The sadomasochistic splitting of power has the characteristics of all symptomatic behavior: it is literally destructive, and it involves a polarization in which one side of the split is apparent, while the other is hidden. People who turn to violence are visibly controlling; what is less obvious are their weakness and feelings of powerlessness. On the other hand, those who habitually play the victim may be quite unaware of their own more subtle methods of control. This is why issues of power are so difficult to deal with: things are not as they appear to be. Weaklings puff themselves up and try to act strong; tough people hide their vulnerabilities; the rest of us fail to look past the surface. We assume that the fabrication of power all around us are genuine, and we fall victim to them. Heinrich Himmler is an excellent example of a vicious, sadistic character who illustrates what has been said about the connection between sadism and the extreme forms of the anal-hoarding, bureaucratic, authoritarian character. The “bloodhound of Europe,” as he was called by many, Mr. Himmler was, together with Mr. Hitler, responsible for the slaughter of between fifteen and twenty million unarmed and powerless Russians, Poles, and Jewish. Whenever one person victimizes another, real power has been lost and replaced by a literalistic drama that is dangerous for both parties. Stage V On forgoing a working agreement, the offender and, in many cases, victim appeared committed to battle. They contributed to and invested in the development of a fateful transaction, one which was problematic and consequential to their face and wider reputation. #RandolphHarris 1 of 19

Both the offender and the victim placed their character on the line, and alternative methods for assessing character focused on a working agreement that violence was appropriate. Because opponents appeared to fear displaying weakness in character and consequent loss of face, and because resolution of the content was situationally bound, demanding an immediacy of response, they appeared committed to following through with expressed or implied intentions. Commitment to battle was additionally enhanced by the availability of weapons to support verbal threats and challenges. Prior to victory, the offender often sought out and secured weapons capable of overcoming the victim. In about thirty-six percent of the cases, offenders carried hand guns or knives into the setting. In only thirteen percent of these cases did offenders bring hand guns or knives into the situation on the assumption that they might be needed if the victims were confronted. In the remainder of these cases such weapons were brought in as a matter of everyday routine. In either event, to inflict the fatal blow required the mere mobilization of the weapon for action. In sixty-four percent of the cases, the offender either left the situation temporarily to secure a hand gun, rifle, or knife, or transformed the status of some existing situational prop, such as a pillow, telephone cord, kitchen knife, beer mug, or baseball bat, into a lethal weapon. The possession of weapons makes battle possible, and, in situations defined as calling for violence, probable. #RandolphHarris 2 of 19

The particular dynamics of the physical interchange are quite varied. In many cases, the battle was brief and precise. In approximately fifty-four percent of the cases, the offender secured the weapon and dropped the victim in a single shot, stab, or rally of blows. In the remaining cases, the battle was two-sided. One or both secured a weapon and exchanges a series of blows, with one falling in defeat. Stage VI Once the victim had fallen, the offender made one of three moves which marked the termination of the transaction. In over fifty-eight percent of the cases, the offender fled the scene. In about thirty-two percent of the cases, the offender voluntarily remained on the scene for the police. In the remaining cases, the offender was involuntarily held for the police by members of the audience. These alternatives seemed prompted by two lines of influence: the relationship of the offender and victim and the position of the audience vis-à-vis the offense. When there is no audience, the offender and victim were intimately related, the offender typically remained on the scene and notified the police. Sometimes these offenders waited for minutes or hours before reporting the event, stating they needed time to think, check the victim’s condition, and make arrangements on financial matters, the children, and work before arret. In contrast, when victims were acquaintances or enemies, offenders typically fled the scene. Moreover, these offenders often attempted to dispose of their victims and incriminating evidence. #RandolphHarris 3 of 19

Seventy percent of the cases, however, occurred before an audience, and offenders’ moves seemed related to audience reactions to the offense. Bystanders seemed to replace the victim as the primary interactant, serving the offender as the pivotal reference for his existing orientations. The audience assumed one of three roles: hostile, neutral, or supportive. In the hostile role, accounting for nearly thirty-five percent of the case, bystanders moved to apprehend the offender, assist the victim, and immediately notify police. Such audiences were generally comprised of persons who either supported the victim or were neutral during the pre-battle escalation. In several of these cases, bystanders suggested, without use of force, that the offender assist the victim, call the police, and so forth. These audiences were comprised of the offender’s intimates, and he or she followed their advice without question. In either case, hostile bystanders forced or suggested the offender’s compliance in remaining at the scene for police. In almost seventeen percent of the cases, the audience was neutral. These people appeared as shocked bystanders. Having witnessed the killing, they stood numb as the offender escaped and the victim expired. In the remainder of the cases, the audience was supportive of the offender. These audiences were usually comprised of persons who encouraged the offender during the pre-battle stages. Supportive bystanders rendered assistance to the offender in his or her escape, destroyed evidence, and maintained ignorance of the event when questioned by the police, breaking down only in later stages of interrogation. Thus, while a hostile audience directs the offender to remain at the scene, the supportive audience permits or directs one’s flight. #RandolphHarris 4 of 19

On the basis of this research, criminal homicide does not appear as a one-sided event with an unwitting victim assuming a passive, non-contributory role. Rather, murder is the outcome of a dynamic interchange between an offender, victim, and, in many cases, bystanders. The offender and victim develop lines of action shaped in part by the actions of the other and focused toward saving or maintaining face and reputation and demonstrating character. Participants develop a working agreement, sometimes implicit, often explicit, that violence is a useful tool for resolving questions of face and character. In some settings, where very small children are murdered, the extent of their participation cannot be great. However, generally these patterns characterized all cases irrespective of such variables as age, gender, race, time and place, use of alcohol, and proffered motive. We know that in the evolution of vertebrates, the bond of personal love and friendship was the epoch-making invention created by the great constructors when it became necessary for two or more individuals of an aggressive species to live peacefully together and to work for a common end. We know that human society is built on the foundation of this bond, but we have to recognize the fact that the bond has become too limited to encompass all that it should; it prevents aggression only between those who know each other and are friends, while obviously it is all active hostility between al men of all nations or ideologies that must be stopped. Obviously, love and friendship should embrace all humanity; we should love all our human brothers indiscriminately. This commandment is not new. Our reason is quire able to understand its necessity as our feeling is able to appreciate its beauty, but nevertheless, made as we are, we are unable to obey it. #RandolphHarris 5 of 19

Indeed, one might be inclined to summarize the whole matter by saying that the individual is obliged to demonstrate involvement in a situation through the modulation of one’s involvements within the situation. However, this would be a loose way of talking. First, that which the individual owes is conveyed through appropriate modulation of situated involvements. What is thereby conveyed, however, is not “involvement,” but rather a kind of respect and regard for that to which attachment and belongingness are owed. At the heart of it is a kind of concern that shows one to be a part of the thing for which one is concerned. Second, a situation, as defined in this study, is merely an environment of communication possibilities, and not the sort of thing to which one can become attached. The little society involved is that of the gathering in the situation, and the little social system found therein is made up from conduct performed in accordance with the norms of situational propriety. Finally, what is owned the gathering is owed the social occasion in which it occurs, the joint social life sustained by the gathering being an embodiment of the occasion itself. Situational proprieties, then, give body to the joint social life sustained by a gathering, and transform the gathering itself from a mere aggregate of persons present into something akin to a little social group, a social reality in its own right. Behind this social function we can see still further ones. #RandolphHarris 6 of 19

When a situation comes into being, mutual accessibility of body signs is not the only contingency faced by those who are present. As already suggested, each person becomes a potential victim or aggressor in the potential occurrence of violent interpersonal actions, such as physical or sexual assault, blocking of the way, and so forth. Further, each person present is in a position to accost or be accosted by the others for the purpose of initiating a state of talk—a joint conversational engagement. And this, too, has its own dangers, for when persons are joined in this way they can command and plead with each other, insult or compliment each other, inform and misinform each other, or be seen (by others) as being on close terms, and the like. Further, when an engagement is sustained in the presence of bystanders, the participants open themselves up to being listened in on and interfered with, just as the bystanders become vulnerable to undesired distractions. Although these various dangers of being in the presence of others are perhaps not frequently realized, especially in middle-class society, the possibility of their occurrence is always there. And it is through body signs that persons present signify to each other that they can be trusted not to exploit these threatening possibilities. Only when these signs are received may the individual feel secure enough to forget about defending oneself, secure enough to give oneself up to the merely-situated aspects of one’s involvements. #RandolphHarris 7 of 19

Aside, then, from the disrespect an individual shows to a gathering by conducting oneself improperly, such improprieties can also cause the others present to fear for their physical and social inviolability, whether rightly or not. And here, incidentally, is one reason for arguing that social situations and the gatherings occurring therein are worth studying, even apart from the social occasion that incorporates them. Ordinarily, situations are thought to be so closely enmeshed in a particular on-going institutional setting, and these settings to be so very different one from another, that excision of situations and their gatherings for separate study might seem questionable. However, it is only in situations that individuals can be physically assaulted, accosted by requests for talk, or drawn away from conversations and other involvements by the antics of bystanders. It is in situations that these accessibilities will have to be faced and dealt with. And in facing these accessibilities and dealing with them, a common and distinctive character is given to the social life sustained in situations, regardless of the uniqueness of the larger span of social life in which each gathering is embedded and of which each is an expression. King James vowed to make deviants conform or he would “harry them out of the land or else do worse.” If from the beginning one did not state making serious efforts to develop will, it is possible to understand and not be able to do anything about a situation. If will remains undeveloped, then the development of understanding cannot help much. One can understand very much, but at the same time not be able to do anything about it. #RandolphHarris 8 of 19

Much like in Elizabethan England, the exiles knew they were supposed to assimilate. Yet they found it difficult to find a way to flee from the profane multitude that harassed them in their gatherings at the manor house of William Brewster at Scrooby. These educated and sometimes prosperous people, knowing they had much to lose, prepared to lose it by booking a ship onto which they sneaked one night in 1607. Someone betrayed them before they could leave for Holland and religious freedom: Officers searched the men’s shirts for money, “yea even the women further than become modesty.” They tried to escape again a few months later, but only some of the husbands and fathers eluded authorities. The families of these pesky believers were then permitted to join them. “Is the will part of being?” Yes, the same as consciousness or understanding. Only if you work too much on understanding and disregard will, then instead of growing stronger, you will will become weaker, or will remain the same as it was. With our will—the will of men nos 1, 2, and 3—we can only control one center, using all the concentration possible for us. We can never control two or three centers, and yet centers are dependent on one another. Suppose that we decide to control one center and, meanwhile, other centers go on by themselves, then they will immediately corrupt the center that we want to control and bring it again to mechanical reaction. “How can one attain this kind of will?” That was explained in relation to “stop” exercise. #RandolphHarris 9 of 19

Those who heard that lecture about “stop” exercise may remember it. To control more than one center is the basis of “stop” exercise. This can only be done if you put yourself under some other will because your own will is insufficient. Sometimes it may be necessary to control four centers, and the maximum of your energy of will can only control one center. So another will is necessary. This is why schools of discipline is necessary and school exercises. “How can we work against self-will? It is possible for us, as we are, to recognize the moments when we have real will?” Not real will; we cannot have that. All we have is self-will and willfulness, or small wills that change all the time. Real will is very far off; it is based on Permanent “I,” consciousness and individuality. We have not got it. About how we can work against self-will: you can study the system. There are certain demands in the system; things you must not do or must do. For instance, you must not talk, because if you do, you will only tell lies. You cannot speak about the system before you know and understand it. In this way, from the very beginning, you meet with ideas of the work opposed to self-will. If you forget about the work, you re not working against self-will. The only way to struggle against self-will is to remember the work. It may be that at one moment the work does not enter at all, but at another moment it does enter, and in that moment you can understand what giving up self-will means. Ask yourself: Is it right from the point of view of the work or not? This is struggle against-self-will. #RandolphHarris 10 of 19

First it is necessary to understand what will is. We have no will; we only have self-will and willfulness. Self-will is self-assertion. Willfulness is going against something, against rules, and so on. Both include a kind of opposition to something and in that form they exist. Man has no original will which can exist without opposition, and which is permanent. That is why it is necessary to subjugate it. This subjugation trains it so that afterwards it can follow a definite line. When it becomes strong enough, it is no longer necessary to limit it. So will cannot be left as it is. Now it runs in all directions. It has to be trained, and in order to train will one has to do many unpleasant things. In an ordinary man will follows a zigzag line or goes in a circle. Will shows the direction of efforts. Effort is our money. We must pay with effort and the time of effort—in the sense of whether it is the right time for the effort or not—we obtain results. Effort needs knowledge, knowledge of moments when effort is useful. The efforts we can make are efforts of self-observation and self-remembering. When people hear about effort, they think about an effort of “doing.” That would be lost effort or wrong effort, but effort of self-observation and self-remembering is right effort because it can give right results. “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. [Every individual] intends only his own security, only one’s own gain. And he is in this lead by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. By pursuing his own interest, one frequently promotes that of society more effectually than when one intends to promote it.” #RandolphHarris 11 of 19

Adam Smith wrote this in 1776 in The Wealth of Nations. Ever since, these word have been music to the ears of free-market advocates. The efficiency of the economic marketplace is then interpreted to suggest that a government should not interfere with individuals’ selfish attempts to maximize their interests. Some free-marketers are inclined to take this idea beyond the economic realm and like Dr. Pangloss in Candide claim that “everything is for the best in this, the best of all possible Worlds.” The sad reality is that Adam Smith’s invisible hand has a relatively small span. There is no general presumption that when every person pursues one’s own interest, the outcome will be the best of all possible Worlds. Even in the narrower sphere of economic affairs, there are important caveats and exceptions to the rule of the invisible hand. Game theory provides a natural way to think about social interactions of individuals. Every person has one’s own aims and strategies; we being them together and examine the equilibrium of the game in which these strategies interact. Remember that there is no presumption that an equilibrium must be good; we have to find out in each situation whether the outcome is a war of each against all, or the best of all possible Worlds, or something between these extremes. #RandolphHarris 12 of 19

Why did Adam Smith think the invisible hand would produce good economic results for society? Well, his argument went as follows. When I buy a loaf of bread, I am using up some socially valuable resources—the wheat, the fuel, the services of the oven, the labor, and so on—that go into marking the loaf. What stops me from over-using these resources is the price of the loaf. (Much like is someone keeps hitting your car, the insurance company charges them a lot of money to repair it, to prevent future accidents. However, if drivers know they can cause an at fault accident and win the lottery, word gets around they got a good one to move into.) I will buy the load only if its value to me exceeds the price I have to pay. In a well-functioning market the price equals the cost of all these resources—the baker will not sell me the loaf unless the price covers all his costs, and competition will preclude his charging me a higher price. Thus I will buy the loaf only if its value to me exceeds the cost of the resources to the rest of society. The market mechanism, therefore, controls my desire to by more bread to just the right extent. It is as if the price were a “fine” I had to pay to compensate the rest of society for using up its resources. On the other side of the picture, the baker, representing the rest of society, is compensated for his costs in supplying the bread that I value, and therefore has just the right incentive to produce it. #RandolphHarris 13 of 19

The simplicity, the clarity, we daresay the beauty of this argument explain its appeal. In fact the clarity carries with it an equally clear message about its limitations. The invisible hand at best applies only to situations in which everything has a price. In many instances outside of economics, and even in many within, people are not charged a fine for doing harm to the rest of society, nor given a reward for doing good to someone else. For example, manufacturers are rarely charged an adequate price for using up clean air, nor compensated for training a worker who might then quit and find other employment. Here pollution is an unpriced good (actually a bad), and the problem is that there is no economic incentive to temper the firm’s selfish interest in supplying a large amount of pollution. When a firm trains a worker, this good is not traded on  market, so there is no price to guide the firm’s action; the firm must equate its own costs with benefits and cannot capture the willingness of others to pay for this service. In the prisoners’ dilemma, when one prisoner confesses, he harms his colleague but is not fined. Because many unpriced or non-marketed activities matter, it is no wonder that individuals acting selfishly often do too much hard to others, and too little good. Within this broad theme, the failures of the invisible hand can occur in many ways. Everyone might do the individually best thing, but this ends up worst from their collective viewpoint, as in the prisoners’ dilemma. Too many people might do the wrong thing, or everyone might do too much of the wrong thing. Some of these problems are amenable to social policies; others, less so. #RandolphHarris 14 of 19

In 1975 a Palestinian consultant to the Iraqi government was given a blunt message. Iraq, in the process of switching its political orientation from the Soviet Union to the West, was in the market for sixty military aircraft, then worth about $300 million. The consultant, Said K. Aburish, tried to negotiate the purchase with a British firm, but the government would not guarantee that spare parts would be available. The Iraqis thus turned to the French, who agreed to sell them F-1 Mirages and to guarantee spare parts. However, the Iraqis sense the French were overcharging them. According to Mr. Aburish, he was then called in by the Iraqis and told: “Drop whatever you are doing, and find out what the bastards charged other countries. You have unlimited expenses—use them to bribe, buy or bully anyone.” Ironically, as he tells the story, he ultimately found the information he needed in the files of the Peace Institute in Stockholm, not exactly a friend of warplane merchant. When France’s then-Prime Minister Jacques Chirac visited Baghdad shortly thereafter, Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi strongman, shoved a paper in front of him with the prices charged other countries. According to Mr. Aburish, Mr. Chirac “volunteered, on the sport, a reduction of $1,750,000 in the price of each plane.” The planes went on to fly during Iran-Iraq war that ended in 1988. This was traditional commercial intelligence activity carried out on behalf of a government. The size of the return—id et, $1.75 million times 60 plane, or a bit over $100 million—against the modest bribe Aburish claims he paid indicates the immense profit possibilities inherent in economic intelligence gathering. It is frequently a low-risk, high-return operation. However, the Aburish case is small potatoes. It is an example of what might be termed “micro-intelligence.” #RandolphHarris 15 of 19

Compare the potential rewards of “macro-intelligence.” When Britain negotiated its entry into the Common Market in 1973, its negotiators were armed with information from the intercepted messages of the other European countries. It is impossible to measure the bargaining edge thus gained, but it would make Iraq’s $100 million look like petty cash. That was macro-intelligence. Today the National Security Agency and the British GCHQ both maintain so-called “watch lists” of companies or organizations they monitor with more than routine interests. These include banks, petroleum companies, and commodity traders whose activities might swing the World price of, day, oil or gain. The Soviets, too, pay a lot of attention to economic data. Says, Raymond Tate, a former official of the National Security Agency, “The Soviet Union has for many years manipulated a lot of commercial markers in the World” by using its intelligence capabilities. However, it is the Japanese, according to Lionel Olmer, a former Under Secretary of Commerce in the United States of America, who “have the most refined and organized system of economics intelligence in the World through a network of ‘operatives’—a word I do not use disparagingly—in their export trade offices. JETRO [the Japanese External Trade Organization] s the main collector. However, Japanese trading companies live and die on information, and they are active everywhere, from Africa to Eastern Europe. We do not know how much of the information they collect is shared with governments, but we assume almost all of it is.” #RandolphHarris 16 of 19

When Olmer was at Commerce, he says, “We spent a year once trying to prove that the Japanese were secretly manipulating the value of the yen—in the period around 1983. We could find no hard evidence to demonstrate that the government was orchestrating up and down moves in the value of the currency. However, we certainly would have like to know.” That is macro-intelligence. In 1988-89 a major commercial tug-of-war broke out between Japan and the United States of America over terms for the joint production of the FSX fighter plane. In those negotiations, says Olmer, “It would have been very helpful if our government were better informed as to the Japanese government’s true intentions. Was it looking to the FSX project as a springboard to help Japan develop a commercial passenger jet business in competition with out own? All we got were a lot of inconsistences.” Here, too, what was at stake was not the sale of a few planes, but the fate of whole industries. These are only the opening skirmishes, however, of an economic intelligence war that will grow more systematic, more central to government policy and corporate strategies alike in the decisive decades ahead. The World’s leading intelligence producers are being driven deeper into economic espionage by several converging factors. First, with the breakup of the Cold War, all the major agencies are searching for new missions to justify their budgets. Second, as the new wealth-creation system forces more industries to globalize, more and more companies have overseas interests to nurture or protect. #RandolphHarris 17 of 19

These firms step up the pressure on governments for political backup and economic intelligence that may be beyond the reach of an individual firm. Whether or not public intelligence should be sued for private gain, these pressures can only mount as globalization proceeds. Beyond this, however, is a startling, largely overlooked fact. As companies, in order to operate in the new super-symbolic economy, become ever more dependent on electronics, building extensive, Earth-spanning networks, transmitting data across borders, exchanging data directly between their computers and those of other companies, the entire business system becomes more vulnerable to electronic penetration by outfits like the NSA or GCHQ, Chobetsu, and their Soviet counterparts. Immense flows of fine-grained business data, once less accessible, will present a vast, irresistible target for intelligence agencies. Finally, as the stake rise in global trade rivalries, intelligence rivalries will heat up in parallel, leading to the intelligence equivalent of the arms race. A breakthrough by one country’s spy service will immediately set all the others racing to outdo it, raising the stakes at each move. Spying, to greater extent than at any time in the past century, will be pressed into service in support not only of government objectives but of corporate strategy as well, on the assumption that corporate power will necessarily contribute to national power. #RandolphHarris 18 of 19

That is why we must expect more refined monitoring crops and mining activities in target nations, more eavesdropping on crucial trade negotiations, more stealing of engineering software, more purloined bidding data, and so on. The entire armamentarium of electronic surveillance may be pressed into commercial service, along with armies of trained human operatives determined to answer precisely the kind of questions Mr. Olmer found unanswerable during his years in the U.S.A. Commerce Department. All of this will led to a boom in cryptography or coding and code-breaking, as companies and individuals seek to protect their secrets from prying eyes and ears. It will also open the door to corruption—the back-door sale of government-acquired data to private parties by agents or former agents. In the absence of enforceable international law, it will also spark bitter international conflicts. That is why it is very important to pay close attention to technology. Potential accidents with nanotechnology richly deserve the attention they will get, and we have confidence that this attention will suffice to make nanotechnology a force for improved human and environmental safety. Abuse is the greater danger, and harder to deal with. When considering a proposed policy, the first question should be, “How will this affect the long-term likelihood of serious abuse?” Guiding technology means making many choices, and being able to deal with the consequences. #RandolphHarris 19 of 19

Cresleigh Homes

Welcome to the newest addition to the #CresleighHomes family – #MagnoliaStation! 🎊

This beautiful neighborhood offers five incredible for plans perfect for any family and any lifestyle. 👏

We are getting a sneak peek on the blog today – click the link in our bio to take a look!

Spirituality does not arrive fully formed without effort. If our spirituality is like  plastic esophagus, then we are starving ourselves, not fasting in a sense. Depictions of violence often glamorize vicious behavior. They offend the Spirit and make you less able to respond to others in a sensitive, caring way. They contradict the Savior’s message of love for one another. Our bodies are temples, and when we abuse our bodies by consuming harmful substances, the Spirit of the Lord is restrained in our lives. The Spirit will not inhabit a polluted temple. Similarly, the Spirit is offended when we pollute our minds with harmful, violent material, whether or not such materials causes us to commit violent acts. Consuming violent media makes it more difficult to keep ourselves unspotted from the World. A diet of violence or pornography dulls the senses, and future exposures need to be rougher and more extreme. Soon the person is desensitized and is unable to react in a sensitive, caring, responsible manner, especially to those in one’s home and family. Good people have become infested with this material and it can have terrifying, destructive consequences. When it comes to our daily lives, sometimes we find ourselves in situations where we may think it is logical to respond violently. However, in retaliating by verbal and physically nonlethal means, offenders appear to suggest to the victim a definition of the situation as one in which violence is suitable in settling questions of face and reputation. When in fact, violence should never be the answer to our problems.  However, programs in the media may make some people believe that violence is a way to resolve problems. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23

Stage IV Except for cases in which the victim has been eliminated, the offender’s preceding move places the victim in a problematic and consequential position: either stand up to the challenge and demonstrate strength of character, or apologize, discontinue the inappropriate conduct, or flee the situation and thus withdraw questions of the offender’s face while placing one’s own in jeopardy. Just as the offender could have dismissed the impropriety, fled the scene, or avoided further contact with the victim, so too did the victim have similar alternatives. Rather than break the escalation in a manner demonstrating weakness, sometimes victims come into a “working” agreement with the proffered definition of the situation as one suited for violence. In the majority of cases, the victim’s move appears as an agreement that violence is suitable to the transaction. In some cases, though, the offender interpreted, sometimes incorrectly, the victim’s move as implicit agreement to violence. A working agreement is struck in several ways. The most prominent response, found in forty-one percent of cases, in our study, involves noncompliance with the offender’s challenge or command, and the continued performance of activities deemed offensive: Case 54 The victim continued ridiculing the offender before friends. The offender finally shouted, “I said shut up. If you don’t shut up and stop it, I’m going to kill you and I mean it.” The victim continued his abusive line of conduct. The offender proceeded to the kitchen, secured a knife, and returned to the living room. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23

She repeated her warning. The victim rose from his chair, swore at the offender’s stupidity, and continued laughing at her. She thrusted the knife deep into his chest. Similarly, a spouse or lover’s refusal, under threat of violence, to conciliate a failing marriage or relationship served as tacit acceptance that violence was suitable to the present transaction. Whether the victims noncompliance was intentional or not, the offender interpreted the move as intentional. Take, for example, the killing of children at the hands of parents. In an earlier illustration, the first move found the parent demanding obedience and backed by a hostile, combative stance. In several of these cases, the child was too young to understand what the parent demanded and the specific consequences for noncompliance. Nevertheless, the child’s failure to eat dinner or stop screaming was interpreted by the parent as a voluntary protest, an intentional challenge to authority. Consequently, the unwitting activities of victims may contribute to what offenders define as very real character contest demanding very real lines of opposition. A second response, occurring in thirty five percent of the cases, found victims physically retaliating against their offenders by hitting, kicking, and pushing—responses short of mortal injury. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23

Case 42 The offender and a friend were passing by a local tavern and noticed the victim, a co-worker at a food-processing plant, sitting at the bar. The offender entered the tavern and asked the victim to repay a loan. The victim was angered by the request and refused to pay. The offender then pushed the victim from his stool. Before the victim could react, the bartender asked them to take their fight outside. The victim followed the offender out the door and, from behind, hit the offender with a brick he grabbed from a trash can immediately outside the door. The offender turned and warned the victim that he would beat the victim if he would not pay up and continued his aggression. The victim then struck the offender in the mouth, knocking out his tooth. In the remaining case, victims issued counter-challenges, moves made when offender’s previous moved involved threats and challenges. In some cases, this move came in the form of calling the offender’s bluff. In other cases, the counter came in the form of a direct challenge or threat to the offender, a move no different from the ultimatum given victims by offenders. Unlike simple noncompliance, physical retaliation against offenders and issuance of counter-challenges signify an explicit acceptance of violence as a suitable means for demonstrating character and maintaining or salvaging face. Just as the victim contributed to the escalation toward violence, so too did the audience. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23

 In these cases, interested members of the audience intervened in the transaction, and actively encouraged the use of violence by means of indicating to opponents that initial improprieties, cheering them toward violent action, blocking the encounter from outside interference, or providing lethal weapons: Case 23 The offender’s wife moved toward the victim, and hit him in the back of the head with an empty beer bottle stating, “That’ll teach you to [molest] my boy. I ought to cut your balls off, your motherf*cker.” She went over to the bar to get another bottle. The victim pushed himself from the table and rose. He then reached into his pocket to secure something which some bystanders thought was a weapon. One of the bystanders gave the offender an axe handle and suggested that he stop the victim before the victim attacked his wife. The offender moved toward the victim. In remembering cases, onlookers were neutral. They were neither encouraging nor discouraging. While neutrality may have been due to fear, civil inattention, or whatever reason, the point is that inaction within a strategic interchange can be interpreted by the opponents as a move favoring the use of violence. Consider the statement of the offender in the following case: Case 48 Police officer: Don’t you think it was wrong to beat [your daughter] when her hands were tied behind her back? [Her hands and feet were bound to keep her from scratching.] Offender: Well, I guess so. But I really didn’t think so then, or [my wife] would have said something to stop me. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23

Whenever another being is not experienced as human, the act of destructiveness and cruelty assumes a different quality. Perhaps this is why so many offenders become violent. They may see the victim as a culmination of all the abuse they have experienced in their lives, the victim then become several people rolled into one. As the victim goes on to represent an architype of offense and abuse, the offender no longer sees that individual as a human being, but more of a target that must be made to pay for its sins. The victim becomes more of a personal devil for the offender, and therefore must be taken out by any means necessary. As Church members, we are seeking to become like Christ and to cultivate loving relationships with our families and those around us. Consequently, the effects of media violence on our interactions with others should be of particular concern. Let us choose carefully the material we allow to enter our hearts and minds and how we respond to others. We must recognize for ourselves the effects of media violence, both temporal and spiritual, and take responsibility for our choices. In our society, there are a vast array of people who are mentally ill and because they are of a certain race, gender, social class, or profession, they have not been held responsible for their actions, and they see life as a game and think they can abuse anyone they want to. Conversely, others have been deemed victims because of race, age, disability, religion, social class, physical appearance, sexuality, gender and so forth. For certain victims, it is hard to seek justice when one has been labeled a victim. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23

Law enforcement is far from perfect, and some law enforcement officials can be criminals. When a person has become a target and politicians, families members, the media and others are trying to make a news story out of a victim, and turn them into an offender, getting help can seem almost impossible. One will be surprised at how people will go out of their way to help corrupt officials. It is truly unbelievable. Sometimes victim’s can get trapped in situations where no one will help them and they cannot escape, and no matter how many years one pleads for help, it never seem to come, even though people in the community make know one is being terrorized. Americans seem so willing to help others, when there is a crisis in another nation, but it is amazing how fast they are willing to condemn their own. People may have the resources and ability to help a target, but they will not. Trying to survive and remain in compliance with the law can be very difficult, but it is possible. When you have no one to turn to and have tried everything possible to save your own life, it is best to turn your problems over to God. Even though you have done this in the past and things may not have gotten better, you have no other option. Sometimes situations can become a battle for your soul. When you have no other options and you have repeatedly reported to authority figures that you are being attacked and they seem to do nothing, keep in mind God is the highest authority figure. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23

Often times, victims may victims may turn to a family member and talk about things people are doing to them, and the person will respond, “Don’t judge that person.” However, one must keep in mind, just like these people are targeting you, not helping you, and participating in the terrorism, God will judge them. Never feel like your life is meaningless. You are of great value to God. Just endure as long as you can, even if it takes over a quarter of a century. We cannot control all that happens to us, but we have absolute control over how we respond to the changes in our lives. There will be times in our lives when we find ourselves on an unexpected path, facing circumstances much more severe than a disrupted vacation. However, no amount of change, trial, or opposition can alter the eternal course. The changes, and resulting challenges, that we encounter in mortality come in a variety of shapes and sizes and impact each of us in unique ways. Although each change may be unique to our individual circumstances, there is a common element in the resulting trail or challenge—hope and peace are always available through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. And, maybe others are right, do not judge these people. Just keep in mind that God will. Just like when you needed help and no one was there for you, perhaps God will not be there for them on judgment day. Many people think they are saved, but through their actions and thoughts, they can lose their salvation. Perhaps God is using you to separate the wicked from the good and because the way they are treating you, they are damning themselves to hell. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23

Abuse and discrimination tactics are not always subtle, sometimes they are a combination being overt and covert. However, unliked friends and loved ones, the Savior not only sympathizes with us, but He can empathize perfectly because He has been where we are. In addition to paying the price and suffering for our sins, Jesus Christ also walked every path, dealt with every challenge, faced every hurt—physical, emotional, or spiritual—that we will ever encounter in mortality. Remember, this life is all some people will ever have, many people on this planet will not make it to Heaven, but perhaps your will and your reward will be much greater than you ever imagined. Man wants to remove God from public life and our consciousness so we forget that He exists and focus on this life and think this is all there is, but there is much more to come in Heaven. The mercy and grace of Jesus Christ are not limited to those who commit sins, but they encompass the promise of everlasting peace to all who will accept and follow Him. His mercy is the mighty healer, even to the wounded innocent. In this mortal experience, we cannot control all that happens to us, but we have absolute control over how we respond to the changes in our lives. This does not imply that the challenges and trials we face are of no consequences and easily handled or dealt with. It does not imply that we will be free from pain or heartache. However, it does mean that there is cause for hope and that due to the Atonement of Jesus Christ, we can move forward and find better days—even days full of joy, light, and happiness. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23

Discovering the Mormon Church is a great way to understand what our Savior has planned for our lives. Their strict doctrines and codes for socialization are the path to salvation. I encourage you to turn your life over to God and find a religion that works for you. And rather than blame God for your problems, pour out your heart to Him. The Lord wants you to be of good comfort, and He promises to ease the burdens which are put upon your shoulders, that you will not feel them upon your back. And the Lord will strengthen you that you will be able to bear up your burdens with ease, and this will allow you to submit cheerfully and with patience to all the will of the Lord. Although you mat not immediately delivered from bondage, by turning to the Lord, you will be blessed according to your needs and according to the Lord’ wisdom. Healing blessings come in many ways, each suited to our individual needs, as known to Him who loves us best. Sometimes a “healing” cures our illness or lifts our burden. However, sometimes we are “healed” by being given strength or understanding or patience to bear the burdens placed upon us. In these latter days, the Lord has provided us with numerous resources, our “brazen serpents,” all of which are designed to help us look to Christ and place our trust in Him. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23

A similar picture presents itself when we look at some of the traffic regulations regarding accessible engagements, especially engagements during social occasions such as parties. Prohibitions against improper involvement with others are prohibitions against taking joint leave of the gathering and the encompassing social occasion. Often prohibitions about intruding upon bystanders—persons presumably maintaining an appropriate regard for the social occasion. Rules obliging one to gibe oneself up to occasioned mutual-engagements, and rules against excluding deferential newcomers, are rules assuring that the occasion as a whole will provide the basis of involvement. By maintaining accessibility to all those present, one shows that the gathering is significant enough in itself to ensure that any participant, merely by virtue of one’s participation, has a right to obtain attention and an obligation to give attention to any other participant. Loyalty, damping, spacing, drift—these are all issues basic to the organization of both accessible engagements and the setting of bystanders in which they occur. These issues are difficult even to describe unless reference is made to their function as supports for the gathering as a whole and, behind this, the social occasion. The constraints that apply to objects of involvement, to modes of managing one’s involvements, and (through these) to the management of accessible engagements, seem together to provide evidence of the weight and reality of the “situation.” #RandolphHarris 11 of 23

The determination and definition of aim is a very important moment in the work. It usually happens that one defines one’s aim quite rightly, in quite the right direction, only one takes an aim that is very far off. Then, with this aim in view, one begins to learn and to accumulate material. The next time one tries to define aim, one defines it a little differently, finding an aim that is a littler nearer. The next time again a little nearer, and so on, until one finds an aim that is quite close—tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. This is really the right way in relation to aims, if we speak about them without definite words. However, besides them, we can find many that have been mentioned definitely. “To be one.” Quite right; very good aim. “To be free.” How? Only when one acquires control of the machine. One may say, “I want to be conscious.” Quite right. Another may say, ‘I want to have will.” Very good. “I want to be awake.” Also very good. These are all aims on the same line, only at different distances. “I have come to the conclusion that most of my aims are too remote and I want to work more on the practical side.” Yes, because before you can reach remote aims, there are many things you have to do here and now, and that is where this system differs from almost all other systems. Nearly all other systems begin at least ten thousand miles ahead and have no practical meaning; but this system begins in this room. That is the difference and that is what must be understood first of all. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23

Again and again we must return to this question of what we want from the work. Do not use the terminology of the system but find what you yourself want. If you say you want to be conscious, that is all very good, but why? What do you want to get by being conscious? You must not think that you can answer this question immediately. It is very difficult. However, you must keep coming back to it. And you must understand that before the time comes when you will be able to get what you want, you must know what it is. This is a very definite condition. You can never get anything until you know it and can say, “I want this.” Then perhaps you may get it or perhaps you may not; but you can never get it unless you know what it is. Also, you must want things in the right order. “What does this mean?” One must study and understand the right order of possibility. This is a very interesting subject. “Do you mean in the system?” With the help of the system. However, you can formulate it in your own way. You must be sincere with yourself. You must know exactly what you want, and then you will ask yourself: “Will the system be able to help me to get it?” and so on. However, it is necessary to know what we want. We are never the same for two days in succession. On some days we shall be more successful, on others less. All we can do is to control what we can. We never control more difficult things if we do not control the easy things. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23

Every day and hour there are things that we could control an do not; so we cannot have new things to control. We are surrounded by neglected things. Chiefly, we do not control our thinking. We think in a vague way about what we want, but if we do not formulate what we want, then nothing will happen. This is the first condition, but there are many obstacles. Think about this question, revise what you have already thought about aim, and think how you would define your aim now after the study of these ideas. It is useless to define an aim that cannot be attained. However, if you define an aim that you can hope to attain, then your work will be conscious, serious. What a man can get, what can be promised to him on the condition that he works, is after some time of work he will see himself. Other things he may get, such as consciousness, unity, connection with higher centers, all come after this—and we do not know in what order they come. However, we must remember one thing; until we get this—until we see ourselves—we cannot get anything else. Until we begin to work with this aim in view we cannot say that we have begun work. So, after some time we must be able to formulate our immediate aim as being to see oneself. Not even to know oneself (this comes later), but to see oneself. Even knowledge and understanding cannot help if one does not work on being. If will does not grow at the same time, one can understand and yet not be able to do anything. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23

Brinkmanship in the Atlantic—“At the outbreak of war, the Navy would move aggressively into the Norwegian Sea, first with submarines and then with several aircraft carriers. They would roll back the Soviet fleet, and attack its home base stations, striking ports and any bastions within reach of the carriers’ attack planes.” –John Leman, U.S.A. Navy Secretary (1981-87). “To threaten Soviet nuclear missile submarines is to wage nuclear war. It is very escalatory.” –Barry Posen, Professors of Political Science, MIT. Posen argues that the U.S.A. Navy is following a very dangerous and escalatory policy in the Atlantic. In the event of any conventional conflict with the U.S.S.R., the U.S. Navy will attempt to sink all Soviet subs in the Atlantic. The problem with this strategy is that, at present, the United States of America cannot distinguish nuclear from nonnuclear armed submarines. Hence there is the risk that the United States of America will cross the nuclear threshold unknowingly by inadvertently sinking a Soviet submarined with nuclear weapon. At that point the Soviets will feel justified in attacking American nuclear weapons, and we will be one step too close to an all-out exchange. Secretary of the Navy John Lehman defends the policy just as vigorously as Posen attacks it. He recognized the increased chance that a conventional war would escalate into a nuclear conflict. However, he reasons that the Soviets should recognize this too! The increased chance of escalation was justified because it would decrease the chance of a conventional conflict in the first place. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23

On which side of the fence does brinkmanship lie? Our understanding of brinkmanship is unlikely to please either side. When the goal is to prevent a nuclear way, the policy should not have any effect. The increased chance of a conventional conflict escalating should be exactly offset by a decrease in the probability of initiating a conventional conflict. An analogy might prove helpful. Suppose we try to make dueling safer by reducing the accuracy of the pistols. The likely outcome is that the adversaries will come close to one another before firing. Suppose that the adversaries are equally good shots, and that killing the other person earns the reward of 1, and that being killed incurs the penalty of -1. Then the optimal strategy is for the two to keep on approaching each other, and fire the moment the probability of hitting reaches 1/2. The probability of a fatal hit is the same (3/4) irrespective of the accuracy of the pistols. A change in the rules need not affect the outcome; all players can adjust their strategies to offset it. To deter the Soviets from initiating a conventional attack, the United States of America must expose them to some risk that the conflict will escalate to a nuclear exchange. If the risk along one route grows larger, then the Soviets will advance down that route more slowly. And the Americans will be more likely (as will the Soviets) to offer a concession, knowing that both countries face this bigger risk. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23

Both the Americans and the Soviets should evaluate their strategies by their consequences, not the actions per se. For another helpful way to think about this, imagine that the two parties are engaged in an auction. Instead of bidding dollars or rubles, they are bidding probabilities of disaster. At some point the bidding gets too rich. One side decides to back down rather than escalate to a twenty-three percent chance of mutual loss. However, it may have waited too long, and the probability of a loss could already have turned into the bad outcome. In a conflict between the United States of America and the Soviet Union, the bids are the probability that the conflict will escalate. How the two sides communicate their bids depends on the rules of the game. However, changing the rules alone cannot make brinkmanship a safer game to play. If the United States of America were to change its policy in the Atlantic, the Soviets could simply adjust their bidding strategy to restore the same pressure on the United States of America. In a safer World, the countries can take more escalatory steps. When the threat is a probability, the Soviets can always adjust their actions so as to keep the probability the same. This does not mean that you should give up and be resigned to the risk of nuclear way. To reduce the risks, you have to attack the problem at a more fundamental level—the game must be changed. Were French and German aristocrats to have used less accurate dueling pistols, that would not have helped them to live longer. Rather, they would have to have changed the honor code that initiated a duel at the drop of a glove. As the United States of America and the Soviet Union begin to share the same objectives, that changes the game, not just the rules. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23

As the World of intelligence adapts to the emerging super-symbolic economy, this ravenous information market will demand new products, and new giants will arise to dominate it. Looming in the not-too-distant future is the breakup or terminal enfeeblement of the UKUSA-NATO espionage alliance. As the Soviet Union’s former satellites in Eastern Europe rush off, each to make its own separate deal with Western spy agencies, the World “intelligence balance” is further tilted. In addition, as Japan and Germany take on much larger diplomatic and political (and perhaps military) riles, consonant with their enormous economic strength, they can be expected to beef up their intelligence activities, which in turn will stimulate intelligence and counter-intelligence among their neighbors, trading partners, allies, and adversaries. (We must assume, for example, that German reunification has delivered to Bonn at least some spy networks and “assets” previously run by the East Germans in the United States of America, France, Britain, or other nations.) The Japanese and the Germans may themselves form the nuclei of new consortia, to which lesser powers will attach themselves. In any event, it would be surprising if both the Bundesnachrichtendienst and the Chobetsu were not enjoying substantial budget increases (no doubt disguised or hidden in the budgets of other agencies). #RandolphHarris 18 of 23

These power-shifting changes in the hidden World of intelligence reflect the new “correlation of forces” (to use a favorite Soviet phrase). As the new system of wealth creation intensifies competition among the high-tech nations, it will also shift the priorities of the main spy services. Three specific topics will command top-level attention from spies in the future: economics, technology, and ecology. Technology is a crucial topic in our World today, as many new technologies are being developed. Abuse of nanotechnology can be delayed, perhaps for a long time, by proper regulation. The goal here is not to make regulations so tight that people will have to violate them to get anything done. This would encourage holdouts, underground work, and disrespect for the law. Instead, the goal is to draw boundaries loosely enough to cause little difficulty for legitimate work, while making dangerous activities very difficult indeed. This is a delicate balance to stroke: those fearful of risk naturally try to loosen an avoid regulation entirely. Nonetheless, the problem must be solved, and this seems the best direction to explore. In one approach, nanomachines could be divided into two classes: experimental devices and approved products. Approved products could be made widely available through special-purpose molecular manufacturing systems. Thus, once an experimental device had passed regulatory inspection, it could become inexpensive and abundant. In this way, popular demands for a product could be satisfied without anyone needing to break safety rules. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23

Approved products could include devices like (but superior to) the full range of modern consumer products, ranging from personal supercomputers with 3-D displays, through smart construction materials, to running shoes with truly amazing features. The main cost of such goods might be the royalty to the designer. In Engines of Creation (the first book to examine this topic), this strategy for producing and distributing approved products is called a “limited assembler system.” Note that both approved products and the limited assemblers that build them would lack the ability to make copies of themselves, to self-replicate. Ralph Merkel sees this ability as the one to keep an eye on: “Self-replicating systems can and should be appropriately regulated. There seems no need, however, to have any more than normal concerns for devices which cannot replicate. While we might, as with any device, need law to ensure their appropriate use, they pose no extraordinary problems.” For must products, normal medical, commercial, and environmental standards would apply; the regulatory bureaucracies are already in place. There are great advantages to permitting nearly free experimentation in new technology, allowing creative people to try ideas without seeking prior approval from a cumbersome committee. Surprisingly, this, too, seems compatible with safety. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23

There are great advantages to permitting nearly free experimentation in a new technology, allowing creative people to try ideas without seeking prior approval from a cumbersome committee. Surprisingly, this, too, seems compatible with safety. In the World of nanotechnology, one cubic micron is a large space, with room enough for millions of components. For many purposes, a few cubic microns would amount to a large laboratory space. To a device on a micron scale, a centimeter is an enormous distance. Surrounding a micron-scale device with a centimeter-thick wall would be like surrounding a human being with a wall kilometers thick, and just as hard to penetrate. Further, a micron-scale device can be incinerate in an instant by something as small as a spark of static electricity. Based on observations like these, Engines of Creation outlined the idea of a sealed assembler lab, in which a researcher could build anything, even something deliberately designed to be dangerous, and yet be unable to get anything out of the microscopic sealed laboratory except for information. With a good communications network, a researcher or product developer in Texas could equally easily perform experiments in a remote Maine laboratory run with the security and secrecy of a Swiss bank. A lab would have a responsibility to its customers to keep proprietary work confidential, and a responsibility to regulatory authorities to ensure that nothing but information leaves the laboratory. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23

Researchers could then perform any small-scale experiments they wish. Only approved products, of course, would be built outside the sealed laboratories. While this may not be the best pattern of regulation possible, it does show one way in which freedom of experimentation could be combined with strict regulation of use. By providing a clear separation between legitimate and illegitimate activity, it would help with the difficult problem of identifying and preventing research aimed at damaging ends. A sensible policy will have to balance the risk of private abuse of technology against the risk of government abuse of technology and regulation. Low-cost manufacturing can make surveillance equipment less expensive. Increased surveillance can reduce some risks in society, but the watchers themselves often are not very well watched. Placing bounds on surveillance is a challenge for today’s citizens as well as tomorrow’s, and lessons learned in the past can be applied in the future. In the long run, it seems wise to assume that someone, somewhere, somehow, will escape the bound of regulation and arms control and apply molecular-manufacturing capabilities to making novel weapons. If by then we have had several decades of peaceful, responsible, creative development of nanotechnology (or perhaps a few years of help from smart machines), then we may have developed both ecosystem protectors and sophisticated immune machines for medicine. There is a good reason to think that distributed technologies of this sort could be adapted and extended to deal with the problem of protecting against novel nanoweaponry. Failure to do so could mean disaster. Nonetheless, building protective systems of this sort will be by far the greatest challenge of any we have discussed. The chief purpose of regulator tactics like those we have descried must be to buy time for those peaceful developments, to maximize the chances that this challenge can be met before time runs out. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23

Violence has a great deal to do with shadow, in particular the shadow of power. Take the example Judas.  Judas led them into battle, and fought like a lion and behold, the hosts of the enemy were vanquished and they fled. And Israel had a great deliverance. And they sang sons of thanksgiving, and praised the Lord of Heaven for His goodness, because His mercy endureth forever. And on the five and twentieth day of Kislev, the same day when three years before the altar of God had been profaned by the heathen, the sanctuary of God was dedicated anew with songs and music, and the people praised the God of Heaven who had given them great victory, and they celebrated the Dedication of the Altar for eight days, and there was great rejoicing among the people. Moreover, Judas and his brethren with the whole congregation of Israel ordained that the days of the Dedication of the Altar should be celebrated from year to year for eight days in gladness and thanksgiving. O Lord, Thou has ever been our fortress and our strength; from days of old hast Thou upheld our fathers. When me rose up against them in the days of Mattathias, to desecrate Thine altar and destroy their faith in Thee, forcing the brave Judeans to forsake Thy covenant, compelling them to follow pagan ways—then didst Thou, O Lord our God, reveal Thy saving power; Thy spirit moved the Maccabees to rise against the foe that ruled by force and might. Right was thus triumphant, faith victorious; the mighty hosts didst Thou deliver to the weak. Thou didst bring low the wicked hordes who sought to crush the faithful few devoted to Thy Law. When the battle was over, and arrogance subdued, Thy children all rejoiced and praised Thee in Thy courts. They purified Thine altar and kindled there the lamp that sheds its rays on all mankind, spreading Thy light afar. As witness-bearers to the triumph of Thy right, we kindle lights in gratitude, and praise Thy holy name. Through that resplendent victory, Israel was preserved, to share Thy truths with all mankind, and by these truths to live. O may we consecrate our lives as did the Maccabees, and dedicate anew our hearts and souls to Thee. The glowing lights of Heaven, today as in the past, proclaim that man must live, not by might nor by power, but by Thy Spirit, O Lord of hosts. #RandolphHarris #RandolphHarris 23 of 23

CRESLEIGH HAVENWOOD

Lincoln, CA | from the high $600s

Now Selling!

No appointment needed! Cresleigh Havenwood features four distinct floor plans ranging from 2,293 – 3,377 square feet and offering up to five bedrooms.  Each plan has been thoughtfully designed and includes great features such as large single-story and two-story homes, guest suites, optional offices, garage workshops, and more!

Get the most out of your new home with Cresleigh’s All-Ready smart home featuring all the connectivity needed to keep your house running. Best of all, each Cresleigh home comes with owned solar included! 

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

The soul needs an intense, full-bodied spiritual life as much in the same way the body requires food. Each person defines beauty, spiritual life, love, pleasure, pain and all the other experiences in a way that makes sense for them. Human beings are tremendously influenced by many things in the cultural experiences. The restrictions against exposed mutual-involvements can sometimes be seen not as a restriction against involvement that withdraws the participants from gathering. Indeed, the individual may at times be obliged to open oneself up for mutual-involvements, as implied in the rule of accessibility. However, one must do this not merely on the grounds of prior relationship but on the basis of the present occasion. (Here we catch another glimmer of the trouble caused by newlyweds or those deeply engaged in courting, who, unlike persons whose relationship is more settled and seasoned, find it awkward to give up their mutual-involvement for the kind of courtesy involvement with a sequence of others that the social occasion often requires.) Thus we find a special kind of exemplary situational conduct when two persons with a long-standing, exclusive relationship manage to treat each other at a sociable gathering with courtesies owed on the basis simply of participation in the occasion; two bitter enemies show a similar regard for the occasion by being “civil.” The same type of courtesy is exhibited by a teacher who addresses her child in class as though he or she were just another student, this being describable not merely as role segregation but also as a gesture of regard for the occasion. #RandolphHarris 1 of 17

Interestingly enough, in the natural history of some social parties, certain forms of fleeting play involving pleasures of the flesh may be a sign that the spirit of the occasion has lifted everyone up with it, not that the party has collapsed into separate pieces. Indeed, should the interactions involving pleasures of the flesh occur between persons brought together only at and for the occasion, it may be a sign of the high degree to which participants have given themselves over to the gathering. The extreme of this, in fact—for example, the kind of interaction involving pleasures of the flesh said to occur at the annual Beaux Arts ball in Paris—can represent not a collapse of duties in regard to the situation, as might at first seem the case, but rather some kind of profane worship of them. Were husbands to engage their wives in this manner, the obligations to the occasion would indeed be threatened. In noting the rule obliging individuals to sustain an occasioned mutual-involvement, we have perhaps a better means of accounting for our response to improper involvements than for predicting actual conduct, for these situational niceties are often ill-sustained. Resistance to the spirit of an occasion, as expressed in a refusal to sustain occasioned mutual-involvements, is apparently so useful a device for conveying so many things that someone in a gathering can usually be counted on to employ it. At public dances in the chief city of Utah, for example, one could usually find a slightly resented handful of couples, solidly middle-class in social status, who withheld themselves from the plebeian pleasures sustained by second-generation crofters. #RandolphHarris 2 of 17

This alienation was expressed by dancing in half-time to the vigorous music and sustaining quiet engrossing talk while doing so, conduct that was obtrusively out of mood with the prevailing ethos. We see, then, that there will be ties when the success of a social occasion such as a party is expressed through the success of a social occasion such as a party is expressed through the success of the participants in finding congenial encounters in which to engross themselves. This engrossment provides proof that each person present is a desirable companion, and that each finds the social occasion significant enough to provide one with grounds for opening oneself up to others. Given these assumptions, we can understand that a person caught for too long between encounters—caught “unengaged”—may cause anxiety to oneself and the hostess, and that the latter may try to anchor one in a convenient port, which particular port being of only secondary significance. And we can also understand why an individual may feel that what one owe the gathering at large can at times override what one owes oneself and one’s fellows in an encounter, providing us with additional evidence that the individual’s engagement in a focused interaction is a fact available to all others in the situation, and hence a part of the unfocused interaction in the situation. Here we have the situational reason for one type of tact, namely, giving the appearance of being spontaneously involved in some occasioned encounter when in fact one is not. #RandolphHarris 3 of 17

Even if you are placed next to some one with whom you have had a bitter quarrel, consideration for your hostess, who would be distressed if she knew you have been put in a disagreeable places, and further consideration for the rest of the table which is otherwise “blocked,” exacts that you give no outward sign of your repugnance and that you make a pretense, at least for a little while, of talking together. At dinner once, Mrs. Winchester, finding herself next to a man she quite openly despised, said to him with apparent placidity, “I shall not talk to you—because I do not care to. But for the sake of my hostess I shall say my multiplication table. Twice one are two, twice two are four—” and she continued on through the tables, making him alternate them with her. As soon as she politely could she turned again to her other companion. Another instance of the obligation to sustain an occasioned involvement with others may be cited from Utah. At a “progressive” whist of twenty tables during a social, the deep engrossment of a member of the gentry in his particular table of whist was likely to be taken as a sign of how thoroughly he was participating in the social occasion. By getting caught up in the spirit of one of the tables, he showed regard for the room as a whole. Had he disdained to invest himself thus, and insisted on wandering from one table to another, making gracious comment to players at all the tables in turn, he might well have tendered the common folk—the crofters—less of a compliment. (And yet if an ordinary crofter became so much involved in a particular hand of whist as to delay appreciably the finishing time for his table, this disregard for the necessity of shifting tables at the end of each game was likely to be considered an affront to the whole social occasion.) #RandolphHarris 4 of 17

If social occasions can be assessed according to their capacity to bring all participants into one occasioned encounter or another, then we can expect that rules will be found obliging those within any encounter to admit entrants. (This corresponds to the previously discussed obligation of the individual to make oneself accessible, the difference being that while an individual may be inaccessible to others because of organic capacity, this excuse is hardly available to encounters.) There are many occasions, as on public streets, where those in an encounter need acknowledge few rights of other to enter. One the other hand, as already suggested, it I characteristic of occasions such as social parties that participants have a right not only to initiate face engagements but also to enter ones that are already in progress. Here participants, in order to demonstrate how thoroughly they have been lifted up and brought together by the party, may feel obliged to admit newcomers to their conversation easily. “Open” topics of conversation may thus be maintained in preparation for newcomers. A conversation that by its tone forbade the entrance of new members would be improper. Consequently, we can understand the strategy sometimes employed by those who would converse about intensely involving private matter in a public place: instead of huddling together in a furtive conspiratorial way, they affect a style of matter-of-fact openness. [Somebody spoke about a useless personality which she enjoyed although she knew that it was useless.] In such a case you can struggle with this personality by strengthening other personalities opposed to it. #RandolphHarris 5 of 17

Suppose you have a certain definite feature you want to struggle with, and try to find some other feature incompatible with it and which may be useful. If in your present equipment you find nothing sufficiently strong to put against it, look in your memory. Suppose you find some feature that is incompatible with the one you want to get rid of, and that can be useful, then just replace one by the other. However, it may happen that even then they can both live happily together. One may present in the evening, the other in the morning, and they may never meet. There is only one real danger. If, for a long time, one goes on without making sufficient efforts or without doing anything seriously, then, instead of becoming one, one becomes divided into two so that all features and personalities are divided into two group—one part useful to the work and helping personal work, and another part either indifferent or even unfriendly. This is a real danger because if two parts begin to form like this, the indifference of one spoils the result of the work of the other. So it is necessary to struggle very quickly and very strongly against that, otherwise it may lead to double crystallization. “What do you mean by crystallizing?” We use the word in a particular sense. Any feature may become crystallized just as buffers crystallize. This term came from the theosophical terminology; it is sometimes a useful term. I think everybody here has heard about higher bodies, the astral, mental and causal. The idea is that man has only one physical body, and development consists in the development of higher bodies. #RandolphHarris 6 of 17

So man no. 5 corresponds to the crystallization of the astral body, man no. 6 to the crystallization of the mental body, and man no. 7 to the crystallization of the causal body. However, speaking of the crystallization of features, one person may have very good and very beautiful features and yet behind them he may have one small feature of false personality which makes work very difficult for him, more difficult perhaps than it is for somebody else who has not got such brilliant features. False personality may pretend to take an interest in the work, may take things for itself and call some negative and mechanical action “self-remembering” or something of that sort. However, it cannot do any useful work; it can only spoil the work of personalities which can do some work and get some results. The system in the light of false personality is quite a different system; it becomes something that strengthens false personality and weakens the real system for you. The moment false personality takes the system to itself, it adds one word here and another word there. You cannot imagine how extraordinary some of these ideas are when they are repeated back to me. One word omitted from some formulation makes quite a different idea; and false personality is fully justified and can do what it likes and so on. The problems of inferring proper lessons (attributing credit) based on limited experience occur in almost every sphere of human activity. #RandolphHarris 7 of 17

Because military organizations only rarely obtain feedback from actual combat, their circumstances make adaptation especially difficult. Since credit attribution has long been so problematic in warfare, military organization have a rich history of refining various forms of simulation, including many forms of gaming and field exercises. The techniques used by the military to cope with the problems of credit attribution when feedback is scarce are therefore particularly illuminating. For these organizations the problem of determining what works well is especially vexing. Large-scale fighting is infrequent—and much work goes into keeping this true. That means that opportunities to try new weapon systems or tactical concepts, or to test officer capabilities, come rarely. Learning only from real combat experience is an unacceptably slow strategy for improvement. This is a price society happily pays for peace, but it leaves military organizations facing a difficult learning problem. Where a firm might have several different versions of a consumer product tested in the field within a few months, a military organization might not accumulate the equivalent amount of useful experience in several decades. For n extreme example, there has never been any full combat experience for our intercontinental ballistic missile hardware, operational concepts, and crews. (This field is the only branch of science where success is achieved by never having any data.) A large portion of what military organizations learn about new technology and operational concepts must come from various forms of experience. #RandolphHarris 8 of 17

This experience may be war games, field exercise, small-scale engagements, mental experiments, computer models, or even imaginative reconstructions of military history. The Information Revolution is providing computer tools that dramatically expand simulation possibilities. The United States of America military now routinely employs simulated aircraft, tanks, ships, and soldiers in its investigations of combat possibilities. Mobilizations of large forces for field exercises incur substantial resource costs, and even without live ammunition, there are inevitable injuries and deaths from the risky movements of personnel and heavy equipment. Such exercises cannot be repeated many times in minor variation of multiple factors may reveal large consequences. The value of these new possibilities is also becoming evident in the business World. Although useful experience is not as scarce as in the military case, there are many situations in which exploratory trials with the real system are not possible, Major reorganizations or changes of corporate strategy are like this. They often have huge costs, and if they do not work, they risk the bankruptcy of the entire firm. In response to this need, simulation tools for business decision making are beginning to appear. Firms are arising that specialize in building such simulation models. Some are spin-offs of computer gaming companies, while others have arisen from consulting practices. There are limitations, of course. One shortcoming is that simulations often place sharp and arbitrary limits on improvisation. #RandolphHarris 9 of 17

While it is an extremely important source of military and business innovation, improvisation is generally not realistically supported in computer simulations, which often insist that the “players” obey rules and constraint that in real activities they might decide to violate. Although they may fall short of realism in significant ways, computer simulations provide the kind of rapidly assessed measure of success we have discussed previously. They generate only surrogate experience, but they can improve learning in an experience-poor domain if they are used wisely, with clear attention to their limitations. So far, our applications of randomized strategies have focused exclusively on games in which the players’ interests are strictly opposed. Somewhat more surprising is the possibility of finding an equilibrium with random behaviour even when the players have common interests. In this case, mixing one’s plays leads to an inferior outcome for all parties. However, just because the outcome is inferior does not mean the strategies are not an equilibrium: equilibrium is a description not a prescription. The reason for mixing one’s moves arises from a failure of coordination. This problem only arises when there is not a unique equilibrium. For example, two people disconnected during a phone call do not always know who should call back. Without the ability to communicate, the players do not know which equilibrium to expect. In a loose sense, the equilibrium with randomization is a way of playing a compromise between the coordinated equilibra. #RandolphHarris 10 of 17

Sarah and William are the sort of couple you read about in fiction, O. Henry’s The Gift of the Magi, to be precise. “Nobody could ever count” their love for each other, and each was willing, even eager, to make any sacrifice to get a really worthy Christmas gift for the other. Sarah would sell her hair to get Willian a chain for his heirloom watch, and William would sell the watch to buy a comb for Sarah’s beautiful hair. If they know each other well enough, they should both reorganize the possibility that each will sell his or her one treasure to buy the other a gift, and the result will be a tragic mistake. Sarah should pause and consider whether it would be better to keep her hair and await William’s gift. Likewise, William should consider not selling his watch. Of course, if they both refrain, neither gives a gift, which would be a different mistake. The couple’s strategies interact even though their interests largely coincide. For each, both kinds of mistake would be a bad outcome. For concreteness, we give this a point of score of zero. As between the two outcomes in which one gives a gift and the other receives it, suppose each thinks it better to give (2 points) than to receive (1 point). The situation in which Sarah keeps her hair and William sells his watch is  possible equilibrium; each spouses strategy is the best response to the other’s. However, the situation in which Sarah sells her hair and William keeps his watch is also an equilibrium. Is there a mutually understood convention to select one equilibrium over the other? Surprise is an important aspect of a gift; therefore they cannot communicate in advance to establish a convention. #RandolphHarris 11 of 17

Mixing can help preserve the surprise, although at a cost. It is easy to check that the strategies in which each chooses to give with probability 2/3 and receive with probability 1/3 also constitute an equilibrium. Supposed Sarah uses such a mixture. If William sells his watch, there is a 1/3 chance that Sarah has kept her hair (2 points) and a 2/3 chance that she has sold it (0 point). The average outcome is 2/3 point. A similar calculation shows that if William keeps his watch, the average outcome is again 2/3 point. So William has no clear reason to choose one strategy rather than another, or indeed any mix. Once again, note that the function of Sarah’s best mix is to keep William willing to mix, and vice versa. The probabilities of mistakes are quite large: 4 times in 9 the couple finds that each has sold the item for which the other has bought the gift (an in the O. Henry story), and 1 time in 9 neither gets any gift. Because of these mistakes, the average score (2/3 point for each) is worse than that of either of the two equilibra in which one gives and the other receives (2 points for the giver and 1 for the receiver). This is unlike the tennis example from the past, in which each could actually raise one’s success rate by mixing. Why the difference? Tennis is a zero-sum game, in which the players’ interests are strictly opposed. They do better when they choose the mixing probabilities independently. #RandolphHarris 12 of 17

In our account of The Gift of the Magi, the couple’s interest are largely aligned. They need, therefore, to coordinate their mixing. They should toss one coin, and depending on the outcome decide who gives and who receives. The couple has a slight conflict of interest; William prefers the top left outcome, and Sarah the bottom right. Coordinated mixing can offer them a compromise, splitting the difference. When a common coin toss decides who gives and who receives, the average outcome for each becomes 1.5 points. Of course the element of surprise is lost. Major shift in demographics always cause disruptions. Even when we know they are coming, we never prepare for them. Our plans are based on expectations of what will happen. If things do not go as expected, we find that we have “malinvested.” Huston real estate was valuable and looked to become even more so when times were good for the oil business there; when the fortunes of the oil business changed, Houston real estate was found to have been overbuilt, overpriced, and many millions of dollars were lost. Lengthening life spans push people toward taking a longer-term perspective, but rapid rates of change force a shorter-term perspective in investments. Turbulence in technology and in governmental monetary policy have already shortened time horizons. Businesspeople once routinely built plants with a thirty-year useful life. Today, the rate of change is so fast, and uncertainty regarding inflation and potential changes in tax laws is too great for such investments to make sense. Faster change will shrink time horizons further. #RandolphHarris 13 of 17

Governments have taken on themselves the burden of looking a lifetime ahead, and the Social Security Administration is in for some rough times. When Otto von Bismarck, Germany’s Iron Chancellor, came up with the notion of a guaranteed old-age pension, it was a cynically clever and low-cost way to gain popular goodwill. So few people lived to age sixty-five that the amounts paid out in pension were a pittance. After watching the German experiment for a handful of years, other governments began following suit. None of them expected a World likes ours where a baby girl born in the United States of America today has an average life expectancy of 82 years—more than double that of Bismarck’s time—and even this estimate is based on the faulty assumption that her medical care will be no better than her great-grandmother’s was. At present, the Social Security Administration has two models: one they call “positive” and one they call “negative.” In the “positive” model, people work like slaves until old age, retire, and promptly die—presumably before they have had a chance to collect substantial social-security or medical benefits. In the “negative” model, people retire early, develop illnesses that require medical intervention, and then live a long time making doctor visits and hospital stays during those years. Plans based on these models deserve to be disturbed. A better, more realistic scenario would have people living and able to support themselves for a long time, with illnesses that can be handled easily and inexpensively. Present social-security are enough to provide a certain standard of living—food, housing, transportation, and so forth. In a future of great material wealth, these benefits will be easy to provide, and present projections of economic woe resulting from an aging population seem quaint. #RandolphHarris 14 of 17

A rapidly accumulating international literature tells lurid stories about computer crime—about bank swindles, espionage, viruses sent from one computer to destroy the contents of others. Movies like WarGames have dramatized the dangers from unauthorized entry to the computer and communication systems that control nuclear weapons. According to a published report in France, the Mafia has kidnapped an IBM executive and cut off his finger because it needed his fingerprint to breach a computer security system. The U.S.A. Department of Justice has defined a dozen different methods used in computer-based criminal activity. They range from switching or altering data as they enter the computer, to putting self-concealing instructions into the software, to tapping the computers. Widely publicized cases of “computer viruses” have illustrated the potential for sabotage of military and political communications and computation. However, relatively little thought has been given so far to the ways in which similar techniques might alter political life. One day in 1986, Jennifer Kuiper, a staff aide of Congressman Ed Zschau, saw her computer screen go blank. When she got her machine up and running again, two hundred letters had disappeared. Four days later hundreds of letters and addresses disappeared from the computer of Congressman John McCain. Capitol Hill police, claiming to have eliminated the likelihood of staff error, launched criminal investigations. #RandolphHarris 15 of 17

According to Zschau, himself, the founder of a computer software firm before entering politics, “Every office on Capitol Hill can be broken into in this way…It can bring the work that a member of Congress does to a complete halt.” With 250,000 word processors being used in the offices of American lawyers, it becomes feasible for a lawyer’s unscrupulous opposing counsel to glean compromising information by illegal access to his or her computer—and that this can be accomplished with inexpensive electronic equipment purchasable in the corner of Radio Shack. Politicians and officials, however, may be even more vulnerable. Thousands of computers, many of them linked in networks, are now found in congressional offices, the homes of elected officials and lobbyists, as well as on the desk tops of hundreds of thousands of civil servants who regulate everything from soybean quotas to air travel safety standards. Unauthorized and secret entry could cause endless troubles and shift power in unexpected ways. Computers also increasingly populate election campaign headquarters. Thus new, virtually undetectable games can be played in the ballot box itself. As you know, voter fraud is real. For example, an Iowa woman was arrested 12 January 2023, in Sioux City for her role in an alleged voter fraud scheme during the Iowa 2020 primary and general elections. Kim Phuong Taylor, 49, of Sioux City allegedly perpetrated a scheme to generate votes in the primary election in June 2020, when her husband was an unsuccessful candidate for Iowa’s 4^th U.S.A. Congressional District, and subsequently in 2020 general election, when her husband was a successful candidate for Woodbury County Supervisor. #RandolphHarris 16 of 17

Taylor allegedly submitted or caused others to submit dozens of voter registrations, absentee ballot request forms, and absentee ballot containing false information. For instance, although these documents required the singer to affirm that he or she was the person named in them, Taylor singed them for voter without their permission and told other that they could sign on behalf of relatives who were not present. Taylor is charged by indictment with 26 counts of providing false information in registering and voting, three counts of fraudulent registration, and 23 count of fraudulent voting. If convicted, she faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison for each count. Secure elections are the cornerstone of a thriving republic. A key priority for any Attorney General is to investigate and prosecute the increasing allegations of voter fraud to ensure election integrity within the United States of America. In Texas, since 2005, the office of the Attorney General successfully prosecuted election fraud offense against 155 individuals, out of 534 cases suspected. The number of pending offenses against 43 defendants is 510, and currently pending prosecution. There 386 case of active election fraud investigations in Texas. Voter fraud is a reason so many people are demanding Voter ID laws are employed and enforced. However, the objection is that millions of Americans lack ID. In fact, 11 percent of U.S.A. citizens—or more than 21 million Americans—do not have government-issued photo identification. The enforcement of voter ID laws is considered to be discriminatory because obtaining an ID costs money. Even if ID is offered for free, voters must incur numerous costs (such a paying for birth certificates) to apply for a government-issued ID. The combined cost is estimated to range from $75 to $175. However, not requiring voter ID is consider a national security threat. #RandolphHarris 17 of 17

Cresleigh Homes

Welcome to the neighborhood! 👋

We’re thrilled to meet newcomers to the #Havenwood community. Ideally located in the charming city of #Lincoln just down the street from Palo Verde Park.

Not a neighbor yet? Find out more on our website!

#CresleighHomes

Life is often a struggle. The characteristics of humanistic psychology are directly related to our view of human nature. Man’s own best interests, viewed in the light of a full understanding of his nature, are the criteria for the study and application of humanistic psychology. The first thing that interests us in understanding the essential self is what makes us go. By testing and trying himself out with all the limits of the human condition, man comes to some understanding of what he can and cannot do. This enables him to arrive at some acquired pattens of thought, attitude, and action, giving him a sense of safety or security. He has learned how to stand, what falling feels like, what staying up feels like, and, in the healthy child, a preference for the feeling of staying him. Far from being forced to grow up, the child who is growing in healthy terms, who has “made it” in the sense of acquiring a homeostatic balance of needs and tension-reductions, literally jumps at the chance to move up to the next stage. Those who were kept at a level of satisfaction and need-reduction become bored, fatigued, resentful. It is part of the biological nature of the person to seek continuing growth. Homeostasis moves up, then, from the biological drive to a learned need at each level, following a pattern: discover a need, motive or deficit, find a goal or incentive that will meet the need, and enjoy the satisfying tension-reduction for a period of time. Then it is time to move on to another field, for a different “ball game,” of the same kinds of processes. There is a level of care a one is obligated to exert for an accessible encounter past civil inattention to the question of how an when one can present oneself for official participation. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21

Even at social parties, where every encounter is supposed to be conducted in a fashion that makes it joinable by any guest, the entrant is expected to exert tact, and when cues suggest, not exercise one’s rights. When one does enter, one is expected to accept the current topic and tone, thus minimizing the disruption one causes. If a lady and gentleman are conversing together at an evening party, it would be a rudeness in another person to go up and interrupt them by introducing a new topic of observation. If you are sure that there is nothing of a particular and private interest passing between them you may join their conversation and strike into the current of their remarks; yet if you then find that they are so much engaged and entertained by the discussion that they were holding together, as to render the termination or change of its character unwelcome, you should withdraw. If, however, two persons are occupied with one another upon what you guess to be terms peculiarly delicate and particular, you should without yourself from their company. Welcome or not, the entrant today is usually expected to knock at the door of the encounter before one enters, thus giving the encounter advance warning of one’s intention and the participants a moment to straighten their house for the newcomer. One of the most interesting forms of cooperation in the maintenance of conventional closure is what might be called spacing. The term “individual distance” was introduced to describe the tendency of birds on a fence or railing to stay a particular distance from each other, the distance apparently varies with the species. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21

The term “flight distance” refers to the closeness with which an individual of a given species can be approached before taking flight. However, one should give caution against cross-cultural generalization. In the U.S.A., we distribute ourselves more evenly than many other people. We have strong feelings about touching and being crowded; in a streetcar, bus, or elevator we draw ourselves in. Toward  person who relaxes and lets oneself come into full contact with others in a crowded place we usually feel reactions that could not be printed on this page. It takes years for us to train our children not to crowd in on us, and allow of to have some room to breathe. In Latin America, where touching is more common and the basic units of space seem to be smaller, the wide automobiles make in the U.S.A. pose problems. People do not even know where to sit. In America, the tendency for units of participation in the situation—either face engagements or unengaged individuals—to distribute themselves cooperatively in the available space so as physically to facilitate conventional closure. (Often this seems to involve a maximization of the sum of squares of the physical distance among the various units. Spacing will of course ensure that “talk lines” are open, that is, that persons addressing one another in an encounter will have no physical obstruction to block the free exchange of glances. A bystander finding oneself interposed in such a line (in America society, at least) is likely to offer an apology and quickly shift one’s position. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21

While the phenomenon of spacing may be difficult to see because one takes it for granted, a tracing of it in reverse can be obtained by observing children and mental patients—those communication delinquents who sometimes play the game of “attack encounter.” On many wards, for example, a patient will follow a pair of talkers around the room until they have stopped moving, and then sidle right up to the edge of the encounter and lean into it. One adolescent patient I studied would intercept talk lines between two persons by waving her knitting needles in the way, or by swinging her upraised arms, or by thrusting her face into the face of one of the participants, or by sitting in his lap. Along with physical spacing, we also find control of sound so that the various units in the situation can proceed with their business at hand without being jammed out of operation. In many cases this will mean restriction on the volume of sound, although, at rare occasions like social parties, where persons may be crowded close to others not in the same encounter, a general raising of voices may be found; this allows coparticipants to hear each other, but jams the opportunities of eavesdroppers. Here, too, accurately designed delicts can be observed, as when an adolescent mental patient, in a spirit of fun, places her face up against the face of someone engaged in talk with another at a distance, and then shouts so that one can neither hear nor be heard. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21

The requirement that visually open talk lines be maintained, and that sound levels not interfere with neighbouring encounters, sets a limit to the distance over which spoken encounters can ordinarily be sustained. For example, should two persons carry on a conversation from one end of a crowded streetcar to the other, all the intervening passengers would have to remain out of the line of talk and modulate their own conversation so as not to jam the one being maintained over a distance. Such a conversation would necessarily also be fully available to everyone between the two speakers, and would therefore be likely to constitute an embarrassment, even were one of the speakers the conductor. Thus, engagements that must be carried on over such a populated distance are likely to be limited to the exchange of silent gestures, for these neither interfere with other encounters nor expose what is being conveyed. As might be expected, therefore, deaf and dumb persons who board a streetcar together and find themselves seated apart need not discontinue their exchange of messages, but are able to carry on conversation as long as sight lines are clear, their “talk” neither jamming the other talkers nor being accessible to them. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21

While physical spacing and sound control certainly have relevance to occasions such as social parties that are carried on within a relatively small physical region, they are perhaps even more important in public streets and roads and in semipublic regions. In Western society, the development of middle-class dominance is expressed in the rise of a relatively equalitarian use of public places. Even today, however, funerals, weddings, parades, and some other ceremonials are allowed to press their spirit momentarily upon the public at large. Technical units, such as ambulances, police cars, and fire engines cut through public traffic; and guests of a city may be given a motor escort. Some of these prerogatives, however, are but small remnants of practices that were once more general, such as the entourage and train associated with “clientage,” which led a worthy to demonstrate one’s status by the cluster of dependent supporters that accompanied one through a town or a house of parliament, shouldering one’s way for one wherever one went. Nor are these rules uniform within Westerns society, as is suggested by the response of King Edward (of Britain) and his party during a 1906 visit to the Emperor of Germany: The Emperor had a standard attached to his motor and a trumpeter on the box who blew long bugle-calls at every corner. The inhabitants thus had no difficulty in making out where the Emperor was, and all the traffic cleared out of the way when they heard the trumpets blow. The King, however, detested what he called “theatrical methods” and drove about like anybody else. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21

There can sometimes be a kind of restructuring that can occur when a situation is transformed from one containing many encounters—a multifocused situation—to one that is exhausted by a single all-encompassing engagement. For example, at noontime on award of Central Hospital, when the attendant shouts, “Chow time!” he is addressing the whole place, and wherever the sound level of his voice reaches, the meanings of his words are meant to carry too. Similarly, at a small social party, the arrival of a couple may cause the hostess to interrupt the separateness of all the separate encounters in order to introduce the newcomers to the assembly. So also, at formal dinners, the moment the hostess indicates that the conversation will be “general,” she opens up whatever is being said to all the guests. And, of course, whenever public speeches are given, the speaker’s words, as well as the heat with which one speaks them, are meant to impinge on the situation at large. In all such cases, there is the understanding that the situation at large. In all such cases, there is the content of the words of an appropriate single speaker; one has, as we say, the floor. The transformation of a multifocused situation into one that is exhausted by one face engagement is an interesting process to consider. At social parties we can observe a singer or guitar player make an effort to incorporate more and more of the room’s population into one’s audience, until a point is reached where one’s singing officially exhausts the chamber, and the party is momentarily transformed into a performance. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21

At the same time, as a particular encounter comes to include a larger and larger number of persons, side involvements increasingly occur in which a subordinate byplay is sustained, sometimes furtively, its volume and character modulated to allow the main show to prevail unchallenged as the dominating one. In mental hospitals there is a special kind of “symptomatic” behaviour that takes recognition of how the situation as a whole can be “talked to.” Many patients talk to someone, present or not, in a voice loud enough for everyone in the situation to hear and be somewhat distracted. However, those on the ward implicitly distinguish this kind of impropriety from that which occurs when a patient “addresses the situation,” haranguing everyone present in a tone and direction of voice that suggest one is purposely breaching the barriers designed to render clusters of talkers and game players safe in their own focused interactions. (Interestingly, although the actual volumes of sound may be greater in the case of a patient insufficiently modulating one’s contribution to a private conversation than in the case of a patient “addressing the situation,” it is the latter that is likely to cause the greater disturbance.) Attacks on the situation should be compared with the attacks on encounters, previously mentioned, which children, mental patients, and other communication delinquents perform. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21

Many middle-class parents in our society have experienced times when their children, forbidden to interrupt or even to enter a room where adults are talking, stealthily stalks the situation in self-conscious mimicry of stealthiness and stalking, resulting in much more disturbance to the gathering than one’s mere presence might entail. When it comes to constructive criticism, it is best to make a fault seem easy to correct. First off, do not start by discouraging an individual. Be honest, and see the potential they have and use those optimistic characteristics to guide them in the right direction. This will prevent an individual from feeling like a failure and give them the hope that they too can become the highest, the most exalted one. Tell your parents, child, spouse, or employer that one is stupid or dumb at a certain thing, has no gift for it, and is doing it all wrong, and you will have destroyed almost every incentive for improvement. However, when being liberal with your encouragement, making the things seem easy to do, letting the other person know that you have faith in one’s ability to do it, that one has an undeveloped flair for it—and one will practice until they are the brightest planet in the sky. Give confidence, inspire others, help one find the courage and strength that they have been endowed with. For instance, there is nothing to preparing for an exam except memory and judgement. Also, if you are going to be a successful student, you have to learn to read, and you have to actually read and gain a great understanding of the English language. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21

Going to college is great, but one will not succeed unless you start reading in high school. Reading is so important. So much of education can only be mastered by reading the material. If you are not going to read your books, and be prepared for lectures, there is no point in going to school. Many young minds are bright, but they are undisciplined. And, I know you may think TV is the most important thing, but those shows will all be there later. You can even binge watch them over Summer vacation. Take the time to study and get your homework done with a military like focus. Find a quiet room, and get busy. You are a potential genius. Sometimes school systems see surgical scars on students and incorrectly assume that they are injured and cannot function at a normal level. Even if you are a few years being in your age group, find a peer who is willing to help bring you up to speed. Every time you study, you are expanding you mind. You will notice the more you do it, the more understanding of the subject you gain, and eventually it will take you less time to absorb the muscle. It is a lot like cars. They start off cold, but gradually warm up. You can never get into a car, smash on the gas and go at top speed, it will ruin the engine. However, taking breaks it also important. If you are on a long haul in your vehicle, do not just suddenly smash on the gas, that can also mess up the engine. And just like a car, you do not want to overload your brain and burn out. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21

Naturally, the more you study, the more your grades will increase. No one is stupid. You notice that as early as four weeks old that many babies have the ability to form short sentences, and some even start walking at 7 months old. That is because they are smart. However, some need more practice and education to achieve these milestones, but they all get there. Also, as you learn the enrichment curriculum, you will notice that your other natural talents will develop and others will start to notice them. You can really learn and accomplish things. Do not let income/inequality be an excuse as to why you cannot succeed. I have seen poor kids grow up and become richer than students who had the World handed to them. Most cities have a public library where you can go and read books of interest. Social media is not as important as you think. So many people want to become famous for doing things that may not be in their best interest, but you can use your brain and become an auto science engineer or a tennis player. Maybe one day you will be elected in the national honour society. Once you find learning is easy, you whole life will change. Also, sometimes you make need to read a chapter in a book twice. Once to get a feel for the subject, and a second time to grasp the concepts being discussed. Eventually, reading will become easier and you will be able to read a chapter once. Also, to become an excellent writer, you need to read. Communication is so very important in any field of work you will go into. Just remember, faults are easy to correct. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21

Some people wonder whether one can do anything by oneself or whether it must be done with the help of others. Testify as to why you are superior and demonstrate it through your actions. When one tells people what should be done, they usually begin to argue, and not only argue but they become negative. That is really why help cannot be given, and why it is necessary to make rule and definite demands. If all that where needed were just to show people what to do, that would be simple, but it is not always easy to explain the chief features of false personality. Sometimes it is seen clearly, at other times it is more hidden and difficult to see, and then it is only possible to think in a general way of false personality. However, there is not a single case where I showed chief feature when people did not start violent arguing. At one meeting somebody said that he was occasionally able to observe oneself in the act of considering or becoming identified. He asked whether in this way he might come to know his false personality, and by observing it to weaken it. Actually, this is the only way and is very good so long as one does not tire of tying to do it. In the beginning, many people start very eagerly but soon get tired and begin to use the word “I” indiscriminately, without asking themselves which “I,” because we have no right to use it really in ordinary conditions. Much later, after long work, we can begin to think of one of the groups of “I”s (like what has been called Deputy Steward) which develop from magnetic center as “I.” #RandolphHarris 12 of 21

However, in ordinary conditions when you hear yourself saying “I do not like,” you must ask yourself which of your “I”s does not like. In this way you will remind yourself about the plurality which is in all of us. If you forget about it one time it will be easier to forget it next time. There are so many good beginnings in the work and then this is forgotten and people start to slide down, and in the end all that happens is that they become more mechanical than before. When it come to attribution of credit, there can be some common mistakes made. The wrong set of factors is often made in Complex Adaptive Systems for much of the same reasons. Diagnosis of causes in complex, multicausal situations are error prone. We might take as an example the problem of examining customer complaints about product malfunction in order to discover product defects or possible design improvements. Many large consumer product companies have service desks that answer thousands of calls per week about products. They frequently have systems that generate “trouble tickets” associated with each call. It is natural to ask what can be learned from the records of all this work that would contribute to improvement of the products, but closing this loop of organizational learning has often proven quite difficult. Working with a group of such reports, an analyst searches for pattern in the way the features and structure of the product interact with the circumstances of use reported by the customers. The hallmarks of complexity are present. The analyst may develop hypotheses such as: “All these customers reported that sound quality deteriorated when they were driving on country roads. Could it be that the audio unit is disturbed by shocks spaced at a particular frequency?” #RandolphHarris 13 of 21

Many hypotheses like this one are generated, but not all will be correct. In many organizations, such hypotheses are tested by checking if they are sufficient to reproduce the problem. In a complex World, many of those tests will fail. Someone from product development (not the same division as customer service) will subject the unit to low-frequency jolts and observe that it still performs well. An interesting strategy at such a moment of impasse is to bring into the process some of the frontline customer service agents who took the original calls. They may suggest something like, “These all came in last winter. Does it only happen if the unit is cold?” Of course, this may not turn out to be the answer. However, in an organization having trouble maintaining contact patterns between two divisions, the effort to correct a misattribution provides an occasion for interaction during which other useful information may flow. It functions as an episode of triggered recombination. Product people learn of other patterns noticed in customer service. The frontline agents learn about new product ideas in development and can then be alert to relevant remarks from customers. All of this reasoning makes sense in games like football or baseball or tennis, in which the same situation arises many times in one game, and the same players confront each other from one game to the next. Then there is time and opportunity to observe any systematic behaviour, and respond to it. Correspondingly, it is important to avoid patterns that can be exploited, and stick to the best mix. However, what about games that are played just once? #RandolphHarris 14 of 21

Consider the choices of points of attack and defense in a battle. Here the situation is usually so unique that no system from your previous actions can be inferred by the other side. However, a case for random choice arises from the possibility of espionage. If you choose a definite course of action, and the enemy discovers what you are going to do, one will adapt one’s course of action to one’s maximum disadvantage. You want to surprise one; the surest way to do so is to surprise yourself. You may want to consider keeping the options open as long as possible, and at the last moment choose between them by an unpredictable and therefore espionage-proof device. The relative proportions of the device should also be such that if the enemy discovered them, one would not be able to turn the knowledge to one’s advantage. However, that is just the best mix calculated in the description above. Finally, a warning. Even when you are using your best mix, there will be occasions when you have a poor outcome. Even if Paris Hilton is unpredictable, sometimes Britney Spears will still guess right and knock the ball out of the park. In football, in the third down and a yard to go, a run up the middle is the percentage play; but it is important to throw an occasional bomb to keep the defense honest. When such a pass succeeds, fans and sportscasters will marvel at the cunning choice of play, and say the coach is a genius. When it fails, the coach will come in for a lot of criticism: how could one gamble on a pass instead of going for the percentage play? #RandolphHarris 15 of 21

The time to justify the coach’s strategy is before using it on any particular occasion. The coach should publicize the fact that mixing is vital; the run up the middle remains such a good percentage play precisely because some defensive resources must be diverted to guard against the occasional costly bomb. However, we suspect that even if the coach shouts this message in all newspapers and television channels before the game, and then uses a bomb in such a situation and it fails, one will come in for just as much criticism as if one had not tried to educate the public in the elements of game theory. Another game we want to consider is politics. Of course, sports can be just as important and as serious as decisions made in Congress. An unnoticed “first” in politics was marked in 1989. That was the year John Sununu moved into the White House as its chief of staff, making him in all likelihood the World’s most highly placed “computernik.” In a World bristling with microchips, he was the first computer-literate person ever to occupy one of the pinnacles of political power. A mechanical engineer by training, Sununu had done doctoral work at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was known as a whiz who could spot and correct programming errors and question the mathematical model underlying an environmental impact statement. Whatever one may think of his political views, Sununu undeniably understood the power-potential of computerized information. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21

Before arriving in Washington, Sununu had served as governor of New Hampshire. When Sununu installed an electronic fiscal and financial control system for the state, members of the legislature demanded access to the data stored in the IBM mainframe. Sununu sidetracked their proposals declaring, “They’ll get what we think they need.” According to Time magazine, Sununu “seemed to be trying to shift the balance of political power” by “holding the state’s computerized financial data close to his chest.” In the end, the governor was forced to give one legislative official a password providing access to some (but not all) of the disputed data. Similarly, though a state court had held that citizens had a right to see and copy public documents, Sununu insisted that this did not apply to computerized data. Sununu, as governor, fully understood the power of knowledge about knowledge. Sununu’s action in New Hampshire was hardly subtle. Stamping something confidential or withholding access is an age-old tactic. New, more potent tools—many of them computer-based—are now available to those who wish to control data, information, and knowledge. In fact, we are witnessing a shift to a higher—and less visible—level of power struggle that reflects the rising level of abstraction and complexity in society generally as the super-symbolic economy spreads. Take, for example, computers. We now use computers to build computers. We are also developing CASE—computer-assisted software engineering. This is based on what might be termed “meta-software”—software designed to produce software. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21

One can imagine a future in which CASE is used to produce the meta-software, itself, in a kind of infinite regress, as the process moves to higher and higher levels of abstraction. Similarly, the early 1980s, “spreadsheet software” spread rapidly through the business World. These computer programs permitted hundreds of thousands of users to put numbers into columns and rows, as in a ledger book, and to manipulate them easily. Because they could automatically show how a change in one number or variable would affect all the others, they accustomed a whole generation of users to think in terms of “what if” scenarios. What would happen if we raised the price of a product by 2 percent? What if interest rates fell by half a point? What if we could get the new product to market a month sooner? However, spreadsheets, like traditional ledgers, were two-dimensional, flat as a chessboard. In 1989, Lotus Development Corporation, the main spreadsheet supplier, introduced its 1-2-3 Release 3.0. This program can be used to create three-dimensional spreadsheets—the accounting equivalent of moving chess pieces up and down as well as backward and forward on the conventional board. It permits users to simulate change in a business or a process in far more complex and revealing ways. It leads users to ask much smarter what-if questions at a much higher level. The new system of wealth creation requires a symbol-drenched work force. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21

Constant exposure to the data deluge—to media, computers, paperwork, fax machines, telephones, movies, posters, advertisements, memos, bills, invoiced, and a thousand other symbolic stimuli, with millions spending their time attending meetings, presenting ideas, persuading, negotiating, and otherwise exchanging images—makes for an increasingly “info-savvy” population. Just as Eskimos develop high sensitivity to differences in the properties of snow, and farmers can almost intuitively sense weather and soil changes, mind-workers become attuned to this informational environment. This rising sophistication compels those in power to seek new, higher-level instruments of persuasion and/or social control. Satellites, videocassettes, narrow-casting, niche-identification, cluster-targeting, extra-intelligent networks, instant polling, simulation, mathematical modeling, and other such technologies are becoming a taken-for-granted part of the political environment in the affluent nations. And along with these come new ways of manipulating computerized information that make all the conventional info-tactics of the politician or bureaucrat look crude and klutzy by comparison. Along with changes in the general population, therefore, fed by the shift to the new wealth-creation system, comes a parallel upgrading of the tools of manipulation used by politicians and government officialdom to hold on to their power. That is what meta-tactics are all about. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21

Nonetheless, even wealth and leisure cause problems. Lester Millbrath, professor of sociology and political science, observes, “Nanotechnologies will create the problem of how to meaningfully and sustainably occupy the time of people who need not perform much work in order to have a sufficiency of life’s goods. Our society has never faced this problem before, and it is not clear what social restructuring will be required to have a good society in those circumstances. We face much deep social learning.” The World has had little experience with what anthropologists’ call “abundance economies.” The Native American tribes of the pacific Northwest were one of those rarities. Their civilization was built upon an ample supply of goods, inexhaustible, and obtained without excessive expenditure of labour. The Kwakiutls became famous for the “potlaches”: contests in which they sought to shame their rivals by heaping more gifts upon them than they could ever return. The potlatches would often be a year in preparation, lasts for days, and occasionally involved destruction of entire buildings. It was certainly a colourful form of keeping up with the Winchesters. What will motivate us, once we have achieved an abundance economy? What will we regard as worthwhile goals to pursue? #RandolphHarris 20 of 21

Will part of the economy of abundance motive of to gain increased knowledge, new art, improved philosophy, eliminate human and planetary ills? Will we find ourselves creating a better, wiser World, or sunk in boredom and jaded now that we have all and want nothing? If boredom gets out of hand, the lively spectacle of wealthy doners seeking to outdo each other to endow the arts, assist the poor, and do other good deeds for the sake of prestige would be welcome. What will happen as life spans continue to lengthen and the time needed to make a living decreases? Even today, there are people who, when confronted with the prospect of significantly longer life span, exclaim that they could not imagine what they would do with all that time. This response can be hard to understand, when it would take a thousand years to walk all the World’s roads, more thousands of years to read all the World’s books, and another ten thousand years to have dinner conversation with each of the World’s people—but tastes differ, and even a few decades of bad television might make anyone long for the peace of the grave. However, perhaps more people will start hibernating. We all could use more sleep. Then wake up to a beautiful World, well rested and ready to enjoy their pleasures of life. Confusing? Of course! Like most truths, when we try to apply them to specific situations in our individual lives, we run the risk of failure. However, let that bit of wisdom sink in: You cannot intentionally set out to create or capture your own personal significance—not as a goal in itself. Human beings strive perpetually toward ultimate humanness, which itself may be anyway a different kind of Becoming and growing. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21

Cresleigh Homes

When it comes to entertaining a crowd, the Residence 4 model at #Havenwood is an absolute dream! 🌈 Take advantage of the butler’s pantry connecting the kitchen and dining rooms and customize the great room and loft room upstairs to fit your family’s needs. 👏

Check out more – including a full virtual tour – on our #CresleighHomes website!