Home » London (Page 16)
Category Archives: London
One Feels the Presence within One of the Mysterious Entity which is One’s Soul!
How to gain, how to keep, how to recover happiness, is in fact for most humans at all times the secret motive of all they do, and of all they are willing to endure. Emotional expressions, or outward signs of what a person is feeling, are another major element of emotion. For example, when you are intensely afraid, your hands tremble, your face contorts, and your posture becomes tense and defensive. Emotion is also revealed by marked shifts in voice tone or modulation. Such expressions are important because they communicate emotion from one person to another. Emotional feelings (a person’s private emotional experience) are a final major element of emotion. This is the part of emotion with which we are usually most familiar. Happiness—that delicious feeling of well-being and joy. What does it mean for our lives? How can we attain it? Have you noticed how your state of happiness or unhappiness colours everything else? Researchers have found that when we are in a happy mood, we see the World as friendly and nonthreatening. We make decisions easily. We recall the good times and forget the bad. Let our mood turn gloomy and soon enough we will find reasons for it: our relationships, our-self-image, and our prospects for the future suddenly seem depressing. What is more, happy people are helpful people. In experiments, those who have a mood-boosting experience become more generous and compassionate. If made to feel successful and intelligent, they are more likely to volunteer as a tutor. If they have just found some money in a phone booth, they are more likely to help someone pick up dropped papers. If they have just had a great day at work, they are more willing to loan someone money. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20
So, being in a good mood triggers happy thoughts and memories and predisposes us to spread happiness to others. How, then, can we find happiness? Well, first of all, when faces with severe adversity or loss, being depressed is a normal and appropriate response. However, sometimes people react even to little problems by doubting and disparaging themselves. Their negative mood now triggers more negative thoughts: “I am no good,” “People do not like me,” “No one appreciates the work I do.” And the withdrawal and complaining that accompany such thoughts irritate others, which further worsens the unhappy person’s predicament. To break this vicious cycle of misery, psychologists often advise people to work at reversing their negative thinking. Keep a diary of daily successes, noting what you did to make them possible. Make negative self-talk more optimistic: not “I will never get this done,” but “One step at a time—I can handle it.” Or keep a gratitude journal. Those who pause each day to write down some optimistic aspects of their lives—perhaps their health, their friends, their family, their freedom, or even just their savouring the wonders of their senses—experience heightened well-being. Forcing ourselves also to act in more beneficial ways—offering a compliment, asserting ourselves—can help, too. When we act as if we are happy and confident, we may become more so. Silly as it may seem, even a smiling expression can sometimes break the cycle of misery. Try it. Make yourself smile. Can you feel the difference? The participants in dozens of recent experiments could feel the differences. When induced to make a frowning expression while electrodes were attached to their faces—“pull your brows together, please,” the researchers might instruct—the people reported feeling a little angry, and their heart rates and skin temperatures actually went up slightly (as if they really were “hot under the collar”). #RandolphHarris 2 of 20

Those induced to smile felt happier and found cartoons more humorous. When we put on a happy face, our outlook seems to brighten. A famous author, on calculating the goods and evils of human life and comparing the two sums, has found that the latter greatly exceeded the former, and that, all things considered, life was a pretty poor present for humans. I am not surprised by his conclusion; he has drawn all of his arguments from the constitution of civil humans. Had he gone back as far as natural man, the judgement can be made that he would have found very different results, that he would have realized that man has scarcely any evils other than those he has given himself, and that nature would have been justified. It is not without trouble that we have managed to make ourselves so unhappy. When, on the one hand, one considers the immense labours of humans, so many sciences searched into, so many arts invented, and so many forces employed, abysses filled up, mountains razed, rocks broken, rivers made navigable, lands cleared, lakes dug, marshes drained, enormous buildings raised upon the Earth, the sea covered with ships and sailors; and when on the other hand, one searches with a little meditation for the true advantages that have resulted from all this for the happiness of the human species, one cannot help being struck by the astonishing disproportion that obtains between these things, and to deplore man’s blindness, which, to feed his foolish pride and who knows what vain sense of self-importance, makes one run ardently after all the miseries to which he is susceptible, and which beneficent nature has taken pains to keep from him. Men are wicked; a sad and continual experience dispenses us from having to prove it. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20

Nevertheless, man is naturally good; I believe I have demonstrated it. What therefore can have depraved him to this degree, if not the changes that have befallen his constitution, the progress he has made, and the sorts of knowledge he has acquired? Let human society be admired as much as one wants; it will be no less true for it that necessarily brings humans to hate one another to the extent that their interests are at cross-purposes with one another, to render mutually to one another apparent services and in fact do every evil imaginable to one another. What is one to think of an interaction where the reason of each private individual dictates to one maxims directly contrary to those that public reason preaches to the body of society, and where each finds one’s profit in the misfortune of another? Perhaps there is not a wealth man whose death is not secretly hope for by greedy heirs and often by his own children; not a ship at sea whose wreck would not be good news for some merchant; not a firm that a debtor of bad faith would not wish to see burn with all the papers it contains; not a people that does not rejoice at the disasters of its neighbours. Thus it is that we find our advantage in the setbacks of our fellow-humans, and that one person’s loss almost always beings about another’s prosperity. However, what is even more dangerous is that public calamities are anticipated and hoped for by a multitude of private individuals. Sone want diseases, others death, others war, others famine. I have seen ghastly men weep with the sadness at the likely prospects of a fertile year. And the great and deadly fire of London, which cost the life or the goods of so many unfortunate people, made the fortunes of perhaps more than ten thousand people. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20

I know that Montaigne bales the Athenian Demades for having had a worker punished, who, by selling coffins at a high price, made a great deal from the death of the citizens. However, since the reason Montaigne proposes is that everyone would have to be punished, it is evident that it confirms my own. Let us therefore penetrate, through our frivolous demonstration of good will, to what happens at the bottom of our hearts; and let us reflect on what the state of things must be where all humans are forced to caress and destroy one another, and where they are born enemies by duty and crooks by interest. If someone answers me by claiming that society is constituted in such a manner that each human gains by serving others, I will reply that this would be very well and good, provided one did not gain still more by harming them. There is no profit, however legitimate, that is not surpassed by one that can be made illegitimately, and wrong done to a neighbour is always more lucrative than services. It is therefore no longer a question of anything but finding the means of being assured of impunity. And this is what the powerful spend all their forces on, and the weak all their ruses. Savage man, when he has eaten, is at peace with all nature, and the friend of all his fellow-men. Is it sometimes a question of one’s disputing over one’s mean? One never comes to blows without having first compared the difficulty of winning with that of finding one’s sustenance elsewhere. And since pride is not involved in the fight, it is ended by a few swings of the first. The victor eats; the vanquished is on one’s way to seek one’s fortune, and everything is pacified. However, for humans in society, these are quite different affairs. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20

It is first of all a question of providing for the necessary and then for the superfluous; next come delights, and then immense riches, and then subjects, and then slaves. One has not a moment’s respite. What is more singular is that the less natural and pressing the needs, the more the passions increase and, what is worse, the power to satisfy them; so that after long periods of prosperity, after having swallowed up many treasures and ruined many humans, my hero will end by butchering everything until he is the sole master of the Universe. Such in brief is the moral portrait, if not of human life, then at least of the secret pretensions of the heart of every civilized human. Compare, without prejudices, that state of civilized humans with that of savage humans and seek, if you can, how many new doors to suffering and death (other than their wickedness, their needs and their miseries) the former has opened. If you consider the emotional turmoil that consumes us, the violent passions that exhaust and desolate us, the excessive cause the former to die of their needs, and the latter of their excesses; if you call to mind the monstrous combinations of food, their pernicious seasonings, the corrupted foodstuffs, tainted drugs, the knavery of those who sell them, the errors of those who administer them, the poison of the vessels in which they are prepared; if you pay attention to the epidemic diseases engendered by the bad air among the multitudes of humans gathered together, to the illnesses occasioned by the effeminacy of our lifestyle, by the coming and going from the inside of our houses to the open air, the use of garments put on or taken off with too little precaution, and all the cares that our excessive sensuality has turned into necessary habit, the neglect or privation of which then costs us our life or health. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20

Furthermore, if you take into account fires and earthquakes, which, in consuming or turning upside down whole cities, cause their inhabitants to die by the thousands; in a word, if you unite the dangers that all these causes continually gather over our heads, you will realize how dearly nature makes us pay for the scorn we have down for the scorn we have down for its lessons. I will not repeat here what I have said elsewhere about war, but I wish that informed humans would, for once, want or dare to give the public the detail of the horrors that are committed in armies by provisions and hospital suppliers. One would see that their not too secret maneuvers, on account of which the most brilliant armies by provisions and hospital suppliers. One would see that their not too secret maneuvers, on account of which the most brilliant armies dissolve into less than nothing, cause more soldiers to perish than are cut down by enemy swords. Moreover, no less surprising is the calculation of the number of humans swallowed up by the sea every years, either by hunger, or scurvy, or pirates, or fire, or shipwrecks. It is clear that we must also put to the account of established property, and consequently to that of society, the assassinations, the poisonings, the highway robberies, and even the puishments of these crimes, punishments necessary to prevent greater ills, but which, costing the lives of two or more for the murder of one man, do not fail really to double the loss to the human species. How many are the shameful ways to prevent the birth of humans or to fool nature: either by those brutal and depraved tastes which insult its most charming work, tastes that neither savages nor animals ever knew, and that have arisen in civilized counties only as the result of a corrpt imagination. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20

Or by those secret abortions, worthy fruits of debauchery and vicious honour; or by the exposure or the murder of a multitude of infants, victims of the misery of their parents or of the barbarous shame of their mothers; or, finally by the mutilation of those unfortunates, part of whose existence and all of the brutal jealousy of a few humans: a mutilation which, in that last case, doubly outrages nature, both by the treatment received by those who suffer it and by the use to which they are destined. [But are there not a thousand more frequent and even more dangerous cases where paternal rights overtly offend humanity? How many talents are buried and inclinations are forced by the imprudent constraint of fathers! How many men would have distinguished themselves in a suitable station who die unhappy and dishonoured in another station for which they have no taste! How many happy but unequal marriages have been broken or disturbed, and how many chaste wives dishonoured by the order of conditions always in contradiction with that of nature! How many other bizarre unions formed by interests and disavowed by love and by reason! How many even honest and virtuous couples cause themselves torment because they were ill-matched! How many young and unhappy victims of their parent’s greed plunge into vice or pass their sorrowful days in tears, and moan in indissoluble chains which the heart rejects and which gold alone has formed! Happy sometimes are those who courage and even virtue them for life before a barbarous violence force them into crime or despair. For give me, father and mother for deplorable. I regrettably worsen your sorrows; but may they serve as an eternal and terrible example to whoever dares, in the name of nature, to violate the most scared of its rights! #RandolphHarris 8 of 20

If I have spoken only of those ill-formed relationships that are the result of our civil order, is one to think that those where love and sympathy have presided are themselves exempt from drawbacks?] What would happen if I were to undertake to show the human species attacked in its very source, and even in the most holy of all bounds, where one no longer dares to listen to nature until after having consulted fortune, and where, with civil disorder confounding virtues and vices, continence becomes a criminal precaution, and the refusal to give life to one’s fellow-human an act of humanity? However, without tearing away the veil that overs so many horrors, let us content ourselves with point out the evil, for which others must supply the remedy. Let us add to all this that quantity of unwholesome trades which shorten lives or destroy one’s health, such as work in mines, various jobs involving the processing of metals, minerals, and especially lead, copper, mercury, cobalt, arsenic, realgar; those other perilous trades which everyday cost the lives of a number of workers, some of them roofers, others carpenters, others masons, other working in quarries; let us bring all of these objects together, I say, and we will be able to see in the establishment and the perfection of societies the reasons for the diminution of the species, observed by more than one philosopher. Luxury, impossible to prevent among humans who are greedy for their own conveniences and for the esteem of others, soon completes the evil that societies have begun; and on the pretext of keeping the poor alive (which it was not necessary to do), luxury impoverishes everyone else, and sooner or later depopulates the state. #RandolphHarris 9 of 20

Luxury is a remedy far worse than the evil it means to cure; or rather it is itself the worst of all evils in any state, however, large or small it may be, and which, in order to feed the hordes of lackeys and wretches it has produced, crushes, and ruins the labourer and the citizen—like those scorching south winds that, by covering grass and greenery with devouring insects, take sustenance away from useful animals, and bring scarcity and death to all the places where they make themselves felt. From society and the luxury it engenders, arise the liberal and mechanical arts, commerce, letters, and all those useless things that make industry flourish, enriching and running states. The reason for this decay is quite simple. It is easy to see that agriculture, by its nature, must be the least lucrative of all the arts, because, with its product being of the most indispensable use to all humans, its price must be proportion to their usefulness, and that the most necessary must finally become the most neglected. From this it is clear what must be thought of the true advantages of industry and of the real effect that results from its progress. Such are the discernible causes of all the miseries into which opulence finally brings down the most admired nations. To the degree that industry and the arts expand and flourish, the scorned farmer, burdened with taxes necessary to maintain luxury and condemned to spend one’s life between toil and hunger, abandons one’s fields to go to the cities in search of the bread one ought to be carrying there. The more the capital cities strike the stupid eyes of the people as wonderful, the more it will be necessary to groan at the sight of countrysides abandoned, fields fallow, and main roads jammed with unhappy citizens who have become beggars or thieves, destined to end their misery one day on the rack or on a dung-heap. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20

Thus it is that the state, enriching itself on the one hand, weakens and depopulates itself on the other; and that the most powerful monarchies, after much labour to become opulent and deserted, end by becoming the prey of poor nations which succumb to the deadly temptation to invade them, and which enrich and enfeeble themselves in their turn, until they are themselves invaded and destroyed by others. Let someone deign to explain to us for once what could have produced those hordes of barbarians which for so many centuries have overrun Europe, Asia, and Africa. Was it to the industry of their arts, the wisdom of their laws, the excellence of their civil order that they owed that prodigious population? Would our learned one be so kind as to tell us why, far from multiplying to that degree, those ferocious and brutal humans, without enlightenment, without restraint, without education, did not all kill one another at every moment to argue with one another over food or game? Let them explain to us how these wretches even had the gall to look right in the eye such capable people as we were, with such fine military discipline, such fine codes, and such wise laws, and why, finally, after society was perfected in the countries of the north, and so many pains were taken there to teach humans their mutual duties and the air of living together agreeably and peaceably, nothing more is seen to come from them like those multitudes of humans it produced formerly. I am very much afraid that something, namely the arts, sciences, and laws, have been very wisely invented by humans as a salutary plague to prevent the excessive multiplication of the species, out of fear that this World, which is destined for us, might finally become too small for its inhabitants. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20

What then! Must we destroy societies, annihilate thine and mine, and return to live in the forests with bears?—a conclusion in the style of my adversaries, which I prefer to anticipate, rather than leave to them the shame of drawing it. Oh you, to whom the Heavenly voice has not made itself heard, and who recognize for your species no other destination except to end this brief life in peace; you who can leave in the midst of the cities your deadly acquisitions, your troubled minds, your corrupt hearts and your unbridled desires. Since it depends on you, retake your ancient and first innocence; go into the woods to lose sight and memory of the crimes of your contemporaries, and have no fear of cheapening your species in renouncing its enlightenment in order to renounce its vices. As for men like me, whose passions have forever destroyed their original simplicity, who can no longer feed on grasses and acorn[s], nor get by without laws and chiefs; those who were honoured in their first father with supernatural lessons; those who will see, in the intention of giving human actions from the beginning a morality they would not have acquired for a long time, the reason for a precept indifferent in itself and inexplicable in any other system; those, in a word, whoa re convinced that the divine voice called the entire human race to the enlightenment and the happiness of the celestial intelligences; all those latter ones will attempt, through the exercise of virtues they oblige themselves to practice while learning to know them, to merit the eternal reward that they ought to expect for them. They will respect the sacred bonds of the societies of which they are members; they will love their fellow-men and will serve them with all their power; they will scrupulously obey the laws and the men who are their authors and their ministers. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20

They will honour above all the good and wise princes who will know how to prevent, cure or palliate that pack of abuses and evils always ready to overpower us; they will animate the zeal of these worthy chiefs by showing them without fear or flattery the greatness of their task and the rigour of their duty. However, they will despise no less for it a constitution that can be maintained only with the help of so many respectable people, who are desired more often than they are obtained, and from which, despite all their care, always arise more real calamities than apparent advantages. Nevertheless, powerful forces are converging to promote the electronic cottage. The most immediately apparent is the economic trade-off between transportation and telecommunication. Most high-technology nations are now experiencing a transportation crisis, with mass transit systems strained to the breaking point, roads and highways clogged, parking spaces rare, pollution a serious problem, strikes and breakdowns almost routine, and costs skyrocketing. The escalating costs of commuting are borne by the individual workers. However, they are, of course, indirectly passed on to the employer in the form of higher wage costs, and to the consumer in higher prices. Jack Nilles and a team sponsored by the National Science Foundation have worked out both dollar and the energy savings that would flow from any substantial shift of white-collar jobs out of centralized offices. Instead of assuming the jobs would go into the homes of employees, the Nilles group used what might be termed a halfway-house model, assuming only that jobs would be dispersed into neighbourhood work centers closer to employee homes. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20

The implications of their findings are startling. On average, Americans travel an average of 32 miles a day to and from work. The higher up the managerial scale, the longer the commute, with top executives averaging 44 miles. All told, these workers drove 12.4 million miles each year to get to work, using up nearly a half-century’s worth of hours to do so. At 2021 prices, this costs about sixty cents per mile, or a total of $15,117,610.34—an amount borne indirectly by the company and its customers. Indeed, it was found that the company was paying its downtown workers $2,879.54 a year more than the going rate in the dispersed locations—in effect, a subsidy of transportation costs. It was also providing parking spaces and other costly services made necessary by the centralized location. If we now assume a secretary was earning in the neighbourhood of $55,375.86 a year, the elimination of commuting costs could have permitted the company to hire nearly 300 additional employees or, alternatively, to add a substantial amount of profits. The key question is: When will the cos of installing and operating telecommunications equipment fall below the present cost of commuting? While gasoline and other transport costs (including the costs of mass-transit alternatives to the auto) are soaring everywhere, the price of telecommunications is shrining spectacularly. Satellites slash the cost of long-distance transmission, bringing it so near the zero mark per signal that engineers now speak of “distance-independent” communications. Computer power has multiplied exponentially and prices have dropped so dramatically that engineers and investors alike are left gasping. With fiber optics and other new breakthrough technologies in the wings, it is clear that still further cost reductions lie ahead—per unit of memory, per processing step, and per signal transmitted. At some point the curves must cross. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20

However, these are not the only forces subtly moving us toward the geographical dispersal of production and, ultimately, the electronic cottage of the future. The Nilles team found that the average American urban commuter uses the gasoline equivalent of 64.6 kilowatts of energy to get back and forth to work each day. (The Los Angeles insurance employees burned 37.4 million kilowatts a year in commuting.) By contrast, it takes far less energy to move information. A typical computer terminal uses only 100 to 125 watts or less when it is in operation, and a phone line consumes only one watt or less while it is in use. Making certain assumptions about how much communications equipment would be needed, and how long it would operate, Nilles calculated that “the relative energy consumption advantage of telecommuting over commuting (id est, the ratio of commuting energy consumption to telecommuting consumption) is at least 29.1 when the private automobile is used; 11.1 when normally loaded mass transit is used; and 2.1 for 100 percent utilized mass transit systems.” Carried to their conclusion, these calculations showed that, even if as little as 12 o 14 percent of urban commuting is replaced by telecommuting, the United States of America would save approximately 75 million barrels of gasoline—and would thereby greatly reduce the need to import as much gasoline from abroad. The implications of that one fac for the U.S. balance of payments for Middle East politics might also be more than trivial. As gasoline prices and energy costs in general rise in the decades immediately ahead, both the dollar cost and energy cost of operating “smart” typewriters, telecopiers, the Internet, video calls, email, audio and video links, and computer desks will plummet, still further increasing the relative advantage of moving at least some production out of the large central workshop that dominated the Second Wave. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20

The dawning of the twentieth century saw a major social attack on the formality and excesses of the Victorian era. In architecture, this was reflected in the supplanting of the elaborate Victorian dwelling with the simpler rustic bungalow. The bungalow style stressed efficiency and simplicity. In spite of its name, the bungalow characteristically had a second floor housing a bathroom and all the bedrooms, and a full concrete-floored basement. Compared to the suburban homes of earlier decades, bungalows were generally smaller and constructed without formal features such as entrance halls or parlours. What they did have, however, was a high degree of comfort and convenience. Not unimportant for newlyweds, the bungalow was also a less expensive first home and thus had a particular appeal to young couples. From the standpoint of the housewife, suburban bungalows took far less time and energy to care for than the larger, but far less modern, homes of their mothers. The bungalows had all the technological advances of the day and included luxuries only available to the well-to-do a generation earlier. The homes were built with modern indoor, bathrooms, electric connections, gas connections for kitchen stoves, and central heating. For latter, you could have steam, hot-air, or hot-water systems. Individual wood- or coal-burning room heaters or stoves were no longer seen; they have been superseded by coal-fire central-heating systems. In some cases the furnaces were even automatic oil-fired units. The “fireplaces” in the 1920s bungalow living room was likely to be a faux fireplace with gas-fed logs. (During the 1990s gas-fired fireplaces again returned to favour.) New “scientific” labour-saving devices such as electric laundry machines, electric irons, electric vacuum cleaners, and even electric toasters all made middle-class women’s lives easier. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20

No longer did you have to daily strain yourself to feed wood or coal into the kitchen stove or room heaters. No longer did you have to have a washerwoman—or yourself—do the backbreaking work of heating water on the stove and then washing the clothes by hand in huge vats. For hot water you turned on the faucet; to wash the clothes you turned on the washing machine, which was now located in the bungalow’s concrete-floored, electric-lighted, and centrally heated basement. It is all but impossible for us today to imagine jus how much time and heavy physical labour was an everyday part of housekeeping prior o the modern era. The new labour-saving electric appliances and more efficient kitchen designs of the smaller bungalow-style suburban homes of the 1920s did more than reduce heavy labour around the home. They also contributed to the ongoing social revolution in women’s equality by providing middle-class women much more free time. The comparative efficiency of the new electric appliances removed some of the time-consuming drudgery from housekeeping and promoted the possibility of leisure time. Woman’s magazines of the day noted how many modern young women living in such suburban homes now had the “free time” to devote to social activities, charity work, or others activities. They might even have a career. The idea that it was possible to have both a home and a career first came into vogue for the middle-class at this time. Having a job outside the home was not the norm, but it now, theoretically, became an option. Middle-class ideology began to change so that a suburban woman’s working at a career or job was not automatically assumed to be the consequence of the early death of the male breadwinner. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20

“Modern” married middle-class women, even those with children, could have a career without automatically being considered negligent wives and mothers. This is not to suggest that the technology of the new housing determined family social and work patterns. Rather, it is to suggest that technological advances, by changing the nature of housework, made it easier for patterns of greater social equality between spouses to develop. A more recent development has been the assumption by adult family members of home repair and improvement activities that were previously done by hired male painters, plumbers, and carpenters. A “do-it-yourself” generation has grown up with the assumption that everything from kitchen cabinets to decks to new bathroom fixtures can be self-installed. TV ads show couples putting in a new ceiling fan or installing new countertops after viewing the hardware warehouse video on how to do it. On the beneficial side, there is a decreasing division between what appropriate men’s work and women’s work. On the negative side, home improvement activities decrease true leisure time. Nonetheless, labour costs all but necessitates that suburban couples who wish to upgrade their homes will do much of their own work. It is taken for granted that they themselves will do much of the work in building a rec room or adding a bedroom. In this respect, the contemporary family unit has a commonalty with early American families, who were expected to physically contribute to the construction and maintenance of their dwellings. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20

One thing you should concentrate on is desire, in fact, your alarming number of desires. You should make them conform to My pleasure. That is to say, you should not prefer your own will to Mine, as the Great Matthew recorded in the Lord’s Prayer in his Gospel (6.10); you should fall all over yourself to put My will first in your life. Why? Desires, I have noticed, often rouse you to act before you think. That is nice, but I think you should consider whether you are acting for our mutually agreed upon alliance or just for your own dalliance. If, however, I am the over cause, you will be happy enough, no matter how much I bang you about. However, if you have some covert initiative, something you do not want to reveal to Me, watch your step. It will trip you up and weigh you down. A few things to beware of. First, do not lean too much on these subcutaneous, subterranean desires of yours. Consult Me first. If you do not, it will make you suffer a lot later. One hint. A desire may please you at first, but it does not satisfy for long. It can only lead you to another, seemingly better supposedly greater desire, which itself is just another one in an endless chain of self-devouring desires that can only lead you to spiritual ruin. Second, not every Friendly Affection has to be seized immediately. There can be an interval. Examine it closely. Use restraint. You do not want to distract your mind from your goodly and indeed Godly studies simply because a Friendly Affection suddenly presents itself. Third, not every Unfriendly Affection must be fled from right away. Again, let there be an interval. Instantaneous and negative reaction may result more in Vitus than Virtue. The last thing you want to do is engender scandal in those who look up to you. Worse, you will arouse those who look down upon you; they will whirl you about until your finally fly apart. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20

Fourth, sometimes you have to use strength, that is to say, to mount an assault against the Sensitive Appetite. The Flesh will make demands. Counter them; demand unconditional surrender—that was the way the pugnacious Paul handled the problem, or so he said in his First Letter to the Corinthians (9.27). Trouble erupts when the Flesh is unwilling to respond to the wishes of the Spirit. Alas, the Flesh has to be broken and bridled until it is willing to do everything that is required of it. That is to say, until it learns to be content with few things, delight in simple things, and overlook annoying things. My words are tied in one with the great mountains, with the great rocks, with the great trees, in one with my body and my heart. O Eternal, we beseech Thee, please save us now. Save Thy people, and bless Thine inheritance; nourish and sustain them forever. And may my words of supplication before the Lord be nigh unto the Lord our God, day and night, that He maintain the cause of His servant and the cause of His people America, as every day shall require; that all people of the Earth may know that the Lord is God; there is none else. Save us, we beseech Thee! For Thy sake, our God, do Thou save us. For Thy sake, our Creator, O save us. For Thy sake, our Redeemer, O save us. For Thy sake, O Thou who seekest us, save us, we beseech Thee. It is not merely feeing to which we give ourselves up, but being into which we settle. The conception alone of a peace which is out of this World is simply daring: its realization is utterly gorgeous in beauty and joyous in remembrance. Mostly as a result of prayer, but sometimes during an unexpected glimpse, a mystical experience of an unusual kind may develop. One feels transparent to the Overself; it light passes into and through one. One then finds that one’s ordinary condition was as if a thick wall surrounded one, devoid of windows and topped by a thick roof, a condition of imprisonment in limitation and ordinariness. However, now the walls turn to glass, their density is miraculously gone, one is not only open to the light streaming in but lets it pass on, irradiating the World around it. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20

Cresleigh Homes
We’re so excited to introduce the Havenwood Residence 1 model! This one comes with a covered patio, 3 bedrooms, and a den that can be converted to a fourth bedroom. The space in this single story home will FLOOR you! (pun intended! 🤣😅) https://cresleigh.com/havenwood/
Now selling! Cresleigh Havenwood is the newest Cresleigh community coming to Lincoln, CA. With four distinct floor plans to choose from ranging from 2,293 – 3,489 square feet offering up to five bedrooms, we are sure you’ll find your dream home here at Havenwood!
In a Nightmare of Supernatural Terror—Afraid to Move Hand or Foot II!

Immediately after I sat down…and did see a black thing jump into the window. And it came and stood just before my face. The body of it looked like a monkey, only the feet were like a cock’s feet with claws, and the face somewhat more like a man’s than a monkey’s. And I being greatly affrighted, not being able to speak or help myself by reason of fear, I suppose, so the thing spoke to me and said, “I am a messenger sent to you. For I understand you are troubled in mind, and if you will be ruled by me you shall want for nothing in this World.” I would have cried out—would have shrieked, if every never had not been paralyzed. I could not doubt the evidence of my sense—if I could have done so the cold, unearthy horror which sicked my very soul would have borne its undeniable testimony that I had behold the impersonation of the hidden curse that rested on this dwelling. I stood there rigid and immovable, as if that blighting Medusa-glance had indeed changed me into stone. It may have been but a very few minutes—it seemed to me a cycle of painful ages, when the light of a brightly burning lamp shone before me, and I heard the cheerful sounds of the new nurse’s voice in my ears: “Come along, cook. Bless your heart, my dear! you need not be nervous; there is no occasion. Mrs. Winchester, ma’am, are you not well, ma’am? “No,” I said faintly, staggering to the woman’s outstretched hands. “Not down there—upstairs to the children.” She turned as I bade her, and supported me up the stairs and into the nursery, the cook following close at my skirts, muttering fervent prayers and chants. #RandolphHarris 1 of 13

The sight of the peacefully sleeping little ones did far more to restore me than all the essences and chafing and unlacing which the two women busily administered. I had got suddenly ill when coming upstairs was the explanation I gave, which the cook, plainly perceived, most thoroughly doubted, at least without the cause she suspected being assigned, which, even in the midst of my terror-stricken condition, I refrained from giving, I did not speak to the nurse either of what had happened, but I felt that she knew as well as if she had been by my ide all the time. However, when William returned I told him. Distressed and alarmed on my account though he was, yet he did not, as before, refuse credence to my story. “We must leave the house, William. I should die here very soon,” I said. “Yes, Sarah; of course we must leave if you have anything to distress or terrify you in his manner, though it does seem absurd to be driven out of one’s house and home by a thing of this kind. Someone’s practical joke, or a trick prompted by malice against the owner of the property in order to lessen its value. I have heard of such things often.” “William, it is nothing of the kind,” I said earnestly; “you know it is not.” “No, I do not,” said William shortly and grimly, as he opened his case of revolvers, “and I wish I did.” The night passed away quietly, to our ears at least; but next morning when William had concluded the usual morning prayers, instead of the usual move of the servants, they remained clustered at the door, Jansen with an exceedingly elongated visage standing slightly in advance of the group as a spokesman. #RandolphHarris 2 of 13

“Please, sir and ma’am, we cannot tell you what to do.” “Why, go and do your work,” retorted William, with a nervous tug at his moustache and an uneasy glance at me. Jansen shook his head slowly. “It cannot be done, sir—cannot be done, ma’am. Why, no living Christian, not to speak of humble, but respectable servants,” said Jansen with a flourish, quite unconscious of the nice distinction he had made, “could stand it any longer.” “What is the matter, pray?” said my husband. “Ghosts, sir—spirits—unclean spirits,” said Charles, in an awestruck whisper which was re-echoed in the cook’s “Lor” “a” mercy!” as she dodged back from the doorway with the housemaid holding fast to one of her ample sleeves, and the lady’s maid holding fast to the other. The New nurse, quietly dandling the baby in her arms, was alone unmoved. “What stories have you been listening to now?” said their master, what a slight laugh and a frown. “No stories, sir; but what we have seen with our eyes and understanded with our ears, and—and—comprehended with our hearts,” said Jansen, with an unsuccessful attempt at quoting Scripture. “What was it as walked the floors last night between one and two, sir? What was it as talked and shrieked and run and raced? What was it as frightened the mistress on the stairs last evening?” And the whole posse of them turned to me, triumphantly awaiting my testimony. I was feeling very ill, and looking so, I daresay, having struggled downstairs in order to prevent the servants having any additional confirmation of their surmises. “That is no affair of yours,” said William gravely; “your mistress is in delicate health, and was feeling unwell all day.” #RandolphHarris 3 of 13

“Will you allow me to speak, please, sir?” said the nurse, and, as her maser nodded assent, she turned to the frightened group with a pleasant smile. “You have no cause to be afraid, cook, or Mr. Jensen, or any of you,” said she, addressing the most important functionary first—“not in the least. I am only a servant like the rest, and here a shorter time than any one; but I think you are very foolish to unsettle yourself in a good situation and frighten yourselves. You need not think they will harm you. Fear God and do your duty, and you need not mind wandering, poor, lonely souls—-” “Lor” “a” mercy! ‘ow you talk, Mrs. Lewis!” said the coo indignantly. “I have seen them more times than one—many and many a time, Mrs. Cook; and they never harmed a hair of my head,” said the nurse, “nor they will ever harm your.” “Well, then,” said the cook, packing into the hall, followed by her satellites, “not to be made Cleopatra, nor the Virgin Mary neither, would I stay to be frighted out of my seven senses, and made into a lunatic creature like poor Linda was!” “Please to make better omelettes for luncheon, cook, than you did yesterday,” said William calmly, though he looked pale and angry enough, “and leave me to deal with the ghost—I will settle accounts with them!” The nurse turned quickly and looked earnestly at him: “I would not say that, sir—God forbid,” said she in an undertone, and the next moment was singing softly and blithely as she carried the children away to their morning bath. William and I looked at each other in silence. “I wish we have never come into this house, dear,” I said. “I wish from my heart that we never had, Sarah,” he responded; “but we must manage to stay the season out, at all events. It would be too absurd to run away like frightened hares, not to speak of the expense and trouble we have gone through expanding the mansion to four floors with a nine-story tower.” #RandolphHarris 4 of 13

“We can may get it taken off our hands with a substantial loss, perhaps,” I suggested. “See the house-agent, William.” “I have seen him, but we have one of the largest, and most expansive estates in the country. No one can afford it,” he replied. “He deeply regretted that we should have any occasion to find fault, especially after our huge investment in expanding the estate, and it is not even completed yet. The agent also said he was happy to do anything in the way of clearing up this little mystery, et cetera. Of course he was laughing at me in his sleeve.” Again, as after our previous alarms, says passed on and lengthened into weeks in undisturbed quietude. William had a good many business matters to arrange; the children looked as rosy and healthy as in their country home, from their constant walking and playing in the airy, pleasant parks. My own health was not every good; and Dr. Winchester, William’s cousin, was kindest and wisest of grave, gentlemanly doctors; so, all thing considered, we stay at the Winchester mansion we have build into a 600 room Queen Anne Victorian mansion from an 18-room farmhouse. Only on my husband’s account, I wished for any change. Something seemed to affect his health strangely, although he never complained of anything beyond the usual lassitude and want of a tone which a gay Santa Clara season might be expected to bequeath him. He was sleepless, frequently depressed, nervous, and irritable; and still he vehemently declared he was quite well, and seemed almost annoyed when I urged him to put his business aside for the present and leave town. #RandolphHarris 5 of 13

He had been induced to enter into a large “Highly Finished Arms” promotion and sales of deluxe Winchesters, and had, besides, some heavy money matters to arrange, connected with his sister’s marriage settlements, which he expected would be required about Christmas. So, all things considered, he had some cause for feeling as haggard as he did. “It will be as well for William to leave Santa Clara, Mrs. Winchester, as soon as he can, said his cousin Dr. Winchester at the close of one of his pleasant “run-in” visits. “His nerves are shaky. We men get nervous nearly as often as the ladies, though we do not confess to the fact quite so openly. A little unstrung, you know—nothing more. A few weeks in sea or mountain air will quite brace him up again.” And as I dressed for dinner that evening, I determined that if wifely entreaties, and arguments, and authority, should not fail for the first time in our wedded life, William should have the sea or mountain air without another week’s delay; and, of course I determined, likewise, to back up entreaties, arguments, and authority with the prettiest dress I could put on. I cannot tell why wives, and young wives too, will neglect their personal appearance when “only one’s husband” is present. It is unpolitic, unbecoming, and unloving; and men and husbands do not like neglect—direct or implied, be sure of that, ladies—young, middle-aged, or old. “Your brown silk, ma’am?—it is rather cold this evening for that cream-coloured grenadine,” said Agnus, rustling at my wardrobe. “No, Agnus, I will not have that brown, I am tired of it,” I replied. If so happened that it was this dress which I had worn on the three occasions when I had been terrified by the strange occurrences in this house; and I had acquired a superstition aversion for this particular robe. #RandolphHarris 6 of 13

So Agnus arrayed me in a particularly charming demi-toilette of pale yellow silk grenadine and white lace; and I felt myself to be a most amiable and affectionate little wife, as I went downstairs to await William’s return for dinner. I never sat in my pretty dressing-room alone. Truth to tell, I disliked the apartment secretly and intensely, and only for fear of troubling and displeasing George I would have shut it up from the first evening I spent in it. He was late for dinner, and I was quite shocked to see how thin and ill he looked by the gas-light; and, as soon as it was concluded, and that by the assistance of excellent coffee and a vast amount of petting, I had coaxed him into his usual smiles and good-humour, I began my petition—that he would leave town for his own sake. He listened to me in silence, and then said, “Very well, Sarah, we will go as soon as we can board up the east wing; I suppose you may come back here. “Oh! yes, I think so,” I replied, “maybe someone attracted these bad spirits and we need to let things cool off again. We shall spend Winter in New Haven, in our dear old house, William.” “Very well,” he said wearily, “though you must know, Sarah, I am not going on account of this one thing. I would hardly quit my house, indeed, because of ghostly or bodily sights or sounds.” He started up from the couch on which he was lying, flushed and excited as he always was when the subject was mentioned, his eyes gleaming as brightly as the flashing scabbard which hung on the wall before him. #RandolphHarris 7 of 13

“Certainly not, dearest,” I said soothingly. “I wish I could solve the mystery,” he pursued, more excitedly; “I would make somebody suffer for it! One’s peace destroyed, and people terrified, and servants driven away, as if one was living in the dark ages, with some cursed necromancer next door!” “Oh! well, it is some time ago now, and the servants have got over their fright. Pray, do not distress yourself about it, dear William.” “Ah, well—you do not—never mind,” he muttered; “but I mean to have tangible evidence before ever I leave this house—I have sworn it!” He was not easily roused, and I felt both surprise and alar to see him so now, and for so inadequate a cause. I had almost fancied he had forgotten the matter, as we, by tacit consent, never alluded to it. “Do not you allow yourself to be alarmed, Sarah, that is all I care about,” he went on, pacing the floor. “I have been half mad with anxiety on your account, for fear those idiotic servants should manage to startle you to death some dark evening-cowards, every one of them; but I mean to have someone to stay here and sit up—-” He paused suddenly, and listened, then stepped noiselessly to the door, and opening it, listened again intently. “William,” I whispered. He took no heed of me; but rapidly unlocking a cabinet drawer, he drew out a thirty-shooter, loaded and capped, and with his finger on the trigger stole softly to the door and into the hall, whither I followed him. Everything was silent, and the hall and stairs lamps were burning clear and high. I could hear the throbbing of my own heart as I stood there watching. #RandolphHarris 8 of 13

Suddenly we both heard heavy rapid footsteps, seemingly overhead; and then confused noises, as of struggling, and quarrelling, and sobbing, mingled in a swelling clamour which sounded now near, deafeningly near, and then far, far away; now overhead, now beside us, now beneath, undistinguishable, indescribable, and unearthly. Then the rushing footsteps came nearer and nearer. And, clenching his teeth, while his face grew rigid and white in desperate resolve, William sprang up the staircase with a bound like a tiger. It has all passed in less than half the time I have taken to relate it, and while I yet stood breathless and with straining eyes, William had nearly reached the last step when I saw him stagger backwards, the thirty-shooter raised in his hand. There was a struggle, a rushing, swooping sound, two shots fired in rapid succession, a floating cloud of white smoke, through which I saw the streaming yellow hair and steel-blue eyes flash downward, and then a shriek rang out—the dreadful cry of a man in mortal terror—a crashing fall, beneath which the house trembled to its foundations, and I saw my husband’s body stretched before the conservatory door, whither he had toppled backwards—whether dead or dying I knew not. I remember dimly hearing my own voice in agonized screams, and the terror-stricken servants hurrying from the kitchens below. I remember the kind of face of my new nurse as she bravely rushed down and dispatched someone for the doctor, and made others help her to carry the senseless figure, with blood slowly dripping from the parted lips and staining the snowy linen shirt-front in great gouts and splashes, up to the chamber, where they laid him on his bed, and I, a wretched frenzied woman, knelt beside him with the sole, ceaseless prayer that brain or lips could form—“God help me!” #RandolphHarris 9 of 13

I remember the physician’s arrival, and the grave face and low clear voice of Dr. Winchester, as he made his enquiries; and then another physician summoned, and the low frightened voices, and peering frightened faces, and the lighted candles guttering away in currents of air form opening and shutting doors, and the long hours of night, and the cold grey dawning, the heart-rendering suspense, and speechless, tearless, wordless agony, and the sun rose, gloriously cloudless, smiling in radiance, as if there was not the shadow of death over the weary World beneath his rays, and I hear the verdict—“there was scarcely a hope.” However, God was merciful to me and to him, and my darling did not die. With a fevered brain and a shattered limb he lay there for weeks—lay there with the dark portals half opened to receive him; lay there, when I could no longer watch beside him, but lay prostrate and suffering in another apartment, tended by kind relatives and friends; but at length, when the mellow sunshine, and the crisp clear air of the soft shadowy October days stole into the sick room. William was able to be dressed and sit up for an hour or two amongst the pillows of his easy-chair by the window. And there he was, longing to be gone away from London. “Sarah, darling, weak or strong I must go,” he said in his trembling uncertain voice, and with a restless longing in his faded eyes, “I shall never get better in this house.” And so a few days afterwards, accompanied by the doctor and two nurses, we went down in a pleasant swift railroad journey to our dear, beautiful, peaceful home in New Haven. #RandolphHarris 10 of 13

William never spoke of that night of horror but once, when Dr. Winchester told of the story connected with the original 18-room farmhouse we purchased, which morphed into a labyrinth of endless room, twisting and winding tunnels, and catacombs. Thirty years before we bought the farmhouse, the man who was both proprietor and tenant of the estate died, leaving his two daughters all he possessed. He had been a bad man, led a bad wild life, and died in a fit brough on by drunkenness; and these two daughters, grown to womanhood, inherited with his ill-gotten fold his evil nature. They were only half-sisters, and were believed to have been illegitimate also. The elder, a tall, masculine, strongly built woman, with masses of coarse fair hair, and bright, glitter blue eyes; and the younger, a plump, dark-haired rather pretty girl, but as treacherous, vain, and bold, as her elder sister was fierce, passionate, and cruel. They lived in this house, with only their servants, for several years after their father’s death, a life of quarrelling and bickering, jealousy, witchcraft, and heart-burnings, on various accounts. The elder strobe to tyrannize over the younger, who repaid it by deceit and crafty selfishness and black magic. At length a lover came, who the elder sister favoured; whom she loved as fiercely and rashly as such wild untamed natures do; and by fiercely and rashly as such wild untamed natures do; and by falsehood and deep-laid treachery the younger sister cast a love spell on the man and won his fickle fancy from the great, harsh-featured, haughty, passionate elder one. The elder woman soon perceived it, and there were dreadful scenes between the two sisters, when the younger taunted the elder, and the elder cursed the younger. #RandolphHarris 11 of 13

However, as fate would have it, one night and at length—there had been a fiercer encounter of words than usual, and the dark-haired girl maddened her sister by insults, and the sudden information that she intended leaving the house in the morning, to stay with a relative until her marriage, which was to take place in one week from that time—the wronged woman, demon-possessed from that moment, waited in her dressing-room, until her sister entered, and then she sprang on her and screaming and struggling, they both wrested until they reached the staircase, where the younger sister, escaping for an instant, rushed wildly down, followed by her murderess, who overpowered her in spite of her frantic struggles, and with her strong, cruel, bony hands deliberately strangled her, until she lay a disfigured palpitating corpse at her feet. She had several scars that seemed as if they had been long there, and they were done by witchcraft. The officers of justice arrested the murderess a few hours afterwards. The jailers put irons on her legs (having received such a command). [It was the curious theory that chaining the prisoner would prevent her specter from afflicting anyone.] The weight of them was about eight pounds. These irons and her other afflictions soon brought her into convulsion fits so they thought she would die that night. She died by poison self-administered on the second day of her imprisonment. What is now known as the Winchester Mansion had been shut up and silent for many a year afterwards, and when, at length, and when, at length, an enterprising landlord put it in habitable order, and found tenants for it again, he only found them to lose them. #RandolphHarris 12 of 13

Year after year passes away, its evil fame darkening with its massive masonry, for none could be found to sanctify with the sacred name and pleasures of home that dwelling blighted by an abiding curse. “I never told you, Sarah,” William said, “although I told my cousin Dr. Winchester, that from the first evening I led a haunted life in that beautiful house, and the more I struggled to disbelieve the evidence of my senses, and to keep the knowledge from you, the more unbearable it became, until I felt myself going mad. I knew I was haunted, but will that last night I had never witnessed what I dreaded day and night to see. And then, Sarah, when I fired, and I saw the devilish murderess face, with its demon eyes blazing on me, and the tall unearthly figure hurrying down to meet me, dragging the other struggling, writhing figure, with her long sinewy fingers seemingly pressed around the convulsed face, then I knew it was all over with me. If there had been a flaming furnace beside me I think I should have leaped into it to escape that awful sight.” That was over a century ago. Sarah eventually returned to the Winchester all along and made several changes to it over 38 years. It is now a 4 story, 160-room mansion, with over 25,500 square feet, sitting on four acres. It was once up to 600 rooms, likely 95,625 square with as many as 737 acres. The strange thing about witchcraft and legends is many of them are based in truth, and sometimes there are unexplainable continuity errors. Take for example An hysterical fit, from J.M. Charcot, Lectures on the Disease of the Nervous System (London, 1877). Look at the extruded tongue, reported during the seventeenth century in witchcraft cases at Gordon, Boston, Salem, and elsewhere. Notice also the legs crossed in spasm; at one time Mary Warren’s legs could not be uncrossed without breaking them. #RandolphHarris 13 of 13

Winchester Mystery House
Happy mansion Monday from one of the most beautiful and bizarre mansions around!
Let’s have a mysterious Monday together! We’re open 10:00am-5:00pm
🗝 winchestermysteryhouse.com
And Some Would Sell their Souls to Marry a Millionaire!

Most of us are more concerned with esteem, love, or security. Perhaps this is because incentives and rewards in our society are slanted to encourage conformity, uniformity, and security in schools, jobs, and relationships. However, it is pretty hard to tell what does bring happiness. Poverty and wealth have both failed. Does money bring happiness? No, most of us would say. Ah, but would a little more money make us a little happier? Many of us smirk and nod. There is, we believe, some connection between fiscal fitness and feeling fantastic. Most of us tell Gallup that, yes, we would like to be rich. Three in four entering American collegians now consider it “very important” or “essential” that they become “very well off financially.” Money matters. It is the classic American dream: life, liberty, and the purchase of happiness. “Of course money buys happiness,” writes Andrew Tobias. Would not anyone be happier with the indulgences promised by the magazine sweepstakes: a forty-foot yacht, deluxe motor home, private housekeeper? Anyone who watched Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous knows as much. “Whoever said many can’t buy happiness isn’t spending it right,” proclaimed a Lexus ad. No wonder many people hunger to know the secrets of “the millionaire mind” and some would sell their souls to marry a millionaire. Well, are rich people happier? Researchers have found that in poor countries, such as Bangladesh, being relatively well off does make for greater well-being. We need food, rest, shelter, social contact. #RandolphHarris 1 of 18
However, a curious fact of life is that in countries where nearly everyone can afford life’s necessities, increasing affluence matters little beyond the short run. The correlation between income and happiness is “surprisingly weak,” observed the University of Michigan researcher Ronald Inglehart in one sixteen-nation study of 170,000 people. Once people are comfortable, more money provides diminishing returns. (Then why do they just not give it away to the poor or pay their employees better?) The second piece of pie, or the second $100,000, never tastes as good as the first, but with money comes status and power, so it is an inelastic good. Yet, even lottery winners, after adapting to their new wealth, and the Forbes’s 100 wealthiest Americas (when surveyed by the University of Illinois psychologist Ed Diener) have expressed only slightly greater happiness than the average American. Making it big brings temporary joy. However, in the long run wealth is like health: its utter absence can breed misery, but having it does not guarantee happiness. Happiness seems less a matter of getting what we want than of wanting what we have. Has our happiness, however, floated upward with the rising economic tide? Are we happier today than in 1940, when two out of five homes lacked a shower or tub? When heat often meant feeding wood or coal into a furnace? When 35 percent of homes had no toilet? Or consider that in 1957, when the economist John Galbraith was about to describe the United States of America as “the affluent society.” #RandolphHarris 2 of 18

Compared to 1957, we are now “the doubly affluent society”—with double what money buys. We now have twice as many cares per person. We eat out two and a half times as often. In the late 1950s, few Americans had dishwashers, clothes dryers, or air conditioning; today, most do. So, believing that a little more money would make us a little happier and that it is very important to be very well off are we indeed now—after nearly seven decades of fluctuating affluence–happier? Are we happier now—with espresso, caller ID, suitcases on wheels, and vaccines—than before? We are not. Since 1957, the number of Americans who say they are “very happy” has declined from 35 to 32 percent. Meanwhile, the divorce and teen suicide rates have doubled, the violent-crime rate have tripled (even after the recent decline), there is an immigration crisis, and more people than ever (especially teens and young adults) are depressed. This soaring wealth and shrinking spirit forms “the American paradox.” More than ever, Americans have big houses and broken homes, high incomes and low morale, apartments and no money for rent, cars and no gas money or insurance, unsecured rights and diminished civility, news and not much truth to it. We excel at making a living but often fail at making a life. We celebrate our prosperity but yearn for purpose. We cherish our freedoms but long for connection. In an age of plenty, we feel spiritual hunger. The radical individualism and materialism that marked the late twentieth-century America—what Garrison Keillor called our “elephantine vanity and greed,” or what Jesse O’Neill calls our “affluenza”—has afflicted other countries somewhat less. #RandolphHarris 3 of 18

Yet the paradox is not exclusively American. In Britain, for example, sharp increases in the percent of households with cars, central heating, and telephones have not been accompanied by increased happiness. These facts of life explode a bombshell underneath our society’s materialism: economic growth has provided no long-term boost to human morale. Moreover, individuals who strive most for wealth tend to experience less of a sense of well-being—a finding that “comes through very strongly in every culture I’ve looked at,” reports the University of Rochester psychologist Richard Ryan. His collaborator, Tim Kasser, concludes from their studies that those who instead strive for “intimacy, personal growth, and contribution to the community” experience a higher quality of life. Ryan and Kasser’s research echoes an earlier finding by H. W. Perkins. Among eight hundred college alumni surveyed, those with “Yuppie values”—those who preferred a high income and occupational success and prestige to having very close friends and a close marriage—were twice as likely and their former classmates to describe themselves as “fairly” or “very” unhappy. We know it, sort of. The Princeton sociologist Robert Wuthnow report that 89 percent of people say “our society is much too materialistic.” Other people are too materialist, that is. For 84 percent also wished they had more money, and 78 percent said it was “very or fairly important” to have “a beautiful home, a new care and other nice things.” #RandolphHarris 4 of 18

Two principles drive this psychology of consumption. The first is our human capacity for adaptation. Once we become adapted to a new level of affluence, it takes a higher high to rejoice the joy. I can recall the thrill of watching my family’s first Planar TVF Complete UHD4K 219 LED video wall solution. Now, if I misplace the remote control, I feel deprived. Having adapted upward, I perceive as negative what I once experienced as beneficial. Adaptation helps explain why, after a period of adaptation, lottery winners and paralyzed persons report roughly similar levels of happiness. It also explains why material wants can be insatiable—why many a child “needs” just one more feature on the BMW M3, they are satisfied with the Ultimate Driving, but also want it to come with the competition package which brings the grand total of the car up to $73,795 up from $70,895. Or why Imelda Marcos, surrounded by poverty while living in splendor as wife of the Philippines’ president, bought 1,060 pairs of shoes. When the victor belongs to the spoils and the possessor is possessed by possessions, adaptation level has run amok. (The phenomenon is, however, bidirectional: if forced to simplify our lives, we would eventually adapt and recover our normal mix of emotions. If another energy crisis curbs our “need” for gas-slurping sport utility vehicles, we would, after temporary feelings of deprivation, again adapt to more efficient cars.) The second principle is our penchant for social comparison. We are always comparing ourselves with others. And whether we feel good or bad depends on who those others are. #RandolphHarris 5 of 18

Only when others are smart or agile are we are slow-witted or clumsy. When one baseball player signs for $10 million a year, his $7-million-a-year teammate may now feel dissatisfied. Further feeding this “luxury fever” is our tendency to compare upward: as we climb the ladder of success or affluence we mostly compare ourselves with those who are at or above our current level. Upward comparison is not inevitable. Jus as comparing ourselves with those who are better off creates envy and consumerism, so comparing ourselves with those less well off boosts our contentment. (However, the danger with that is when something goes wrong, it is a real let down and one feels like their bad luck is a result of being prideful, boastful, and not humble.) In one study, even just imagining and then writing about various personal tragedies, such as being burned and disfigured, led the participants to express greater satisfaction with their own lives. “I cried because I had no shoes,” states a teen in Oakland, California; until I met a man who had no feet.” Moreover, one has to wonder, What is the point of luxury fever? “Why,” wondered the prophet Isaiah, “do you spend your money for that which is not bread, and your labour for that which does not satisfy?” What is the point of accumulating stacks of basketball shoes you will never wear, closets full of seldom-worn Gucci dresses, garages with Ultimate Diving Machines—all purchased in a vain quest for an elusive joy? And what is the point of leaving significant inherited wealth to one’s heirs, as if it could buy them happiness, when that wealth could do so much in a hurting World? (However, what is the point of feeding the World and leaving your own in a state of lack and limitations when they are your legacy?) #RandolphHarris 6 of 18

As social consciousness increases, more people are beginning to veer off the well-traveled road of materialism and individualism. A new American dream is taking shape, one that encourages initiative and restrains exploitation, thus building a more compassionate market economy that shrinks the underclass; welcomes children into families with parents who love them, and into an environment that nurtures families: protects both basic liberties and communal well-being, enabling diverse people to advance their common good in healthy surroundings; encourages close relationships within extended families and with supportive neighbours and caring friends—people who celebrate when you are born, care about you as you live, and miss you when you are gone; develops children’s capacities for empathy, self-discipline, and honesty; provides media that offers social scripts of kindness, civility, attachment, and faithful love; regards relationships as covenants and sexuality not as mere recreation but as life uniting and love renewing; takes care of the soul by developing a deeper spiritual awareness of a reality greater than self and of life’s resulting meaning, purpose, and hope. Harbingers of this renewal are already emerging, like crocuses blooming at winter’s end. People are beginning to understand the costs as well as the benefits of the unbridled pursuit of the classic American dream—individually achieved wealth. In increasing numbers, neigbourhoods are organizing, foundations are taking initiatives, youth are volunteering, scholars are discerning, faith-based institutions are tackling local problems, and civic-renewal organizations are emerging. #RandolphHarris 7 of 18

Government and corporate decision-makers are becoming more agreeable to family-supportive tax and benefit policies. The nonpartisan National Marriage Project aims to strengthen that state of our unions. And a new “positive psychology” movement aims to advance human happiness, strengthen character, and promote civic health. These various initiatives reflect a renewed appreciation for the importance of our human bonds. A new communitarian movement offers a “third way”—an alternative to the individualistic civil libertarianism of the left and the economic libertarianism of the right. It implores us, in the words of Martin Luther King Jr., “to choose between chaos and community,” to balance our needs for independence and attachment, liberty and civility, me-thinking and we-thinking. Fulfilling the new American dream need not return us to the impoverished past or destroy the incentives of a market economy. However, it will require our seasoning prosperity with purpose, capital with compassion, and enterprise with equity. Is it conceivable that there could occur such a transformation in consciousness—from materialism to postmaterialism and from radical individualism to more communal thinking? It has happened before (recall the civil rights, environmental, and women’s movements). And it could happen again. Hidden inside our advance to a new production system is a potential for social change so breathtaking in scope that few among us have been willing to face its meaning. To begin with, the shift from Second Wave manufacturing to the new, more advanced Third Wave manufacturing reduces, the number of workers who actually have to manipulate physical goods. #RandolphHarris 8 of 18
With less workers being needed to manipulate physical goods, this means that even in the manufacturing sector an increasing amount of work is being done that—given the right configuration of telecommunications and other equipment—could be accomplished anywhere, including one’s own living room. Nor is this just a science fiction fantasy. When Western Electric shifted from producing electromechanical switching equipment for the phone company to making electronic switching gear, the work force at its advanced manufacturing facility in northern Illinois was transformed. Before the changeover, production workers outnumbered white-collar and technical workers three to one. Today the ratio is one to one. This means that fully half of the 250,000 workers now handle information instead of things, and much of their work can be done at home. Dom Cuomo, former director of engineering at the Northern Illinois facility put it flatly: “If you include engineers, ten to twenty-five percent of what is done here could be done at homes with existing technology.” All told, in any industry, fully 35 to 50 percent of the entire work force in advanced manufacturing could even now could do most, if not all, their work at home, providing one chose to organize production that way. Third Wave manufacturing, Marx notwithstanding, does not require 100 percent of the work force to be concentrated in the workshop. Nor are such estimates found in electronic industries alone or in giant enterprises. The question now is not “How many can be permitted to work at home?” but rather, “How many have to work in the office or factory?” #RandolphHarris 9 of 18

In many industries, if provided the necessary communications technology, it has been discovered that fully 75 percent of employees would work at home. Clearly, what applies to electronics and pharmaceuticals also applies to other advanced industries. If significant numbers of employees in the manufacturing sector could be shifted to the home even now, then it is safe to say that a considerable slice of what the white-collar sector-where there are no materials to handle—could also make that transition. Indeed, an unmeasured but appreciable amount of work is already being done at home by people at several corporations because of the pandemic, from doctors and state workers, secretaries and even congress, designers and architects by phone visits, video calls, and only occasionally touching base at the office. Others include a burgeoning pool of specialized consultants in many industries; by large numbers of human-service workers like therapists or psychologist; by music teachers and language instructors; by art dealers, investment counselors, insurance agents, lawyers, and academic researchers; and by several other categories of white-collar, technical, and professional people. These are, moreover, among the most rapidly expanding work classification, and when we suddenly make available technologies that can place a low-cost “work station” in any home, providing it with a “smart” typewriter, mobile phone, Internet access, along with a facsimile machine and teleconferencing equipment, the possibilities for home work are radically extended. Given such equipment, who might be the first to make the transition from centralized work to the “electronic cottage”? #RandolphHarris 10 of 18

Whole it would be a mistake to underestimate the need for direct face-to-face contact in business, and all the subliminal and nonverbal communication that accompanies that contact, it is also true that certain tasks do not require much outside contact at all—or need it only intermittently. Thus “low-abstraction” office workers for the most part perform tasks—entering data, typing, retrieving, totaling columns of figures, preparing invoices, and the like—that require few, if any, direct face-to-face transactions. They could perhaps be most easily shifted into the electronic cottage. Many of the “ultrahigh-abstraction” workers-researchers, for example, and economists, policy formulators, organizational designers—require both high-density contact with peers and colleagues and times to work along. There are times when even deal-makers need to back off and do their “homework.” Future technology will increase the amount of “homework” significantly. Indeed, many companies are already relaxing their insistence that work be done in the office. When Weyerhaeuser, the great timer-products company, needed a new brochure on employee conduct not long ago, Vice-President R. L. Siegel and three of his staff members met at his home for almost a week until they had hammered out a draft. “We felt we needed to get out [of the office], to avoid the distractions,” says Siegel. “Working at home is consistent with our shift toward flexible hours,” he adds. “The important thing is getting your job done. It is incidental to us where you do it.” Weyerhaeuser is not alone. Even before the pandemic, many other companies were allowing their employees work at home. #RandolphHarris 11 of 18

Among one of the corporations letting its employees work at home, is United Airlines, whose director of public relations, at the time, allowed his staff people to write at home as much as 20 days a year. Even McDonald’s, whose lower-rung employees are needed to staff the hamburger grills, encourages home work among some top executive. Do you really need an office at all? Two-way communications capability has enhanced sufficiently to encourage a widespread practice of working at home. As information jobs proliferate and communications facilities improve, the number of people who may work at home or at local work centers will also increase. These corporate parks in suburban communities can be used for people from various corporations to meet in a central location and work on their assignments without comminuting to the congested central city. People will be more able to work at home, meeting their boss only periodically to talk over problems, and, of course to attend office parties. This may also allow the way suburban communities were built in the past to revert. When the model was the communities were built around corporations. And given the tools necessary, many of the present duties of the secretary could be done from home as well as in the office. Such a system would increase the labour pool by allowing married secretaries caring for small children at home to continue o work. There may be no overriding reason why a secretary could not just as well, in many instances, take dictation at home and type and text on a home terminal which produces a clean text at the author’s home or office. #RandolphHarris 12 of 18
Many of the tasks performed by engineers, drafters and other white-collar employees might be done from homes as readily as, or sometimes more readily than, from the office. Many part-time computer programmers already work in their own homes. As the Third Wave sweeps across society, we find more and more companies that can be described, in the words of one researcher, as nothing but “people huddled around a computer.” Put the computer in people’s homes, and they no longer need to huddle. Third Wave white-collar work, like Third Wave manufacturing, will not require 100 percent of the work force to be concentrated in the workshop. One should not underestimate the difficulties entailed in transferring work from its Second Wave locations in factory and office to its Third Wave location in the home. Problems of motivation and management, of corporate and social reorganization will make the shift both prolonged and, perhaps, painful. Nor can all communication be handled vicariously. Some jobs—especially those involving creative deal making, where each decision is nonroutine—require much face-to-face contact. We all need to be within a thousand feet of one another. The beginning of the twentieth century saw the earlier Victorian ideology of separate male and female spheres well on the way to being replaced by a newer Progressive household ideology. This ideology was not one of separateness, but one of shared domesticity. For those in the rising middle-class professions, the family, no just the mother and children, was now seen as the basic domestic unit. In practical terms this meant that husbands, as well as wives and children, were expected o share common time and space. This sharing was also encouraged by physical changes in the middle-class home. #RandolphHarris 13 of 18

Older Victorian homes had been divided by walls and doors into separate male rooms (the study) and female rooms (drawing and morning rooms). Drawing rooms, for example, were the rooms to which the women withdrew after dinner so men could have their port, cigars, and male conversation. (If the home were an elaborate one, the men might withdraw to smoking room or a billiard room.) Design of the rooms was to reflect their usage. Smoking rooms were to be heavy and masculine, while furniture in the drawing room was to be light, elegant, and “ladylike.” Regardless of its usage, each rom was heated by its own fireplace or stove, which encouraged designing a house with small rooms that could be closed off from unheated areas. Even central heating contributed to the success of the ideology of sharing space and activity. Central heating not only brought a new level of comfort, it helped change family patterns. Central heating and the removal of compartmentalizing walls meant that family members could now purse individual activities in common familial space. Here was an implicit acceptance that within the home, there was an interconnection between physical space and the moral environment. The social rationale was that open spaces promoted familial togetherness and communal activities. The larger family living room, in which all family members could gather, came to replace the parlour and reception rooms. Housing was being designed to be less gender-specific and to reduce gender segregation. More modern designed houses would produce more space for cohesive families to bond as a unit. #RandolphHarris 14 of 18

The modern suburban home, by encouraging familial activity, thus could ennoble those who inhabited it. Floor plans specifically were designed to strengthen family togetherness. In the middle-class house of a century and a quarter ago, father, mother, and children might still be doing separate activities, but they should all be gathered around the family hearth, not in separate partitioned rooms. Particularly in the evening, the family was expected to congregate informally in the living room. This image of living room family domesticity was widely portrayed in the homes advertisements as well as the women’s magazines of the day. It is also the picture of the “ideal” family publicized in the famous Dick and Jane elementary school readers. These readers, with their picture of father in his chair smoking his pipe, mother in her chair doing the sewing, and Dick and Jane playing on the rug with the cat, were still commonly in use until the 1960s. They provide the “official” middle-class view of proper family life. This image was echoed in the family-based TV shows of the 1950s and 1960s. (It might also be noted that following World War II, suburban homes underwent another physical metamorphosis. The living room grew smaller and took on more formal aspects of the earlier parlour. Everyday family activity and living now took place in a new, more informal, and specifically named, “family room.”). By the turn of the twentieth century, the new open floor plans and the idea of shared domesticity had achieved widespread acceptance. The living room, according to the early twentieth-century home magazines was the symbolic representation of family togetherness. #RandolphHarris 15 of 18

Frank Lloyd Wright would later claim the sole honour of removing the partitions and doors from first floors, but other architects were moving in the dame direction. Mr. Wright, however, did move further than others in removing segregated small spaces by making the whole first floor excepting the kitchen into essentially one large one. Family togetherness thus was not something invented after World War II and only found in postwar suburban housing developments. Over a century ago, shared domesticity or togetherness had already found suburban acceptance. By the beginning of the century, it already had been accepted by suburban men that males had a role in the home and men even had limited domestic duties and responsibilities for children, such as reading them bedtime stories. A suburban man’s place most evenings was at homes with his family rather than out with his clubmen or colleagues. There was, however, a limited sharing of domestic duties, rather than supporting early feminism, tended to blunt the power of feminist demands. It also should be noted that while the ideology of shared domesticity developed strong middle-class suburban roots, this ideology was not equally shared either by the very wealthy or by the working class. Both the rich and the urban working class continued to maintain sharper gender-defined roles both within their lives and within their homes. Upper-class men had their male club, and working-class men had the male-dominated saloon. By the 1920s the suburban ideal of the domestic family unit of father, mother, and children had become a mass-produced commodity. Home ownership had become part of the American middle-class ideology. #RandolphHarris 16 of 18
Having your own home, preferably in convenient suburb, meant that you had arrived and were part of the American Dream. Popular magazines such as Good Housekeeping and Ladies Home Journal constantly stressed the advantages of suburban environments for the proper rearing of children. The suburban home, not the city apartment, was touted as the place where small children would find a “normal” and “healthy” environment. Thus suburbs were where mothers could safely let children outside to play. One now moved to the suburbs “for the children’s sake.” Post-World War II versions of suburban domesticity as portrayed in TV shows such as Father Knows Best strongly reinforced traditional family patterns and values. In all this Christian Science teaching it is essential to note that the healer can utter these healing formulae, think these healing truths, either out of one’s intellect or out of one’s insight. In the first case one words and thoughts are merely like the map of a country. In the second case they are like an actual visit to the country. The first healer makes an unwarranted claim, does no see that one’s statements could be truly made only if one attained the stature and purity of Jesus. It is not enough that the patient should have faith; the healer oneself must have the requisite higher consciousness. For the divine power which actually effects the healing will not come from one’s ordinary self but out this higher one. Since other cults holding contradictory theories are also able to claim cures, and since there is a natural healing force in the body itself, the Christian Scientists should be cautious and realize that their own theory may be only partially and not wholly correct. #RandolphHarris 17 of 18

Whereas Christian Science denies the reality of the body and hence of the body’s ills, most other spiritual healing schools admit it. Whereas Christian Science nowhere speaks of man struggling upward through constant reincarnations on Earth to realize one’s highest possibilities, its most powerful rival—the Unity school of Christianity—proclaims this doctrine. Rudolf Steiner opposed psychic healing because, he said, it did not cure but merely drove the disease deeper inside, to reappear later in some other parts of the body. If the patient recovers, the system of healing—whether it be orthodox or unorthodox—gets the credit; but if he fails to recover, the system does not get the debit. The Vedantist and Christian Scientist who are determined to exclude the idea of the World-existence from their view, are nevertheless forced to yield and re-admit the exile when a simple toothache instructed them to the contrary. A cautious attitude to these cures may well find them to be the result of natural healing processes; they would have happened anyway. From bondage grim Thy power brought forth the pure, Thou, Gracious One, didst all their grief endure. So save Thou us! They passed between the deep divided sea; and with them for their guide, the light from Thee. So save Thou us! “He saved”: Thy stock with joyful singing told; then saved was He, who gave them birth of old. So save Thou us! “And I will bring you out,” the mandate said: “And I went out with you,” the mystics read. So save Thou us! Thy sons with circling step, (their guardian Thou!) Around Thine altar bore the will bough. So save Thou us! Thine Ark was won by marvels from the foe, Philistia, sinful, by Thy wrath laid low. So save Thou us! And with Thy banished throngs to Babylon journeyed in love Thy presence, Gracious One! So save Thou us! Helper of Jacob’s captive tribes of yore, return, and Jacobs exiled tents restore, and save Thou us! #RandolphHarris 18 of 18

MILLS STATION AT CRESLEIGH RANCH
Rancho Cordova, CA |
Now Selling!

Mills Station at Cresleigh Ranch is Rancho Cordova’s newest home community! This charming neighborhood offers an array of home types with eye catching architecture styles such as Mission, Mid-Century Modern, California Modern, and Contemporary Farmhouse.
Located off Douglas Road and Rancho Cordova Parkway, the residents of Cresleigh Ranch will enjoy, being just minutes from shopping, dining, and entertainment, and quick access to Highway 50 and Grant Line Road providing a direct route into Folsom. Residents here also benefit from no HOA fees, two community parks and the benefits of being a part of the highly-rated Elk Grove Unified School District. https://cresleigh.com/
A Smarter Environment Might Make Smarter People!

Diversity is important, and we must keep that in mind and even respect and welcome groups who may not be oppressed. Equality is not for one, it is for all! One of the dangers facing the World is the deterioration of the home and family. The family is one of the greatest institutions of civilization. Subversion of this great institution can do nothing less than bring destruction upon the World. The plan of life and salvation teaches that marriage is for time and eternity. They very purpose of life is that we might take upon ourselves morality, that we might prove ourselves to see if we will do the things that the Lord has commanded up. This is a glorious World in which we live. It was created by God through his only Begotten Son, with its Heavenly bodies and their functions. The Earth with its abundance of flowers, its adornment of beautiful tress and shrubs; the majestic mountains; the mighty blue oceans; the sun and its great functions; the starts and the amazing planets in the Heaven and Victorian architecture—yes, they are all the handiwork of God. All these things bid us have joy. Humans, however, are the greatest of all God’s creations. The Lord God told Moses: “This is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of humans,” reports Moses 1.39. The question, “Do miracles occur?” and the question, “Is the course of Nature absolutely uniform?” are the same question asked in two different ways. Hume, by sleight of hand, treats them as two different questions. He first answers “Yes,” to the question whether Nature is absolutely uniform: and then uses this “Yes” as a ground for answering, “No,” to the question, “Do miracles occur?” The single real question which he set out to answer is never discussed at all. He gets the answer to one form of the question by assuming the answer to one form of the same question. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23
Probabilities of the kind that Hume is concerned with hold inside the framework of an assumed Uniformity of Nature. When the question of miracles is raised, we are asking about the validity or perfection of the frame itself. No study of probabilities inside a given frame itself tells us how probable it is that the frame itself can be violated. Granted a school time-table with French on Tuesday morning at ten o’clock, it is really probable that Jones, who always skimps his French preparation, will be in trouble next Tuesday, and that he was in trouble on any previous Tuesday. However, what does this tell us about the probability of the time-table’s being altered? To find that out one must eavesdrop in the masters’ common-room. It is no use studying the time table. If we stick to Hume’s method, far from getting what he hoped (namely, the conclusions that all miracles are infinitely improbable) we get a complete deadlock. The only kind of probability he allows holds exclusively within the frame of uniformity. When uniformity is itself in question (and it is in question the moment we ask whether miracles occur) this kind of probability is suspended. And Hume knows no other. By his method, therefore, we cannot say that uniformity is either probable or improbable. We have impounded both uniformity and miracles in a sort of limbo where probability and improbability can never come. This result is equally disastrous for the scientist and the theologian; but along Hume’s lines there is nothing whatever to be done about it. Our only hope, then, will be to cast about for some quite different kind of probability. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23

Let us for the moment cease to ask what right we have to believe in the Uniformity of Nature, and ask why in fac humans do believe in it. I think the belief has three causes, two of which are irrational. In the first place we are creatures of habit. We expect new situations to resemble old ones. It is a tendency which we share with other terrestrial beings; one can see it working, often to very comic results, in our dogs and cats. In the second place, when we plan our actions, we have to leave out of account the theoretical possibility that Nature might not behave as usual to-morrow, because we can do nothing about it. It is not worth bothering about because no action can be taken to meet it. And what we habitually put out of our minds we soon forget. The picture of uniformity thus comes to dominate our minds without rival and we believe it. Both these causes are irrational and would be just as effective in building up a false belief as in building up a tree. However, I am convinced that there is a third cause. “In science,” said the late Sir Arthur Eddington, “we sometimes have convictions which we cherish but cannot justify; we are influenced by some innate sense of the fitness of things.” This may sound a perilously subjective and aesthetic criterion; but can one doubt that it is a principal source of our belief in Uniformity? A Universe in which unprecedented and unpredictable events were at every moment flung into Nature would not merely be inconvenient to us: it would be profoundly repugnant. We will not accept such a Universe on any terms whatever. It is utterly detestable to us. It shocks our “sense of the fitness of things.” #RandolphHarris 3 of 23

In advance of experience, in the teeth of many experiences, we are already enlisted on the side of uniformity. For of course science actually proceeds by concentrating not on the regularities of Nature but on her apparent irregularities. It is the apparent irregularity that prompts each new hypothesis. It does do because we refuse to acquiesce in irregularities: we never rest till we have formed and verified a hypothesis which enables us to say that they were not really irregularities at all. Nature as it comes to us looks at first like a mass of irregularities. The stove which lit all right yesterday will not light to-day; the water which was wholesome last year is poisonous this year. The whole mass of seemingly irregular experience could never have been turned into scientific knowledge at all unless from the very start we had brought to it a faith in uniformity which almost no number of disappointments can shake. This faith—the preference—is it a thing we can trust? Or is it only the way our minds happen to work? It is useless to say that it has hitherto always been confirmed by the event. That is no good unless you (at least silently) add, “And therefore always will be”: and you cannot add that unless you know already that our faith in uniformity is well grounded. And that is just what we are now asking. Does this sense of fitness of our correspond to anything in external reality? The answer depends on the Metaphysic one holds. If all that exists is Nature, the great mindless interlocking event, if our own deepest convictions are merely the by-products of an irrational process, then clearly there is not the slightest ground for supposing that out sense of fitness and our consequent faith in uniformity tells us anything about a reality external to ourselves. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23

Our convictions are simply a fact about us—like that colour of our hair. If Naturalism is true, we have no reason to trust our conviction that Nature is uniform. Only if quite a different Metaphysic is true, can it be trusted. If the deepest things in reality, the Fact which is the source of all other facthood, is a thing in some degree like ourselves—if it is a Rational Spirit and we derive our rational spirituality from It—then indeed our conviction can be trusted. Our repugnance to disorder is derived from Nature’s Creator and ours. The disorderly World which we cannot endure to believe in is the disorderly World He would not have endured to create. Our conviction that the time-table will not be perpetually or meaninglessly altered is sound because we have (in a sense) eavesdropped in the Masters’ common-room. The sciences logically require a metaphysic of this sort. Our greatest natural philosopher thinks it is also the metaphysic out of which they originally grew. Professor Whitehead points out that centuries of belief in a God who combined “the personal energy of God” with “the rationality of a Greek philosopher” first produced that firm expectation of systemic order which rendered possible the birther of modern science. Humans became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a Legislator. In most modern scientists this belief has died: it will be interesting to see how long their confidence in uniformity survives it. Two significant developments have already appeared—the hypothesis of a lawless sub-nature, and the surrender of the claim that science is true. We may be living nearer than we supposed to the end of the Scientific Age. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23

However, if we admit God, must we admit Miracle? Indeed, indeed, you have no security against it. That is the bargain. Theology says to you in effect, “Admit God and with Him the risk of a few miracles, and I in return will ratify your faith in uniformity as regards the overwhelming majority of events.” The philosophy which forbids you to make uniformity absolute is also the philosophy which offers you solid grounds for believing it to be general, to be almost absolute. The Being who threatens Nature’s claim to omnipotence confirms her in her lawful occasions. Give us this ha’porth of tar and we will save the ship. The alternative is really much worse. Try to make Nature absolute and you find that her uniformity is not even probable. By claiming too much, you get nothing. You get the deadlock, as in Hume. Theology offers you a working arrangement, which leaves the scientist free to continue one’s experiments and the Christian to continue one’s prayers. We have also, I suggest, found what we were looking for—a criterion whereby to judge the intrinsic probability of an alleged miracle. We must judge it by our “innate sense of fitness of things,” that same sense of fitness which led us to anticipate that the Universe would be orderly. I do not mean, of course, that we are to use this sense in deciding whether miracles in general are possible: we know that they are on philosophical grounds. Nor do I mean that a sense of fitness will do instead of close inquiry into the historical evidence. As I have repeatedly pointed out, the historical evidence cannot be estimated unless we have first estimated the intrinsic probability of the recorded event. It is in making that estimate as regards each story of the miraculous that our sense of fitness comes into play. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23

If in giving such weight to the sense of fitness I were doing anything new, I should feel rather nervous. In reality I am merely giving formal acknowledgement to a principle which is always used. Whatever humans may say, no one really thinks that the Christian doctrine of Resurrection is exactly on the same level with some pious title-tattle about how Mother Egaree Louise miraculously found her second best thimble by the assistance of St. Anthony. The religious and the irreligious are really quite agreed on the point. The whoop of delight with which the sceptic would unearth the story of the thimble, and the “rosy pudency” with which the Christian would keep it in the background, both tell the same tale. Even those who think all stories of miracles absurd think some very much more absurd than others: even those who believe them all (if anyone does) think that some require a specially robust faith. The criterion which both parties are actually using is that of fitness. More than half the disbelief in miracles that exists is based on a sense of their unfitness: a conviction (due, as I have argued, to false philosophy) that they are unsuitable to the dignity of God or Nature or else to the indignity and insignificance of humans. Although God can do all things, He cannot make a think that is corrupt not to have been corrupted. There does not fall under the scope of God’s omnipotence anything that implies a contradiction. Now that the past should not have been implies a contradiction. For as it implies a contradiction to say that Socrates is sitting, and not sitting, so does it to say that he sat, and did not sit. However, to say the he did sit is to say that it happened in the past. To say that he did not sit, is to say that it did not happen. Whence, that the past should not have been, does not come under the scope of divine power. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23

This is what Augustine means when he says (Contra Faust. xxix, 5): “Whosoever says, If God is almighty, let Him make what is done as if it were not done, does not see that this is to say: If God is almighty let Hum effect that what is true, by they very fact that it is true, be false.” And the Philosopher says (Ethic. vi, 2): “Of this one thing alone is God deprived—namely, to make undone the things that have been done. Although it is impossible accidentally for the past not to have been, if one considers the past thing itself, as, for instance, the running of Socrates; nevertheless, if the pas thing is considered as past, that it should not have been is impossible, not only in itself, but absolutely since it implies a contradiction. Thus, it is more impossible than the raising of the dead; in which there is nothing contradictory, because this is reckoned impossible in reference to some power, that is to say, some natural power; for such impossible thing do some beneath the scope of divine power. As God, in accordance with the perfection of the divine power, can do all things, and yet some things are not subject to His power, because they fall short of being possible; so, also, if we regard the immutability of the divine power, whatever God could do, He can do now. Some things, however, at one time were in the nature of possibility, whilst they were yet to be done, which now fall short of the nature of possibility, when they have been done. So is God said not to be able to do them, because they themselves cannot be done. God can remove all corruption of the mind and body from a woman who has fallen; but the fact she has been corrupt cannot be removed from her; as also is it impossible that the fact of having sinned or having lost charity thereby removed from the sinner. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23

In altering the info-sphere so profoundly, we are destined to transform our own minds as well—the way we think about our problems, the way we synthesize information, the way we anticipate the consequences of our own actions. We are likely to change the role of literacy in our lives. We may even alter our own brain chemistry. Hald’s comment about the ability of computers and chip-studded appliance to converse with us is not as blue-sky as it might seem. “Voice data entry” terminals in existence today almost feel at home with natural language, even thought they are not yet able to detect emotion or context, but forecasts for when this might happen range upwards of twenty years down to a mere five years, and the implications of this development—on both the economy and the culture—could be tremendous. Today millions of people are excluded from the job market because they are functionally illiterate. Even the simplest jobs demand people capable of reading forms, on-off buttons, paychecks, job instructions, and the like. In the Second Wave World the ability to read was the most element skill required by the hiring office. Pretty soon people will have to know how to write computer programs and repair computers to enhance their employment opportunities. It only makes sense. Learning a second or third language does give over a competitive advantage over the next applicant, but if one could also learn the language of computer programming and repair, that would be a huge advantage in the age of information. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23
Still, illiteracy is not the same as stupidity. We know that illiterate people the World over are capable of mastering highly sophisticated kills in activities as diverse as agriculture, construction, hunting, and music. Many illiterates have prodigious memories and can speak several languages fluently—something most university-educated Americans cannot do. In Second Wave societies, however, illiterates were economically doomed. Literacy, of course, is more than a job skill. It is the doorway to a fantastic Universe of imagination and pleasure. Yet in an intelligent environment, when machines, appliances, and even walls are programmed to speak, literacy could turn out to be less paycheck-linked than it has been for the past three hundred years. Airline reservation clerks, stock-room personnel, machine operators, and repair people may be able to function quite adequately on the job by listening rather than reading, as a voice from the machine tell them, step by step, what to do next or how to replace a broken par. Computers are not superhuman. They need repair and rest. They make errors—sometimes dangerous ones. There is nothing magical about them, and they are assuredly not “spirits” or “souls” in our environment. Yet with all these qualifications, they remain among the most amazing and unsettling of human achievements, for they enhance our mind-power as Second Wave technology enhanced our muscle-power, and we do not know where our own minds will ultimately lead us. As we grow more familiar with the intelligent environment, and learn to converse with it from the time we leave the cradle, we will begin to use computers with a grace and naturalness that is hard for us to imagine today. And they will help all of us—not just a few “super-technocrats”—to think more deeply about ourselves and the World. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23

Today, when a problem arises, we immediately seek to discover its causes. However, until now even the most profound thinkers have usually attempted to explain things in terms of a relative handful of causal forces. For even the best human mind finds it difficult to entertain, let alone manipulate, more than a few variables at a time. (While we may deal with many factors simultaneously on a subconscious or intuitive level, systematic, conscious thinking about a great many variables is damnably difficult, as anyone who has tried it knows.) In consequence, when faced with a truly complicated problem—like why a child is delinquent, or why inflation ravages an economy, or how urbanization affects the ecology of a nearby river—we tend to focus on two or three factors and to ignore many others that may, singly or collectively, be far more important. Worse yet, each group of experts typically insists on the primal importance of “its own” causes, to the exclusion of others. Faced with the staggering problems of urban decay, the Housing Expert traces it to congestion and a declining housing stock; the Transportation Expert points to the lack of mass transit; the Welfare Expert shows the inadequacy of budgets for day-care centers or social work; the Crime Expert points a finger at the infrequency of police patrols; the Economic Expert shows that high taxes are discouraging business investment; and so on. Everyone high-mindedly agrees that all these problems are somehow interconnected—that they form a self-reinforcing system. However, no one can keep the many complexities in mind while trying to think through a solution to the problem. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23

Urban decay is only one of a larger number of what Peter Ritner, in The Society of Space, once felicitously termed “weave problems.” He warned that we would increasingly face crises that were “not susceptible to ‘cause and effect analysis” but would require ‘mutual dependence analysis’; not composed of easily detachable elements but of hundreds of cooperating influences from dozens of independent, overlapping sources.” Because it can remember and interrelate large numbers of causal forces, the computer can help us cope with such problems at a deeper than customary level. It can sift vast masses of data to find subtle patterns. It can help assemble “blips” into larger, more meaningful wholes. Given a set of assumptions or a model, it can trace out the consequences of alternative decisions, and do it more systematically and completely than any individual normally could. It can even suggest imaginative solutions to certain problems by identifying novel or hitherto unnoticed relationships among people and resources. Human intelligence, imagination, and intuition will continue in the foreseeable decades to be far more important than the machine. Nevertheless, computers can be expected to deepen the entire culture’s view of causality, heightening our understanding of the interrelatedness of things, and helping us to synthesize meaningful “wholes” out of he disconnected data whirling around us. The computer is one antidote to blip culture. At the same time, the intelligent environment may eventually begin to change not merely the way we analyze problems and integrate information, but even the chemistry of our brains. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23

Experiments by David Krech, Marian Diamond, Mark Rosenzweig, and Edward Bennett, among others, have down that animals exposed to an “enriched” environment have larger cerebral cortices, more glial cells, bigger neurons, more active neurotransmitters, and larger blood supplies to the brain than animals in a control group. Can it be that, as we complexify the environment and make it more intelligent, we shall make ourselves more intelligent as well? Dr. Donald F. Klein, Director of Research at New York Psychiatric Institute, one of the World’s leading neuropsychiatrists, speculates: “Krech’s work suggests that among the variable affecting intelligence is the richness and responsiveness of the early environment—understimulating, poor, unresponsive—coon learn not to take chances. There is little margin for error, and it actually pays off to be cautious, conservative, uninquisitive or downright passive, none of which works wonders for the brain. On the other hand, kids raised in a smart, responsive environment, which is complex and stimulating, may develop a different set of skills. If kids can call on the environment to do things for them, they become less dependent on parents at a younger age. They may gain a sense of mastery or competence. And they can afford to be inquisitive, exploratory, imaginative, and to adopt a problem-solving approach to life. All of which may promote changes in the brain itself. At this point, all we can do is guess. However, it is not impossible that an intelligent environment could lead us to develop new synapses and a larger cortex. A smarter environment might make smarter people.” #RandolphHarris 13 of 23

All this, however, only begins to hint at the larger significance of the changes the new info-sphere brings with it. For the de-massification of the media and the concomitant rise of the computer together change our social memory. Self-imagery holds us together by a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy. We confirm that we are as we imagine ourselves to be, by acting in a way which confirms it. In this, we may be guided by realistic self-imagery: “This-is-what-I-am,” or we may be guided by more idealized imagery: “This-is-how-I-would-wish-to-be.” There may not always be a lot of difference between these two: fortunate people are guided by ideas about themselves which please them, not crippled by aspects of themselves which shame or hurt them. How do we come to value our selves? More to the point, how do we come to value the ideas about ourselves which we do value? Surely our sense of worth comes initially from (m)others, though of course that is not how the infant part of us experiences it. The infant has right to feel grand. However, in fact our sense of worth depends on a good mirroring facilitating environment. If a mother accepts the faecal gift of proudly—or if she rejects it or is uninterested in it—she is not only responsive to a drive. She is also responding to the child’s forming self. Her attitude, in other words, influences a set of inner experiences that play a crucial role in the child’s future development. She responds—accepting, rejecting, disregarding—to a self that, in giving and offering, seeks confirmation by the mirroring self-object. The child therefore experiences the joyful prideful parental attitude, or the parent’s lack of interest…as the acceptance or rejection of one’s tentatively established, yet still vulnerable, creative-productive-active self. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23
If the mother rejects this self just as it begins to assert itself as a center of creative-productive initiative (especially of course if her rejection or lack of interest is only one link in a long chain of rebuffs and disappointments emanating from her pathogenically unemphatic personality) or if her inability to respond to her child’s total self leads her to a fragmentation—producing preoccupation with its faeces—to the detriment of the cohesion-establishing involvement with her total child, her faeces-producing, learning, controlling, maturing, total child—then the child’s self will be depleted and it will abandon the attempt to obtain the joys of self-assertion. It will, for reassurance, turn to the pleasures it can derive from the fragments of its body self. This search for good feelings then no only fails to consolidate a valued self-image, but also leads to further fragmentation. In order to escape from depression, the child runs from the unemphatic or absent self-object to oral, anal and phallic sensation, which it experiences with great intensity. Disintegration—de-differentiation—is the fear at the heart of the narcissistically injured, that is of those whose self-imagery is a source of frequent misery to them. They lack that which gives more fortunate people a constant sense of their own well-being and worthwhileness. While the satisfaction of its needs gives the child a sense of well-bring and strength, what eventually gives it its integration and its identity is being treated as a whole person when it is not as yet feeling whole. For this to happen, people must relate to the baby as a person, and not as a series of chores or achievements. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23

When the baby is treated as a collection of “part-objects,” there is likely to be less integration and less integrity. Very different consequences awaits the child whose oral, anal, and phallic sensations are welcomed as valid expressions of that child’s whole self (even before the child has a whole self). The empathic, mirroring, reflecting function of the adult then ensures pride in these functions without giving any of them eminence above the child as a living and loving human being—the whole person is validated. For people to value themselves, so that they can run their lives according to what they value, they have first to have been valued as persons. And they must have been loved for being, not for doing this or that—it is this which gives them the sense that they are valuable people rather than a jumble of bits. Initially, other people give the fortunate infant this identity by showing love and respect. In due course, this sense of value, given by (m)others, becomes self-respect, and becomes capable of acting as an integrating and guiding principle. This process is called “personalizing,” because it is the opposite of “depersonalizing.” By the late 1970s the postwar pattern seemed set. European Americans, for a variety of racial, educational, life-style, and tax reason, would continue to out-migrate to the suburbs. Non-European Americans, on the other hand, with few exceptions would become ever-more concentrated in the cities. The assumption that this is the inevitable future continues to be “popular wisdom” today, in spite of a quarter of a century of European American inner-city revitalization and gentrification and African American, Latino, and Asian suburbanization. During the 1970s it became increasingly apparent that in spite of the fact that both scholarly and popular attention were focused elsewhere, there were major changes in non-European American suburbanization. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23
The fair housing legislation of 1968 legally opened the suburbs to middle-class non-European Americans. While racial steering still occurred, the housing legislation meant that African American, Latino, and Asian suburbanization was no longer de facto restricted to predominately Non-European American suburbs. The result was the beginning of African American and others experiencing a middle-class exodus to the suburbs. Not only did the non-dominant culture of America’s population grow faster than that in the cities; nationally, the rate of African American suburbanization was twice as fast as the previous decade. During the 1950s and 1960s, the percentage of African Americans who lived in suburbs barely changed. The 1970s marked a real turning point, with the African American population living outside cities growing faster than that within. In contrast to earlier decades, the 1970s showed the African American suburban population increasing three times as rapidly as the European American population. Washing, D. C., for example, saw its African decline 17 percent during the decade. By contrast, suburban Fairfax, in Virginia, saw a 119 percent increase in its African American residents, while the percentage increases for suburban Montgomery and Prince George’s counties in Maryland were 136 and 170 percent. By 1980 the latter county had 248,000 African American residents. Moderate- and middle-income non-European Americans were leaving the city for the suburbs. For upwardly mobile African Americans, as for European Americans, owning a home in the suburbs because a symbol of success in climbing the economic ladder. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23

However, while the legal restriction of middle-class African Americans to urban high-risk neighbourhoods was no more, housing discrimination remained. De jure housing discrimination on the basis of race was no longer operative but de facto discrimination, particularly on the individual level, remained a fact of life. Nonetheless, in spite of de facto discrimination, there was an opportunity for middle-class families who could afford to do so left the cities and moved into suburban neighbourhoods. The leavers sought better housing and better educational opportunities for themselves and their children. As a consequence, middle-class African American rates of suburbanization accelerated at the same time as European American suburban growth rates were declining. According to the Bureau of the Census figures, the European American suburban population increased 13.1 percent during the decade of the 1970s, while the African American population increased 42.7 percent. The European American suburban increase was exactly half the 26.1 percent figure of the 1960 to 1970 period and only a fraction of the rapid growth of European American suburbanites in the 1950s. African American suburban growth during the 1970s was not just a regional phenomenon; it too place in all areas of the country. A pattern seemed to be developing in which African American population shifts trailed European American changes by a decade or so but followed the same general patterns. One example of this African American population shift was that several of the cities having the largest African American populations, such as Philadelphia, Washington, Cleveland, and St. Louis, saw their African American populations actually decline. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23

During the 1970–1980-decade, African Americans departed from Washington, D.C., at twice the rate of European Americans. Moreover, those departing were disproportionately people in their twenties and thirties with young children. One consequence of the upswing in African American suburbanization was that by 1980, African Americans numbered 12 percent the national population and represented 6.1 percent of the suburban population. By 1990, the African American figure had increased to 6.6 percent. As of 2021, the population of African Americans in the suburbs is 27 percent. Overall, suburbs are 35 percent non-European American. Some argue that non-European Americans are still underrepresented in the suburbs. However, in general, many people like to buy homes in middle-class and upper-middle class communities that have a high number of college educated, professional European Americans because they tend to keep to themselves, are peaceful, quiet, and keep their properties in outstanding condition. So, it is not only because they tend to have higher property values, but also because they are busy working and tend to care about their reputations in the community. Nonetheless, the underrepresentation of African Americans in the suburbs is not just because of income or educational differences. African Americans of every income level are highly segregated from European Americans at the same economic level. Political distinctions necessarily lend themselves to civil distinctions. The growing inequality between the people and its leaders soon makes itself felt among private individuals, and is modified by them in a thousand ways according to passions, talents and events. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23
The magistrate cannot usurp illegitimate power without producing proteges for oneself to whom one is forced to yield some part of it. Moreover, citizens allow themselves to be oppressed only insofar as they are driven by blind ambition; and looking more below than above them, domination becomes more dear to the than independence, and they consent to wear chains in order to be able to give them in turn to others. It is very difficult to reduce to obedience someone who does not seek to command; and the most adroit politician would never succeed in subjecting humans who wanted merely to be free. However, inequality spreads easily among ambitious and cowardly souls always ready to run the risks of fortune and, almost indifferently, to dominate or serve, according to whether it becomes favourable unfavourable to them. Thus it is that there must have come a time when the eyes of people ere beguiled to such an extent that its leaders merely had to say to the humblest of humans, “Be great, you and all your progeny,” and one immediately appeared great to everyone as well as in one’s own eyes, and one’s descendants were elevated even more in proportion as they were at some remove from one. The more remote and uncertain the cause, the more the effect increased; the more loafers one could count in a family, the more illustrious it became. If this were the place to go into detail, I would easily explain how [even without government involvement] the inequality of prestige and authority becomes inevitable among private individuals, as soon as they are united in one single society and are focused to make comparisons among themselves and to take into account the differences they discover in the continual use they have to make of one another. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23

These differences are of several sorts, but in general, since wealth, nobility or rank, power and personal meri are the principal distinctions by which someone is measured in society, I would prove that the agreement or conflict of these various forces is the surest indication of a well- or ill-constituted state. I would make it apparent that among these four types of inequality, since personal qualities are the origin of all the others, wealth is the last to which they are ultimately reduced, because it readily serves to buy all the rest, since it is the most immediately useful to well-being and the easiest to communicate. This observation enables one to judge rather precisely the extent to which each people is removed from its primitive institution, and of the progress it has made toward the final stage of corruption. I would note how much that universal desire for reputation, honours, and preferences, which devours us all, trains and compares our talents and strengths; how much it excites and multiplies the passions; and, making all humans competitors, rivals, or rather enemies, how many setbacks, successes and catastrophes of every sort it causes every day, by making so many contenders run the same course. I would show that it is to this ardor for making oneself the topic of conversation, to this furor to distinguish oneself which nearly always keeps us outside ourselves, that we own what is best and worst among humans, our virtues and vices, our sciences and our errors, our conquerors and our philosophers, that is to say, a multitude of bad things against a small number of good ones. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23

Finally, I would prove that is one sees a handful of powerful and rich humans at the height of greatness and fortune while the mob grovels in obscurity and misery, it is because the former prize the things they enjoy only to the extent that the others are deprived of them; and because, without changing their position, they would cease to be happy, if the people ceased to be miserable. However, these details alone would be the subject of a large work in which one would weigh the advantages and the disadvantages of every government relative to rights of the state of nature, and where one would examine all the different faces under which inequality has appeared until now and many appear in [future] ages, according to the nature of these governments and the upheavals that time will necessarily bring in its wake. We would see the multitude oppressed from within as a consequence of the very precautions it had taken against what menaced it from without. We would see oppression continually increase, without the oppressed ever being able to know where it would end or what legitimate means would be left for them to stop it. We would see the rights of citizens and national liberties gradually die out, and the protests of the weak treated like seditious murmurs. We would see politics restrict the honour of defending the common cause to a mercenary portion of the people. We would see arising from this the necessity for taxes, the discouraged farmer leaving one’s field, even during peacetime, and leaving his plow in order to gird oneself with a sword. We would see the rise of fatal and bizarre rules in the code of honour. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23

We would see the defenders of the homeland sooner or later become its enemies, constantly holding a dagger over their fellow citizens, and there would come a time when we would hear the say to the oppressor of their country: “If you order me to plunge my sword into my brother’s breast or my father’s throat, and into my pregnant wife’s entrails, and steal the gold coins from my uncle’s purse, I will do so, even though my right hand is unwilling.” When despair for the World grows in me and I wake in the night at the least sound in fear of what my life and my children’s lives may be, I go and lie down where the wood drake rests in his beauty on the water, and the great heron feeds. I come into the peace of wild things who do not takes their lives with forethought of grief. I come into the presence of still water. And I feel above me the day-blind stars waiting with their light. For a time I rest in the grace of the World, and am free. Flee, my Beloved, till our love shall please Thee, then turn in pity. Base kings would sweep us hence;–shall their despoiling not appease Thee? O tear their roots up from our ruined heap! Then raise our rampart; let our songful children call, “Behold, He standeth now behind our wall.” Flee, my Beloved, till the day be breaking beyond the end of vision—then arise and chase these shadows,–him Thou wast forsaking, despised, shall be exalted, high and wise, sprinkling the nations.—Bare Thine art, Lord, when we cry, “The voice of my Beloved soundeth nigh.” Flee, my Beloved,–like a roe be flying till Thou reveal the end of mine account. Despoiled, and for my crown of beauty sighing, contemned, but longing for the glorious mount,–so with no leader and no prophet leave me, with yet no Tishbite to renew my fame; but plead my cause at last; the bonds that grieve me break; and my foe shall turn away in shame when these that do reproach me and deceive me I answer with sweet words that speak Thy name: “Lo, this is my Beloved, my Redeemer, Lover, Friend, my father’s God, my God until the end.” For the fathers’ sake Thou wilt save the children, yea, and bring redemption unto their children’s children. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who hast redeemed America. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23
Cresleigh Homes

The perfect house has space for the fancy and the casual! The Brighton Station Residence 2 offers a homey kitchen with a pass-through to the formal dining room, so you can eat frozen pizza or a three course meal – whatever fits the mood!

Many people enjoy the ease and accessibility in this single-story, light and roomy home, which boasts of nearly 2,500 square feet. All of the windows make this enchanting home an extension of the wonderful outdoor areas from which to relax or entertain. https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/residence-2/
I believe all of our lives we were looking for a Cresleigh Home, and we were really lucky to find it.
#CresleighHomes
#CresleighRanch

































































































