoramites would enter into a correspondence which the Lamanites, and that it would be the means of great loss on the part of the Nephites. And now, as the preaching of the word had a great tendency to lead the people to do that which was just—yea, it had had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword, or anything else, which had happened unto them—therefore Alma thought it was expedient that they should try the virtue of the word of God. Therefore he took Ammon, and Aaron, and Omner; and Himni he did leave in the church in Zarahemla; but the former three he took with him, and also Amulek and Zeesrom, who were at Melek; and he also took two of his sons. Now the eldest of his sons he took not with him, and his name was Helaman; but the names of those whom he took with him were Shiblon and Corianton; and these are the names of those who went with him among the Zoramites, to preach unto the word. #RandolphHarris 20 of 26
“Now the Zoramites were dissenters from the Nephites; therefore they had had the word of God preached unto them. However, they had fallen into great errors, for they would not observe to keep the commandments of God, and his statutes, according to the law of Moses. Neither would they observe the performances of the church, to continue in prayer and supplication to God daily, that they might not enter into temptation. Yea, in fine, they did pervert the ways of the Lord in very many instances; therefore, for this cause, Alma and his brethren went into the land to preach the word unto them. Now, when they had come into the land, behold, to their astonishment they found that Zoramites had built synagogues, and that they did gather themselves together on one day of the week, which day they did call the day of the Lord; and they did worship after a manner which Alma and his brethren had never beheld. For they had a place built up in the center of their synagogue, a place for standing, which was high above the head; and the top thereof would only admit one person. Therefore, whosoever desired to worship must go forth and stand upon the top thereof, and stretch forth his hands towards Heaven and cry with a loud voice, saying: Holy, holy God; we believe that thou art God, and we believe that thou art holy, and that thou wast a spirit, and that thou art a spirit, and that thou wilt be a spirit forever. #RandolphHarris 21 of 26
Holy God, we believe that thou hast separated us from our brethren; and we do not believe the tradition of our brethren, which was handed down to them by the childishness of their fathers; but we believe that thou hast elected us to be thy holy children; and also thou hast made it known unto us that there shall be no Christ. However, thou art the same yesterday, today, and forever; and thou hast elected us that we shall be saved, whilst all around us are elected to be cast by thy wrath down to hell; for the which holiness, O God, we thank thee; and we also thank thee that thou hast elected us, that we may no be led away after the foolish traditions of our brethren, which doth bind them down to a belief of Christ, which doth lead their heart to wander far from thee, our God. And again we thank thee, O God, that we are a chosen and a holy people. Amen. Now it came to pass that after Alma and his brethren and his sons had heard these prayers, they were astonished beyond all measure. For behold, every human did go forth and offer up these same prayers. Now the place was called by them Rameumptom, which, being interpreted, is the holy stand. #RandolphHarris 22 of 26
“Now, from this stand they did offer up, every human, the selfsame prayer unto God, thanking their God that they were chosen of him, and that he did not lead them away after the tradition of their brethren, and that their hearts were not stolen away to believe in things to come, which they knew nothing about. Now, after the people had all offered-up thanks after this manner, they returned to their homes, never speaking of their God again until they had assembled themselves together again to the holy stand, to offer up thanks after their manner. Now when Alma saw this his heart was grieved; for he saw that they were a wicked and a perverse people; yea, he saw that their hearts were set upon gold, and upon silver, and upon all manner of fine goods. Yea, and he also saw that their hearts were lifted up unto great boasting, in their pride. And he lifted up his voice to Heaven, and cried, saying: O, how long, O Lord, wilt thou suffer that thy servants shall dwell here below in the flesh, to behold such gross wickedness among the children of human? Behold, O God, they cry unto thee, and yet their hearts are swallowed up in their pride. Behold, O God, they cry unto thee with their mouths, while they are puffed up, even to greatness, with the vain things of the World. #RandolphHarris 23 of 26
“Behold, O my God, their costly apparel, and their ringlets, and their bracelets, and their ornaments of gold, and all their precious things which they are ornamented with; and behold, their hearts are set upon them, and yet they cry unto thee and say—We thank thee, O God, for we are a chosen people unto thee, while others shall perish. Yea, and they say that thou hast made it known unto them that there shall be no Christ. O Lord God, how long wilt thou suffer that such wickedness and infidelity shall be among this people? O Lord, wilt thou give me strength, that I may bear with mine infirmities. For I am infirm, and such wickedness among this people doth pain my soul. O Lord, my heart is exceedingly sorrowful; wilt thou comfort my soul in Christ. O Lord, wilt thou grant unto me that I may strength, that thy servants shall dwell here below in the flesh, to behold such gross wickedness among the children of humans? Behold, O God, they cry unto thee, and yet their hearts are swallowed up in their pride. Behold, O God, they cry unto thee with their mouths, while they are puffed up, even to greatness, with the vain things of the World. #RandolphHarris 24 of 26
“Behold, O my God, their costly apparel, and their ringlets, and their bracelets, and their ornaments of gold, and all their precious things which they are ornamented with; and behold, their hearts are set upon them, and yet they cry unto thee and say—We thank thee, O God, for we are a chosen people unto thee, while others shall perish. Yea, and they say that thou hast made it known unto them that there shall be no Christ. O Lord God, how long wilt thou suffer that such wickedness and infidelity shall be among this people? O Lord, wilt thou give me strength, that I may bear with mine infirmities. For I am infirm, and such wickedness among this people doth pain my soul. O Lord, my heart is exceedingly sorrowful; wilt thou comfort my soul in Christ. O Lord, wilt thou grant unto me that I may have strength, that I may suffer with patience these afflictions which shall come upon me, because of the iniquity of this people. O Lord, wilt thou comfort my soul, and give unto me success, and also my fellow labourers who are with me—yea, Ammon, and Aaron, and Omner, and also Amulek and Zeezrom, and also my two sons—yea, even all these wilt thou comfort, O Lord. Yea, wilt thou comfort their souls in Christ. Wilt thou grant unto them that they may have strength, that they may bear their afflictions which shall come upon them because of the iniquities of this people. #RandolphHarris 25 of 26
“O Lord, wilt thou grant unto us that we may have success in bringing them again unto thee in Christ. Behold, O Lord, their souls are precious, and many of them are our brethren; therefore, give unto us, O Lord, power and wisdom that we may bring these, our brethren, again unto thee. Now it came to pass that when Alma had said these words, that he clapped his hands upon all them who were with him. And behold, as he clapped his hands upon them, they were filled with the Holy Spirit. And after that they did separate themselves one from another, taking no thought for themselves what they should eat, or what they should drink, or what they should put on. And the Lord provided for them that they should hunger not, neither should they thirst; yea, and he also gave them strength, that they should suffer no manner of affliction, save it were swallowed up in joy of Christ. Now this was according to the prayer of Alma; and this because he prayed in faith,” reports Alma 31.1-38. Love is more important than what we can take. Please say with me, three times—Love! Love! Love! There exists in the World today a gigantic reservoir of good will toward us, the American people. Business underlies everything in our national life, including our spiritual life. Witness the fact that the Lord’s Prayer, the first petition is for daily bread. No one can worship God or love one’s neighbour on an empty stomach. #RandolphHarris 26 of 26
Cresleigh Homes
What is on the menu today? How about this #MillsStation Residence 2 home, complete with a large center work island, stainless steel appliances, and an open floor plan as the cherry on top. 🍒
We have a video walkthrough of this plan available on our website. Link in bio. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Rpm_C0hXkY&feature=youtu.be
#CresleighRanch
#CresleighHomes
Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat—God Moves in a Mysterious Way, Survival of the Fittest!
Half of the reporters in town are looking on you as a Pulitzer Prize waiting to be won. The word norm means an authoritative standard, and correspondingly, normal means abiding by such a standard. It follows that a normal personality is one whose conduct conforms to an authoritative standard, and an abnormal personality is one whose conduct does not do so. However, having said this much we immediately discover that there are two entirely different kinds of standards that may be applied to divide the normal from the abnormal: the one statistical, the other ethical. The one pertains to the average or usual, and the other to the desirable or valuable. These two standards are not only different, but in many ways they stand in flat contradiction to one another. It is, for example, usual for people to have some noxious trends in their natures, some pathology of tissues or organs, some evidences of nervousness and some self-defeating habits; but though usual or avege, such trends are not healthy. Or again, society’s authoritative standard for a wholesome love life may be achieved by only a minority of American males. Here too the usual is not the desirable; what is normal in one sense is not normal in the other sense. #RandolphHarris 1 of 24
Certainly, unless they are taught what is legal, ethical, moral and Godly, no system of ethics in the civilized World holds up as a model for its children becoming productive members of society. It is not the actualities, but rather the potentialities, of human nature that somehow provide us with a standard for a sound and healthy personality. One hundred years ago this double meaning of norm and normal did not trouble psychology so much as it does today. In those days psychology was deeply involved in discovering average norms for every conceivable type of mental function. Means, modes, and sigmas were in the saddle, and differential psychology was riding high. Intoxicated with the new-found beauty of the normal distribution curve, psychologists were content to declare its slender tails as the one and only sensible measure of “abnormality.” Departures from the means were abnormal and for this reason slightly unsavory. In this era there grew up the concept of mental adjustment, and this concept held sway well into the decade of the 1920s. While not all psychologists adjustment with average behaviour, this implication was pretty generally present. It was, for example, frequently pointed out that an animal who does not adjust to the norm for one’s species usually dies. It was not yet pointed out that a human being who does so adjust is a bore and a mediocrity. #RandolphHarris 2 of 24
Now time have changed. Our concern for the improvement of average human behaviour is deep, for we now seriously doubt that the merely mediocre human can survive. As social anomie spreads, as society itself becomes more and more sick, we doubt that the mediocre human will escape mental disease and delinquency, or that one will keep oneself out of the clutch of dictators or succeed in preventing atomic or biological warfare. The normal distribution curve, we see, holds out no hope of salvation. We need citizens who are in a more beneficial and optimistic sense of normal, healthy and sound. And the World needs them more urgently than it ever did before. It is for this reason, I think, that psychologists are now seeking a fresh definition of what is normal and what is abnormal. They are asking questions concerning the valuable, the right, and the good as they have never asked them before. At the same time psychologists know that in seeking for a criterion of normality in this new sense they are trespassing on the traditional domain of moral philosophy. They also know that, by and large, philosophers have failed to establish authoritative standards for what constitutes the sound life—the life that educators, parents, and therapist should seek to mold. #RandolphHarris 3 of 24
And so psychologist, for the most part, wish to pursue the search in a fresh way and if they can, avoid the traditional traps of axiology. During the past few months two proposals have been published that merit serious attention. Both are by social scientists, one a psychologist in the United States of America, the other a sociologist in England. Their aim is to derive a concept of normality (in the value sense) from the condition of humans (in the naturalistic sense). Both seek their ethical imperatives from biology and psychology, not from value-theory directly. In short, they boldly seek the ought (the goal to which teachers, counsellors, therapists should strive) from the is of human nature. Many philosophers tell us that this is an impossible undertaking. However, before we pass judgment let us see what success they have had. Humans are expected to maximize those attributes that are distinctively human. The first is human’s capacity for the use of propositional language (symbolization). From this particular superiority over animals derives several specific guidelines for normality. With the assistance of symbolic language, for example, humans can delay their gratifications, holding in mind a distant goal, a remote reward, an objective to be reached perhaps only at the end of one’s life or perhaps never. #RandolphHarris 4 of 24
With the assistance of symbolic language, one can imagine a future for oneself that is far better than the present. One can also develop an intricate system of social concepts that leads one to all manner of possible relations with other human beings, far exceeding the rigid symbiotic rituals of, say, the social insects. A second distinctive human quality is related to the prolonged childhood in the human species. Dependence, basic trust, sympathy and altruism are absolutely essential to human survival, in a sense and to a degree that is maybe not always true for animals. The conception of normality has to do with a model of integrative adjustment. It follows that a sense of personal responsibility marks the normal human, for responsibility is a distinctive capacity derived from holding in mind a symbolic image of the future, delaying gratification, and being able to strive in accordance with one’s conception of the best principles of conduct for oneself. Similarly social responsibility is normal; for all these symbolic capacities can interact with the unique factor of trust or altruism. Closely related is the criterion of democratic social interest which derives from both symbolization and trust. Similarly, the possession of ideals and the necessity for self–control follow from the same naturalistic analysis. #RandolphHarris 5 of 24
A sense of guilt is an inevitable consequence of human’s failure to live according to the distinctive human pattern, and so in our concept of normality we must include both guilt and devices for expiation. Every psychologist who wishes to make minimum assumptions and who wishes to keep close to empirical evidence, and who inclines toward the naturalism of biological science prefers fact-based evidence that has not been manipulated. Manipulated and prejudice science is worthless junk. It is must like fake news and has no value other than propaganda. Nonetheless, our philosopher friends will arise to confound us with some uncomfortable questions. Is it not a distinctively human capacity, they will ask, for a possessive mother to keep her child permanently tied to her apron strings? Does any lower animal engage in this destructive behaviour? Likewise, is it not distinctively human to develop fierce in-group loyalties that lead to prejudice, contempt, and war? Is it not possible that the burden of symbolization, social responsibility, and guilt may lead a person to depression and suicide? Suicide, along with all the other destructive patterns I have mentioned, is distinctly human. #RandolphHarris 6 of 24
A philosopher who raises these questions would conclude, “No, you cannot derive the ought from the is of human nature. What is distinctively human is not necessarily distinctively good.” What are the minimum conditions for survival? When we know these minimum conditions we can declare that any situations falling below this level will lead to abnormality, and tend toward death and destruction, which COVID-19 could be symbolic of—humanity falling below minimum conditions needed to sustain a developing nation like America, and others around the World. This criterion is called the abnorm and we can define it, even if we cannot define normality, because people in general agree more readily on what is bad for humans than on what is good for them. They agree on the bad because all mortals are subject to the basic imperative of survival. The need for survival is connected to our need for growth and the need for social cohesion. These two principles are the universal conditions of all life, not merely of human life. Growth means autonomy and the process of individuation. Cohesion is the basic fact of social interdependence, involving, at least for human beings, initial trust, heteronomy, mating and the founding of family. #RandolphHarris 7 of 24
By taking an inventory of conditions deleterious to growth and cohesion we may establish the “abnorm.” As a start, the first and foremost disorders of child training is the continued or repeated interruption of physical proximity between mother and child and emotional rejection of the child by the mother are conditions that harm survival of the individual and the group. In the first criterion of abnormality lies in a rupture in the transmutation of cohesion into love. Most of what is abnormal can be traced to failures in the principle of cohesion, so that the child becomes excessively demanding and compulsive. It is abnormal (inimical to survival) if repetition of conduct occurs irrespective of the situation and unmodified by its consequences; also when one’s accomplishments constantly fall short of one’s potentialities; likewise when one’s psychosexual frustrations prevent both growth and cohesion. Normality requires a balance between individuation and socialization, between autonomy and heteronomy. When an individual identifies oneself to an extreme degree with a group, the effect is that one loses one’s value. On the other hand, a complete inability to identify has the effect that the environment loses its value for the individual. #RandolphHarris 8 of 24
In both extreme cases the dynamic relationship between individual and environment is distorted. An individual behaving in such a way is called neurotic. In a normal group each member preserves one’s individuality but accepts one’s role as participator also. While there is much agreement that the normal personality must strike a serviceable balance between growth as an individual and cohesion with society, we do not yet have a clear criterion for determining when these factors are in serviceable balance and when they are not. However, Philosophers, I fear, would shake their heads at us and ask us, “How do you know that survival is a good thing?” Further, “Why should all people enjoy equal rights to the benefits of growth and cohesion?” And, “How are we to define the optimum balance between cohesion and growth within the single personality?” We also have to worry about the relationship between abnormality and creativity. It was Nietzsche who declared, “I say unto you: a human must have chaos yet within one to be able to give birth to a dancing star.” Have not many meritorious works of music, literature, and even of science draw their inspiration not from balance but from some kind of psychic chaos? In effect that creativity and normality are not identical values. #RandolphHarris 9 of 24
On the whole the normal person will be creative, but if valuable creations come likewise from people who are slipping away from the norm of survival, this fact can only be accepted and valued on the scale of creativity, but not properly on the scale of normality. In this day of existentialism I sense that psychologist are becoming less and less content with the concept of adjustment, and correspondingly with the concepts of tension reduction, restoration of equilibrium, and homeostasis. We wonder if a human who enjoys these beatific conditions is truly human. Growth we know is not due to homeostasis but to a kind of “transiistasis.” And cohesion is a matter of keeping our human relationships moving and not in mere stationary equilibrium. Stability cannot be a criterion of normality since stability brings evolution to a standstill, negating both growth and cohesion. Dr. Freud once wrote to Dr. Fliess that he finds “moderate misery necessary for intensive work.” When people have a zero correlation between self and ideal self, it is too low for normality; it leads to such anguish that the sufferer seeks therapy. At the same time normal people are by no means perfectly adjusted to themselves. There is always a wholesome gap between self and ideal self, between present existence and aspiration. On the other hand, too high a satisfaction indicates pathology. #RandolphHarris 10 of 24
When individuals reach an extremely high coefficient for self-satisfaction, it is clear that one is pathological. Perfect correlations we might expect only from smug psychotics, particularly paranoid schizophrenics. And whatever our definition of normality turns out to be it must allow for serviceable imbalances within personality, and between person and society. There is an approach dear to the psychologist’s heart. The established criterion of normality or otherwise known as soundness, leads us to identify people who are “sound.” Teachers of graduate students in the University of California nominated a large number of people whom they considered sound, and some of the opposite trend. In testing and experimenting with these two groups, whose identities were unknow to the investigators, certain significant difference appeared. For one thing the sounder human had more realistic perceptions; they were not thrown off by distortions or by surrounding context in the sensory field. Further, on adjective check-lists they stood high on such traits as integrated pursuit of goals, persistence, adaptability, good nature. On the Minnesota Personality Inventory they were high in equanimity, self-confidence, objectivity and virility. Their self-insight was superior, as was their physical health. Finally, they came from homes where there was little or not affective rupture. #RandolphHarris 11 of 24
A healthy person will be able to “love” and to “work.” On the schedule of other qualities a healthy person possesses include among others: efficient perception of reality, philosophical humour, spontaneity, detachment, and acceptance of self and others. A normal person has a strong ego, an abnormal person has a weak ego. Whether one is normal or abnormal depends on the degree to which one can manage one’s relationships successfully. Furthermore, the earlier enthusiasm of psychologist for the normal distribution curve helps to entrench the theory of continuum. Extreme withdrawal and escape constitute psychosis. However, you may ask, do no we all do some escaping? Yes, we do, and what is more, escapism may provide not only recreation but may sometimes have a certain constructive utility, as it has in mild daydreaming. Only if the dominant process is confrontation, the process of escape can still be harmless. Left to itself escapism spells disaster. In the psychotic this process has the upper hand; in the normal person, on the contrary, confrontation has the upper hand. Following this line of reasoning we can list other processes that intrinsically generate abnormality, and those that generate normality. #RandolphHarris 12 of 24
The first list deals with catabolic (energy used to break down) functions. I would mention: Escape or withdrawal (including fantasy), repression or dissociation, other “ego defences,” including rationalization, reaction formation, projection, displacement, impulsivity (uncontrolled), restriction of thinking to concrete level, fixation of personality at a juvenile level, all forms of rigidification. The list is not complete, but the process in question, I submit, are intrinsically catabolic. They are as much so as are the disease mechanisms responsible for diabetes, tuberculosis, hyperthyroidism, or cancer. A person suffering only a small dose of these mechanisms may appear to be normal, but only if anabolic (requires energy to grow and build) mechanisms predominate. Among the latter I would list: Confrontation (or, if you prefer, reality testing) availability of knowledge to consciousness, self-insight, with its attendant humour, integrative action of the nervous system, ability to think abstractly, continuous individuation (without arrested or fixated development), functional autonomy of motives, frustration of tolerance. I realize that what I have called processes, or mechanisms, are not in all cases logically parallel. However, they serve to make my point, that normality depends on the dominance of one set of principles, abnormality upon the dominance of another. #RandolphHarris 13 of 24
The fact that all normal people are occasionally afflicted with catabolic processes does not alter the point. The normal life is marked by a preponderance of the anabolic functions; the abnormal by a preponderance of the catabolic. Investigations have told us much concerning the nature of human needs and motives, both conscious and unconscious. Much is known concerning the pathologies that result from frustration and imbalance of these needs. We know much about childhood conditions that predispose toward delinquency, prejudice, and mental disorder. A moralist might do well to cast one’s imperatives in terms of standards for child training. I can suggest, for example, that the abstract imperative “respect for persons” should be tested and formulated from the point of view for child training. The distinction between the anabolic and catabolic processes in the formation of personality represents a fact of importance. Instead of judging merely the end-product of action, perhaps the moralist would do well to focus one’s attention upon the process by which various ends are achieved. Conceivably, the moral law could be written in terms of strengthening anabolic functions in oneself and in others whilst fighting against catabolic functions. #RandolphHarris 14 of 24
Apriorism, belief in a priori principles or reasoning specifically: the doctrine that knowledge rests upon principles that are self-evident to reason or are presupposed by experience in general, is a legitimate tool of philosophy. Up to now this method as yielded a wide array of moral imperatives, including the following: so act that maxim of thy action can become a universal law; be a respecter of persons; seek to reduce your desires; harmonize your interests with the interest of others; thou art nothing, thy folk is everything; thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind…and thy neighbour as thyself. Psychologists who in their teaching and counselling follow the lines now laid down will not go far wrong in guiding personalities toward normality. “Do not speak evil against one another, brethren,” reports James 4.11. God forbids any speech (whether true or false) which runs down another person. Certainly no Christian should ever be a party to slander—making false charges against another’s reputation. Yet some do. However, even more penetrating is the challenge to refrain from any speech intends to run down someone else, even if it is totally true. Personally I can think of few commands that go against commonly accepted conventions more than this, for most people think it is okay to convey negative information if it is true. #RandolphHarris 15 of 24
Some people have had to defend themselves because no one else would. Still, no innocent person should be physically attacked and terrorized by a violent mob and forced to defend themselves. We understand that lying is immoral. However, is passing along damaging truth immoral? It seems almost a moral responsibility! By such reasoning, criticism behind another’s back is thought to be all right as long as it is based on fact. Likewise, denigrating gossip (of course it is never called gossip!) is seen as okay if the information is true. Thus many believers use truth as a license to righteously diminish others’ reputations. Related to this, some reject running down another behind one’s back, but believe it is okay if done face to face. These persons are driven by a “moral” compulsion to make others aware of their shortcomings. Fault-finding is, to them, a spiritual gift – a license to conduct spiritual search-and-destroy missions. What people like this do not know is that most people are painfully aware of their own faults – and would like to overcome them – and are trying very hard to do so. Then someone mercilessly assaults them believing they are doing their spiritual duty – and, oh, the hurt! This destructive speaking down against others can also manifest itself in the subtle art of minimizing another’s virtues, and accomplishments. #RandolphHarris 16 of 24
After being with such people, your mental abilities, athletic accomplishments, musical skills, and domestic virtues seem not to be quite as good as they were a few minutes earlier. Some of this feeling came perhaps from their words about your Ultimate Driving Machine—“what a nice little BMW”—or from surprised exclamations about what you did not know. It was also the tone of the voice, the cast of the eye, and the surgical silences. There are many sinful reasons why humans in Christ talk down to one another. Revenge over some slight, real or imagined, may be the motivation of “Christian” slander. Others imagine that their spirituality and sensitivity equips them to pull others from their ivory towers and unmask their hypocrisies. Gideon once rightly cried, “A sword for the Lord and for Gideon!” (Judges 7.20), and we may do the same, but in our case it is too often a sword of self-righteousness. Condescending words and actions may also come from the need to elevate oneself – like the Pharisee who thanked God he was not like other sinners “or even like this tax collector” (Luke 18.11). We thus enjoy the dubious elevation of walking on the bruised head of others, and coming down on innocent heads. #RandolphHarris 17 of 24
Sometimes this diminishing of others simply comes from too much empty talk. People do not have much to talk about, so they fuel the fires of conversation with the flesh of others. The abilities and motivations of the Body of Christ to run itself down could fill a library. We are all skillful in rationalizing such talk, but God’s Word still speaks: “Christians do not speak against one another.” Verbal cyanide comes in many forms. Gossip, innuendo, flattery, criticism, diminishment, are only a few of the venoms with which Christians inject each other. And the results are universal: toxic gastric juices a Devil’s feast – the swill of souls. Dear Lord in Heaven, please eat what is offered to you and transform it, as food is transformed, into blessings for me, and for all my household. The fire that burns on my hearth is the very heart of my Cresleigh Home. By feeding the fire with wood and with air, I am feeding my Cresleigh Home with what it needs most. I give you these things, fire on my hearth and more gifts will follow as we live our lives together. I light a fire on my family’s hearth and praise the God of our home. I pray to the Most High and praise the Ancestors. Hear my words, see me as I perform the rites, receive the gifts I offer you. Threshold Spirit, guardian and protector of my Cresleigh Home’s entrance, I honour you as I pass through the beautiful door. #RandolphHarris 18 of 24
God of doorways, bless my goings out, bless my comings in. Lord of the threshold, of doors and gates Lord, place where inside and outside meet: God is my threshold. Please Guard my doors, God, keeper of the keys. Watch it with care, please keep my Cresleigh Homes safe. May the blessings of God guard this door. God it is who guards our doors. The Lord commands Ammon to lead the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi to safety—upon meeting Alma, Ammon’s joy exhausts his strength—the Nephites give the Anti-Nephi-Lehies the land of Jershon—they are called the people of Amon. About 90-77 Before Christ. “Now it came to pass that when those Lamanites who had gone to war against the Nephites had found, after their many struggles to destroy them, that it was in vain to seek their destruction, they returned again to the land of Nephi. And it came to pass that the Amalekites, because of their loss, were exceedingly angry. And when they saw that they could not seek revenge from the Nephites, they began to stir up the people in anger against their brethren, the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi; therefore they began again to destroy them. Now this people again refused to take their arms, and they suffered themselves to be slain according to the desires of their enemies. #RandolphHarris 19 of 24
“Now when Amon and his brethren saw this work of destruction among those whom they so dearly beloved, and among those who had so dearly beloved them—for hey were treated as though they were angels sent from God to save them from everlasting destruction—therefore, when Amon and his brethren saw this great work of destruction, they were moved with compassion, and they said unto the king: Let us gather together this people of the Lord, and let us go down to the land of Zarahemla to our brethren the Nephites, and flee out of the hands of our enemies, that we be not destroyed. However, the king said unto them: Behold, the Nephites will destroy us, because of the many murders and sins we have committed against them. And Ammon said: I will go and inquire of the Lord, and if he say unto us, go down unto our brethren, will ye go? And the king said unto him: Yea, if the Lord saith unto us go, we will go down unto our brethren, and we will be any slaves among them; therefore let us go down and rely upon the mercies of our brethren. However, the king said unto him: Inquire of the Lord, and if he saith unto us go, we will go; otherwise we will perish in the land. #RandolphHarris 20 of 24
“And it came to pass that Ammon went and inquired of the Lord and the Lord aid unto him: Get this people out of this land, that they perish not; for Satan has great hold on the hearts of the Amalekites, who do stir up the Lamanites to anger against their brethren to slay them; therefore get thee out of this land; and blessed are this people in this generation, for I will preserve them. And now it came to pass that Ammon went and told the king all the words which the Lord had said unto him. And they gathered together all their people, yea, all the people of the Lord, and did gather together all their flocks and herds, and departed out of the land, and came into the wilderness which divided the land of Nephi from the land of Zarahemla, and came over near the borders of the land. And it came to pass that Ammon said unto them: Behold, I and my brethren will go forth into the land of Zarahemla, and ye shall remain here until we return; and we will try the hearts of our brethren, whether they will that ye shall come into their land. And it came to pass that as Ammon was going forth into the land, that he and his brethren met Alma, over in the place of which has been spoken; and behold, this was a joyful meeting. #RandolphHarris 21 of 24
“Now the joy of Ammon was so great even that he was full; yea, he was swallowed up in the joy of his God, even to the exhausting of his strength; and he fell again to the Earth. Now was not this exceeding joy? Behold, this is joy which none receiveth save it be the truly penitent and humble seeker of happiness. Now the joy of Alma in meeting his brethren was truly great, and also the joy of Aaron, of Omner, and Himni; but behold their joy was not that to exceed their strength. And now it came to pass that Alma conducted his brethren back to the land of Zarahemla; even to his own house. And they went and told the chief judge all the things that that happened unto them in the land of Nephi, among their brethren, the Lamanites. And it came to pass that the chief judge sent a proclamation throughout all the land, desiring the voice of the people concerning the admitting their brethren, who were the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi. And it came to pass that the voice of the people came, saying: Behold, we will give up the land of Jershon, which is on the east by the sea, which joins the land Bountiful, which is on the south of the land Bountiful; and this land Jershon is the land which we will give unto our brethren for an inheritance. #RandolphHarris 22 of 24
“And behold, we will set our armies between the land Jershon and the land Nephi, that we may protect our brethren in the land of Jershon; and this we do for our brethren lest they should commit sin; and this their great fear came because of their sore repentance which they had, on account of their many murders and their awful wickedness. And now behold, this will we do unto our brethren, that they may inherit the land Jershon; and we will guard them from their enemies with our armies, on condition that they will give us a portion of their substance to assist us that we may maintain our armies. Now, it came to pass that when Ammon had heard this, he returned to the people of Anti0Nephi-Lehi, and also Alma with him, into the wilderness, where they had pitched their tents, and made known unto them all these things. And Alma also related unto them his conversion, with Ammon and Aaron, and his brethren. And it came to pass that it did cause great joy among them. And they went down into the land of Jershon, and took possession of the land of Jershon; and they were called by the Nephites the people of Ammon; therefore they were distinguished by that name ever after. #RandolphHarris 23 of 24
“And they were among the people of Nephi, and also numbered among the people who were of the church of God. And they were also distinguished for their zeal towards God, and also towards humans; for they were perfectly honest and upright in all things; and they were firm in the faith of Christ, even unto the end. And they did look upon shedding the blood of their brethren with the greatest abhorrence; and they never could be prevailed upon to take up arms against their brethren; and they never did look upon death with any degree of terror, for their hope and views of Christ and the resurrection; therefore, death was swallowed up to them by the victory of Christ over it. Therefore, they would suffer death in the most aggravating and distressing manner which could be inflicted by their brethren, before they would take the sword or cimeter to smite them. And thus they were a zealous and beloved people, a highly favoured people of the Lord,” reports Alma 27.1-30. O God, Whose will it runs down the order of all the ages; come to me, please look favorably on your servant’s sake. I try to live up to the order of Godly people and promote the messages in the scripture. You are the one and only God, and I approve of dedicating my service to you, Lord. Thank you for your gifts and take pity of me. #RandolphHarris 24 of 24
Cresleigh Homes
We might have found the coziest reading spot in #PlumasRanch. 😍📚
Visit our website to take a virtual tour of our homes at Plumas Ranch. Link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-riverside-at-plumas-ranch/
#CresleighHomes
Look down from Heaven, O Christ, on Thy flock and lambs, and bless their bodies and souls. Grant those who have received Thy sign, O Christ, on their foreheads, to be Thine own in the day of judgment.
Love Never Demands—Love is Unconditional Acceptance of One and One’s Feelings!
One that wrestles with us strengthens our nerves, and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper. We are indeed much more than what we eat, but what we eat can nevertheless help us to be much more than what we are. We have built an imaginative account of how the World may come to be represented in the nervous system of the organism. Because of this, it becomes possible to extend the imagination toward an idea of the self as also represented there, in the nervous system of the organism. We can put the self on the map. Some self-imagery is on the map to start with; we are born with it. The cortex carries mapped representations of our bodies, often called homunculi (little persons). One set of nerve-endings, when traced into the brain, maps out the endings of the nerves which activate movement: these nerve-endings sketch out the motor-homunclus. Another set of nerve-endings delineates the nerves which transmit sensations from our skin: the sensory homunculus. The homunculi are ourselves as experienced in our muscles, our bones, our skins, our glands. Their cortical mappings look weird because motor and sensory nerve-endings do not arrive in the cortex in the same proportions as our optical nerve-endings do when we look in the mirror. #RandolphHarris 1 of 24
The homunculi is the basis of the concern of the self as a place where things happen. This can be contrasted with the more personal self as an object, which refers to those regions which carry the memories of all the messages that ever reached us about what is happening to us. We are not only recipients of experience, however. Also mapped are records of what we have done, and of the impulses to action which we have experienced. This kind of self-imagery is also built into the map-imagery, of our selves as agents. Our self is on the map. It is usually also represented in the model of the situation in which we find ourselves. The model, it will be remembered, is that active part of the map which at each moment accounts for where we are in relation to our World as it is, and in relation to our World as we expect it to be, and in relation to good placed and bad places, allowing feedback processes to act gyroscopically. Thus our current sense of self (the model) is closely linked with the self on the map, giving a sense of identity and continuity, direction and value. The “model” self stands out in relation to the “map” self: “This is myself now,” “Here I am now” in relation to “This is the sort of person I am in general, with these experiences behind me, and with these hopes and fears about my well-being in general.” #RandolphHarris 2 of 24
Thus self-imagery can have an evaluative, controlling function. Our image of ourselves in the situation, and our favourite self-imagery, influence what we do. I think of myself— “I am a person who gets up early” or “I am a person who runs towards trouble and not away from it.” This is continually confirmed when I behave “like myself.” The more I can do so, the more pleased I am to think of myself in particular ways. Whenever there is incongruity between what I am doing (which is represented in my model f my self in the situation) and the person I imagine myself to be, or the person I would prefer to be (represented on the map), I am under tension to reduce the incongruity. So now we have a map, with imagery about the self as well as about the World. When there is too great an incongruity between the self on the map and the running-ahead anticipating model self, feedback processes bring about a situation in which the model self and the self-imagery on the map may correspond more closely. To put this in everyday language, I steer myself by a sense of what is “me” and I avoid behaviour which is “not me.” #RandolphHarris 3 of 24
This gives us a picture of a person with all one’s experiences stored, including experiences of the self, meeting new events either by adapting to them or by taking steps to change the environment to suit the self. Here is a self that is active, has a memory, and has direction. Once such a continuous reproduction of the environment is maintained in the highest centers, it becomes the main function of the sensory impulses to keep this apparatus of orientation up to date and capable of determining the responses to particular stimuli in the light of the whole situation. How integrated is the self? One of the tings wrong with this picture, which is quite like the common-sense idea we have of ourselves as human beings, is that it may be too unified. For a description of the process by which linkages will gradually produce a map of the relations between the stimuli acting on the organism, the smile of the map soon becomes inadequate…The classifications with which we are concerned will occur on many successive levels. We have to think of the whole system of connexions as consisting of many superimposed sub-systems which in some respects may operate independently of each other. #RandolphHarris 4 of 24
Every subsystem of this kind constitutes a partial map of the environment Such partial maps at any level serve for the guidance of a relatively more limited set of information which could be on its way to other and perhaps “higher” centers. These are called “partial selves.” Geography books helps us to a useful analogy. In an atlas there will be a master-map of Europe. However, also filed away are partial maps which show only Britain, or only France – partial selves: myself as a student, myself as an uncle. And each of these partial maps can itself be substructured further: France in Europe, Paris in France, the Louvre in Paris. There are also other kinds of partial maps, whereby partial features are abstracted from the total information on other spatial principles. Instead of abstracting France from Europe, we can abstract annual rainfall from all areas in Europe, or proneness to earthquakes, or density of population or intensity of industrial output. From my map of myself, I can abstract not only partial selves but also the number of towns I have lived in, the illness I am prone to, the sort of people I am attracted to – all kinds of subsystems. It will become important to keep in mind that there may be several subsystems, each to do with a partial view of the self, and each able to give an account of what is going on, from the perspective of that particular partial map. #RandolphHarris 5 of 24
If there is little intercommunication between these subsystems, the result would be that a person has several “partial selves,” moods, one might say, or roles. The concept of subsystems is also important when we think of psychical systems as not necessarily hierarchical, but as parts of a system in the making—of parts of the personality with some organization but not (yet) integrated with other parts. We must not think of the personality as more integrated than it is. Nor must we think of the personality as more widely conscious than it is. While the full and detailed classification of sensory impulses, corresponding to the order of sensory qualities which we know from conscious experience, is effected mainly at the highest centers, we must assume a more limited classification on somewhat similar principles to take place already at the lower levels, where certainly no conscious experience is associated with it. When we consider the development of consciousness in the mental order, we must ask ourselves what might be the criteria of consciousness. What are those special attributes of conscious behaviour by which we distinguish it from behaviour which also appears to be co-ordinated and purposive but of which the person is not “aware?” #RandolphHarris 6 of 24
In conscious behaviour a person will be able to gibe an account of what one is doing, be able to take account in one’s actions of other simultaneous experiences of which one is also conscious, and, be guided to a large extent not only by one’s current perceptions but also by images which might be evoked by the existing situation. This is very attractive and easily understood idea, that we are conscious when we can tell the story of what is happening to us. When we say that a person is able to give an account of one’s mental processes, we mean by this tat one is able to communicate them to other people by means of symbols. Symbols are concepts that can stand for other concepts. The symbols we mostly learn to use to communicate with are words, and most ordinary states of consciousness depend on words for symbol-formation and symbol use, though there are (in my view enviable) people who can also communicate to others in painting or music or dance, and there are also (in my view pitiable) people who can communicate only in these ways. To express in symbol-form what I experience myself to be can be a lifetime’s occupation. However, to sum it up simply, our sense of identity comes from the imagery of ourselves that we have on our maps—selves as objects, selves as agents, selves as seen in the mirror, and so on. #RandolphHarris 7 of 24
And we have to be able to say something about ourselves to give an account of ourselves’ to be self-conscious. So the sense of identity, at least the way I shall think of it, requires self-consciousness, an ability to use symbols, and an ability to stand back from phenomena to some extent and see them in some way as separate from one’s own stream of existence. It is, incidentally, with the latter achievement, that most of the present narrative is concerned. We are considering processes which take place long before verbal concepts have evolved. Still, his is the point at which it may be salutary to consider the place of words in the development of the personality. Because considering is a process which is done in words, and for many related reasons, it is easy to have a rather simple unquestioning belief in the validity of the words we use. A reminder is needed that words not only symbolize but also falsify our inner experiences. The use of words drastically affects our capacity to give an account of ourselves, our consciousness, and our self-consciousness. For better, and for worse, it sets the growing child a number of problems to surmount. #RandolphHarris 8 of 24
Consider, for instance, how a child learns to use sentences in which “I” is used correctly to refer to itself, and “you” to refer to others; and consider the difficulties caused by the fact that the child is addressed by others as “you” and therefore has perhaps at first learnt to think of itself as “you.” Objects, such as tables, chairs, and cars, are much more easily correctly labelled. Words are given by people who mean something to the child; this has a strong effect on the concept to which it will be attaching their verbal label. The concepts the child has constructed from experience now acquire all sorts of additional elements, based on how others use the word-labels. Moreover, once people really start talking to the child in words, concepts ca also be acquired just from what other people say—the child is no longer dependent only on experience, as animals are. The child learns “Drinking all your milk is good” and “Getting your feet wet is bad.” Who know what moral ideas it gathers from this? Someone in a song is “mighty like a rose.” What does that mean to a child? With much useful and accurate information, all kinds of nonsense enters a child’s mind. #RandolphHarris 9 of 24
We must keep remembering that the child’s concepts are not always in all respects what we think they are, though we use the same words. There must have been a time, for instance, when the child did not as yet have verbal concepts for “milk” and for “drinking.” In the very early days, messages directly to do with milk may come to be so inevitably associated with messages about comfort, warmth, arms, mouth, and so on, that the concept “milk,” which singles out the liquid bit, may not begin to be attained until the child has experienced of it in bottle or cup. We, the observers, know that the child is “drinking milk,” but the child does not, and is indeed not doing what we unthinkingly imagine it to be doing when we say “the child is drinking milk.” The general culture in which the child is brought up plays an important role in our learning to use the right words for our experiences. This particularly so when what the words refer to is not visible. The culture plays an important part in our learning to label emotional states so that they have meaning for ourselves and for others. For instance, the experience of distress is, at the beginning of life, a very undifferentiated one: not enough has happened yet for differentiation into more refined concepts. #RandolphHarris 10 of 24
More experience (including verbal learning) has happen before distress become differentiated into anger, or rage, or fight, or aggression, or assertion, or fear, or flight, or panic, or anxiety, or worry, or embarrassment, or boredom, or hurt, and so on. Using such words correctly is not just a matter of increased skill in identifying feelings and in naming them correctly is not just a matter of increased skill in identifying feelings and in naming them correctly so that others understand us. It is not just the process by which “horsey” differentiates into “horse,” “cow,” and “donkey.” Feelings are private. We cannot point at them, the way we can point to donkeys. If we wish, we can certainly consent to a set of rigorous criteria which we have agreed shall determine the proper use of each disputed word. However, what are we in touch with at the end of that process? The effect which language has on the way we organize our experience is most easily seen when we compare cultures, even cultures as closely similar as the various European ones. This gives a very convincing demonstration of the extent to which our emotional experiences are organized by the words we use, which we have been taught by the grown-ups in the culture. #RandolphHarris 11 of 24
Take a German word like fleissig, very frequently used, and compare it with its nearest English translation “industrious” – hardly ever met. Who ever speaks of an “industrious child?” (There must be some!) In Holland, many people are driftig, a state of mind frequently met and accepted among the Dutch. The nearest English translation, “hot-tempered,” is very rare and seems to me (Dutch by origin) to carry a tinge of disapproval. So early in my argument I would not wish to antagonize any potential reader by turning my eye to such technical words as “psychotic,” “narcissistic,” or “schizoid.” Though there be no such thing as Chance in the World; our ignorance of the real cause of any event has the same influence on the understanding, and begets a like species of belief or opinion. There is certainly a probability, which arises from a superiority of chances on any side; and according as this superiority increases, ad surpasses the opposite chances, the probability receives a proportionable increase, and begets still a higher degree of belief or assent to that side, in which we discover the superiority. If a die were marked with one figure or number of spots on four sides, and with another figure or number of sports on the two remaining sides, it would be more probable, that the former would turn up than the latter. #RandolphHarris 12 of 24
Though, if the die had a thousand sides marked in the same manner, and only one side different, the probability would be much higher, and our belief or expectation of the event more steady and secure. This process of the thought or reasoning may seem trivial and obvious; but to those who consider it more narrowly, it may, perhaps, afford matter for curious speculation. It seems evident, that, when the mind looks forward to discover the event, which may result from the throw of such a die, it consider the turning up of each particular side as alike probable; and this is the very nature of chance, to render all the particular events, comprehended in it, entirely equal. However, finding a greater number of sides concur in the one event than in the other, the mind is carried more frequently to that event, and meets it oftener, in revolving the various possibilities or chances, on which the ultimate result depends. This concurrence of several views in one particular event begets immediately, by an inexplicable contrivance of nature, the sentiment of belief, and gives that event the advantage over its antagonist, which is supported by a smaller number of views, and recurs less frequently to the mind. If we allow, that belief is nothing but a firmer and stronger conception of an object than what attends the mere fictions of the imagination, this operation may, perhaps, in some measure, be accounted for. #RandolphHarris 13 of 24
The concurrence of these several views or glimpses imprints the idea more strongly on the imagination; gives it superior force and vigour; renders its influence on the passions and affections more sensible; and in a word, begets that reliance or security, which constitutes the nature of belief and opinion. The case is the same with the probability of cases, as with that of chance. There are some causes, which are entirely uniform and constant in producing a particular effect; and no instance has ever yet been found of any failure or irregularity in their operation. Fire has always burned, and water suffocated every human creature: The production motion by impulse and gravity is an universal law, which has hitherto admitted of no exception. However, there are other causes, which has always been found more irregular and uncertain; nor has rhubarb always proved a purge, or opium a soporific to every one, who has taken these medicines. It is true, when any cause fails of producing its usual effect, philosophers ascribe not this to any irregularity in nature; but supposed, that some secret causes, in the particular structure of parts, have prevented the operation. Our reasonings, however, and conclusions concerning the event are the same as if this principle had no place. #RandolphHarris 14 of 24
Being determined by custom to transfer the past to the future, in all our inferences; whereas the past has been entirely regular and uniform, we expect the event with the greatest assurance, and leave no room for any contrary supposition. However, where different effects have been found to follow from causes, which are to appearance exactly similar, all these various effects must occur to the mind in transferring the past to the future, and enter into our consideration, when we determine the probability of the event. Though we give the preference to that which has been found most usual, and believe that this effect will exist, we must not overlook the other effects, but must assign to each of them a particular weight and authority, in proportion as we have fond it to be more or less frequent. It is more probable, in almost every country of EUROPE, that there will be frost sometime in JANUARY, than that the weather will continue open throughout that whole month; though this probability varies according to the different climates, and approaches to a certainty in the more northern kingdoms. Here then it seems evident, that, when we transfer the past to future, in order to determine the effect, which will result from any cause, we transfer all the different events, in the same proportion as they have appeared in the past, and conceive one to have exited a hundred times, for instance, another ten times, and another once. #RandolphHarris 15 of 24
As a great number of views do here concur in one event, they fortify and confirm it to the imagination, beget that sentiment which we call belief, and give its object the preference above the contrary event, which is not supported by an equal number of experiments, and recurs not so frequently to the thought in transferring the past to the future. Let any one try to account for this operation of the mind upon any of the received systems of philosophy, and one will be sensible of the difficulty. For my part, I shall think it sufficient, if the present hints excite the curiosity of philosophers, and make them sensible how defective all common theories are in treating of such curious and such sublime subjects. A sensation is a state of awareness or sentience, a mode of consciousness, for example, a conscious awareness of sound, colour, or pain. A visual sensation, like an experience of a tree, is a state of the soul, not a state of the eyeballs. The eyes do not see. I (my soul) see with or by means of the eyes. The eyes, and the body in general, are instruments, tools the soul uses to experience the external World. Some sensations are experiences of things outside me like a tree or a table. Others are awarenesses of other states within me like pains or itches. Emotions are a subclass of sensations and, as such, forms of awareness of things. I can be aware of something angrily or lovingly or fearful. #RandolphHarris 16 of 24
A thought is a mental content that can be expressed in an entire sentence and that only exists while it is being thought. Some thoughts logically imply other thoughts. For example, “All dogs are mammals” entails “This dog is a mammal.” If the former is true, the latter must be true. Some thoughts do not entail but merely provide evidence for other thoughts. For example, certain thoughts about evidence in a court case provide evidence for the thought that a person is guilty. A belief is a person’s view, accepted to varying degrees of strength, of how things really are. If a person has a belief (for example, that it is raining), then that belief serves as the basis for the person’s tendency or readiness to act as if the thing believed were really so (for example, the person gets an umbrella). At any given time, one can have many beliefs that are not currently being contemplated. A desire is a certain felt inclination to do, have, or experience certain things. Desires are either conscious or such that they can be made conscious through certain activities, for example, through therapy. An act of will is a volition or choice, an exercise of power, and endeavouring to do a certain thing. Remember that you pray with deeds as well as words. God likes to be remembered, even when we are not in conscious prayer. #RandolphHarris 17 of 24
Light softly glowing in the heart of my home, God of the hearth, life of my dwelling, keep my family free from discord, free from want, free from fear, free from all that would disturb us and that would disturb your perfect peace. The light from the water is here. The light from the land is here. The light from the sky is here. From below, from about, from above, light has come here to my hearth: shine there, God of Clear Sight. A celestial light you are, God. A center point are you, God. A place of warmth are you, God. The heart of our home are you, God. To you, God, I dedicated my soul in your honour. The home’s central point is a glowing light, the heart of our home is shining brightly. God, created of the Universe, please bless all of your people, all who dwell in this house. Almighty and merciful God, we beseech Thy boundless loving-kindness, that at Thy humble servants’ entrance Thou wouldest be pleased to visit with Thy salvation this Thy servants on Earth who are laying, worn with uneasiness, on this Earth. “And now, these are the words of Ammon to his brethren, which say thus: My brothers and my brethren, behold I say unto you, how great reason have we to rejoice; for could we have supposed when we started from the and of Zarahemla that God would have granted into us such great blessings? And now, I ask, what great blessings has he bestowed upon us? Can ye tell? #RandolphHarris 18 of 24
“Behold, I answer for you; for our brethren, the Lamanites, were in darkness, yea, even in the darkest abyss, but behold, how many of them are brought to behold the marvelous light of God! And this is the blessing which hath been bestowed upon us, that we have been made instrument in the hands of God t bring about this great work. Behold, thousands of them do rejoice, and have been brought into the fold of God. Behold, the field was ripe, and blessed are ye, for ye did thrust in the sickle, and did reap with your might, yea, all the day long did ye labour; and behold the number of your sheaves! And they shall be gathered into the garners, that they are not wasted. Yea, they shall not be beaten down by the storm at the last day; yea, neither shall they be harrowed up by the whirlwinds; but when the storm cometh they shall be gathered together in their place, that the storm cannot penetrate to them; yea, neither shall they be driven with fierce winds whithersoever the enemy listeth to carry them. However, behold, they are in the hands of the Lord of the harvest, and they are his; and he will raise them up at the last day. Blessed be the name of our God; let us sing to his praise, yea, let us give thanks to his holy name, for he doth work righteousness forever. #RandolphHarris 19 of 24
“Behold, how many thousands of our brethren has he loosed from the pains of hell; and they are brought to sing redeeming love, and this because of the power of his word which is in us, therefore have we not great reason to rejoice? Yes, we have reason to praise him forever, for he is the Most High God, and has loosed our brethren from the chains of hell. Yea, they were encircled about with everlasting darkness and destruction; but behold, he has brought them into his everlasting light, yea, into everlasting salvation; and they are encircled about with the matchless bounty of his love; yea, and we have been instruments in his hands of doing this great and marvelous work. Therefore, let us glory, yea, we will glory in the Lord; yea, we will rejoice, for our joy is full; yea, we will praise our God forever. Behold, who can glory too much in the Lord? Yea, who can say too much of his great power, and of his mercy, and of his long-suffering towards the children of human? Behold, I say unto you, I cannot say the smallest part which I feel. Who could have supposed that our God would have been so merciful as to have snatched us from our awful, sinful, and polluted state? Behold, we went for the even in wrath, with mighty threatenings to destroy his church. #RandolphHarris 20 of 24
“Oh then, why did he not consign us to an awful destruction, yea, why did he not let the sword of his justice fall upon us, and doom us to eternal despair? Oh, my soul, almost as it were, fleeth at the thought. Behold, he did not exercise his justice upon us, but in his great mercy hath brought us over that everlasting gulf of death and misery, even to the salvation of our souls. Nd now behold, my brethren, what natural human is there that knoweth these things? I say unto you, there is none that knowth these things, save it be the penitent. Yea, one that repeneth and exerciseth faith, and bringeth forth good works, and prayeth continually without ceasing—unto such it is given t know the mysteries of God; yea, unto such it shall be given to reveal things which never have been revealed; yea, and it shall be given unto such to bring thousands of souls to repentance, even as it has been given unto us to bring these our brethren to repentance. Now do ye remember, my brethren, that we said unto our brethren in the land of Zarahemla, we go up to the land of Nephi, to preach unto our brethren, the Lamanites, and they laughed us to scorn? For they said unto us: Do ye suppose that ye can bring the Lamanites to the knowledge of the truth? #RandolphHarris 21 of 24
“Do ye suppose that ye can convince the Lamanites of the incorrectness of the traditions of their fathers, as stiffnecked a people as they are; whose hearts delight in the shedding of blood; whose days have been spent in the grossest iniquity; whose ways have been the ways of a transgressor from the beginning? Now my brethren, ye remember that this was their language. And moreover they did say: Let us take up arms against them, that we destroy them and their iniquity out of the land, lest they overrun us and destroy us. However, behold, my beloved brethren, we came into the wilderness with the intent to destroy our brethren, but with the intent that perhaps we might save come few of their souls. Now when our hearts were depressed, and we were about to turn back, behold, the Lord comforted us, and said: Go amongst thy brethren, the Lamanites, and bear with patience thine afflictions, and I will give unto you success. And now behold, we have come, and been forth amongst them; and we have been patient in our sufferings, and we have suffered every privation; yea, we have traveled from house to house, relying upon the mercies of the World—not upon the mercies of the World alone but upon the mercies of God. #RandolphHarris 22 of 24
“And we have entered into their houses and taught them, and we have taught them in their streets; yea, and we have taught them upon their hills; and we have also entered into their temples and their synagogues and taught them; and we have been cast out, and mocked, and spit upon, and smote upon our cheeks; and we have been stoned and taken and bound with strong cords, and cast into prison; and through the power and wisdom of God we have been delivered again. And we have suffered all manner of afflictions, and all this, that perhaps we might be the means of saving some soul; and we supposed that our joy would be full if perhaps we could be the means of saving some. Now behold, we can look forth and see the fruits of our labours; and are they few? I say unto you, Nay, they are many; yea, and we can witness of their sincerity, because of their love towards their brethren and also towards us. For behold, they had rather sacrifice their lives than even to take the life of their enemy; and they have buried their weapons of war deep in the Earth, because of their love towards their brethren. And now behold I say unto you, has there been so great love in all the land? Behold, I say unto you, Nay, there has not, even among the Nephites. For behold, they would take up arms against their brethren; they would not suffer themselves to be slain. #RandolphHarris 23 of 24
“However, behold how many of these have laid down their lives; and we know that they have gone to their God, because of their love and of their hatred to sin. Now have we not reason to rejoice? Yea, I say unto you, there never were humans that had so great reason to rejoice as we, since the World began; yea, and my joy is carried away, even unto boasting in my God; for he has all power, all wisdom, and all the understanding; he comprehendeth all things, and he is a merciful Being, even unto salvation, to those who will repent and believe on his name. Now if this is boasting, even so will I boast; for this is my life and my light, my joy and my salvation, and my redemption for everlasting wo. Yea, blessed is the name of my God, who has been mindful of this people, who are a branch of the three of Israel, and has been lost from its body in a strange land; yea, I say, blessed be the name of my God, who has been mindful of us, wanderers in a strange land. Now my brethren, we see that God is mindful of every people, whatsoever land they may be in; yea, he numbereth his people, and his bowels of mercy are over all the Earth. Now this is my joy, and my great thanksgiving; yea, and I will give thanks unto my God forever. Amen,” reports Alma 26.1-37. #RandolphHarris 24 of 24
Cresleigh Homes
We are opting to call this #BrightonStation Residence 3 island an ‘ice cap’ after the hot weekend we Have had. 🥵 Do not worry, it still comes equipped with the undermount sink and quartz countertops you know and love. 😉
Watch a video walkthrough of this and other #CresleighRanch homes on our website. Link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/residence-3/
May the Father bless thee, Who created all things in the beginning; May the Son of God heal thee; May the Holy Ghost enlighten thee, guard thy body, save thy soul, direct thy thoughts, and bring thee safe to the Heavenly country; Who liveth and reigneth God, in a perfect Trinity, throughout all ages. #CresleighHomes
Randolph Harris II International 