Home » brain (Page 10)
Category Archives: brain
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!
Humans Expect Something Extraordinary: The Coming of the New World Order in the Near Future!
I am an invisible person. No, I am not a spook…nor am I one of your Hollywood-movie ectoplasms. I am a human of substance, of flesh and bone, fiber and liquids—and I might even be said to possess a mind. I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me. Creativity is a yearning for immortality. We have seen that intuitionism raises the question of the extent to which it is possible to give a systematic account of our considered judgments of the just and unjust. In particular, it holds that no constructive answer can be given to the problem of assigning weights to competing principles of justice. Here at least we must rely on our intuitive capacities. Classical utilitarianism tries, of course, to avoid the appeal to intuition altogether. It is a single-principle conception with one ultimate standard; the adjustment of weights is, in theory anyway, settled by reference to the principle of utility. Mill thought that there must be but one such standard, otherwise there would be no umpire between competing criteria, and Sidgwick argues at length that the utilitarian principle is the only one which can assume this role. They maintain that our moral judgments are implicitly utilitarian in the sense that when confronted with a clash of precepts, or with notions which are vague and imprecise, we have no alternative except to adopt utilitarianism. #RandolphHarris 1 of 27
Mills and Sidgwick believe that at some point we must have a single principle to straighten out and to systematize our judgments. Undeniably one of the great attractions of the classical doctrines is the way it faces the priority problem and tries to avoid relying on intuition. As I already remarked, there is nothing necessarily irrational in the appeal to intuition to settle questions of priority. We must recognize the possibility that there is no way to get beyond a plurality of principles. No doubt any conception of justice will have to rely on intuition to some degree. Nevertheless, we should do what we can to reduce the direct appeal to reduce the direct appeal to our considered judgments. For if humans balance final principles differently, as presumably they often do, then their conceptions of justice are different. The assignment of weights is an essential and not a minor part of a conception of justice. If we cannot explain how these weights are to be determined by reasonable ethical criteria, the means of rational discussion have come to an end. An intuitionist conception of justice is, one might say, but had a conception. We should do what we can to formulate explicit principles for the priority of problem, even though the dependence on intuition cannot be eliminated entirely. #RandolphHarris 2 of 27
In justice as fairness the role of intuition is limited in several ways. Since the whole question is rather difficult, I shall only make a few comments here the full sense of which will not be clear until later on. The first point is connected with the fact that the principles of justice are those which would be chosen in the original position. They are the outcome of a certain choice situation. Now being rational, the persons in the original position recognize that they should consider the priority of these principles. For if they wish to establish agreed standards for adjudicating their claims on one another, they will need principles for assigning weights. They cannot assume that their intuitive judgment of priority will in general be the same; given their different positions in society they surely will not. Thus I suppose that in the original positions the parties try to reach some agreement as to how the principles of justice are to be balanced. Now part of the value of the notion of choosing principles is that the reasons which underlie their adoption in the first place may also support giving them certain weights. Since in justice as fairness the principles of justice are not thought of as self-evident, but have their justification in the fact that they would be chosen, we may find in the grounds for their acceptance some guidance or limitation as to how they are to be balanced. #RandolphHarris 3 of 27
Given the situation of the original position, it may be clear that certain priority rules are preferable to others for much the same reasons that principles are initially assented to. By emphasizing the role of justice and the special features of the initial choice situation, the priority problem may prove more tractable. A second possibility is that we may be able to find principles which can be put in what I shall call a serial or lexical order. The term “lexicographical” drives from the fact that most familiar examples of such an ordering is that of words in a dictionary. To see this, substitute numerals for letters, putting “1” for “a” “2” for “b” and so on, and then rank the resulting strings of numerals from left to right, moving to the right only when necessary to break ties. In general, a lexical ordering cannot be represented by a continuous real-valued utility function; such a ranking violates the assumption of continuity. In the history of moral philosophy the conception of a lexical order occasionally appears though it is not explicitly discussed. A clear example may be found in comparing pleasures of the same kind, we use their intensity and duration; in comparing pleasures of different kinds, we must consider their duration and dignity jointly. Pleasure of higher kinds may have a worth greater than those of the lower kinds however great the latter’s intensity and duration. #RandolphHarris 4 of 27
It also is natural to rank moral worth as lexically prior to non-moral values. And of course the primacy of justice, as well as the priority of right are further cases of such an ordering. The theory of utility in economics began with an implicit recognition of the hierarchical structure of wants and the priority of moral consideration. (The correct term of lexical order is “lexicographical,” but it is too cumbersome.) This is an order which requires us to satisfy the first principle in the ordering before we can move on to the second, the second before we consider the third, and so on. A principle does not come into play until those previous to it are either fully met or do not apply. A serial ordering avoids, then, having to balance principles at all; those earlier in the ordering have an absolute weigh, so to speak, with respect to later ones, and hold without exception. We can regard such a ranking as analogous to a sequence of constrained maximum principles. For we can suppose that any principle in order is to be maximized subject to the condition that preceding principles are fully satisfied. As an important special cast I shall, in fact, propose an ordering of this kind by ranking the principle of equal liberty prior to the principle regulating economic and social inequalities. #RandolphHarris 5 of 27
This means, in effect, that the basic structure of society is to arrange the inequalities of wealth and authority in ways consistent with the equal liberties required by the preceding principle. Certainly the concept of a lexical, or serial, order does not offhand seem very promising. Indeed, it appears to offend our sense of moderation ad good judgment. Moreover, it presupposes that the principles in the order be of a rather special kind. For example, unless the earlier principles have but a limited application and establish definite requirements which can be fulfilled, later principles will never come into play. Thus the principle of equal liberty can assume a prior position since it may, let us suppose, be satisfied. Whereas if the principle of utility were first, it would render otiose all subsequent criteria. I shall try to show that at least in certain social circumstances a serial ordering of the principles of justice offers an approximate solution to the priority problem. Finally, the dependence on intuition can be reduced by posing more limited questions and by substituting prudential for moral judgment. Thus someone faced with the principles of an intuitionist conception may rely that without some guidelines for deliberation one does not know what to say. One might maintain, for example, that one could not balance total utility against equality in the distribution of satisfaction. #RandolphHarris 6 of 27
Not only are the notions involved here too abstract and comprehensive for one to have any confidence in one’s judgement, but there are enormous complications in interpreting what they mean. The aggregative-distributive dichotomy is no doubt an attractive idea, but in this instance it seems unmanageable. It does not factor the problem of social justice into small enough parts. In justice as fairness the appeal to intuition is focused in two ways. First we single out a certain position in the social system from which the system is to be judged, and then we ask whether, from the standpoint of a representative human in this position, it would be rational to prefer this arrangement of the basic structure rather than that. Given certain assumptions, economic and social inequalities are to be judged in terms of the long-run expectations of the least advantaged social group. Of course, the specification of this group is not very exact, and certainly our prudential judgments likewise give considerable scope to intuition, since we may not be able to formulate the principle which determines them. Nevertheless, we have asked a much more limited question and have substituted for an ethical judgment a judgment of rational prudence. Often it is quite clear how we should decide. #RandolphHarris 7 of 27
The reliance on intuition is of a different nature and much less than in the aggregative-distributive dichotomy of the intuitionist conception. In addressing the priority problem the task is that of reducing and not of eliminating entirely the reliance on intuitive judgments. There is no reason to suppose that we can avoid all appeals to intuition, of whatever kind, or that we should try to. The practical aim is to reach a reasonable reliable agreement in judgment in order to provide a common conception of justice. If human’s intuitive priority judgments are similar, it does not matter, practically speaking, that they cannot formulate the principles exist. Contrary judgments, however, raise a difficulty, since the basis for adjudicating claims is to that extent obscure. Thus our object should be to formulate a conception of justice which, however much it may call upon intuition, ethical or prudential, tends to make our considered judgments of justice converge. If such a conception does exist, then, from the standpoint of the of the initial situation, the priority problem is not that of how to cope with the complexity of already given moral facts which cannot be altered. Instead, it is the problem of formulating reasonable and generally acceptable proposals for bringing about the desired agreements in judgment. #RandolphHarris 8 of 27
On a contract doctrine the moral facts are determined by the principles which would be chosen in the original position. These principles specify which considerations are relevant from the standpoint of social justice. Since it is up to the persons in the original position to choose these principles, it is for them to decide how simple or complex they want the moral facts to be. The original agreement settles how far they are prepared to compromise and to simplify in order to establish the priority rules necessary for a common conception of justice. I have reviewed two obvious and simple ways of dealing constructively with the priority problem: namely, either by a single overall principle, or by a plurality of principles in lexical order. Other ways no doubt exist, but I shall not consider what they might be. The traditional moral theories are for the most part single-principled or intuitionistic, so that the working out of a serial ordering is novelty enough for a first step. While it seems clear that, in general, a lexical order cannot be strictly correct, it may be an illuminating approximation under certain special though significant conditions. In this way it may indicate the larger structure of conceptions of justice and suggest the directions along which a closer fit can be found. #RandolphHarris 9 of 27
Since the spiritual life is instinctoid, all the techniques of subjective biology apply to its education. The spiritual life (B-values, B-fact, metaneeds, et cetera) can in principle be introspected. It has “impulse voices” or “inner signals” which, though weaker than basic needs, can yet be “heard,” and which therefore comes under the rubric of the “subjective biology” I have described. In principle, therefore, all the principles and exercises which help to develop (or teach) our sensory awareness, our body awarenesses, our sensitivities to the inner signals (given off by our needs, capacities, constitution, temperament, body et cetera)—all these apply also, though less strongly, to our inner metaneeds, id est, to the education of our yearnings for beauty, law, truth, perfection, et cetera. I have used the term “experientially empty” to describe those persons whose inner signals are either absent or remain unperceived. Perhaps we can also invent some such term as “experientially rich” to describe those who are so sensitive to the inner voices of the self that even the metaneeds can be consciously introspected and enjoyed. It is this experiential richness which in principle should be “teachable” or recoverable, I am confident, at least in degree, perhaps with the proper use of psychedelic chemicals, with Esalen-type, non-verbal methods, with prayer and contemplation techniques, with further study of peak-experiences or of B-cognition, et cetera. #RandolphHarris 10 of 27
The Esalen Institute at Big Sur, California, specializes in such methods. The tacit assumption underlying this new kind of education is that both the body and the “spirit” can be loved, and that they are synergic and hierarchically rather than mutually exclusive, id est, one can have both. Not only are humans PART of nature, and it part of them, but also they must be at least minimumly isomorphic (corresponding or similar in form and relations) with nature (similar to it) in order to be viable in it. It has evolved humans. Their communion with what transcends them therefore need not be defined as non-natural or supernatural. It may be seen as a “biological” experience. Perhaps human’s thrilling to nature (perceiving it as true, good, beautiful, et cetera) will one day be understood as a kind of self-recognition or self-experience, a way of being oneself and full functional, a way of being at home, a kind of biological authenticity, of “biological mysticism,” et cetera. Perhaps we can see mystical or peak-fusion not only as communion with that which is most worthy of love, but also as fusion with that which is, because humans belong there, being truly part of what is, and being, so to speak a member of the family: one direction in which we find increasing confidence is the conception that we are basically one with the cosmos instead of strangers to it. #RandolphHarris 11 of 27
This biological or evolutionary version of the mystic experience or the peak-experience—here perhaps has no different from the spiritual or religions experience—reminds us again that we must ultimately outgrow the obsolescent usage of “highest” as the opposite of “lowest” or “deepest.” Here the “highest” experience ever descried, the joyful fusion with the ultimate that humans can conceive, can be seen simultaneously as the deepest experience of our ultimate personal animality and specieshood, as the acceptance of our profound biological nature as isomorphic with nature in general. “And Jesus went out, and his disciples, into the towns of Caesarea Philippi: and by the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, Whom do humans say that I am? And they answered, John the Baptist: but some say, Elias; and others, One of the prophets. And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ. And he charged them that they should tell no human of him. And he began to teach them, that the Son of humans must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be skilled, and after three days rise again. And he spake that saying openly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him. #RandolphHarris 12 of 27
“However, when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of humans,” reports Mark 8.27-33. This story is the center of Mark’s Gospel. And in this story we find the heart of the Christian message. The message is infinitely simple, yet rich and profound, and concentrated in four words: “Thou art the Christ.” Let us think about this message in the light of our story, which is the real beginning of the Passion and Death. Then Jesus and his disciples set out for the villages of Caesarea and Philippi, on a road between some unimportant villages, at a time which seems indefinite—“then.” However, on this road occurred the most important event of human history. It is the most important not only from the point of view of the believer, but also from the of the detached observer of World history. And this indefinite “the” pointed to the most definite and decisive moment in the experience of humankind, the moment in which one human dared to say to another: “Thou art Christ.” On the road, He inquired of Hid disciples, “Who do people say I am?” John the Baptist,” they told him, although some say that you are Elijah, and others, that you are one of the prophets.” #RandolphHarris 13 of 27
Why did they give Him titles that elevated Him above the ordinary human being? It was because they expected something extraordinary: the coming of the new World order in the near future. All generations of humankind had waited in vain for this stage of the World, in which justice and peace would reign. The people believed that their generation would witness its coming. However, before it would come, forerunners would have to appear, to announce its coming and to prepare the people. Elijah would come from Heaven, to which he had been elevated; perhaps Jeremiah would rise from the dead; or some other prophet would appear; even John the Baptist might return from his grave. They felt that behind the figure of this teaching and healing Rabbi some mysterious thing was hidden. They thought that He must be the mask for one of the forerunners, who would come to prepare the new and final period of history. That is what the disciple heard from the people. Although there have been two thousand years of Christianity, there are still such people. Jesus. For them, remains the forerunner. The new World and he who is to bring it in are still to come. #RandolphHarris 14 of 27
Justice and peace have not yet begun to rule. The new World may be near at hand, or it may be still far from us. In any case, it has not appeared. That is the characteristic feeling of the Jewish people, the feeling that prevents them from becoming Christian. It is also the feeling of large groups within present-day Christendom, the feeling that drives them to wait and to work for the World of peace and justice, although they are constantly disappointed, and constantly have to start over again. If Jesus should ask us today, “Who do people say that I am?” we should have to answer exactly as His first disciples did: that He was one of the forerunners, and although perhaps the greatest of them all, probably not the last one; a forerunner and a prophet, but not one who will fulfill all things. The reign of justice and peace, the new World has not yet come. For their use is not more for probation than for affecting and moving. For there are many forms which, though they mean the same, yet affect differently; as the difference is great in the piercing of that which is sharp and that which is flat, though the strength of the percussion be the same. Certainly there is no human who will not be more affected by hearing it said, Your enemies will be glad of this” ……than by hearing it said only, “This will be evil for you.” …these points and stings of words are by no means to be neglected. #RandolphHarris 15 of 27
Consider what has been said. In an abstract way, it has been said that an idea may or may not evoke an emotional response, many carry different degrees of emotional response, may call out different kinds of emotion in different persons. In a concrete way, it is being observed that a sharp instrument pierces easier than a dull one, though the force exerted be the same. Consider the economy in phrasing the abstract conception and note that it is instantly illuminated by the image of piercing. The abstraction and the image have been related analogically. Reason has been put to work and so has imagination. Even more interesting, because more subtle, is the pair of statements: This will be evil for you. Your enemies will be glad of this. The base of both statements was probably suggested by the stock, popular generalization: What is good for the virtuous human is evil for the bad human, and what is evil for the virtuous human is good for the bad human. As reason has applied the idea to a specific person or audience, the outcome is flat, literal statement: this will be evil for you. As imaginative reason has applied the idea—your enemies will be glad of this—concreteness of language and indirectness of reference have set up a context of allusiveness that might well lead a respondent to construct a clear, full image for the illusion oneself. #RandolphHarris 16 of 27
The illusion works through the principles of comparison and contrast, and so the intellect is served; the images are intimated, and so the imagination is invited to act. I have by me indeed a great many more Sophisms of the same kind, which I collected in my youth; but without their illustrations and answers, which I have not now the leisure to perfect; and to set forth the naked colours without their illustrations (especially as those above given appear in full dress) does not seem suitable. Ideas must be accessible to sense; that is, they must be images of one kind or another that the recipient can “see.” The imagination was not always directed, restrained, and bound by reason. It could serve a higher power than reason. It is the instrument of faith and divine grace as the faculty through which God communicated directly with humans. In matter of faith and religion our imagination raises itself above reason; not that divine illumination resides in the imagination; its seat being rather in the very citadel of the mind and understanding; but that the divine grace uses the motions of the imagination as an instrument of illumination, just as it uses the motions of the will as an instrument of virtue; which is the reason why religion ever sough access to the mind by similitudes, types, parables, visions, dreams. #RandolphHarris 17 of 27
Humans can learn of things divine from two sources: from nature or from God directly. If from nature, there can be two avenues of knowing. One is that which springs from sense, induction, reason, argument, according to the laws of Heaven and Earth. One is that which flashed upon the spirit of humans by an inward instinct, according to the law of conscience; which is a spark and relic of one’s primitive original purity. The almost universal belief of our times that when God drove humans from the Garden of Eden he vouchsafed them a vestige of knowledge of truth and goodness, a seed to which they could become sensitive and could learn to nourish. This kind of seed was in the citadel of the mind. However, humans also can learn of God directly. If they did, it would be through faith, a mysterious way that is based on the belief that the spirit is affected by spirit. Imagination is that modulation of spirit that is peculiarly sensitive to images and that is adept at reproducing and making them. So by nature imagination is a sensitive instrument, sensitive to its own mater, spirit, and sensitive to its own kind, similitudes. “And now, my son Helaman, I command you that ye take the records which have been entrusted with me; and I also command you that ye keep a record of this people, according as I have done, upon the plates of Nephi, and keep all these things sacred which I have kept, even as I have kept them; for it is for a wise purpose that they are kept. #RandolphHarris 18 of 27
“And these plates of brass, which contain these engravings, which have the records of the holy scriptures upon them, which have the genealogy of our forefathers, even from the beginning—Behold, it has been prophesied by our fathers, that they should be kept and handed down from one generation to another, and be kept and preserved by the hand of the Lord until they should go forth unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people that they shall know of the mysteries contained thereon. And now behold, if they are kept they must retain their brightness; yea, and they will retain their brightness; yea, and also shall all the plates which do contain that which is holy writ. Now ye may suppose that this is foolishness in me; but behold I say unto you, that by small and simple things are great things brought to pass; and small means in many instances doth confound the wise. And the Lord God doth work by means to bring about his great and eternal purposes; and by very small means the Lord doth confound the wise and bringeth about the salvation of many souls. And now, it has hitherto been wisdom in God that these things should be preserved; for behold, they have enlarged the memory of this people, yea, and convinced many of the error of their ways, and brought them to the knowledge of their God unto the salvation of their souls. #RandolphHarris 19 of 27
“Yea, I say unto you, were it not for these things that record do contain, which are on these plates, Ammon and his brethren could not have convinced so many thousands of the Lamanites of the incorrect tradition of their fathers; yea, these records and their words brought them unto repentance; that is, they brought them to the knowledge of the Lord their God, and to rejoice in Jesus Christ their Redeemer. And who knoweth but what they will be the means of bringing many thousands of them, yea, and also many thousands of our stiffnecked brethren, the Nephites, who are now hardening their hearts in sin and iniquities, to the knowledge of their Redeemer? Now these mysteries are not yet fully made known unto me; therefore I shall forbear. And it may suffice if I only say that are preserved for a wise purpose, which purpose is known unto God; for he doth counsel in wisdom over all his works, and his path are straight, and his course is one eternal round. O remember, remember, my son Helaman, how strict are the commandments of God. And he said: If ye will keep my commandments ye shall prosper in the land—but if ye keep not his commandments ye shall be cut off from his presence. #RandolphHarris 20 of 27
“And now remember, my son, that God has entrusted you with these things, which are sacred, which he has kept sacred, and also which e will keep and preserve for a wise purpose in him, that he may show forth his power unto future generations. And now behold, I tell you by the spirit of prophecy, that is ye transgress the commandment of God, behold, these things which are sacred shall be taken away from you by the power of God, and ye shall be delivered up unto Satan, that he may sift you as chaff before the wind. However, if ye keep the commandments of God, and do with these things which are sacred according to that which the Lord doth command you, (for you must appeal unto the Lord for all things whatsoever ye must do with them) behold, no power of Earth or hell can take them from you, for God is powerful to the fulfilling of all his words. For he will fulfill al his promises which he shall make unto you for he has fulfilled his promises he had made unto our fathers. For he promised unto them that he would preserve these things for a wise purpose in him, that he might show forth his power unto future generations. And now behold, one purpose hath he fulfilled, even to the restoration of many thousands of the Lamanites to the knowledge of the truth; and he hath shown forth his power in them unto future generations; therefore they shall be preserved. #RandolphHarris 21 of 27
“Therefore I command you, my so Helaman, that ye be diligent in fulfilling all my words, and that ye be diligent in keeping the commandments of God as they are written. And now, I will speak unto you concerning those twenty-four plates, that ye keep them, that mysteries and the words of darkness, and their secret works, or the secret works of those people who have been destroyed, may be made manifest unto this people; yea, all their murders, and robbings, and their plunderings, and all their wickedness and abominations, may be made manifest unto this people; yea, and they ye preserve these interpreters. For behold, the Lord saw that his people began to work in darkness, yea, work secret murders and abominations; therefore the Lord said, if they did not repent they should be destroyed from off the face of the Earth. And the Lord said: I will prepare unto my servant Gazelem, a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness unto light, that I may discover unto them the works of their brethren, yea, their secret works, their works of darkness, and their wickedness and abominations. And now, my son, these interpreters were prepared that the word of God might be fulfilled, which he spake. #RandolphHarris 22 of 27
“I will bring forth out of darkness unto light all their secret works and their abominations; and except they repent I will destroy them from off the face of the Earth; and I will bring to light all their secrets and abominations, unto every nation that shall hereafter possess the land. And now, my son, we see that they did not repent; therefore they have been destroyed, and thus far the word of God has been fulfilled; yea, their secret abominations have been brought out of darkness and made known unto us. And now, my son, I command you that ye retain all their oaths, and their covenants, and their signs and their wonders ye shall keep from this people, that they know them not lest peradventure they should fall into darkness also and be destroyed. For behold, there is a curse upon all this land, that destruction shall come upon all those workers of darkness, according to the power of God, when they are fully ripe; therefore I desire that his people might not be destroyed. Therefore ye shall keep these secret plans of their oaths and their covenants from this people, and only their wickedness and their murders and the abominations shall ye make known unto them; and ye shall teach the to abhor such wickedness and abominations and murders; and ye shall also teach them that these people were destroyed on account of their wickedness and abominations and their murders. #RandolphHarris 23 of 27
For behold, they murdered all the prophets of the Lord who came among them to declare unto them concerning their iniquities; and the blood of those who they murdered did cry unto the Lord their God for vengeance upon those who were their murderers; and thus the judgments of God did come upon these workers of darkness and secret combinations. Yea, and cursed be the land forever and ever unto those workers of darkness and secret combinations, even unto destruction, except they repent before they are fully ripe. And now, my son, remember the words which I have spoken unto you; trust not those secret plans unto this people, but teach them an everlasting hatred against sin and iniquity. Preach unto them repentance, and faith on the Lord Jesus Christ; teach them to humble themselves and to be meek and lowly in heart; teach them to withstand every temptation of the devil, with their faith on the Lord Jesus Christ. Teach them to never be weary of good works, but to be meek and lowly in heart; for such shall find rest to their souls. O, remember, my son, and learn wisdom in thy youth; yea, learn in thy youth to keep the commandments of God. Yea, and cry unto God for all thy support; yea, let all thy doings be unto the Lord, and whithersoever thou goest let it be in the Lord. #RandolphHarris 24 of 27
“Yea, let all thy thoughts be directed unto the Lord; yea, let the affections of thy heart be placed upon the Lord forever. Counsel with the Lord in all thy doings, and he will direct thee for good; yea, when thou liest down at night lie down unto the Lord, that he may watch over you in your sleep; and when thou risest in the morning let thy heart be full of thanks unto God; and if ye do these things, ye shall be lifted up at the last day. And now, my son, I have somewhat to say concerning the things which our fathers call a ball or director—or our fathers called it Liahona, which is, being interpreted, a compass; and the Lord prepared it. And behold, there cannot any human work after the manner of so curious a work-personship. And behold, it was prepared to show unto our father the course which they should travel in the wilderness. And it did work for them according to their faith in God; therefore, if they had faith to believe that God could cause that those spindles should point the way they should go, behold, it was done; therefore they had this miracle, and also many other miracles wrought by the power of God, day by day. Nevertheless, because those miracles were worked by small means it did show unto them marvelous works. #RandolphHarris 25 of 27
“They were slothful, and forgo to exercise their faith and diligence and then those marvelous works ceased, and they did not progress in their journey; therefore, they tarried in the wilderness, or did not travel a direct course, and were afflicted with hunger and thirst, because of their transgressions. And now, my son, I would that ye should understand that these things are not without a shadow; for as our father were slothful to give heed to this compass (now these things were temporal) they did not prosper; even so it was with things which are spiritual. For behold, it is as easy to give heed to the word of Christ, which will point to you a straight course to eternal bliss, as it was for our fathers to give heed to this compass, which would point unto them a straight course to the promised land. And now I say, is there not a type in this thing? For just as surely as this director did bring our fathers, by following its course, to the promised land, shall the words of Christ, if we follow their course, carry us beyond this vale of sorrow into a far better land of promise. On my don, do not let us be slothful because of the easiness of the way; for so was it with our father; for so was it prepared for them, that if they would look they might live; even so it is with us. #RandolphHarris 26 of 27
“The way is prepared, and if we will look we may live forever. And now, my son, see that ye take care of these scared things, yea, see that ye look to God and live. Go unto this people and declare he word, and be sober. My son, farewell,” reports Alma 37.1-47. Wheels turn and the seasons turn and the Earth turns and the stars turn. The Universe turns and I turn with it. King of the tuning, my face turns toward you in wonder. Great Father, please help me. I have studied your ways for many years now, and still you hide yourself from me. I can call to you under a multitude of names, but still you do not come. I can tell you a large number of your stories, but still I do not know who you are. I have many pictures of you, but still I have not seen your face. Though I throw out titles and powers and associations in mad armfuls, still there is nothing there when the whirlwind I create as become still. In that nothing, then, in the quiet after my storm, I will await you. Come to me, if such is your will, or do not come to me, if such is your will. Still I will wait. What else can I do? I bring greetings to God of this place from my people, from my family, from me, and not only greetings but gifts of friendship. I give them to you to establish between us the sacred bond. I who stand before you, I who come into your presence, I who am your worshipper, call out to you, God. #RandolphHarris 27 of 27
Cresleigh Homes
Been eyeing the homes at #MillsStation? You’re in luck! We have multiple home sites ready for move-in, including sites 17 and 77 in the Residence 1 floor plan! Head to our website to take a virtual tour of this home today! https://cresleigh.com/mills-station/residence-1/
Lord of the Pathway, to you I call; Lord of the Pathway, I lift my voice to you. Gate Keeper, Waiting One please open the door, that I may pass through to your land, God, there to be refreshed by the power you, Great one. Please do not hide in you cave of clouds, Most High, and deprive our World of your splendor. Please come to the mirror we have prepared, washing it with clear water. See, we are clean to; nothing is here which would defile. We are worthy of your presence ad eager to see you. Please leave your cloud cave and shine for us.
Dear Lord of the shining bow, with hair of flame, with beauty shining, truth’s bright friend and falsehood’s foe, Masters of both lyre and singing: Please be with me, bring art and grace, please be with me, bring light and song, please be with me, bring all that is beautiful, please bring all that is beautiful when you come to me.
#CresleighRanch
#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/
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
May the Angel of Peace Come in—One’s Over-Great Hat to Repay an Obligation is a Kind of Ingratitude!
It is very peaceful to be able to live for your work alone. The self-denial, the sacrifices that our work demands are all compensated for by that lovely serenity of giving yourself up to dance. People also need to understand their existential freedom and their responsibility in exercising that freedom. One must develop the chance to experience one’s self as an entity separate from one’s environment, with the capacity to respond to one’s own initiative rather than merely reacting. Does emotion have a presence r identity independent of the person it is “in”? We talk as if it did. We commonly speak of expression, storing, getting in touch with, or even spreading and emotion. We speak of guilt as something that haunts us, or fear as something the grips, strikes, betrays, paralyzes, or overwhelms us. Fear, as we talk about is, is something that can lurk, hide, creep, look up, or attack. Love is something we fall into or out of. Anger is something that overtakes or overwhelms us. In this way of talking we use the fiction of some independent, outside agency in order to describe a contrasting inner state. It is important for a person to understand the sociohistorical precedence for the present attitudes one felt victim to. #RandolphHarris 1 of 22
Music, When Soft Voices Die, Vibrates in the Memory—If Music be the Food of Love, Play on!
There is a young and impressionable mind out there that is very hungry for information…It has latched on to an electronic tube as its main source of nourishment. As a whole, the Democratic Republic of the Congo contains 615,942 square miles of forest. and it is known for its high levels of biodiversity, including more than 600 tree species and 10,000 animal species. Some of its most famous residents include forest elephant, gorillas, chimpanzees, okapi, leopards, hippos, and lions. Researchers has found that Central African forests generally have taller trees but lower density of small tress than forest in the Amazon or Borneo. That is because Elephants, gorillas, and large herbivores keep the density of small trees very low through predation, reducing competition for large trees. However, in areas where these animals have been depleted by hunting, forests tend to be shorter and denser with small trees. However, between 2000 and 2010, the country lost 14,331 square miles of forest. It risks being left in a fragmented and severely degraded state due to the growing threat of deforestation carried out to clear the illegal logging. If the current trend continues, the entire forest will be gone by the end of this century, 2100 A.D. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20
Understanding tropical deforestation is important because forests store vast amounts of carbon. Deforestation releases carbon to the atmosphere and prevents the forest from taking up more carbon, and this increases global temperatures and poor air quality. Deforestation also leads to the death of animals and makes it hard for the native to find much needed food. Also, the natives are not allowed to cut down trees because every tree that cut down costs them a fine that is ten times the minimum wages, and a jail sentence. However, since this country is poor, big corporations cannot be stopped from logging trees, and cut them down to plunder. The first inhabitants of these lands, the indigenous, are left forgotten in a corner, while the looters grow and become stronger. The natives have their history and try to defend themselves and their homes so they will not die. The threat to the rainforest seems like a joke because it is a single county, the country of money, put itself above all flags. When they utter, “Globalization,” many think it is absurd because it is an order in which money is the only country served and the borders are erased, not our of fraternity but because of the bleeding that fattens the powerful without nationality. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20
The lie of globalization became a universal coin, and for a few in the Congo, it wove a dream of prosperity above everyone else’s nightmare. Corruption and falsehoods are used to deceive the masses. Being poor, the people are dressed in the wealth of their scarcities, and because the lie is so deep and so broad, they end up mistaking it for truth. The people prepared for the great international forums and, by the will of the government, poverty was declared an illusion that faded before the development proclaimed by economic statistics. The people of the land became even more forgotten, and their history was not enough to keep the from dying, forgotten and humiliated. However, death did not hurt them as much as being forgotten did. They discovered that they no longer existed, and those who govern had forgotten about them in their euphoria of statistics and growth. A similar phenomenon is happening in the City of Sacramento with the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on sports complexes and theater expansions, which cannot even be used, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but nothing being done to make sure people have affordable housing. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20
A country that forgets itself is a sad country. A country that forgets its past cannot have a future. I have said that the original position is the appropriate initial status quo which ensures that the fundamental agreements reached in it are fair. This fact yields that name “justice as fairness.” It is clear, then, that I want to say that one conception of justice is more reasonable than another, or justifiable with respect to it, if rational persons in the initial situation would choose its principles over those of the other for the role of justice. Conceptions of justice are to be ranked by their acceptability to persons so circumstanced. Understood in this way the question of justification is settled by working out a problem of deliberation: we have to ascertain which principles it would be rational to adopt given the contractual situation. This connects the theory of justice with the theory of rational choice. If this view of the problem of justification is to succeed, we must, of course, describe in some detail the nature of this choice problem. A problem of rational decision has a definite answer only if we know the beliefs and interests of the parties, their relations with respect to one another, the alternatives between which they are to choose, the procedure whereby they make up their minds, and so on. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20
As the circumstances are presented in different ways, correspondingly different principles are accepted. The concept of the original position, as I shall refer to it, is that of the most philosophically favoured interpretation of this initial choice situation for the purposes of a theory of justice. However, how are we to decide what is the most favoured interpretation? I assume, for one thing, that there is a broad measure of agreement that principles of justice should be chosen under certain conditions. To justify a particular description of the initial situation one shows that is incorporates these commonly shared presumptions. One argues from widely accepted but weak premises to more specific conclusions. Each of the presumptions should by itself be natural and plausible; some of them may seem innocuous or even trivial. The aim of the contract approach is to establish that taken together they impose significant bounds on acceptable principles of justice. The ideal outcome would be that these conditions determine a unique set of principles; but I shall be satisfied if they suffice to rank the main traditional conceptions of social justice. One should not be misled, then, by the somewhat unusual conditions which characterize the original position. The idea here is simply to make vivid to ourselves the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for principles of justice, and therefore on these principles themselves. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20
Thus it seems reasonable and generally acceptable that no one should be advantaged or disadvantaged by natural fortune or social circumstances in the choice of principles. It also seems widely agreed that it should be impossible to tailor principles to the circumstances of one’s own case. We should ensure further that particular inclinations and aspirations, and persons’ conceptions of their good do not affect the principles adopted. The aim is to rule out those principles that it would be rational to propose for acceptance, however little the chance of success, only if one knew certain things that are irrelevant from the standpoint of justice. For example, if a one knew that one was wealthy, one might find it rational to advance the principle that various taxes for welfare measures be counted unjust; if one knew that one was poor, one would most likely propose the contrary principle. To represent the desired restrictions one imagines a situation in which everyone is deprived of this sort of information. One excludes the knowledge of those contingencies which sets humans at odds and allows the to be guided by their prejudices. In this manner the veil of ignorance is arrived at in a natural way. If we keep in mind the constraints on arguments that it is meant to express, this concept should cause no difficulty. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20
At any time we can enter the original position, so to speak, simply by following a certain procedure, namely, by arguing for principles of justice in accordance with these restrictions. It seems reasonable to suppose that the parties in the original positions are equal. That is, all have the same rights in the procedure for choosing principles; each can make proposals, submit reasons for their acceptance, and so on. Obviously the purpose of these conditions is to represent equality between human beings as moral persons, as creatures having a conception of their good and capable of a sense of justice. The basis of equality is taken to be similarity in these two respects. Systems of ends are not ranked in value; and each human is presumed to have the requisite ability to understand and to act upon whatever principles are adopted. Together with the veil of ignorance, these conditions define the principles of justice as those which rational persons concerned to advance their interests would consent to as equals when none are known to be advantaged or disadvantage by social and natural contingencies. There is, however, another side to justifying a particular description of the original position. This is to see if the principles which would be chosen match our considered convictions of justice or extend them in an acceptable way. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20
We can note whether applying these principles would lead us to make the same judgments about the basic structure of society which we now make intuitively and in which we have the greatest confidence; or whether, in cases where our present judgements are in doubt and given with hesitation, these principles offer a resolution which we can affirm on reflection. There are questions which we feel sure must be answered in a certain way. For example, we are confident that religious intolerance and racial discrimination are unjust. We think that we have examined these things with care and have reached what we believe is an impartial judgment not likely to be distorted by an excessive attention to our own interests. These convictions are provisional fixed points which we presume any conception of justice must fit. However, we have much less assurance as to what is the correct distribution of wealth and authority. Here we may be looking for a way to remove our doubts. We can check an interpretation of the initial situation, then, by the capacity of its principles to accommodate our firmest convictions and to provide guidance where guided is needed. In searching for the most favoured description of this situation we work from both ends. We begin by describing it so that it represents generally shared and preferably weak conditions. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20
We then see if these conditions are strong enough to yield a significant set of principles. If not, we look for further premises equally reasonable. However, if so, and these principles match our considered convictions of justice, then so far well and good. However, presumably there will be discrepancies. In this case we have a choice. We can either modify the account of the initial situation or we can revise our existing judgments, for even the judgments we take provisionally as fixed points are liable to revision. By going back and forth, sometimes altering the conditions of the contractual circumstances, at others withdrawing our judgments and conforming them to principle, I assume that eventually we shall find a description of the initial situation that both expresses reasonable conditions and yields principles which match our considered judgments duly pruned and adjusted. This state of affairs I refer to as reflective equilibrium. It is an equilibrium because at last our principles and judgments coincide; and it is reflective since we known to what principles our judgments conform and the premises of their derivation. At the moment everything is in order. However, this equilibrium is not necessarily stable. It is liable to be upset by further examination of the conditions which should be imposed on the contractual situation and by particular cases which may lead us to revise our judgments. #RandolphHarris 9 of 20
Yet for the time being we have done what we can to render coherent and to justify our convictions of social justice. We have reached a conception of the original position. I shall not, of course, actually work through this process. Still, we may think of the interpretation of the original position that I shall present as the result of such a hypothetical course of reflection. It represents the attempt to accommodate within one scheme both reasonable philosophical conditions on principles as well as our considered judgments of justice. In arriving at the favoured interpretation of the initial situation there is no point at which an appeal is made to self-evidence in the traditional sense either or general conceptions or particular convictions. I do not claim for the principles of justice proposed that they are necessary truths or derivable from such truths. A conception of justice cannot be deduced from self-evident premises or conditions on principles; instead, its justification is a matter of the mutual support of many considerations, of everything fitting together into one coherent view. We shall want to say that certain principles of justice are justified because they would be agreed to in an initial situation of equality. I have emphasized that this original position is purely hypothetical. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20
It is natural to ask why, if this agreement is never actually entered into, we should take any interest in these principles, moral or otherwise. The conditions embodied in the description of the original position are ones that we do in fact accept. Or if we do not, then perhaps we can be persuaded to do so by philosophical reflection. Each aspect of the contractual situation can be given supporting grounds. Thus what we shall do is to collect together into one conception a number of conditions on principles that we are ready upon due consideration to recognize as reasonable. These constraints express what we are prepared to regard as limits on fair terms of social cooperation. One way to look at the idea of the original position, therefore, is to see it as an expository device which sums up the meaning of these conditions and helps us to extract their consequences. On the other hand, this conception is also an intuitive notion that suggests its own elaboration, so that led on by it we are drawn to define more clearly the standpoint from which we can best interpret moral relationship We need a conception that enables us to envision our objective from afar: the intuitive notion of the original position is to do this for us. When I am your president, I hope you will come see me. Please do not leave me up there in the White House all by myself. I grew up watching PBS, and still watch it. For enlightened news coverage, tune in to PBS. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20
Love must be aggressively translated into simple justice. “Each one should use whatever gift one has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace in its various forms,” reports 1 Peter 4.10. Peter and Paul are saying the same thing. The spiritual gifts we have, and the ministries we perform are gifts of God’s grace. None of us deserves the gifts one has been given. They are given to us by God’s undeserved favour to us through Christ. This means the most “worthy” and the most “unworthy” of all Christians both receive their gifts and their ministries on the same basis. The “unworthy” person surely does not deserve one’s gift, but neither does the most “worthy.” They both receive them as unmerited favours from God. There are quotations marks around worthy and unworthy in above because in reality there is no such distinction in God’s sight. In His sight, we are all totally and permanently bankrupt spiritually. Paul’s statement, “There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3.22-23), is just as true for believers as for unbelievers. We never earn our privileges of ministry because of our heard work or faithfulness in previous service to God. I taught adult Saturday school for many years in a small church before God launched me into a much wider sphere of ministry. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20
However, I did not earn an enlarged ministry through my “faithful” teaching; rather, it was a gift of God’s grace. We are so accustomed to thinking of spiritual gifts in terms of abilities to minister that we lose sight of the ordinary meaning of the word. A gift is something given to us; something we do not earn. However, even our ordinary meaning fails to adequately convey the biblical sense. We tend to give gifts to people who, even though they have not earned them, in some sense deserve them because of their relationship to us or because they have done us a favour of some kind. However, God gives spiritual gifts to people who do not deserve them. None of us deserves to be in God’s service on some far away mission field. It is an awesome thing to attempt to speak on behalf of God. Yet that is exactly what we do when we teach, or preach, or write. It matters not whether our audience is one person or fifty thousand, whether they are kindergarten pupils or graduate theological students. Any time we say or write something that we hold out to be biblical truth, we are putting ourselves in the position of being God’s spokes-person. Peter said, “If anyone speaks, one should do it as one peaking the very words of God,” reports 1 Peter 4.11. I suspect that most people who these essays do teach the Scriptures occasionally if not regularly. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20
Do we appreciate the awesomeness of our responsibility, to be speaking on behalf of God? Do we consider the accountability that comes with being entrusted with the divine message? Paul himself was keenly conscious of his immense responsibility when he said, “Unlike so many, we do not peddle the word of God for profit. On the contrary, in Christ we speak before God with sincerity, like humans sent from God,” reports 2 Corinthians 2.17. He said he spoke like a human sent from God, but he also said he spoke before God, or in the sight of God. That is, God not only sent him, but observed him. One Saturday as I stood up to teach my adult Saturday school class, to my dismay, I realized the president of our denominational seminary was sitting in the class. To make matters more intense, he also happened to be the professor of homiletics (the art of preaching). I was sure he was critiquing everything I said, both in content and delivery. Now if the presence of a seminary president in my class was an awesome experience, how much more awed should I be when I realize I speak, or write, in the very presence of God and on His behalf. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20
What, then, will gives us the courage to undertake or continue to teach the Scriptures or, for that matter, to exercise any other spiritual gift? The heartfelt conviction that we have our ministry by God’s grace. Again, as Paul said, “Therefore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart,” reports 2 Corinthians 4.1. It was a sense of God’s mercy that gave Paul courage or, as he expressed it, caused him not to lose heart. Mercy is God’s grace expressed specifically toward people who are viewed by Him as guilty, condemned, and helpless. It is generally expressed in terms of relieving the misery due to their sin. However, God not only relieved Paul’s misery, He elevated him to the office of apostle and gave him the ministry of proclaiming the richest of Christ. However, Paul never lost sight of his own unworthiness, even when exercising his office of apostleship. He never forgot he held that office by God’s mercy. Here we see the biblical relationship between a sense of one’s utter unworthiness on the one hand, and the courage to undertake a ministry for God on the other. To lose sight of our unworthiness is to risk exercising our gifts and fulfilling our ministries in a spirit of presumptuous pride, as if God were fortunate to have us on His team. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20
However, to focus too much on our unworthiness, to the neglect of God’s grace, will effectively immobilize us for His service. That attitude is also an expression of pride because we are still focusing on ourselves and our worthiness or unworthiness, as if God were dependent on some innate quality within us to equip us for His service. Remember we did not declare temporary spiritual bankruptcy. Our bankruptcy is total and permanent. The only worthiness we have with which to come before God is in Christ. And the only worthiness we have to qualify us for ministry is in Christ. If we are to progress in any aspect of the Christian life, we must look outside ourselves and only to Christ. It is in Him that the grace of God is so abundantly poured out on us. God may be generous enough to accept us as we are, with our weaknesses and mistakes, but the law of Karma is above all human emotions, whether they be generous or ingenerous. It demands full payment and distributes to them the consequences of their actions. There is a strong similarity between this and law, irrevocably decreed in Heaven before the foundations of this World, upon which all blessings are predicated. We believe we are born where we should be, but that a just and loving Father in Heaven has decided where we can best perform in this mortal sphere of activity. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20
We believe we reap the rewards of our actions, but we also believe in the atonement of Jesus. Were it not for this merciful provision, we would be left with nearly the same doctrine as others who believe that karma cannot change. That is, we would be left to eternally pay the price of our sins. Christians are taught to be involved in the actions of others through doing good deeds and teaching the gospel. This is the doctrine of loving your neighbour as yourself. Spiritual insights surpass our mere powers of reason. We realize, however, that these moments of enlightenment are given to us by God through the power of the Holy Ghost and that we must study some things out for ourselves and then seek a spiritual confirmation. The gospel also teaches us to follow a wise, God-revealed health law. Physical care and conditioning have been taught since the early days of the Church. “Behold, now it came to pass that the king of the Lamanites sent a proclamation among all this people, that they should not lay their hands on Ammon, or Aaron, or Mmner, or Himni, nor either of their brethren who should go forth preaching the word of God, in whatsoever place they should be, in any part of their land. Yea, he sent a decree among them, that they should not lay their hands on them to bind them, or to cast them into prison. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20
“Neither should they spit upon them, nor smite them, nor cast them out of their synagogues, nor scourge them; neither should they cast stones at them, but that they should have free access to their houses, and also their temples, and their sanctuaries. And thus they might go forth and preach the word according to their desires, for the king as been converted unto the Lord, and all his household; therefore he sent his proclamation throughout the land unto his people, that the word of God might have no obstruction, but that it might go forth throughout the land unto his people, that the word of God might have no obstruction, but that it might go forth throughout all the land, that his people might be convinced concerning the wicked traditions of their fathers, and that they might be convinced that they might be convinced that they were all brethren and that they ought not to murder, nor to plunder, nor to steal, nor to commit adultery, nor commit any manner of wickedness. And now it came to pass that when the kind had sent forth this proclamation, that Aaron and his brethren went forth from city to city, and from one house of worship to another, establishing churches, and consecrating priests and teachers throughout the land among the Lamanites, to preach and to teach the word of God among them; and thus they began to have great success. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20
“And thousands were brought to the knowledge of the Lord, yea, thousands were brought to believe in the traditions of the Nephites; and they were taught the records and prophecies which were handed down even to the present time. And as sure as the Lord liveth, so sure as many as believed, or as many as were brought to the knowledge of the truth, through the preaching of Ammon and his brethren, according to the spirit of revelation and of prophecy, and the power of God working miracles in them—yea, I say unto you, as the Lord liveth, as many of the Lamanites as believed in their preaching, and were converted unto the Lord, never did fall away. For they became a righteous people; they did lay down the weapons of their rebellion, that they did not fight against God any more, neither against any of their brethren. Now, these are they who were converted unto the Lord: The people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Ishmael; and also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Middoni; and also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the city of Nephi; and also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Shemlon, and in the city of Lemuel, and in the city of Shimnilom. And these are the names of cities of the Lamanites which were converted unto the Lord; and these are they that laid down the weapons of their rebellion, yea, all their weapons of war; and they were all Lamanites. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20
“And the Amalekites were not converted, save only one; neither were any of the Amulonites; but they did harden their heart, and also the hearts of the Lamanites in that part of the land wheresoever they dwelt, yea and all their villages and all their cities. Therefore, we have named all the cities of the Lamanites in which they did repent and come to the knowledge of truth, and were converted. And now it came to pass that the king and those who were converted were desirous that they might be distinguished from their brethren; therefore the king consulted with Aaron and many of their priests, concerning the name that they should take upon them, that they might be distinguished. And it came to pass that they called their names Anti-Nephi-Lehies; and they were called by this name and were no more called Lamanites. And they began to be a very industrious people; yea, and they were friendly with the Nephite; therefore, they did open a correspondence with them, and the curse of God did no more follow them,” Alma 23.1-18. Our Lord Jesus Christ be near thee to defend thee, within thee to refresh thee, around thee to preserve thee, before three to guide thee, behind thee to justify thee, above thee to bless thee; Who liveth and reigneth, thank you for bestowing us with your grace. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20
Today’s blog features some inspiring houseplant ideas from plant and interior stylist @hiltoncarter! We are loving the unique decor hacks he has been featuring on his profile lately. Check it out at the link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/blog/
Bless us, O Lord, we welcome you in our house, and may you bless all that dwell in it, as we are graciously pleased to bless the house of Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; we dwell in the walls of an angel of light. As people enter our atmosphere, they feel the abundance of Jesus Christ residing. God gives us the dew of heaven, and the richness of Earth. Be glad for the peacemakers, and through the indulgence of grace bless the Earth with your presence.
God of the hearth, beat strong and pure in the heart of my home. Lord of the threshold, keep vigilant guard over the entrance of my home. Spirits of the land, keep watch throughout the yard of my home. God of the borders, stand ready to repulse all disorder from my home. #CresleighHomes
God is in His Heaven—All is Right with the World! Grow Old with Me Because the Best if Yet to Be!
Pro-tip 💡: Your #MillsStation Residence 4 dining room is the perfect spot for some succulents to call home. 🤩
Take a virtual tour of this floor plan on our website! Link in bio. https://cresleigh.com/mills-station/residence-4/
In early 1948, Emanuel D’amico rented a brownstone storefront at number 309 Court Street in the Brooklyn neighborhood of Carroll Gardens. Emanuel, a sea merchant from Palermo, Sicily, left his home some twenty years prior — one of the over 4 million Italians who immigrated to America seeking their fortune in the New World. He’d lost all he had in a failed Pasta Company endeavor and New York seemed his last chance to make things right. For a number of years he worked odd jobs and began a number of side ventures, but none were too successful. A number of years later, after sending for his wife under a U.S. sponsored amnesty program, the two reunited in Brooklyn and shortly after opened the doors to D’amico Foods.
D’amico Foods originally set their sights on coffee. In 1948, there were few cafes and most coffee consumed was mass produced, undrinkable swill. With an AJ Deer Royal Roaster, Emanuel became one of the first small batch, roast to order Brooklyn roasters. The max capacity of the machine was a mere 10 pounds, ensuring that all coffee which left D’amico Foods was fresh. He was revolutionary in his approach and developed quite a following amongst the Italian immigrant population in Carroll Gardens. With each batch Emanuel pulled, the rich aroma of fresh roasted coffee spilled out into the neighborhood.
Randolph Harris II International Institute 