Home » wife (Page 62)
Category Archives: wife
Only a Being Who Has Overcome the Lower Nature Oneself May Help Others to Overcome it in their Turn!
Ah, but you have worked it all so well. It was easier for you in old Rome, was it not? However, what a palace you have here. There are kings who would envy you. Master, long years ago, or so they seem to me, in some far-away place, where I lived before I came to you, I was what they called a Fool for God. I do not remember it clearly and never will as both of us well know. But a Fool for God was a man who gave himself over to God completely and did not care what happened, whether it was mockery, or starvation, or endless laughter, or dreadful cold. That much I remember, that I was a Fool for God in those times. Whatever I did I was a Fool for God. A Fool for God in some miserable monastery painting the sacred pictures, convinced my life would mean nothing unless it was a life of sacrifice and pain. And now, in your magic I see some similar burning purity. And I turned away from all the riches of life in Venice for that burning purity; I turned away from all that a human may have. “When I look at thy Heavens, the work of thy fingers, the Moon and the Stars which thou hast dost care for him? Yet thou hast made him little less than God, and dost crown him with glory and honor. Thou hast given him dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet,” Psalms 8.3-6. Sometime ago representative of the World of science demanded a new line of research. They called it a “science of survival.” #RandolphHarris 1 of 17
The science of survival did not mean the survival of individuals or social groups, of nations or of races—that would not be new—but the survival of civilized humankind, or of humankind as a whole, or even life altogether on the surface of this planet. Such a proposition is a sign that we have reached a stage of human history that has only one analogy in the past, the story of the “Great Flood,” found in the Old Testament and also among the myths and legends of many nations. The only difference between our situation and that of the Flood is that in these stories the gods or God brings about the destruction of life on Earth because beings have aroused divine anger. As the book of Genesis describes it: “The Lord was sorry that he had made humans on Earth and it grieved him to his heart. So the Lord said, I will blot out man, whom I have created, from the face of the ground, man and beast and creeping things and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.” In the next verse, the story answers the questions of possible survival—“But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.” Through him, we read, not only man but also a pair of each species of animal was to make possible the survival of life upon Earth. #RandolphHarris 2 of 17
Today, the destruction and survival of life have been given into the hands of beings—men and women and children. Beings who have dominion over all things, according to the psalm, has the power to save or destroy them, for they are little less than God. How do beings react to this new situation? How do we react? How should we react? “The Earth and we” has ceased to be merely a subject for human curiosity, artistic imagination, scientific study, or technical conquest. It has become a question of profound human concern and tormenting anxiety. We make desperate attempts to escape its seriousness. However, when we look deep into the minds of our contemporaries, especially those of the younger generation, we discover a dread that permeates their whole being. This dread was absent a few decades ago and is hard to describe. It is the sense of living under a continuous threat; and although it may have many causes, the greatest of these is the imminent danger of a universal and total catastrophe. Their reaction to this feeling is marked either by a passionate longing for security in daily life, or an exaggerated show of boldness and confidence in being, based on one’s conquest of Earthly and trans-Earthly space. Most of us experience some of these contradictory reactions in ourselves. #RandolphHarris 3 of 17
Our former naïve trust in the “motherly” Earth and her protective and preserving power has disappeared. It is possible that the Earth may bear us no longer. We ourselves may prevent her from doing so. No Heavenly sign, like rainbow given to Noah as a promise that there would not be a second flood, has been given to us. We have no guarantee against human-made floods, that destroy not by water but by fire and air. Such thoughts give rise to the question—what has it to say about the significance of the Earth, the scene of human history, in view of the vastness of the Universe? What about the short span of time allotted to this planet and the life upon it, as compared to the unimaginable length of rhythms of the Universe? Such questions have been rarely asked in Christian teaching and preaching. For the central themes of Christianity have been the drama of the creation and fall, of salvation and fulfillment. However, sometimes peripheral questions move suddenly into the center of a system of thought, not for any theoretical reason, but because such questions have become, for many, matters of life and death. This is the kind of movement has very often occurred in human history as well as in Christian history. And whenever it has occurred, it has changed being’s view of oneself in all respects, as it has changed the understanding of the Christian tradition on all levels. #RandolphHarris 4 of 17
It may well be that we are living in such a moment, and that being’s relation to the Earth and the Universe will, for a long time, become the point of primary concern for sensitive and thoughtful people. Should this be the case, Christianity certainly cannot withdraw into the deceptive security of its earlier questions and answers. It will be compelled forward into the more daring inroads of the human spirit, risking new unanswered questions, like those we have just asked, but at the same time pointing in the direction of the eternal, the source and goal of beings and this World. For a moment, let us imagine what thinking must have been like for the first people who were aware that they were aware. Science cannot explain why the World makes scientific sense. It cannot explain why we are here, or, now that we are here, what we should do about it. The first people had no words to describe the World they were experiencing. Because we think in symbols, it is difficult for us to imagine what those early people, who had no symbols, thought, but we can try. The first aware people began to collect information about the World. They saw a large, bright object move across the Sky. It has a profound effect upon their bodies. While it was there, they felt warm, and they could see. In its absence, the World became dark and cold. #RandolphHarris 5 of 17
As it passed, those first human beings saw the trees drop their leaves and die. Then, magically, the trees came back to life in brilliant colors and alluring smells. Finally, those trees produced an object that was good to eat. Then the trees appeared to die, only to return to give birth again and again. Try to imagine how awed early people must have been by these simple events. The first humans were becoming aware. However, they had no word-symbols to express that awareness in thought or speech. Then perhaps one day two human beings both made a similar sound while grabbing for the same apple. They walked on apart, but perhaps one of these people heard yet another person make the same sound, and, magically, the picture of the apple appeared in the mind of this early human being. It was probably through random events such as this that people began the process of naming object and understanding their World. Many primitive people probably believed that everything was controlled by some sort of spirit. If there was a storm, the reason must be that the gods were angry. People also assumed that forces or spirits controlled all their behavior. Our predicament has been brought about chiefly by the scientific and technical development of our century. It is as foolish as it is futile to complain of this development. #RandolphHarris 6 of 17
There it is possessed before us—a realm created by humans quite beyond the realm that was given one by nature when one first emerged from earlier forms of life. There it is, changing our lives and thoughts and feelings in all dimensions, consciously, and even more, unconsciously. Today’s students are not what students of the preceding generations were. Today’s hopes and anxieties are strange and often unintelligible to the older among us. And if we compare our two generations with any in earlier centuries, the distance separating us from them becomes really immense. Since this sudden thrust forward has been brought about by science and its application, must not science itself have the last word about beings, their Earth and the Universe? What can religion add? Indeed, has not religion, whenever it did try to explore these subjects, interfered with scientific development, and therefore been pushed aside? This certainly happened in the past, and is happening again today. However, it is not religion in itself that interferes; it is the anxiety and fanaticism of religious people—laymen as well as theologians—marked by a flight from serious thought and an unwillingness to distinguish the figurative language of religion from the abstract concepts of scholarly research. #RandolphHarris 7 of 17
In many sections of the Christian World, however, such distortions and misuse of religion have been overcome. Here one can speak freely of a being and their Earth in the name of religion, with no intention of adding anything to scientific and historical knowledge, or of prohibiting any scientific hypothesis, however bold. We imagine that the thought of the Sage is too far behind us; we left all that when we left the primitive and medieval ages. The philosophic quest is apparently something quite obnoxious to the modern matter-of-fact spirit. The reality is that thought of the Sage is too far ahead of us, and leaves the plain being panting. The Masters exist, not as a special community in far-off Rocklin Trails, but as scattered individuals in different parts of the World. They have their strange powers and enigmatic secrets, but these are not the theatrical and sensational things that imaginative occultists would have us believe. The spiritually stronger a being becomes, the less one needs to lean on other beings. Consequently advanced mystics have little or no need of joining any society, fraternity, or community. All talk of the adepts and masters themselves being members of such associations, living together in a Cresleigh Home in Rocklin Trails or elsewhere, is possible, but no one really knows. #RandolphHarris 8 of 17
It is an invisible spiritual order to which they belong, one which needs no visible organization because that could never express it but only limit its universality and falsify its insights. There is an aristocracy of time in a truer sense than that which we in the West usually give the word. It is formed from the aristocrats of the mind; a superior caste of men and women which was founded hundreds of thousands of years before our first European noble was given his accolade. Their breeding is not based on fleeting codes, but on the eternal laws of life. What is ethical to meaner mortals is aesthetical to them. I sought to tack down the truth about the Taltos, to determine whether they were pure myth or whether they were human beings. Here was a subject engulfed in superstition, misinformation, and wishful thinking—not only in the distant West but also in it own Old World homelands. After I discovered it, I then discovered that people did not know the most elementary facts about Taltos but preferred, in their mental picture, either to deprive them of all humanity or to turn them into overly sentimental all-too-human creatures. Some successful breeding occurred and the offspring gave rise both to ‘little people’ and Taltos with human genes of the Taltos. And centuries passed, all this became a matter of superstition and legend. #RandolphHarris 9 of 17
There were terrible wars and massacres and unspeakable bloodshed. The Taltos, being far less aggressive than human, lost out to the new species. The Taltos tend in their natural state to be extremely naïve and childlike. They are telepathic, curious by nature and hardwired with a tremendous amount of basic historical and intellectual knowledge. It is born knowing, as the say, all about the species itself, the island continent from which they came, and the place in the British Isles to which they migrated after the island was destroyed by the same volcano that created it. The rarity of such beings among us shows what anyone can quickly see—that their attainment is hard to realize. However, it also shows that most of them do not return to this Earth again. They pass on. However, the tradition is that they do not pass without initiating one other person at least. Such men and women are indeed the spiritual vanguard of the human race. In one sense, one is the loneliest of beings, for one rarely meets with others of one’s kind inhabiting the plant. However, in another sense one is not, for the extent and depth of the affection which one receives are out of the ordinary. Such beings are so few, their worth to society so great, the darkness around us gathering so thickly, that their presence among us is the greatest blessing. #RandolphHarris 10 of 17
According to our traditions the history of the World does not contain any period where there were not beings who had realized their higher nature. However, they were very very few. Is there anyone among those you know today, as well as all those you have known in the past, to whom you can point as a fully enlightened beings, as one conscious of one’s Overself? Your answer will reveal how rare this attainment is. The succession of saviours has existed as long as the human race itself as existed. The infinite power which shepherds its evolution can always be trusted to send these illumined beings as and when its own laws and human needs call for them. Beings who have entered into the fill glory of spiritual illumination, who have realized to the utmost their diviner possibilities, are rare in any age, rarer still in our own materialistic one. This deep union with the Overself occurs in the greatest secrecy. Nobody else knows what has happened to the being, much less understands. Nor will one let anyone know. Except in the case of a prophet sent on a public mission to humankind, people will have to discover it for themselves. The greater the being, the more one shriks from being made a show. The race of sages is nearly dead. There may be some hiding in the monasteries of Cresleigh Homes in Rocklin Trails or in the penthouses of New York City. #RandolphHarris 11 of 17
It remains what it always was—a very small inconspicuous minority although some individuals among it, gifted with talent or singled out by destiny, have become personally conspicuous at times. Where are they do few, these sages, these serene and urbane self-realized ones? Nature works very hard and only attains her aim once in a multitude of throws. In humankind is she created one sage in a human million people, she may well be contended. It is indeed difficult to find beings whose lives are thus touched with Truth. They stand supreme but solitary in the mystic battlefield of life, but when they enter the public arena the World becomes aware that a star of unwonted brilliance is blazing it its firmament. There was either a longer past or a loftier planet than our own behind these great masters. It is true that most people believe that they cannot like the sages or live like the saints and that it is useless to entertain any further thought about them. They look at the World around them and see the events which are taking place or read about them and they believe that this is not the kind of World with which sages and saints could cope and that therefore they have little value to us today. However, here they are not altogether right. A study of history from the earliest times will show that whenever sages and saints have appeared there were great evils in the World of their time and they were always exception figures among their peoples. #RandolphHarris 12 of 17
The memories of them have remained carefully kept and guarded by those who know the importance of right values. That importance reminds today and what these figures of eminent wisdom and holiness have to tell us about the higher laws of life and the higher nature of beings is still as true as ever it was. Creativity occurs in an act of encounter and is to be understood with this encounter as its center. I see a tree. I see it in a way no one else has ever seen it. I experience it, and no doubt have been grasped by that tree. The arching grandeur of the tree, the mothering spread, the delicate balance as the tree grips the Earth—all these and many more characteristics of the tree are absorbed into my perception and are felt throughout my nervous structure. These are part of the vision I experience. This vision involved an omission of some aspects of the scene and a greater emphasis on other aspects and the ensuing rearrangement of the whole’ but it is more than the sum of all these. Primarily it is vision that is now not tree, but Tree; the concrete tree I looked at is formed into the essence of tree. However, original and unrepeatable my vision is, it is still a vision of all trees triggered by my encounter with the particular one. The painting that issues out of this encounter between a human being, I, and an object of reality, the tree, are literally new, unique and original. #RandolphHarris 13 of 17
Something is born, comes into being, something that did not exist before—which is as good as a definition of creativity as we can get. Thereafter everyone who looks at the painting with intensity of awareness and lets it speak to one will see the tree with the unique powerful movement, the intimacy between the tree and the landscape, and the architectural beauty which literally did not exist in our relation with trees until I experienced and painted them. I can say without exaggeration that many have never really seen a tree until they have seen and absorbed beautiful paintings of them. Think about it, trees are alive, they have souls, they give birth, grow and die. And to deprive a tree of water and making it endure the hot Summer days is probably about as painful as branding a human with a hot comb. “And there was no inequality among them; the Lord did pour out his Spirit on all the face of the land to prepare the minds of the children of beings, or to prepare their hearts to receive the word which should be taught among them at the time of his coming—that they might night be hardened against the word, that they might not be unbelieving, and go on to destruction, but that they might receive the word with joy, and as a branch be grafted into the true vine, that they might enter into the rest of the Lord their God,” reports Alma 16.16-17. #RandolphHarris 14 of 17
We must take care not to fall into the depressing belief that this is to be attained by masters only and that we cannot attain it. It is unhelpful to put this goal on some Everest-like peak far beyond the human climbing. If many are called but few are chosen, it is their own weakness which defers the time of being chosen. In the end, and with much patience, they too will find the way beyond the struggle into peace. It is not enough to find an ideal to help one’s course in life: it should also be based on truth, not fancy of falsity. The aspiration must not only be a desirable one, it must also be attainable. There is always a valid reason for disparity between the sought-for objective and the actual performance. Those who begin hopefully and enthusiastically but find themselves disappointed and without result, ought to look first to their understanding of the Quest and correct it, to their picture of the Goal and redraw it. The existentialists teach that both [creatureliness and godlikeness] are defining characteristics of human nature…And any philosophy which leaves out either cannot be considered to be comprehensive. If you want to find out why so many fail to reach the Quest’s objective and so few succeed in doing so, first find out what the Quest really is. Then you will understand that the failures are no failures at all; that so large a project to change human nature and human consciousness cannot be finished in a little time. #RandolphHarris 15 of 17
B.F. Skinner’s experiments are not concerned with the goals of the conditioning. The animal or the human subject is conditioned to behave in a certain way. What one is conditioned to is determined by the decision of the experimenter who sets the foals for the conditioning. Usually the experimenter in these laboratory situations is not interested in what he or she is condition an animal or human subject for, but rather in the fact that one can condition them to the goal of one’s choice, and in how one can do it best. However, serious problems arise when we turn from the laboratory to realistic living, to individual or social life. In this case the paramount questions are: to what are people being conditioned, and who determines these goals? In seems that when Skinner speaks of culture, he still has his laboratory in mind, where the psychologist who proceeds without value judgments can easily do so because the goal of the conditioning hardly matters. At least, that is perhaps one explanation why Skinner does not come to grips with the issue of goals and values. For example, he writes, “We admire people who behave in original or exceptional ways, not because such behavior is itself admirable, but because we do not know how to encourage original or exceptional behavior in any other way.” #RandolphHarris 16 of 17
This is nothing but circuitous reasoning: we admire originality because we can condition it only by admiring it. But why we do we want to condition it if it is not a desirable goal in itself? The degree of originality and creativity that is desirable in various classes and occupational groups in a given society varies. Scientists and top managers, for instance, need to have a great deal of these qualities in a technological-bureaucratic society like ours. For blue-collar workers to have the same degree of creativity would be a luxury—or a threat to the smooth functioning of the whole system. I do not believe that this analysis is a sufficient answer to the problem of the value of originality and creativity. There is a great deal of psychological evidence that striving for creativeness and originality are deeply rooted impulses in beings, and there are some neurophysiological evidence for the assumption that the striving for creativity and originality is built in the system of the brain. It may be that such beings are vanishing from the World scene, that their successors today are second and third rate, possessors of a shallower enlightenment and a narrow perception. These beings are not just abnormal variations of the human species but glorious harbingers of its future development when its own times arrives. #RandolphHarris 17 of 17
And Yet One Word Frees Us of All the Weight and Pain of Life: That Word is Love!
The old art of the churches and the monasteries would never have allowed such a thing. Indeed it had banished such carnality completely. Yet here in the Pope’s chapel were these damsels, one with her back to us, and the other facing us, a dreamy expression in her eyes. “Duchess Meghan,” I whispered. “I have found you here, found you in your youth and in your eternal beauty. Duchess Meghan, you are here on the wall.” I turned away from these frescoes. I paced the floor. Then I went back to them, studying them with my uplifted hands, careful not to touch them, studying them with my uplifted hands, careful not to touch them, just moving my hands over there, as if I had to look through my hands as well as through my eyes. I had to know who this painter was! I hat to see his work. I had fallen in love with him. I had to see everything ever done by him. Was he young? Was he old? Was he alive? Was he dead? I had to know. The structural trends of modern society and the manipulative character of its communication technique come to a point of coincidence in the mass society, which is largely metropolitan society. The growth of the metropolis, segregating men and women into narrowed routines and environments, causes them to lose any firm sense of their integrity as a public. #RandolphHarris 1 of 15
The members of publics in smaller communities know each other more or less fully, because they meet in the several aspects of the total life routine. The members of masses in metropolitan society know one another only as fractions in specialized milieux: the being who fixes the car, the girl who serves your lunch, the sales persons, the person who takes care of your child at school during the day. Prejudgment and stereotype flourish when people meet in such ways. The human reality of others does not, cannot, come through. People, we know, tend to select those formal media which confirm what they already believe and enjoy. In a parallel way, they tend in the metropolitan segregation to come into live touch with those whose opinions are similar to theirs. Others they tend to treat unseriously. In the metropolitan society they develop, in their defense, a blasé manner that reaches deeper than a manner. They do not, accordingly, experience genuine clashes of viewpoint, genuine issues. And what they do, they tend to consider it mere rudeness. Sunk in their routines, they do not transcend, even by the discussion, much less by action, their more or less narrow society and of their role as a public within it. The city is a structure composed of such little environments, and the people in them tend to be detached from one another. #RandolphHarris 2 of 15
The stimulating variety of the city does not stimulate the men and women of the bedroom belt, the one-class suburbs, who can go through life knowing only their kind. If they do reach for one another, they do so only through stereotypes and prejudiced images of the creatures of other milieux. Each is trapped by one’s confining circle; each is cut off from easily identifiable groups. It is for people in such narrow milieux that the mass media can create a pseudo-World beyond, and a pseudo-World within themselves as well. Publics live in milieux but they can transcend them—individually by intellectual effort; socially by public action. By reflection and debate and by organized actions, a community of publics comes to feel itself and comes in fact to be active at points of structural relevance. However, members of a mass exist in muieux and cannot get out of them, either by mind or by activity, except—in the extreme case—under the organized spontaneity of the bureaucrat on a motorcycle. We have not yet reached the extreme case, but observing metropolitan beings in the American mass we can surely see the psychological preparations for it. We may think of it in this way: When a handful of beings do not have jobs, and do not seek work, we look for the causes in their immediate situations and character. However, when twenty million people are unemployed, then we cannot believe that all of them suddenly got lazy and turned out to be no good. #RandolphHarris 3 of 15
Economist call this structural unemployment—meaning, for one thing, that the beings involved cannot themselves control their jobs chances. Structural unemployment does not originate in one factory or in one town, nor is it due to anything that one factory or in one town, nor is it due to anything that one factory or one town does or fails to do. Moreover, there is little or noting that one ordinary being in one town can do about it when it sweeps over one’s personal milieux. Now, this distinction, between social structure and personal milieu, is one of the most important available in the sociological studies. It offers us a ready understanding of the position of the public in America today. In every major area of life, the loss of a sense of structure and the submergence into powerless milieux is the cardinal fact. In the military it is most obvious, for here the roles beings play are strictly confining; only the command posts at the top afford a view of the structure of the whole, and moreover, this view is a closely guarded official secret. In the division of labor too, the jobs beings enact in the economic hierarchies are also more or less narrow milieux and the positions from which a view of the production process as a whole can be had are centralized, as beings are alienated not only from the product an the tools of their labor, but from any understanding of the structure and the process of production. #RandolphHarris 4 of 15
In the political order, in the fragmentation of the lower and in the distracting proliferation of the middle-level organization, beings cannot see the whole, cannot see the top, and cannot state the issues that will in fact determine the whole structure in which they live and their place within it. This loss of any structural view or position is the decisive meaning of the lament over the loss of community. In the great city, the division of milieux and of segregating routines reaches the point of closet contact with the individual and the family, for, although the city is not the unit of prime decision, even the city cannot be seen as a total structure by most of its citizens. On the one hand, there is the increased scale and centralization of the structure of decision; and, on the other, the increasingly narrow sorting out of being into milieux. From both sides, there is the increased dependence upon the formal media of communication, including those of education itself. However, the being in the mass does not gain a transcending view from these media; instead one gets one’s experience stereotyped, and then one gets sunk further by that experience. One cannot detach oneself in order to observe, must less to evaluate, what one is experiencing, much less what one is not experiencing. Rather than that internal discussion we call reflection, one is accompanied through one’s life-experience with a sort of unconscious, echoing monologue. #RandolphHarris 5 of 15
One had no projects of one’s own: one fulfills the routines that exist. One does not transcend whatever one is at any moment, because one does not, one cannot, transcend one’s daily milieux. One is not truly aware of one’s own daily experience and of its actual standards: one drifts one fulfills habits, one’s behavior a result of a planless mixture of the confused standards and the confused standards and the uncriticized expectations that one has taken over from others whom one no longer really knows or trusts, if indeed one ever really did. One takes things for granted, one makes the best of them, one tries to look ahead—a year or two perhaps, or even long if one has children or a mortgage—but one does not seriously ask, What do I want? How can I get it? A vague optimism suffuses and sustains one, broken occasionally by little miseries and disappointments that are soon buried. One is smug, from the standpoint of those who think something might be the matter with the mass style of life in the metropolitan frenzy where self-making is an externally busy branch of industry. By what standards does one judge oneself and one’s effort? What is really important to one? Where are the models of excellence for this being? #RandolphHarris 6 of 15
One loses one’s independence, and more importantly, one loses the desire to be independent: in fact, one does not have hold of the idea of being an independent individual with one’s own mind and one’s own worked-out of life. It is not that one likes or does not like this life; it is that the question does not come up sharp and clear so one is not bitter and one is now sweet about conditions and events. One thinks one wants merely to get one’s share of what is around with as little trouble as one can and with as much fun as possible. Such order and movement as one’s life possesses are in conformity with external routines; otherwise one’s day-to-day experience is a vague chaos—although one often does not know it because, strictly speaking, one does not truly possess or observe one’s own experience. One does not formulate one’s desires; they are insinuated into one. And, in the mass, one loses the self-confidence of the human being—if indeed one has ever had it. For life in society of masses implants insecurity and further impotence; it makes beings uneasy and vaguely anxious; it isolates the individual from the solid group, the being in the mass just feels pointless. The idea of a mass society suggests the idea of an elite of power. The idea of public, in contrast, suggests the liberal tradition of society without any power elite, or at any rate with shifting elites of no sovereign consequence. #RandolphHarris 7 of 15
For, if a genuine public is sovereign, it needs no master; but the masses, in their full development, are sovereign only in some plebiscitarian moment of adulation to an elite as authoritative celebrity. The political structure of a democratic state requires the public; and, the democratic being, in one’s rhetoric, must asset that this public is the very seat of sovereignty. However, now, given all those forces that have enlarged and centralized the political order and more administrative; given the transformation of the old middle classes into something which perhaps should not even be called middle class; given all the mass communications that do not truly communicate; given all the metropolitan segregation that is not community; given the absence of voluntary associations that really connect the public at large with the centers of power—what is happening is the decline of the set of publics that is sovereign only in the most formal and rhetorical sense. Moreover, in many countries the remnants of such publics as remain are now being frightened out of existence. They lose their will for rationally considered decision and action because they do not possess the instruments for such decision and action; they lose their political belonging because they do not belong; they lose their political will because they see no way to realize it. #RandolphHarris 8 of 15
The top of modern American society is increasingly unified, and often seems willfully co-ordinated: at the top there has emerged an elite of power. The middle levels are a drifting set of stalemated, balancing forces: the middle does not link the bottom with the top. The bottom of this society is politically fragmented, and even as a passive fact, increasingly powerless: at the bottom there is emerging a mass society. One can likewise see the compartmentalization in the separation of art from the realities of life, the use of art in its prettified, romantic, academic forms as hypocritical escape from existence and nature, the art as artificiality against Cezanne. Van Gogh, the impressionists, and other modern art movement so vigorously protested. One can furthermore see the fragmentation in the separating of religion from weekday existence, making it an affair of Sundays and special observances, and the divorce of ethics from business. The segmentation was occurring also in philosophy and psychology—when Kierkegaard fought so passionately against the enthronement of an arid, abstract reason and pleaded for a return to reality, he was by no means tilting at windmills. #RandolphHarris 9 of 15
The Victorian men and women saw themselves as segmented into reason, will, and emotions and found the picture good. Their reason was supposed to tell them what to do, then voluntaristic will was supposed to give one the means to do it, and emotions—well, emotions could be best be channeled into compulsive business drive and rigidly structuralized in Victorian mores; and the emotions which would really have upset the formal segmentation, such as pleasures of the flesh and hostility, were to be staunchly repressed or let out only in orgies of patriotism or on well-contained weekend binges in Bohemia in order that one might, like a steam engine which has let off surplus pressure, work more effectively on returning to one’s desk Money morning. Naturally, this kind of being has to put great stress on rationality. Indeed, the very term irrational means a thing not to be spoken of or thought of; and Victorian being’s repressing, or compartmentalizing, what was not to be thought of was a precondition for the apparent stability of the culture. The citizen of the Victorian period so needed to persuade oneself of one’s own rationality that one denied the fact that one had ever been a child or had a child’s irrationality and lack of control; hence the radical split between the adult and the child, which was portentous for Dr. Freud’s investigations. #RandolphHarris 10 of 15
This compartmentalization went hand in hand with the developing industrialism, as both cause and effect. A being who can keep the different segments of one’s life entirely separated, who can punch the clock every day at exactly the same moment, whose actions are always predictable, who is never troubled by irrational urges or poetic visions, who indeed can manipulate oneself the same way one would the machine whose levers one pulls, is the most profitable worker not only on the assembly line but even on many of the higher levels of production. The corollary is likewise true: the very success of the industrial system, with its accumulation of money as a validation of personal worth entirely separate from the actual product of a being’s hands, had a reciprocal depersonalizing and dehumanizing effect upon beings in their relation to others and oneself. It was against these dehumanizing tendencies to make beings into a machine, to make one over in the image of the industrial system for which one labored, that the early existentialists image of the industrial system for which one labored, that the early existentialists fought so strongly. And they were aware that the most serious threat of all was that reason would join mechanics in sapping the individual’s vitality and decisiveness. Reason, was predicted, as becoming reduced to a new kind of technique. #RandolphHarris 11 of 15
Scientists in our day are often not aware that his compartmentalization, finally, was also characteristic of the sciences of the century of which we are heirs. This nineteenth century was the era of the autonomous sciences. Each science developed in its own direction; there was no unifying principle, particularly with relation to beings. The views of beings in the period were supported by empirical evidence amassed by the advancing sciences, but each theory became a Procrustean bed on which the empirical facts were stretched to fit a preconceived pattern…Owing to this development our modern theory of beings lost their intellectual center. We acquired instead a complete anarchy of thought. Theologians, scientists, politicians, sociologists, biologists, psychologists, ethnologists, economists all approached the problem for their own viewpoints…every author seems on the last count to be led by one’s own conception and evaluation of human life. In no other period of human knowledge have beings ever become more problematic to oneself than in our own days. We have a scientific, a philosophical, and a theological anthropology that knowing nothing of each other. Therefore, we no longer possess any clear and consistent idea of beings. The ever-growing multiplicity of the particular sciences that are engaged in the study of beings has much more confused and obscured than elucidated our concept of beings. #RandolphHarris 12 of 15
Now it is to be noted that the compartmentalization of the culture had its psychological parallel in radical repression within the individual personality. Dr. Freud’s genius was in developing scientific techniques for understanding, and mayhap curing, this fragmentized individual personality; but one did not see—until much later, when he reacted to the fact with pessimism and some detached despair—that the neurotic illness in the individual was only one side of disintegrating forces which affected the whole of society. The results of this disintegration upon the inner emotional and spiritual life of the individual; endemic anxiety, loneliness, estrangement of one being from another, and finally the condition that would lead to ultimate despair, being’s alienation from oneself. We live in a period of atoms, of atomic chaos, and out of this chaos we foresee, in a vivid prediction of collectivism in the twenty first century, the terrible apparition…the Nation State…and the hunt for happiness will never be greater than when it must be caught between today and tomorrow; because the day after tomorrow all hunting time may have come to an end altogether…Dr. Freud saw this fragmentation of personality in the light of natural science and was concerned with formulating its technical aspects. #RandolphHarris 13 of 15
We must not underestimate the importance of the specific psychological analysis; but they were much more concerned with understanding humans as the being who represses, the being who surrenders self-awareness as a protection against reality and then suffers the neurotic consequences. The strange questions is: What does it mean that beings, the being in the World who can be conscious that one exist and can know one’s existence, should choose or be forced to choose to block off this consciousness and should not suffer anxiety, compulsion for self-destruction, and despair? Be keenly aware that the sickness of soul of Western beings is a deeper and more extensive morbidity than could be explained by the specific individual or social problems. Something is radically wrong in being’s relation to themselves; beings have become fundamentally problematic to themselves. This is Europe’s true predicament, together with the fear of beings we have lost the love of humanity, confidence in beings, indeed, the will to humans. Spiritual experiences that occur during adolescence are indications that one has possibilities of travelling on the spiritual quest. However, one must decide whether one prefers abnormal occult experiences or the less dramatic, slower growth in the cultivation of one’s divine soul. #RandolphHarris 14 of 15
A beginner cannot mix the two goals safely. And if one seeks the higher goal, one can expect to have help of an advanced mystic. One would be a rash being who promised everyone who embarked upon this quest definite experiences of a mystical, occult, extraordinary, ecstatic, supernatural, or any such kind. Such results sometimes come, sometimes not; but the persons who follow the regimes or endure the disciplines chiefly in expectation of them may well be disappointed, may even end in distrust in their teachers and teachings. A wiser type of aspirant will not insist on such experiences but will understand that there are more important and more lasting things. The spiritual crisis of beings is harder and longer, in effort to redress the balance. “And ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit. And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, one will I baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost, even as the Lamanites, because of their faith in me at the time of the conversion, were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and the knew it not. Behold, I have come unto the World to bring redemption into the World, to save the World from sin,” 3 Nephi 9.20-21. God is the ambassador from the infinite, an envoy to all beings from the higher plane of their own being, and is a link between the commonplace World of ordinary living and the sublime World of mystical being. #RandolphHarris 15 of 15
And then to Lose Him, to Lose this Young One with Whom I Felt Such Utter Communion—Ah, that was Such Rich Pain!
This is what I believe happened. I brought the inventions of the modern World to her as offerings. At first it was the machines that played music, and then came those which would show moving pictures. At last, I brought the most powerful of all, the television that would play constantly. I set it in her shrine as though it were a sacrifice. In all modern societies, the autonomous associations standing between the various classes and the state tend to lose the effectiveness as vehicles of reasoned opinion and instruments for the rational exertion of political will. Such associations can be deliberately broken up and thus turned into passive instruments of rule, or they can more slowly wither away from lack of use in the face of centralized means of power. However, whether they are destroyed in a week, or wither away in a generation, such associations are replaced in virtually every sphere of life by centralized organizations, and it is such organizations with all their new means of power that can take charge of the terrorized—or as the case may be—merely intimidated, society of masses. The institutional trends that make for a society of masses are to a considerable extent a matter of impersonal drift, but the remnants of the public are also exposed to more personal and intentional forces. Rather like the music of the violin, I think, just as deeply colored, such terrible pain. #RandolphHarris 1 of 18
With the broadening of the base of politics within the context of a folk-lore of democratic decision-making, and with the increased means of mass persuasion that are available, the public of public opinion has become the object of intensive efforts to control, manage, manipulate, and increasingly intimidate. In political, military, economic realms, power becomes, in varying degrees, uneasy before the suspected opinions of masses, and, accordingly, opinion-making becomes an accepted technique of power-holding and power-getting. The minority electorate of the propertied and the educated I replaced by the total suffrage—and intensive campaigns for the vote. The small eighteenth-century professional army is replaced by the mass army of conscripts—and by the problems of nationalist morale. The small shop is replaced by the mass-production industry—and the national advertisement. As the scale of institutions has become larger and more centralized, so has the range and intensity of the opinionmakers’ efforts. The means of opinion-making, in fact, have paralleled in range and efficiency the other institutions of greater scale that cradle the modern society of masses. Accordingly, in addition to their enlarged and centralized means of administration, exploitation, and violence, the modern elite have had placed within their grasp historically unique instruments of psychic management and manipulation, which include universal compulsory education as well as the media of mass communication. #RandolphHarris 2 of 18
Early observers believed that the increase in the range and volume of the formal means of communication would enlarge and animate the primary public. In such optimistic of animating the primary public—written before radio and television and movies—the formal media are understood as simply multiplying the scope and pace of personal discussion. Enlarge indefinitely the competition of ideas, and whatever has owed its persistence merely to lack of comparisons is likely to go, for that which is really congenial to the choosing mind will be all the more cherished and increased. There is a reason to be excited by the break-up of the conventional consensus of the local community, as the new means of communication are furthering the conversational dynamic of classic democracy, and with it the growth of rational and free individuality. No one really knows all the functions of the mass media for in their entirety these functions are probably so pervasive and so subtle that they cannot be caught by the means of social research now available. However, we do no have reason to believe that these media have helped less to enlarge and animate the discussions of primary publics than to transform them into a set of media markets in mass-like society. I do not refer merely to the higher ratio of deliverers of opinion to receivers and to the decreased chance to answer back; nor do I refer merely to the violent banalization and stereotyping of our very sense organs in terms of which these media now compete for attention. #RandolphHarris 3 of 18
I have in mind a sort of psychological illiteracy that is facilitated by the media, and that is expressed in several ways: Very little of what we think we know of the social realities of the World have found out first-hand. Most of the pictures in our hears we have gained from these media—even to the point where we often do not really believe what we see before us until we read about in in the paper or hear about it on the radio. The media not only gives us information; they guide our very experiences, and that is why many are producing fictional and sensualized stories. Our standards of credulity, our standards of reality, tend to be set by these media rather than by our own fragmentary experience. Accordingly, even if the individual has direct, personal experience of events, it is not really direct and primary: it is organized stereotypes. It takes long and skillful trainings to so uproot such stereotypes that an individual sees things freshly, in an unstereotyped manner. One might suppose, for example, that is all the people went through a depression they would all experience it, and in terms of this experience, that they would all debunk or reject or at least refract what the media say about it. However, experience of such a structural shift has to be organized and interpreted if it is to count in the making of opinion. #RandolphHarris 4 of 18
The kind of experience, in short, that might serve as a basis for resistance to mass media is not an experience of the raw events, but the experience of meanings. If we are to use the word experience seriously, the fleck of interpretation must be there in the experience. And the capacity for such experience is socially implanted. The individual does not trust one’s own experience, as I have said, until it is confirmed by others or by the media. If it disturbs loyalties and beliefs that the individual already hold, usually such direct exposure is not accepted. To be accepted, it must relieve or justify the feelings that often are possessed in the back of one’s mind as key features of one’s ideological loyalties. Stereotypes of loyalty underlie beliefs and feelings about given symbols and emblems; they are the very ways in which beings see the social World and in terms of which beings make up their specific opines and views of the event. They are the result of previous experience, which affect present and future experience. It goes without saying that being are often unaware of these loyalties, that often they could not formulate them explicitly. Yet such general stereotypes make for the acceptance or the rejection of specific opinions not so much by the force of logical consistency as by their emotional affinity and by the way in which they relieve anxieties. To accept opinions in their terms is to gain the good solid feeling of being correct without having to think. #RandolphHarris 5 of 18
When ideological stereotypes and specific opinions are linked in this way, there is a lowering of the kind of anxiety which arises when loyalty and belief are not in accord. Such ideologies lead to a willingness to accept a given line of belief; then there is no need, emotionally or rationally, to overcome resistance to give items in that line; cumulative selections of specific opinions and feelings become the pre-organized attitudes and emotions that shape the opinion-life of the person. These deeper beliefs and feelings are not a sort of lens through which beings experience their Worlds, they strongly condition acceptance or rejection of specific opinions, and they set being’s orientation toward prevailing authorities. Eight decades ago, Walter Lippmann saw such prior convictions as biases: they kept beings from defining reality in an adequate way. They are still biased. However, today they can often be seen as good biases; inadequate and misleading as they often are, they are less so than the crackpot realism of higher authorities and opinion-makers. They are first generation to be so exposed. So long as the media are not entirely monopolized, the individual can play one medium off against another; one can compare them, and hence resist what any one of them put out. #RandolphHarris 6 of 18
The more genuine competition there is among the media, the more resistance the individual might be able to command. However, how much is this now the case? So people compare reports on public events or policies, playing one medium’s content off against another’s? The answer is: generally no, very few do: We know that people tend strongly to select those media which carry contents with which they already agree. There is a kind of selection of new opinions on the basis of prior opinions. No one seems to search out such counter-statements as may be found in alternative media offerings. Given radio programs and social media and video streaming and magazines and newspapers often get a rather consistent public, and thus reinforce their messages in the mind of pubic. The idea of playing one medium off against another assumes that the media really have varying contents. It assumes genuine competition, which is not widely true. The media display an apparent variety and competition, but on closer view they seem to compete more in terms of variations on a few standardized themes than of clashing issues. The freedom to raise issues effectively seems more and more to be confined to those few interests that have ready and continual access to these media. #RandolphHarris 7 of 18
The media have not only filtered into our experience of external realities, they have also entered into our very experience of our own selves. They have provided us with new identities and new aspirations of what we should like to be. They have provided in the models of conduct they hold out to us a new and larger and more flexible set of appraisals of our very selves. In terms of the modern theory of the self, we may say that the media bring the reader, listener, viewer into the sight of larger, higher reference groups—groups, real or imagined, up-close or vicarious, personally known or distractedly glimpsed—which are looking glasses for one’s self-image. They have multiplied the groups to which we look for confirmation of our self-image. More than that: the media tell the being in the mass who he or she is—they give one identity; they tell one what one wants to be—they give one aspirations; they tell one how to get that way—they give one technique; and they tell one how to feel that one is that way even when one is not—they give one an escape. The gaps between the identity and aspirations lead to technique and/or to escape. That is probably the basic psychological formula of a pseudo-World which the media invent and sustain. As they now generally prevail, the mass media, especially television, often encroach upon the small-scale discussion, and destroy the chance for the reasonable and leisurely and human interchange of opinion. #RandolphHarris 8 of 18
They are an important reason why they only fail as an educational force, but are a malign force: they do not articulate for the viewer or listener the broader sources of one’s private tensions and anxieties, one’s inarticulate resentments and half-formed hopes. They neither enable the individual to transcend one’s narrow milieu nor clarify its private meeting. The media provide much information and news about what is happening in the World, but they do not often enable the listener or the viewer truly to connect one’s daily life with these larger realities. They do not connect the information they provide on public issues with the troubles felt by the individual. They do not increase rational in identified with the ruing institutions and their agents, who ay use authority explicitly and nakedly. They do not in the extreme case, have to gain or retain power by hiding its exercise. Manipulation becomes a problem wherever beings have power that is concentrated and willful but do not have authority, or when, for any reason, they do not wish to use their power openly. Then the powerful seek to rule without showing their powerfulness. They want to rule, as it were, secretly, without publicized legitimation. It is in this mixed case—as in the intermediate reality of the American today—that manipulation is a prime way of exercising power. #RandolphHarris 9 of 18
Small circles of beings are making decisions which they need to have at least authorized by indifferent or recalcitrant people over whom they do not exercise explicit authority. So the small circle tries to manipulate these people into willing acceptance or cheerful support of their decisions or opinions—or at least to the rejection of possible counter-opinions. Authority formally resides in the people, but the power of initiation is in fact held by small circles of beings. That is why the standard strategy of manipulation is to make it appear that the people, or at least, a large group of them really made the decision. That is why even when the authority is available, beings with access to it may still prefer the secret, quieter ways of manipulation. However, are not the people now more educated? Why not emphasize the spread of the education rather than the increased effects of the mass media? The answer, in brief is that mass education, in many respects, has become another mass medium. It is thought by environmentalists that human behavior is exclusively molded by the influence of the environment. According to this their theory behavior is controlled by social and cultural, as opposed to innate factors. This is particularly true with regard to aggression, one of the main obstacles to human progress. #RandolphHarris 10 of 18
In its most radical form this view was already presented by the philosophers of the Enlightenment. Beings were supposed to be born good and rational, and it was due to bad institutions, bad educations, and bad example that one developed evil strivings. Some denied that there were any physical differences between the genders (L’ame n’a pas de sex) and proposed that whatever differences existed, aside from the anatomical ones, were exclusively due to education and social arrangements. In contrast to behaviorism, however, these philosophers were not concerned with methods of human engineering and manipulation but wit social and political change. They believed that the good society would create the good being, or rather, allow the natural goodness of beings to manifest itself. However, many who accept Neobehaviorism as true believe that to consider human behavior as impelled by intentions, purposes, aims or goals, would be a prescientific and useless way of looking at it. Psychology has to study what reinforcements tend to shape human behavior and how to apply the reinforcements most effectively. B. F. Skinner’s psychology is the science of the engineering of behavior; its aim is to find the right reinforcements in order to produce a desired behavior. #RandolphHarris 11 of 18
Skinner spears of operant conditioning. Briefly, this means that unconditioned behavior, provided it is desirable from the experimenter’s standpoint, is rewarded, for instance, followed by pleasure. (Skinner believes that the rewarding reinforcement to be much more effect than the punishing.) As a result, the subject will eventually continue to behave in the desired fashion. For example, Leo does not like spinach particularly; he eats it, mother rewards him with a praising remark, an affectionate glance, or an extra piece of cake, whichever is most reinforcing for Leo as measured by what works best—for instance, Leo’s mother administers beneficial reinforcements. Leo will eventually love to eat spinach, particularly if the reinforcements are effectively administered in terms of their schedules. In hundreds of experiments, it has been shown that the techniques for this operant conditioning of beneficial reinforcement when used with animals and humans can be altered to an amazing degree, even in opposition to what some would loosely call innate tendencies. To have shown this is undoubtedly the great merit of Skinner’s experimental work; it also supports the views of those who believe that the social structure (or culture in the parlance of most American anthropologists) can shape the being, even though not necessarily through operant conditioning. It is important to add that Skinner does not neglect genetic endowment. #RandolphHarris 12 of 18
In order to render Skinner’s position correctly, one should say that apart from genetic endowment, behavior is determined entirely by reinforcement. Reinforcement can occur in two ways: it happens in the normal cultural process, or it can be planned, according to Skinnerian teaching and thus lead to a design for culture. The prime task of public education, as it came widely to be understood in this country, was political: to make the citizen more knowledgeable and thus better able to think and judge of public affairs. In time, the function of education shifted from the political to the economic: to train people for better-paying jobs and thus to get ahead. This is especially true of the high-school movement, which has met the business demands for white-collar skills at the public’s expense. However, educating children and keeping them off the streets is beneficial for parents, society, and the economy. Public education provides society with a facilitator, who educates your children and keep the off the streets and out of trouble while you are at work. This reduces childcare cost, law enforcement costs, medical costs, and keeps your children out of jail, while fostering the tools they will need to become productive members in society. In large part education has become merely vocational; in so far as its political task is concerned, in many schools, that has been reduced to a routine training of nationalist loyalties, which is why to instill national pride, many Americans think the kids should still pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. #RandolphHarris 13 of 18
The training of skills that are of more or less direct use in the vocational life is an important task to perform, but ought not to be mistake for liberal education: job advancement, no matter on what levels, is not the same as self-development, although the two are now systematically confused. Among skills, some are more and some are less relevant to the aims of liberal—that is to say, liberating—education. Skills and values cannot be so easily separated as the academic search for supposedly neutral skills causes us to assume. And especially not when we speak seriously of liberal education. Of course, there is a scale, with skills at one end and values at the others, but it is the middle range of this scale, which one might call sensibilities, that are of most relevance to the classic public. To train someone to operate a lathe or to read and write is pretty much education of skill; to evoke from people an understanding of what they really want out of their lives or to debate with them stoic, Christian and humanist ways of living, is pretty much a clear-cut education of values. However, to assist in the birth among a group of people of those cultural and political and technical sensibilities which would make them genuine members of a genuinely liberal public, this is at once a training in skills in an education of values. #RandolphHarris 14 of 18
The skills and values include a sort of therapy in the ancient sense of clarifying one’s knowledge of one’s self; it includes the imparting of all those skills of controversy with one’s self, which we call thinking; and with others, which we call not fighting, not arguing, but debate. And the end product of such liberal education of sensibilities is simply the self-educating, self-cultivating man or woman. The knowledgeable being in the genuine public is able to turn one’s personal troubles into social issues, to see their relevance for one’s entire community and one’s community’s relevance for them. One understands that what on thinks and feels as personal troubles are very often not only that but problems shared by others and indeed not subject to solution by any one individual but only by modifications of the structure of the groups in which one lives and sometimes the structure of the entire society. Beings in masses are gripped by personal troubles, but they are not aware of their true meaning and source. Beings in public confront issues, and they are aware of their terms. It is the task of the liberal institutions, as of the liberally educated beings, continually to translate troubles into issues and issues into the terms of their human meaning for the individual. In the absence of deep and wide political debate, schools for adults and adolescents could perhaps become hospitable frameworks for just such debate. #RandolphHarris 15 of 18
In a community of publics the task of liberal education would be to keep the public from being overwhelmed; to help produce the disciplined and informed mind that cannot be overwhelmed; to help produce the disciplined and informed mind that cannot be overwhelmed; to help develop the bold and sensible individual that cannot be sunk by the burdens of mass live. However, educational practice has not made knowelegde directly relevant to the human need of the troubled person of the twenty first century or to the social practices of the citizens. This citizen cannot now see the roots of one’s own biases and frustrations, not think clearly about one’s self, nor for that matter about anything else. One does not see the frustration of idea, of intellect, by the present organization of society, and one is not able to meet the tasks now confronting the intelligent citizen. Educational institutions have not done these things and, expect in rare instances, they are not doing them. They have become mere elevators of occupational and social ascent, and, on all levels, they have become politically timid. Moreover, in the hands of professional educators, many schools have come to operate on an ideology of life adjustment that encourages happy acceptance of mass ways of life rather than the struggle for individual and public transcendence. #RandolphHarris 16 of 18
There is not much doubt that modern regressive educators have adapted their notions of educational content and practice to the idea of the mass. They do not effectively proclaim standards of cultural level and intellectual rigor; rather they often deal in the trivia of vocational tricks and adjustment to life—meaning the slack of life masses. Deomcratic schools often mean the furtherance of intellectual mediocrity, vocational training, nationalistic loyalties, and little else. This is causing people to be frightened by the expanding culture and of its image, and feel threatened by the possible loss of their own theoretical identity because their students are no longer trying as hard to become educated and successful leaders, meanwhile in China, students are going to school six days a week and spend all of their free time studying. America has enjoyed a prosperous lifestyle due to the hard work of our ancestors, which has allowed the youth to slack off, but it is time to make our kids realize how important an education is not just for themselves, but for their family and for the prosperity and security of our nation. By 2020, China will have an affluent population of 280 million people, which is equal to 86 percent of the total American population. That means these people have money and are not worried about their future, they have worked hard enough to take care of all their needs and save money. #RandolphHarris 17 of 18
Some American cities like Sacramento, California USA are extremely corrupt because of the present painful effects of a too sudden transition from serfdom to industrialization. They were willing to elect a mayor who had a criminal background and to allow an investor from the Middle East with a scandalous history to virtually have control over the entire city. The people in Sacramento are living closer to irrational elements than the older European countries, and, therefore, being more threatened by untamed irrationality, and are not in need of greater effort to control it by regulation. Scientific, economic, moral, as well as political—are threatened by the rampant corruption in the city of Sacramento. This is necessarily and inevitably so. We cannot escape our anxiety over the fact that the possible destroyers have control of our nicely ordered systems. “Yea, he saw great inequality among the people, some lifting themselves up with their pride, despising others, turning their backs upon the needy and the vulnerable and those who were hungry, and those who were athirst, and those who were sick and afflicted,” reports Alma 4.12. Many people feed on this thing called the media, as gods are wont to do when they come down to their altars. They feed on its terrible electric violence. Lurid colors flash over their faces, and images accost them. And I wonder sometimes if the endless public talk of the great World is not in itself inspiring an imitation of behavior in the public’s mind causing them to awake with an ugly sense of purpose. That they will rule the World. #RandolphHarris 18 of 18
Folsom, California USA 230 Units with Clubhouse, Pool, Fitness Center, Bocce Ball court:
HUB Apartments highlights how an active and walkable lifestyle can be met in a suburban location. Situated directly across the street from the Intel campus in Folsom, HUB’s location allows its residents to easily walk to and from work, and have convenient access to shopping and dining options. Both residents and the community benefit from the bold, contemporary architecture that ties in the tech campus across the street and stands out along the bustling Iron Point Road. HUB features one, two, and three bedroom units some with direct access garages into their home. The clubhouse includes a business lounge, social room, game room, and exhibition kitchen. Residents also benefit from the state of the art gym, salt water pool and spa, two dog parks, and package lockers.
If We Do Not Know Why We are Here, the Universal Mind Does—We May and Must Trust it!
There beyond stood the glass city, and beyond it a blue sky, blue as a sky at midday, only one which was now filled with every known star. I started out for the city. Indeed, I started with such impetuosity and such conviction that it took three people to hold me back. I stopped. I was quite amazed. However, I knew these men. These were priests, old priests of my homeland, who had died long before I had even come to my calling, all of which was quite clear to me, and I knew their names and how they had died. They were in fact the saints of my city, and of the great house of catacombs where I had lived. To come immediately to the heart of my theme, then, what I propose is to imagine ourselves reasoning with a fellow-mortal who is on such terms with life that the only comfort left one is to brood on the assurance, “You my end it when you will.” What reasons can we plead that may render such a brother (or sister) willing to take up the burden again? Ordinary Christians, reasoning with would-be suicides, have little to offer them beyond the usual negative, “Thou shalt not.” God alone is master of life and death, they say, and it is a blasphemous act to anticipate his absolving hand. However, can we find nothing richer or more beneficial than this, no reflections to urge whereby the suicide may actually see, and in all sad seriousness feel, that in spite of adverse appearances even for one life is still worth living? #RandolphHarris 1 of 19
There are suicides and suicides (in the United States of America suicide is the tenth leading cause of death overall claiming the lives of about 47,173 people each year. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among individuals between the ages of 10 and 34, and the fourth leading cause of death among individuals between the ages of 35 and 54. However, globally, close to 800,000 people die due to suicide every years, which is one person every 40 seconds), and I must frankly confess that with perhaps the majority of these my suggestion are impotent to deal. Where suicide is the result of insanity or sudden frenzied impulse, reflection is impotent to arrest its headway; and cases like these belong to the ultimate mystery of evil, concerning which I can only offer considerations and tending toward religious patience at the at the end of this hour. My task, let me say now, is practically narrow, and my words are to deal only with that metaphysical tedium vitoe which is peculiar to reflecting beings. Most of you are devoted, for good or ill, to the reflective life. Many of you are students of philosophy, and have already felt in your own persons the scepticism and unreality that too much grubbing in the abstract roots of things will breed. This is, indeed, one of the regular fruits of the over-studious career. #RandolphHarris 2 of 19
Too much questioning and too little active responsibility lead, almost as often as too much sensualism does, to the edge of the slope, at the bottom of which lie pessimism and the nightmare or suicidal view of life. However, to the diseases which reflection breeds, still further reflection can oppose effective remedies; and it is of the melancholy and Weltschmerz bred of reflection that I now proceed to speak. Let me say, immediately, that my final appeal is to nothing more recondite than religious faith. So far my argument is to be destructive, it will consist in nothing more than the sweeping away of certain views that often keep the springs of religious faith compressed; and so far as it is to be constructive, it will consist in holding up to the light of day certain considerations calculated to let loose these springs in a normal, natural way. Pessimism is essentially a religious disease. In the form of it to which you are most liable, it consists in nothing but a religious demand to which there comes no normal religious reply. Now, there are two stages of recovery from this disease, two different levels upon which one may emerge from the midnight view to the daylight view of things, and I must treat of them in turn. The second stage is the more complete and joyous, and it corresponds to the freer exercise of religious trust and fancy. #RandolphHarris 3 of 19
There are, as is well known, persons who are naturally very free in this regard, other who are not at all so. There are persons, for instance, whom we find indulging to their heart’s content in prospects of immortality; and there are others who experience the greatest difficulty in making such a notion seem real to them, moreover, feel a sort of intellectual loyalty to what they call hard facts, which is absolutely shocked by the easy excursions into the unseen that other people make at the bare call of sentiment. Minds of either class may, however, be intensely religious. They may equally desire atonement and reconciliation, and crave acquiescence and communion with the total soul of things. However, the craving, when the mind is pent in to the hard facts, especially as science now reveals them, can breed pessimism, quite as easily as it breeds optimism when it inspires religious trust and fancy to wing their way to another and a better World. This is why I call pessimism an essentially religious disease. The nightmare view of life has plenty of organic sources; but its great reflective source has at all times been the contradiction between the phenomena of nature and the craving of the heart to believe that behind nature there is a spirit whose expression nature is. #RandolphHarris 4 of 19
What philosophers call natural theology has been one way of appeasing this craving; that poetry of nature in which our English literature is so rich has been another way. Now, suppose a mind of the latter of our two classes, whose imagination is pent in consequently, and who takes its facts hard; suppose it, moreover, to feel strongly the craving for communion, and yet to realize how desperately difficult it is to construe the scientific order of nature either theologically or poetically,–and what result can there be but inner discord and contradiction? Now, this inner discord (merely as discord) can be relieved in either of two ways: The longing to read the facts religiously may cease, and leave the bare facts by themselves; or, supplementary facts may be discovered or believed-in, which permit the religious reading to go on. These two ways of relief are the two stages of recovery, the two levels of escape from pessimism, to which I made allusion a moment ago, and which the sequel will, I trust, make more clear. However, this kind of picture risks putting primitive beings even further beyond our comprehension, even though it seems logically to explain what they were doing. The problem is in the key motive, guilt. Unless we have a correct feeling for what guilt is, what the experience means, the sacred nature of primitive economics may escape us. #RandolphHarris 5 of 19
We may even prefer our illusionless economic being to the pitiful primitives—and this result will entirely undo other thesis from the past. Some prefer the idea of these pitiful primitives because scorn of guilt as a weakness seems to have rubbed off on them. They are not as prosperous and inventive so they have to make the primitive man and woman look bad to justify their lack luster lives. Even more seriously, these scornful individuals do not have any theory of the nature of guilt. Many people make the explanation of guilt as a simple reflect of the repression of enjoyment—something for which one has explained by the thought the repression of full enjoyment in the present inevitably releases aggression against those ancestors out of love of whom the repression was instituted. And furthermore, by stating the aggression against those simultaneously loved is guilt. However, this one explanation of guilt that comes from psychoanalysis the child in one’s boundless desires for gratification cannot help feeling love for those who respond to one; at the same time, when they inevitably frustrate one for one’s own good, one cannot help feeling hate and destructive impulses toward them, which puts one in an impossible bind. The bind is one kind of guilt, but only one aspect of the total bind of life which constitutes the immense burden of guilt on the human psyche. #RandolphHarris 6 of 19
One of the reasons guilt is so difficult to analyze is that it is itself dumb. It is a feeling of being blocked, limited, transcended, without knowing why. It is the peculiar experience of an organism which can apprehend a totality of things, and not be able to move in relation to it. Beings experience this uniquely as a feeling of the crushing awesomeness of things and one’s helplessness in the face of them. This real guilt partly explains why being’s willing subordinacy to one’s culture; after all, the World of beings is even more dazzling and miraculous in its richness than the awesomeness of nature. Also, subordinacy comes naturally from the being’s basic experiences of being nourished and cared for; it is a logical response to social altruism. Especially when one is sick or injured, one experiences the healing forces as coming from the superordinate cultural system of tools, medicines, and the hard-won skills of persons. An attitude of humble gratitude is a logical one to assume toward the forces that sustain one’s life; we see this very plainly in the learning and development of children. Another reason that guilt is so diffuse is that it is many different things: there are many different binds in life. One can be in a bind in relation to one’s own development, can feel that one has not achieved all one should have. #RandolphHarris 7 of 19
One can be in a bind relation to one’s own development, can feel that one has not achieved all one should have. One can be in a bind in relation to one’s body, which is guilt of anality: to feel bound and doomed by one’s physical appendages and orifices. Beings also experience guilt because one takes up space and has unintended effects on others—for example, when we hurt others without intending to just by being what we are or by following our natural desires and appetites, not to mention when we hurt others physically by accident or thoughtlessness. This, of course, is part of the guilt of our bodies, which have effects that we do not intend in our inner selves. This guilt we feel for being a fate-creating object. We feel guilt in relation to what weighs on us, a weight that we sense is more than we can handle, and so our wives or husbands, and children are a burden of guilt because we cannot possibly foresee and handle all the accidents, sicknesses, and so forth, that can happen to them; we feel limited and bowed down, we cannot be as carefree and self-expansive as we would like, the World is too much with us. When we have not developed our potential, if we feel guilt, we also are put into a bind by developing too much. Our own uniqueness becomes a burden to us we stick out more than we can safely imagine. #RandolphHarris 8 of 19
Guilt make sense in relation to evolution itself. Being are on the cutting edge of evolution; one is the animal whose development is not prefigured by instincts, and so one is open to becoming what one can. This means literally that each person is already somewhat ahead of oneself simply by virtue of being human and not animal. No wonder people have almost universally feared the evil eye in traditional society: it expresses a natural and age-old reaction to making oneself too prominent, detaching oneself too much from the background of things. In traditional Jewish culture, for example, each time the speaker made a favorable remark about the health or achievement of someone dear to one, one immediately followed this remark with the invocation “Kein Ayin-Hara” (no evil eye), as to say “may this good fortune and prominence not be undone by being too conspicuous.” Some individual achieve an intensity of individuation in which they stick out so far that almost each day is an unbearable exposure. However, even the average person in any society is already more of an individual than any animal can be; the testimonial to this is in the human face, which is the most individuated animal expression in nature. Faces fascinate us precisely because they are unique, because they stick out of nature and evolution as the most fully developed expression of the pushing of the life force in the intensity of its self-realization. #RandolphHarris 9 of 19
We do not understand why the life force is personalizing in this way, what it is trying to achieve; but we flatly know that it is personalizing because we have our heads and faces as empirical testimony, and as a burden of guilt. We might say that the development of life is life’s own burden. I linger on these ontological thoughts for a very good reason: they tell us what is bothering us deep down. If your face is the most individual part of nature, and if its sticking out is a burden to you because you are an embodiment of the cutting edge of evolution and are no longer safely tucked into the background of nature—if this is so, then it follows that it is dangerous to have a head. And I think humankind has always recognized this implicitly, especially on primitive levels of experience. It is a crime to own a head in society; historically societies have not tolerated too much individuation, especially on primitive levels. This is the simplest explanation of head-hunting. Well, there can be no more explanation for the widespread passion for head-hunting; but probably the underlying thing that the various forms of head-taking have in common is that the head is prized as a trophy precisely because it is the most personal part, the one that juts most prominently out of nature. #RandolphHarris 10 of 19
In some sense, too, headhunting may be a way of projecting onto others one’s own guilt for sticking out so much, so that their heads are taken as scapegoats to atone for the guilt. It is as if to say, “This will teach you to stick out so blatantly.” Certainly we feel something of this in societies in which decapitation as punishment was practiced and the heads were publicly displayed. This was a destruction of individuality at its most intensive point, and so a vindication of the pool of faces of the community whose laws had been transgressed. If we extend these thoughts one logical step, we can understand a basic psychoanalytic idea that otherwise seems ridiculous: “in the eyes of culture, to live is a crime.” In other words, to live is to stick out, to go beyond safe limits; hence it is to court sanger, to be a locus of the possibility of disaster for the group. If we take all this into view, we should find more palatable to our understanding of what it is mean when so say that social organization is a structure of shared guilt, a symbolic mutual confession of it. Humankind has so many things that put it into a confession of it. Humankind has so many things that put it into a bind that it simply cannot stand them unless it expiates them in some way. #RandolphHarris 11 of 19
Each person cannot stand one’s own emergence and the many ways in which one’s organism is dumbly baffled from within and transcended from without. If one did not tuck oneself back into something, each person would literally be pulled off one’s feet and blown away or would gnaw away one’s own insides with acid anxiety. This is why the main general characteristic of guilt is that it must be shared: beings cannot stand alone. And this is precisely what is meant when one says, “Archaic men and women give because one wants to lose; the psychology is self-sacrificial…whatever the giver wants to lose is guilt.” Or, metaphorically, “In the gift complex dependence on the mother is acknowledged, and then overcome by mothering others.” Society, in other words, is a dramatization of dependence and an exercise in mutual safety by the one animal in evolution who had to figure out a way of appeasing oneself as well as nature. We can conclude that primitives were more honest about these things—about guilt and debt—because they were more realistic about being’s desperate situation vis-à-vis nature. Primitive beings embedded social life in a sacred matrix not necessarily because one was more fearful or masochistic than beings in later epochs, but because one saw reality more clearly in some basic ways. #RandolphHarris 12 of 19
Once we acknowledge this, we have to be careful not to make too much of it; I mean that group living though the motive of guilt is not all humble and self-effacing. As we saw in our consideration of gift giving, not only expiation but the blatant affirmation of power is a primary impetus behind it. If guilt is the experience of fear and powerlessness, then immersing oneself in a group is one way of actively defeating it: groups alone can make big surplus, can generate extravagant power in the form of large harvests, the capture of dangerous animals and many of them, the manufacture of splendid and intricate items based on sophisticated techniques, and so forth. From the beginning of time the group has presented big power, big victory, much life. If we thus look at both sides of the picture of guilt, we can see that primitive beings allocated to themselves the two things that beings need most: the experience of prestige and power that constitutes beings a hero, and the experience of expiation that relieves one of the guilt of being human. The gift complex took care of both these things superlatively. Being worked for economic surplus of some kind in order to have something to give. In other words, one achieved heroism and expiation at the same time, like the dutiful son or daughter who brings home one’s paper-route earnings and puts them in the family coffer. #RandolphHarris 13 of 19
One protruded out of nature and tucked oneself in with the very same gesture, a gesture of heroism-expiation. Beings need self-esteem more than anything; one wants to be a cosmic hero, contributing with one’s energies to nothing less than the greatness and pleasures of the gods themselves. At the same time this risks inflating one to proportions one cannot stand; one becomes too much like the gods themselves, and one must renounce this dangerous power. Not to do so is to be unbalanced, to run the great sin of hubris as the Greeks understood it. Hubris means forgetting where the real source of power is possessed and imagining that it is in oneself. The neurotic personality is one suffering from fragmentation—that is, from repression of instinctual drives, blocking off of awareness, loss of autonomy, weakness and passivity of the ego, together with the various neurotic symptoms which result from this fragmentation. Depression and despair result from the individual’s self-estrangement, an estrangement from oneself proceeds to different in forms and degrees of severity. Blocked instinctual powers turn within the individual into resentment, self-hatred, hostility, and aggression. These fragmentations are symptoms of the emotional, psychological, and spiritual disintegration occurring in the culture and in the individual. #RandolphHarris 14 of 19
One can observe the fragmentation in the family life through the respectable citizen who keeps his wife and family in one compartment and his business and other Worlds in others is making his one a doll’s house and preparing its collapse. Reduction to poverty of life is not healing. However, where there is abundance there is also the danger of conflict, of disease and demonic bondage. In the light of this insight, let us look at a most important example, most important certainly for you who are sent to heal and to cast out demons—the church that sends you. It may well be that the disease of many churches, denominations and congregations is that they try to escape disease by cutting off what can produce disease, and what also can produce greatness of life. A church that has creased to risk sickness and even demonic influences has little power to heal and to cast out demons. Every minister who is proud of a smooth-running or gradually growing church should ask oneself whether or not such a church is able to make its members aware of their sickness, and to give them the courage to accept the fact that they are healed. One should ask oneself why the great creativity in all realms of being’s spiritual life keeps itself consistently outside the churches. In many expressions of our secular culture, especially in the present decades, the awareness of being’s sickness is great. #RandolphHarris 15 of 19
It is only because of prejudice that these people, who powerfully express the demonic bondage of beings, do not look to the church or to you, the ministers, for healing and casting out demons? Or is it because of the lack of healing power in the church, sick in its fears of sickness? When Jesus asks the disciples to heal and cast out demons, he does not distinguish between bodily and mental or spiritual diseases. However, every page of the gospels demonstrates that he means all of them, and many stories show that he sees their interrelationship, their unity. We see this unity today more clearly than many generations just behind us. This is a great gift, and you who have studied in the places you now are leaving have had much occasion to share in this gift. Above all, you have learned the truth of the good news—that laws and commands do not heal, but increase, the sickness of the sick. You have learned that the name of the healing power is grace, be it the grace of nature on which every physician depends, as even ancient medicine knew, or the grace in history that sustains the life of humankind by traditions and heritage and common symbols of grace of revelation that conquers the power of the demons by the message of forgiveness and of a new reality. #RandolphHarris 16 of 19
And you have learned that disease that seems bodily may be mental at root, and that a disease that seems individual may be social at the same time, and that you cannot heal individuals without liberating them from the social demons that have contributed to their sickness. Beyond this, you may have become aware of the fact that both physical and mental, individual and social, illness is a consequence of the estrangement of being’s spirit from the divine Spirit, and that no sickness can be healed nor any demon cast out without the reunion of the human spirit with the divine Spirit. For this reason you have become ministers of the message of healing. You are not supposed to be physicians; you are not supposed to be psychotherapists; you are not supposed to become political reformers. However, you are supposed to pronounce and to represent the healing and demon-conquering power implied in the message of Christ, the message of forgiveness and of a new reality. You must be conscious of the other ways of healing. You must cooperate with them, but you must not substitute them for what you represent. Can you represent the Christian message? This may be your anxious questions in this solemn hour. Should you ask me—can we heal without being healed ourselves?—I would answer you—you can! #RandolphHarris 17 of 19
For neither the disciples nor you could ever say—we are healed, so let us heal other. One who would believe this of oneself is least fit to heal others; for one would be separating oneself from them. Show them who you counsel that their predicament is also your predicament. And should you ask me—can we cast out demons without being liberated from demonic power ourselves?—I would answer—you can! Unless you are aware of the demonic possibility in yourselves, you cannot recognize the demon in others, and cannot do battle against it by knowing its name and thus depriving it of its power. And there will be no period in your life, so long as it remains creative and had healing power, in which demons will not split your souls and produce doubts about your faith, your vocation, your whole being. If they fail to succeed, they may accomplish something else—self-assurance and price with respect to your power to heal and to cast out demons. Against this pride Jesus warns—“Do not rejoice in this that the spirits are subject to you; but rejoice that your names are written in Heaven.” And “written in Heaven” means written in spite of what is written against you in the records of your life. There is no greater vocation on Earth than to be called to heal and to cast out demons. Be joyous in this vocation! #RandolphHarris 18 of 19
Do not be depressed by its burden, nor even by the burden of having to deal with those who do not want to be healed. Rejoice in your calling. In spite of your own sickness, in spite of the demons working within you and your churches, you have a glimpse of what can heal ultimately, of one in Whom God made manifest His power over demons and disease, of one who represents the healing power that is in the World, and sustains the World and lifts it up to God. Rejoice that you are his messengers. When you leave this place, take with you this joy! The pat is union with Higher Self and is a ray from the Logos, it is as near as a human being can get to it anyway. The goal is to bring beings into touch with Reality. What one chooses at the beginning of one’s quest will predetermine what one will become at its end. And the choice is between self-centered escape and selfless activity. Both paths will give one a greater peace. Both will permit one to remain true to one’s inner call. However, the harder one will give something to suffering humanity also. A merely personal salvation will not satisfy the philosophical aspirant. “Nevertheless Alma labored much in the spirit, wrestling with God in mighty prayer, that he would pour out his Spirit upon the people who were in the city; that he would also grant that he might baptize them unto repentance,” reports Alma 8.10. #RandolphHarris 19 of 19
Cresleigh Homes
Right this way! 👉👉👉 #RocklinTrails
Visit our Sales Center today to find out more about the ONE remaining home for sale! We are open daily from 10am – 6pm.
#Rocklin
#NewHomesForSale
#CresleighHomes
https://cresleigh.com/new-homes-in-rocklin-california-rocklin-trails/
I Give You Power so that You May Have Power—The More You Give, the More Everyone Gets!
There was something altogether more Nordic and icy about him than there was about Lestat, whose hair tended more to golden, for all its luminous highlights, and whose eyes were forever prismatic, drinking up the colors around him, becoming even a gorgeous violent with the slightest provocation from the worshipful outside World. In Marius, I saw the sunny skies of the northern wilderness, eyes of steady radiance which rejected any outside color, perfect portals to his own most constant soul. In official circles, the very term itself, “the public”—as Walter Lippmann noted eight seven years ago—has come to have a phantom meaning, which dramatically reveals its eclipse. From the standpoint of the deciding elite, some of those who clamor publicly can be identified as Labor, others as Business, still others as Farmer. Those who can not readily be so identified make up The Public. In this usage, the public is composed of the unidentified and the non-partisan in a World of defined and partisan interest. It is socially composed of well-educated salaried professionals, especially college professors; of non-unionized employees, especially white-collar people, along with self-employed professionals and small business people. #RandolphHarris 1 of 16
In this faint echo of the classic notion, the public consists of those remnants of the middle class, old and new, those interests are not explicitly defined, organized, or clamorous. In a curious adaption, the public often becomes, in fact, the unattached expert, who, although well informed, has never taken a clear-cut, public stand on controversial issues which are brought to a focus by organized interests. These are the public members of the board, the commission, the committee. What the public stands for, accordingly, is often a vagueness of policy (called open-mindedness), a lack of involvement in public affairs (known as reasonableness), and a professional disinterest (known as tolerance). Some such official members of the public, as in the field of labor-management meditation, start out very young and make a career out of being careful to be informed but never taking a strong position; and there are many others, quite unofficial, who take such professionals as a sort of model. The only trouble is that they are acting as if they were disinterested judges but they do not have the power of judges; hence their reasonableness, their tolerance, and their open-mindedness do not often count for much in the shaping of human affairs. #RandolphHarris 2 of 16
All those trends that make for the decline of the politician and of his or her balancing society bear decisively upon the transformation of public into mass. One of the most important of the structural transformations involved is the decline of the voluntary association as a genuine instrument of the public. As we have already seen, the executive ascendancy in the economic, military, and political institutions has lowered the effective use of all those voluntary associations which operate between the state and the economy on the one hand, and the family and the individual in the primary group on the other. It is not only that institutions of power have become large-scale and inaccessibly centralized; they have at the same time become less political and more administrative, and it is within this great chance of framework that the organized public has waned. In terms of organization, the transformation has become underpinned by the shift from the individual and one’s primary community to the voluntary association and the mass party as the major units of organized power. Voluntary associations have become larger to the extent that they have become effective; and to just that extent they have become inaccessible to the individual who would shape by discussion the policies of the organization to which one belongs. #RandolphHarris 3 of 16
Accordingly, along with the older institutions, these voluntary associations have lost their grip on the individual. As more people are drawn into the political arena, these associations become mass in scale; and as the power of the individual becomes more dependent upon such mass associations, they are less accessible to the individual’s influence. Mass democracy means the struggle of powerful and large-scale interest groups and associations, which stand between the big decisions that are made by state, corporation, army, and the will of the individual citizens as a member of the public. Since these middle-level associations are the citizen’s major link which decision, one’s relation to them is of decisive importance. For it is only through them that one exercises such power as one may have. The gap between the members and the leaders of the mass association is becoming increasingly wider. As soon as a being get to be a leader of an association large enough to count one readily becomes lost in an instrument of that association. One does so in the interests of maintaining one’s leading position in, or rather over, one’s mass association and so one does so because one comes to see oneself not as a mere delegate, instructed or not, of the mass association one represent, but as a member of an elite comped of such beings as oneself. #RandolphHarris 4 of 16
These facts, in turn, lead to the big gap between the terms in which issues are debated and resolved among members of this elite, and the terms in which they are presented to the members of the various mass associations. For the decisions that are made must take into account those who are important—other elites—but they must be sold to the mass memberships. The gap between speaker and listener, between power and public, leads less to any iron law of oligarchy than to the law of the representative of others in a professional capacity: as the pressure group expands, its leaders come to organize the opinions they represent. So elections, as we have seen, become contests between two giant and unwieldy parties, neither of which the individual can truly feel that one influences, and neither of which is capable of winning psychologically impressive or politically decisive majorities. And, in all this, the parties are of the same general form as other mass associations. When we say that a being in the mass is without any sense of political belonging, we have in mind a political fact rather than merely a style of feeling. We have in mind a certain way of belonging to a certain kind of organization. The way of belonging here rests upon a belief in the purposes and in the leaders of an organization, and thus enables men and women freely to be at home within it. #RandolphHarris 5 of 16
To belong in this way is to make the human association a psychological center of one’s self, to take into our conscience, deliberately and freely, its rules of conduct and its purposes, which we thus shape and which in turn shape us. We do not have this kind of belonging to any political organization. The kind of organization we have in mind is a voluntary association which has three decisive characteristics: first, it is a context in which reasonable opinions may be formulated; second, it is an agency by which reasonable activities may be undertaken; and third, it is a powerful enough unit, in comparison with other organizations of power, to make a difference. It is because they do not find available association at once psychologically meaningful and historical effective that beings often feel uneasy in their political and economic loyalties. The effective units of power are not the huge corporation, the inaccessible government, the grim military establishment. Between these, on the one hand, and the family and the small community on the other, we find no intermediate associations in which beings feel secure and with which they feel powerful. There is little live political struggles. Instead, there is administration from above, and the political vacuum below. #RandolphHarris 6 of 16
The primary publics are now either so small as to be swamped, and hence give up; or so large as to be merely another feature of the generally distant structure of power, and hence in accessible. Public opinion exists when people who are not in the government of a country claim the right to express political opinions freely and publicly, and the right that these opinions should influence or determine the policies, personnel, and actions of their government. In this formal sense there has been and there is a definite public opinion in the United States. And yet, with modern developments this formal right—when it does still exist as a right—does not mean what it once did. The older World of voluntary organization was as different from the World of the mass organization, as was Tom Paine’s World of pamphleteering from the World of the mass media. Since the French Revolution, conservative thinkers have Viewed With Alarm the rise of the public, which they called the masses, of something to that effect. “The populace is sovereign, and the tide of barbarism mounts,” wrote Gustave Le Bon. “The divine right of the masses is about to replace the divine right of the kings,” and already “the destinies of nations are elaborated at the present in the heart of the masses, and no longer in the councils of princes.” #RandolphHarris 7 of 16
During the twentieth century, liberal and even socialist thinkers have followed suit, with more explicit references to what we have called the society of masses. From Le Bon to Emil Leader and Ortega y Gasset, they have held that the influence of the mass is unfortunately increasing. However, surely those who have supposed the masses to be all powerful, or at least well on their way to triumph, are wrong. In our time, as Chakhotin knew, the influence of autonomous collectivities within political life is in fact diminishing. Furthermore, such influence as they do have is guided; they must now be seen not as publics acting autonomously, but as masses manipulated at focal points into crowds of demonstrators. For as publics become masses, masses sometimes become crowds; and, in crowds, the physical rape by the mass media is supplemented up close by the harsh and sudden harangue. Then the people in the crowd disperse again—as atomized and submissive masses. For the primitive the gift was a part of the stream of nature’s bounty. Many people today think that the primitive saw the World more under the aspect of miracle and awe than we do, and so one appreciated elemental things more than we do. In order to recapture this was of looking at nature, we moderns usually have to experience a breakdown and rebirth into naïve perception. #RandolphHarris 8 of 16
When asked about what Christianity means to some, many people say it is about the search for the elements of bread and wine. However, we do not need to romanticize about primitive (whether truly or not) in order to understand one’s valuation of nature’s bounty. We saw that the main organismic motive was self-perpetuation; its is logical that when self-perpetuation became a conscious problem at the level of being one naturally tended to value those things that gave one the power to endure, those things that incorporated the Sun’s energy and that gave warmth and life. The original sacrifice is always food because this is what one wants from the gods as the basis for life. “Give us our daily break.” Furthermore, if food contains power, it is always more than itself, more than a physical thing: it has a mysterious inner essence or spirit. Milk is the essence of the cow, shark’s teeth are the essence of the shark’s vitality and murderousness, and so forth. So when the primitive being gave these things as gifts, one did not give a dead thing, a mere object as it appears to us—but a piece of life, of spirit, even a part of oneself because one was immersed in the stream of life. The gifts had mana power, the strength of supernatural life. This is what made the bond and allowed the stream to follow between giver and receiver: to give and then to counter-give kept the motion going, preserved the cycle of power. #RandolphHarris 9 of 16
This is how we are to understand the potlatch giving and one-upmanship, the destruction of quantities of goods: the eternal flux of power in the broad stream of life was generated by the greatest possible expenditure; beings wanted that stream to follow as bountifully as possible. It then became hard to distinguish who gave and who received, since all were bathed in the power of the movement: everyone participated in the powers that were opened up—the giver, the community, the gods. “I give you power so that you may have power.” The more you give, the more everyone gets. This feeling of expenditure as power is not strange to us moderns either. We want to keep our goods moving with the same obsessive dedication—BMW 4 Series automobiles, General Electric refrigerators, Cresleigh homes, and cold hard cash money. If the economy moves, if there is a frenzy of buying and trading on the stock market, activity in the banks and record low employment, we feel that there is health and strength in the World; and this is not only because the movement of goods piles up money in the bank, but actually reflects, I think, the sense of trust and security that the magical free-enterprise powers are working for us so long as we continue to buy, sell, and move goods. And the Trump economy has done this with the Dow Jones reaching a record high of 27,359.16 on 15 July 2019. #RandolphHarris 10 of 16
China is experiencing the same thing as it continues to rack up one of the most enviable growth rates in the World. Consumers continue to trade up to more expensive premium goods and some companies are registering record sales. And as China looks to shift its export dependent community to a greater reliance on domestic consumption, the total number of affluent consumers in China is expected to read 280 million by 2020—more than doubling the current total of 120 million. Affluent people are described and households with disposable incomes of between $20,000 and $1 million. Disposable income is money left over after taxes are taken out of your paycheck, but many people also define disposable income as the money you have left over after taxes and other bills such as mortgage, car payment, student loans and electric bill have been paid. The upper affluent in China—those earning between $40,000 and $1 million per year will account for 40 percent of the 280 million. There are 327 million people in the Untied States and the affluent in China, by year 2020, will match 86 percent of the total United States of America population. So the sense of exhilaration and self-celebration in China is a movement of production and consumption of goods. #RandolphHarris 11 of 16
Like the primitive men and women, modern beings feel that one can prosper only if one shows that one already has power. Yet of course in its one-dimensionality this is a caricature on the primitive potlatch, as much of modern power ideology is; it has no anchor in the invisible World, in the deference to the gods. Primitive beings gave to the gods. This is the origin of trade: the fact the one group made offerings to the gods of their kinsmen and vice versa. This led to the exchange of different groups, and in it we see the direct motive of the creation of a surplus for exchange. The exchange of offerings was always a kind of contest—who could give the most to their gods of their kinsmen. We can see that this did for a person: it gave one a contest in which one could be victorious if one’s offerings of surplus exceeded those of the clan. In a word, it gave one cosmic heroism, the distinction of releasing the most power in nature for the benefit of all. One was a hero in the eye not only of the gods but also o beings; one earned social honor, the right to crow. One was a big power being. Thus we can see in gift giving and potlatch the continuation of the triumph of the hunter, but not in the creation and distribution of one’s own fabricated surplus. This state of things is called narcissistic capitalism: the equation of wealth with magic power. #RandolphHarris 12 of 16
And so all this seemingly useless surplus, dangerously and painstakingly wrought, yields the highest usage of all in terms of power. Humans, the animals who knows they are not safe here, who need continued affirmation of one’s powers, is one animal who is implacably driven to work beyond animal needs precisely because one is not a secure animal. The origin of human drivenness is religious because beings experience creatureliness; the amassing of a surplus, then, goes to the very heart of human motivation, the urge to stand out as a hero, to transcend the limitations of the human condition and achieve victory over impotence and finitude. We see, too, that in the strict utilitarian sense in which we understand the term, primitive work cannot be economic; for instance, our common ownership and collective enterprise in which the person is a partner do not do justice to the multidimensionality of the primitive World. Primitive beings worked so that one could win a contest in which the offering was made to the gods; one got spiritual merit for one’s labors. I suppose early Calvinism was an echo of this performance for the eyes of beings and the gods, but without the continual giving, the redistribution of the most goods. Big men in primitive society were those who gave away the most, had nothing for themselves. #RandolphHarris 13 of 16
Sometimes a chief would even offer his own life to appease an injured party in a quarrel; one’s role was often nothing else than to be a vehicle for the smooth flow of life in the tribe. (The resemblance of historical Calvinism ends abruptly at this kind of performance for spiritual merit.) This reveals a central fact about social life: primitive beings immersed themselves in a network of social obligations for psychological reasons. Beings have to have a core psychological motive for being in the group in the first place, otherwise one would not be a group-living animal. Or, to call a spade a space, beings entered social organizations in order to share guilt. You know fat meat is greasy, and trying to hide the truth from some people is like trying to hide Sunrise from a rooster. Social organizations is a structure of shared guilt…a symbolic mutual confession of guilt. And so in one sweep we can understand how primitive economics is inexorably sacred, communal, and yet psychologically motivated at the same time. We must accept that facts that human beings reveal themselves in art and literature and philosophy, and by profiting from the insights of the particular cultural movements which express the anxiety and conflicts of contemporary beings. #RandolphHarris 14 of 16
It is also important here to remind ourselves that every scientific method rests upon philosophical presuppositions. These presuppositions determine not only how much reality the observer with this particular method can see—they are indeed the spectacles through which one perceives—but also whether or not what is observed is pertinent to real problems and, therefore, whether the scientific work will endure. It is a gross, albeit common, error to assume naively that one can observe facts best if one avoids all preoccupation with philosophical assumptions. All one does, then, is mirror uncritically the particular parochial doctrines of one’s own limited culture. The result in our day is that science gets identified with methods of isolating factors and observing them from an allegedly detached house base—a particular method which arose out of the split between subject and object made in the seventeenth century in Western culture and then developed into its special compartmentalized form in the late nineteenth and twenty-first centuries. We in our day are no less subject to methodolatry than are members of any other culture. However, it seems especially a misfortune that our understanding in such a crucial area as the psychological study of beings, with the understanding of emotional and mental health depending upon it, should be curtailed by uncritical acceptance of limited assumptions. Science offers more leeway than graduate students are permitted to realize. #RandolphHarris 15 of 16
Is not the essence of science the assumption that reality is lawful and, therefore, understandable, and is it not an inseparable aspect of scientific integrity that any method continuously criticize its own positions? The only way to widen one’s blinders is to analyze one’s philosophical assumptions. In my judgment it is very much to the credit of the psychiatrists and psychologists in this existential movement that they seek to clarify their own bases. This enables them to see their human subjects with a fresh clarity and to shed original light on many facets of psychological experience. “Know ye not that ye are in the hands of God? Know ye not that he hath all power, and at his great command the Earth shall be rolled together as a scroll? Therefore, repent ye, and humble yourselves before him, lest he shall come out in justice against you—least a remnant of the seed of Jacob shall go forth among you as a lion, and tear you in pieces, and there is none to deliver,” reports Mormon 5.23-24. God not only has developed all his forces to their highest degree of maturity but also has attained a perfect equilibrium of them. The masses who turn to such a figure will receiver the inspiration to be received, and are functioning on a higher level as their psyche is ruled by reality. Because some holy being have been uncouth, unkempt, uncivilized, uneducated, and unmannerly, it is foolish to connect them with holiness. They were simply barbarians. #RandolphHarris 16 of 16
Winchester Mystery House
Have you seen the edible replica of the Winchester Mystery House? The very talented Christineh McConnell reveals how she made the massive recreation on her YouTube channel!
Watch the full video now | http://ow.ly/WK9y50w4rGK
One Seeks to Fulfill a Steady Purpose which Remains and is Not an Emotional Froth which Abates and Later Vanishes
Ah, what a spectacle! Amid dozens of little candle stubs and Earthen lamps full of burning fat, there stood a propped some twenty or more ikons, some very old and darkened in their gold frames, and some radiant, as though only yesterday they had come alive through the power of God. We now consider some dilemmas which arise from the relation of the unconscious to techniques and machines. No discussion of creativity and the unconscious in our society can possible avoid these difficult and important problems. We live in a World that has become mechanized to an amazingly high degree. Irrational unconscious phenomena are always a threat to this mechanization. Poets may be delightful creatures in the meadow or the garret, but they are menaces on the assembly line. Mechanization requires uniformity, predictability, and orderliness; and the very fact that unconscious phenomena are original and irrational is already an inevitable threat to the bourgeois order and uniformity. This is one reason people in our modern Western civilization have been afraid of unconscious and irrational experience. For the potentialities that surge up in them from deeper mental wells simply do not fit the technology which has become so essential for our World. #RandolphHarris 1 of 16
What people today do out of fear of irrational elements in themselves as well as in other people is to put tools and mechanics between themselves and the unconscious World. This protects them from being grasped by the frightening and threatening aspects of irrational experience. I am saying nothing whatever, I am sure it will be understood, against technology or techniques or mechanics in themselves. What I am saying is that the danger always exists that our technology will serve as a buffer between us and nature, a block between us and the deeper dimensions of our own experience. Tools and techniques ought to be an extension of consciousness, but they can just as easily be a protection from consciousness. Then tools become a defense mechanisms—specifically against the wider and more complex dimensions of consciousness that we call the unconscious. Our mechanisms and technology then make us uncertain in the impulses of the spirit. Western civilization since the Renaissance has centrally emphasized techniques and mechanics. Thus it is understandable that the creative impulses of ourselves and our forefathers, again since the Renaissance, should have been channeled into the making of technical things—creativity directed toward the advance and application of science. #RandolphHarris 2 of 16
Such channeling of creativity into technical pursuits is appropriate on one level but serves as a psychological defense on a deeper level. This means that technology will be clung to, believed in, and depended on far beyond its legitimate sphere, since it also serves as a defense against our fears of irrational phenomena. Thus the very success of technological creativity—and that its success is magnificent does not need to be heralded by me—is a threat to its own existence. For if we are not open to the unconscious, irrational, and transrational aspects of creativity, then our science and technology have helped to block us off from what I shall call creativity of the spirit. By this I mean creativity that has noting to do with technical use; I mean creativity in art, poetry, music, and other areas that exist for our delight and the deepening and enlarging of meaning in our lives rather than for making money or for increasing technical power. To the extent that we lose this free, original creativity of the spirit as it is exemplified in poetry and music and art, we shall also lose our scientific creativity. Scientists themselves, particularly the physicists, have told us that the creativity of science is bound up with the freedom of human beings to create in the free, pure sense. #RandolphHarris 3 of 16
In modern physics it is very clear that the discoveries that later become utilized for our technological gains are generally made in the first place because a physicist lets his imagination go and discovers something simply for the joy of discovery. However, this always runs the risk of radically upsetting our previously nicely worked-out theories, as it did when Einstein introduced his theory of relativity, and Heisenberg introduced his principle of indeterminacy. My point here is more than the conventional distinction between pure and applied science. The creativity of the spirit does and must threaten the structure and presuppositions of our rational, orderly society and way of life. Unconscious, irrational urges are bound by their very nature to be a threat to our rationality, and the anxiety we experience thereupon is inescapable. I am proposing that the creativity coming from the preconscious and unconscious is not only important for art and poetry and music; but is essential in the long run also for our science. To shrink from the anxiety this entails, and block off the threatening new insights and forms this engenders, is not only to render our society banal and progressively more empty, but also to cut off as well the headwaters in the rough and rocky mountains of the stream that later becomes the river of creativity in our science. #RandolphHarris 4 of 16
The new physicists and mathematicians, for fairly obvious reasons, have been furthest ahead in realizing this interrelation between unconscious, irrational illumination and scientific discovery. Let me now give an illustration of the problem we face. In the several times I have been on television, I have been struck by two different feelings. One was wonder at the fact that my words, spoken in the studio, could be delivered instantaneously into the living rooms of two million people. The other was that whenever I got an original idea, whenever in these programs I began to struggle with some unformed, new concept, whenever I had an original thought that might cross some frontier of the discussion, at that point I was cut off. I have no resentment against emcees who do this; they know their business, and they realize that if what goes on in the program does not fit in the World of listeners all the way from Georgia to Wyoming, the viewers will get up, go to the kitchen, get a can of beer, come back, and switch on a Western. When you have the potentialities for tremendous mass communication, you inevitably tend to communicate on the level of the two-million people who are listening. What you say must have some place in their World, must at least be partly known to them. Inevitably, then, originality, the breaking of frontiers, the radical newness of ideas and images are at best dubious and at worst totally unacceptable. #RandolphHarris 5 of 16
Mass communication—wonder as it may be technologically and something to be appreciated and valued—presents us with a serious danger, the danger of conformism, due to the fact that we all view the same things at the same time in al the cities of the country. This very fact throws considerable weight on the side of regularity and uniformity and against originality and freer creativity. By the middle of the 19th century: individualism had begun to be replaced by collective forms of economic and political life; harmony of interests by inharmonious struggle of classes and organized pressures; rational discussions undermined by expert decisions on complicated issues, by recognition of the interested bias of argument by vested positions; and by the discovery of the effectiveness of irrational appeal to the citizen. Moreover, certain structural changes of modern society, which we shall presently consider, had begun to cut off the public from the power of active decision. The transformation of public into mass is of particular concern to us, for it provides an important clue to the meaning of the power elite. If that elite is truly responsible to, or even exists in connection with, a community of publics, it carries a very different meaning than if such a public is being transformed into a society of masses. #RandolphHarris 6 of 16
The United States of America today is not altogether a mass society, and it has never been altogether a community of publics. These phrases are names for extreme types; they point to certain features of reality, but they are themselves constructions; social reality is always some sort of mixture of the two. Yet we cannot readily understand just how much of which is mixed into our situation if we do not first understand, in terms of explicit dimensions, the clear-cut and extreme types: If we are to grasp the differences between public and mass, at least four dimensions must be attended to. There is first, the ratio of the givers of opinion to the receivers, which is the simplest way to state the social meaning of the formal media of mass communication. More than anything else, it is the shift in this ratio which is central to the problems of the public and of public opinion in latter-day phases of democracy. At one extreme on the scale of communication, two people talk personally with each other; at the opposite extreme, one spokes person talks impersonally through a network of communications to millions of listeners and viewers. In between these extremes there are assemblages and political rallies, parliamentary sessions, law-court debates, small discussion circles dominated by one being, open discussion circles with talk moving freely back and forth among fifty people, and so on. #RandolphHarris 7 of 16
The second dimension to which we must pay attention is the possibility of answering back an opinion without internal or external reprisals being taken. Technical conditions of the means of communication, in imposing a lower ratio of speakers to listeners, may obviate the possibility of freely answering back. Informal rules, resting upon conventional sanction and upon the informal structure of opinion leadership, may govern who can speak, when, and for how long. Such rules may or may not be in congruence with formal rules and with institutional sanctions which govern the process of communication. In the extreme case, we may conceive of an absolute monopoly of communication to pacified media groups whose members cannot answer back even in private. At the opposite extreme, the condition may allow and the rules may uphold the wide and symmetrical formations of opinion. We must also consider the relation of the formation of opinion to its realization in social action, the ease with which opinion is effective in the shaping of decisions of powerful consequences. This opportunity for people to act out their opinions collectively is of course limited by their positions in the structure of power. This structure may be such as to limit decisively this capacity, or it may allow or invite such action. It may confine social action to local areas or it may enlarge the area of opportunity; it may make action intermittent or more or less continuous. #RandolphHarris 8 of 16
There is, finally, the degree to which institutional authority, with its sanctions and controls, penetrates the public. Here the problem is the degree to which the public has genuine autonomy from instituted authority. Atone extreme, no agent of formal authority moves among the autonomous public. At the opposite extreme, the public is terrorized into uniformity by the infiltration of information and the universalization of suspicion. One thinks of the late Nazi street-and-block system, the eighteenth-century Japanese Kumi, the Soviet cell structure. In the extreme, the formal ebb and flow of influence by discussion which is thus killed off. By combining these several points, we can construct little models or diagrams of several types of societies. Since the problem of public opinion as we know it is set by the eclipse of the classic bourgeois public, we are here concerned with only two types: public and mass. In a public, as we may understand the term, virtually as many people express opinions as receive them. Public communications are so organized that there is a chance immediately and effectively to answer back any opinion expressed in public. Opinion formed by such discussion readily finds an outlet in effective action, even against—if necessary—the prevailing system of authority. And authoritative institutions do not penetrate the public, which is thus more or less autonomous in its operations. #RandolphHarris 9 of 16
When these conditions prevail, we have the working model of a community of publics, and this model fits closely the several assumptions of classical democratic theory. At the opposite extreme, in a mass, far fewer people express opinions than receive them; for the community of publics becomes an abstract collection of individuals who receive impressions from the mass media. The communications that prevail are so organized that it is difficult or impossible for the individual to answer back immediately or with any effect. The realization of opinion in action is controlled by authorities who organize and control the channels of such action. The mass has no autonomy from institutions; on the contrary, agents of authorized institutions penetrate this mass, reducing any autonomy it may have in the formation of opinion by discussion. The public and the mass maybe most readily distinguished by their dominant modes of communication: in a community of publics, discussion is the ascendant means of communication, and the mass media, if they exist, simply enlarge and animate discussion, linking one primary public with the discussion of another. In a mass society, the dominant type of communication is the formal media, and the publics become mere media markets: all those exposed to the contents of given mass media. #RandolphHarris 10 of 16
When we look upon the public from almost any angle of vision that we might answer, we realize that we have moved a considerable distance along the road to the mass society. At the end of that road there is totalitarianism, as in Nazi Germany or in Communist China. We are not yet at the end. In the Untied States of America today, media markets are not entirely ascendant over primary publics. However, surely we can see that many aspects of the public life of our times are more the features of a mass society than of a community. What is happening might again be stated in terms of the historical parallel between the economic market and the public of public opinion. In brief, there is a movement from widely scattered little powers to concentrated powers and the attempt at monopoly control from powerful centers, which being partially hidden, are centers of manipulation as well as of authority. The small shop serving the neighborhood is replaced by the anonymity of the national corporation: mass advertisement replaces the personal influence of opinion between merchant and customer. The political leader hooks up one’s speech to a national network and speaks, with appropriate personal touches, to a million people he never saw and never will see. Entire brackets of professions and industries are in the opinion business, impersonally manipulating the public for hire. #RandolphHarris 11 of 16
The craving for affection may be restricted to certain groups of persons, perhaps to one with which there are interests in common, such as a political or religious group; or it may be restricted to one of the genders. If the need for reassurance is restricted to the opposite gender the condition may superficially appear to be normal, and will usually be defended as normal by the person concerned. There are women, for example, who, if they do not have men around them, feel miserable and anxious; they will start an affair, break it off after short time, again feel miserable and anxious, start another affair, and so on. That this is no genuine longing for relationship with men is shown by the fact that the relationships are conflicting and unsatisfactory. Rather, these women choose indiscriminately any man; they want only to have one near them, and are not found of any of them. And as a rule they do not even find physical satisfaction. In reality, of course, the entire picture is more complicated; I am highlighting only that art which is played in it by anxiety and the need for affection. One may find similar pattern in men; they will have a compulsion to be liked by any woman and will feel uneasy in the company of other men. If the need for affection is concentrated on the same gender, this may be one of the determining factors in latent or manifest homosexuality. #RandolphHarris 12 of 16
If the way to the opposite gender is barred by too much anxiety, the need for affection may be directed toward the same gender. Needless to say, this anxiety need not be manifest, but may be concealed by a feeling of disgust or disinterest concerning the opposite gender. Since getting affection is of vital importance it follows that the neurotic will pay any price for it, mostly without realizing that one is doing so. The most common ways in which the price is paid are an attitude of compliance and an emotional dependence. The complying attitude may take the form of not daring to disagree with or to criticize the other person, of showing nothing but devotion, admiration and docility. If persons of this type do allow themselves to make critical or derogatory remarks they feel anxiety, even though their remarks may be harmless. The complying attitude can go so far that the neurotic will extinguish not only aggressive impulses but all tendencies toward self-assertion, will let oneself be abused and will make any sacrifice, no matter how detrimental this may be. One’s self-abnegation may appears as, for example, a wish to have bipolar disorder because the person whose affection one desires is interested in research in bipolar disorder, implying that having this illness might perhaps win the other’s interest. #RandolphHarris 13 of 16
Closely akin to the attitude of compliance, and interwoven with it, is the emotional dependence which results from the neurotic’s need to cling to someone who holds out the promise of protection. This dependence not only may cause endless suffering but may even be wholly destructive. There are relationships, for example, in which a person becomes helplessly dependent on another, even through one is fully aware that the relationship is untenable. If one does not get a kind work or smile, one feels as if the World would go to pieces, one may even have an attack of anxiety at the time one expects a telephone call, and feel utterly desolate if the other is prevented from seeing one. However, one is unable to break away. In the primary public the competition of opinions goes on between people holding views in the service of their interests and their reasoning. However, in the mass society of media markets, competition, if any, goes on between the manipulators with their mass media on the one hand, and the people receiving their propaganda on the other. Under such conditions, it is not surprising that there should arise a conception of public opinion as a mere reaction—we cannot say response—to the content of the mass media. #RandolphHarris 14 of 16
In this view, the public is merely the collectivity of individuals each rather passively exposed to the mass media and rather helplessly opened up to the suggestion and manipulations that flow from these media. The fact of manipulation from centralized points of control constitutes, as it were, an expropriation of the old multitude of little opinion producers and consumers operating in a free and balanced market. Usually the structure of an emotional dependence is more complicated. In relationships in which one person becomes dependent on the other there is invariably a great deal of resentment. The dependent person resents being enslaved; one resents having to comply, but continues to do so out of fear of losing support from and individual or the masses. Not knowing that it is one’s own anxiety which creates the situation, one will easily assume that one’s subjugation has been brought about by the other’s imposing on one. Resentment growing on such a basis has to be repressed, because the affection of the other is bitterly needed, and this repression in turn generates new anxiety, with a subsequent need for reassurance and hence a reinforced impulse to cling to the other. Thus in certain neurotic persons emotional dependence produces a very realistic and even justified fear that their life is being ruined. When the fear is very great they may seek to protect themselves against this dependence by not attaching themselves to anyone. #RandolphHarris 15 of 16
The thirst for perfection is certainly present within us. This thirst is a pointer to its eventual slaking. However, there is no necessary implication that this will be attained whilst we are in the flesh and on a level of existence where everything is doomed to decay and death. The perfection we seek and the immortality we hope for are more likely to be mental rather than physical achievements. For all mystics are at least agreed that there is such a level of untainted, purely spiritual being. The fundamental task of beings is first to free themselves of animalist and egotist tyrannies, and second, to evolve into awareness of one’s spiritual self. The goal is to free oneself from the meshes and fetters, to being all the forces of one’s being under mastery. The aim is to emancipate oneself from Earthly bondage, to redeem oneself from animal enslavement. One’s quest can come to an end only when the unveiled Truth is seen, not in momentary glimpses, but for the rest of one’s lifetime without a break. We have to bring this awareness of the Overself as a permanent and perpetual feature into active life. It is perpetual abidance in the divine that is to be sought. “Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Every tree that bringeth not fort good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them,” reports 3 Nephi 14.17-20. #RandolphHarris 16 of 16
Individual Personalities Mass Produced with Happiness Thrown in or Your Money Back!
It is an old spell; it binds you to come to me, it binds the spirits who listen to me to drive you towards me. It binds them to fill your dreams and your waking hours with thoughts of me. As the spell builds in power it presses out all other considerations, and finally there is one obsession, that you come to me, and nothing else will do. I have commanded the spirits drench your soul, your mind, your hear with a heat for me, to inflict upon your nights and days a relentless and torturous longing for me; to invade your dreams with the images of me; to let there be nothing that you eat or drink that will solace you as you think of me, until you return to me, until you stand in my presence, until I can use every power at my command on you as we speak together. I will not for a moment let you be quiet; not for a moment will you be able to turn away. May you be as a slave to me, many you be the faithful servant of my designs, may you have no power to refuse what I have confided to you, I will make you strong when you are weak, give you words when you cannot speak. When heart aches weighs you down, I will be the one to show you how to live again, my great and faithful spirits. May you fulfill that destiny which I choose of my own accord. #RandolphHarris 1 of 18
The yearning for diversion whereof a little more than a little is by much too much, because no displaced craving can be satisfied by catering to it in its displaced form. Only when it becomes possible to experience the desire in its true form and to dispense with the internalized processes that balked and displaced it does actual gratification become possible. Diversion at most, through weariness and fatigue, can numb and distract anxiety. For instance, in many popular movies the tear ducts are massaged and thrills are produced by mechanized assaults on the center of sense. (However, in the 2001 film Romeo Must Die, starring Aaliyah and Jet Li, Aaliyah thought of sad memories to make herself cry when it was called for in the script.) We are diverted temporarily and in the end perhaps drained—but not gratified. Direct manipulation of sensations can produce increases and discharges of tension, as the touch of one’s own hand in personal pleasures of the flesh, but it is a substitute. It does not involve reality but counterfeits it, much like social media does. Sensations directly stimulated and discharged without being intensified and completed through feelings sifted and acknowledged by the intellect are debasing because the do not involve the whole individual in one’s relation to reality. When one becomes inured to bypassing reality and individuality in favor of meaningless excitement, ultimate gratification becomes impossible. #RandolphHarris 2 of 18
Once fundamental impulses are thwarted beyond retrieving, once they are so deeply repressed that no awareness is left of their aims, once the desire for a meaningful life has been lost as well as the capacity to create it, only a void remains. Life fades into tedium when the barrier between impulses and aims so high that neither penetrates into consciousness and no sublimation whatever takes place. Diversion, however frantic, can overwhelm temporarily but not ultimately relieve the boredom which oozes from non-fulfillment. Though the bored person hungers for things to happen to one, the disheartening fact is that when they do one empties them of the very meaning one unconsciously yearns for by using them as distractions. In popular culture even the second coming would become just another barren thrill to be watched on television till Milton Berie comes on. No distraction can cure boredom, just as the company so unceasingly pursued cannot stave off loneliness. The bored person is lonely for oneself, not, as one thinks, for others. One misses the individuality, the capacity for experience from which one is debarred. No distraction can restore it. Hence one goes unrelieved and insatiable. #RandolphHarris 3 of 18
The popular demand for inside stories, for vicarious sharing of the private life—even someone else’s—of those who are dimly aware of having none whatever, or a least no life that holds their interest. The attempts to allay boredom are assiduous as they are unavailing. Countless books pretend to teach by general rules and devices what cannot be learned by devices and rules. Individual personalities cannot be mass produced (with happiness thrown in or your money back). Nevertheless, the messages of much popular culture is “you, too, can be happy if you only buy this BMW 4 series, and a Cresleigh Home, then purchase a new dress from Draper James, and bake a Betty Crocker Butterscotch Pudding Layer Cake, and try that TRESemme Smooth and Silky hair tonic; you will be thrilled, you will have adventure, romance, popularity—you will no longer be lonely and left out if you follow this formula. And success, happiness or at least freedom from anxiety is also the burden of popular religion, as unchristian in these its aims as it is in its means. From Dale Carnegie to Norman Vincent Peale to Harry and Bonaro Overstreet only the vocabulary changes. The principle remains the same. The formula is well illustrated in the following. #RandolphHarris 4 of 18
Warm Smile is an Attribute of Charm
For this, train the upper lip by the method:
- Stretch the upper lip down over the teeth. Say “Mo-o-o-o.”
- Hold the lip between the teeth and smile.
- Purse the lips, pull them downward and grin.
- Let the lower jaw fall and try to touch your nose with your upper lip.
Months of daily practice are necessary to eliminate strain from the new way of smiling, but it, too, can become as natural as all beguiling smiles must be. One will be surrounded by an Overself-conscious atmosphere even in the midst of social functions. One’s inward repose will be no less evident there than in solitude. #RandolphHarris 5 of 18
Whatever the formula, nothing can be more tiresome than the tireless, cheerless pursuit of pleasures. When they are empty, days go slowly; one cannot tell one from the other. And yet the years go by fast. When time is endlessly killed, one lives in an endless present until time ends without ever having passed, leaving a person who never lived to exclaim, “I wasted time and now doth time waste me.” To the Christian, despair is a sin not because there is anything to be hoped for in this life, but because to despair is to lack faith in redemption from it—in the life everlasting. As for the pleasure of this life, they are not worth pursuing. Though they fade not of themselves yet to us they fade. We are hungry and we eat. Eat we not till that fades and we are as weary of our fulness as we were of our fasting. We are weary and we rest. Rest we not till that fades and we are as weary of our rest as ever we were of our weariness? Our bodies and minds themselves fade as do their pleasures. The insults of time are spared to none of us. Such is the human predicament. In Civilization and Its Discontents, Dr. Freud pointed to the additional burdens that civilization imposes on human beings. They, too, are inevitable, for civilizations, despite its cost, eases the total burden we bear. #RandolphHarris 6 of 18
The mass of beings lead lives of quiet desperation. A stereotyped but unconscious despair is concealed even under what are called games and amusements of humankind. Despair, we find, is no longer quiet. Popular culture tries to exorcise it with much clanging and banging. Perhaps it takes more noise to drone it out. Perhaps we are less willing to face it. However, whether wrapped in popular culture, we are less happy than our quieter ancestors, or the natives of Bali, must remain an open question despite all romanticizing. (Nor do we have a feasible alternative to popular culture. Besides, a proposal for the mass of beings would be unlikely to affect the substance of popular culture. And counsel to individuals must be individual.) There have been periods happier and others more desperate than ours. However, we do not know which. And even an assertion of today’s bliss with yesterday’s. The happiness felt in disparate groups, in disparate periods and places cannot be measured and compared. Our contention is simply that by distracting from the human predicament and blocking individuation and experience, popular culture impoverishes life without leading to contentment. However, whether the mass of beings felt better or worse without the mass production techniques of which popular culture is an ineluctable part, we shall never know. Of happiness and of despair, we have no measure. #RandolphHarris 7 of 18
Mercedes had been a tomboy in her youth and had early developed a great ambition as shown in the phrase which she used, “Either Caesar or nothing.” In her late teens there becomes evident her perpetual and all-encompassing dilemmas which trapped her like vices; she vacillated from despair to joy, from anger to docility, but most of all from gorging food to starving herself. Mercedes had a long illness which we would term in our day severe anorexia nervosa. However, her doctor was not interested here in the technique of treatment but was concerned with trying to understand her. Mercedes fascinates him by seeming to be in love with death. In her teens Mercedes implores Amel to kids her to death. She writes, “Death is the greatest happiness in life, if not the only one. If he makes me wait much longer, the great friend, death, then I shall set out to seek him.” She writes time and again that she would like to die “as the bird dies which bursts its throat in supreme joy.” Her talent as a writer is shown in her extensive poetry, diaries, and prose about her fascinating with immortality and vampirism. Mercedes reminds me of Anne Rice. Her fascination with vampires and immortality made me wonder: Are there some persons who can fulfill their existence only by taking their own lives? #RandolphHarris 8 of 18
However, where the existence can exist only be relinquishing life, there the existence is a tragic existence. I know her and I know magic. Mercedes was able to use blood to cast spells. Do you not see, this woman not only believes in magic, she understands it. Perhaps a million mortal magicians have lived and died during the past millennia, but how many of them were the genuine article? She knows what she is doing! Your blood was in the weave of her own garment. She has cast a spell on you that I do not know how to break! To live in the face of death, however, means to die unto death, or to die one’s own death. Every passing away, every dying, whether self-chosen death or not, is still an autonomous act of life. This leads us to ask, “Is life worth living?” Some reply, “It depends on the liver.” In the deepest heart of all of us there is a corner in which the ultimate mystery of things works sadly; and I know now what such an association as yours intends, nor what you ask of those whom you invite to address you, unless it be to lead you from the surface-glamour of existence, and for an hour at least to make you heedless to the buzzing and jigging and vibration of small interests and excitements that form the tissue of our ordinary consciousness. #RandolphHarris 9 of 18
Without further explanation or apology, then, I ask you to join me in turning an attention, commonly too unwilling, to the profounder bass-note of life. Let us search the lonely depths for an hour together, and see what answers in the last folds and recesses of things our question may find. With many beings the question of life’s worth is answered by a temperamental optimism which makes them incapable of believing that anything seriously evil can exist. Our dear old Walt Whiteman’s works are the standing text-book of this kind of optimism. The mere joy of living is so immense in Walt Whitman’s veins that it abolishes the possibility of any other kind of feeling:–“To breathe the air, how delicious! To speak, to walk, to seize something by the hand! To be this incredible God I am! O amazement of things, even the least particle! O spirituality of things! I too carol the Sun, usher’d or at noon, or as now, setting; I too throb to the brain and beauty of the Earth and of all the growths of the Earth. I sing to the last the equalities, modern or old, I sing the endless finales of things, I say Nature continues—glory continues. I praise with electric voice, for I do not see one imperfection in the Universe, and I do not see one cause or result lamentable at last.” #RandolphHarris 10 of 18
So Rousseau, writing of the nine years he spent at Annecy, with nothing but his happiness to tell:–“How tell what was neither said nor done nor even thought, but tasted only and felt, with no object of my felicity but the emotion of felicity itself! I rose with the Sun, and I was happy; I went to walk, and I was happy; I saw ‘Maman,’ and I was happy; I left her, and I was happy. I rambled through the woods and over the vine slopes, I wandered in the valleys, I read, I lounged, I worked in the garden, I gathered the fruits, I helped at the indoor work, and happiness followed me everywhere. It was in no one assignable thing; it was all within myself; it could not leave me for a single instant.” If moods like this could be made permanent, and constitutions like these universal, there would never be any occasion for such discourses as the present one. No philosopher would seek to prove articulately that life is worth living, for the fact that it absolutely is so would vouch for itself, and the problem disappear in the vanishing of the question rather than in the coming of anything like a reply. However, we are not magicians to make the optimistic temperament universal; and alongside of the deliverances of temperamental optimism concerning life, those of temperamental pessimism always exist, and oppose to them a standing refutation. #RandolphHarris 11 of 18
In what is called ‘circular insanity,’ phases of melancholy succeed phases of mania, with no outward cause that we can discover; and often enough to one and the same well person life will present incarnate radiance to-day and incarnate dreariness to-morrow, according to the fluctuations of what the older medical books used to call “the concoction of the humors.” In the words of the newspaper joke, “it depends on the liver.” Rousseau’s ill-balanced constitution undergoes a change, and behold him in his latter evil days a prey to melancholy and black delusions of suspicion and fear. Some beings seem launched upon the World even from their birth with souls as incapable of happiness as Walt Whitman’s was of gloom, and they have left us their messages in even more lasting verse than his,–the exquisite Leopardi, for example; or our own contemporary, James Thomason, in that pathetic book. The City of Dreadful Night, which I think is less well-known than it should be for its literary beauty, simply because beings are afraid to quote its words,–they are so gloomy, and at the same time so sincere. In one place the poet describes a congregation gathered to listen to a preacher in a great unillumined cathedral at night. #RandolphHarris 12 of 18
The sermon is too long to quote, but ends thus:– “O Brothers of sad lives! they are so brief; a few short years must bring us all relief: Can we not bear these years of laboring breath? However, if you would not this poor life fulfil, Lo, you are freed to end it when you will, without the fear of waking after death. The organ-like vibrations of his voice thrilled through the vaulted aisles and died away; the yearning of the tones which bade rejoice was sad and tender as a requiem lay: our shadowy congregation rested still, as brooding on that End it when you will. Our shadowy congregation rested still, as musing on that message we had heard, and brooding on the End it when you will, perchance awaiting yet some other word; when keen as lightning through a muffled sky sprang forth a shrill and lamentable cry:–the man speaks sooth, alas! the man speaks sooth; we have no personal life beyond the grave; there is no God; Fate knows nor wrath nor ruth: Can I find here the comfort which I crave? In all eternity I had one chance, one few years term of gracious human life,–the splendors of the intellect’s advance, the sweetness of the home with babes and wife; the social pleasures with their genial wit; the fascination of the Worlds art; the glories of the Worlds of Nature lit by large imagination’s glowing heart. #RandolphHarris 13 of 18
“The rapture of mere being, full of health; the careless childhood and the ardent youth; the strenuous manhood winning various wealthy, the reverend age serene with life’s long truth: all the subline prerogatives of Man; the storied memories of the times of old, the patient tracking of the World’s great plan through sequences and changes myriadfold. This chance was never offered me before; for me the infinite past is blank and dumb; this chance recurreth never, nevermore; blank, blank for me the infinite To-come. And this sole chance was frustrate from my birth, a mockery, a delusion; and my breath of noble human life upon this Earth so racks me that I sigh for senseless death. My wine of life is poison mixed with gall, my noonday passes in a nightmare dream, I worse than lose the years which are my all: What can console me for the loss supreme? Speak not of comfort where no comfort is, speak not at all: can words make foul things fair? Our life’s a cheat, our death a black abyss: Hush, and be mute, envisaging despair. This vehement voice came from the northern aisle, rapid and shrill to its abrupt harsh close; and none gave answer for a certain while, for words must shrink from these most wordless woes; at last the pulpit speaker simply said, with humid eyes and thoughtful, drooping head,– #RandolphHarris 14 of 18
“My Brother, my poor Brothers, it is thus: This life holds nothing good for us, but it ends soon and nevermore can be; and we knew nothing of it ere our birth, and shall know nothing when consigned to Earth: I ponder these thoughts, and they comfort me.” When Louis committed suicide in the novel Merrick by Anne Rice by going into the Sun, when he was resurrected he said he saw “Nothing.” He bowed his head, but then he looked up helplessly. “Nothing. I saw nothing and I felt that there was nothing. I felt it-empty, colorless, timeless. Nothing. That I had ever lived in any shape seemed unreal.” His eyes were shut tight, and he brought up his hand to hide his face from us. He was weeping. “Nothing,” he said. “Nothing at all.” “It ends soon, and never more can be,” “Lo, you are free to end it when you will,”—these versus flow truthfully from the melancholy Thomson’s pen, and are in truth a consolation for all to whom, as to him, the World is far more like a steady den of fear than a continual fountain of delight. That life is not worth living the whole army of suicides declare,–and army whose roll-call, like the famous evening gun of the British army, follows the Sun round the World and never terminates. #RandolphHarris 15 of 18
We, too, as we sit here in our comfort, must ponder these things also, for we are of one substance with these suicides, and their life is the life we share. The plainest intellectual integrity,–nay, more, the simplest manliness and honor, forbid us to forget their case. “If suddenly,” says Mr. Ruskin, “in the midst of the enjoyments of the palate and lightnesses of heart of a London dinner-party, the walls of the chamber were parted, and through their gap the nearest human beings who were famishing and in misery were borne into the midst of the company feasting and fancy free; if, pale from death, horrible in destitution, broken by despair, body by body they were laid upon the soft carpet, one beside the chair of every guest,–would only the crumbs of the dainties be cast to them; would only a passing glance, a passing thought, be vouchsafed to them? Yet the actual facts, the real relation of each Dives and Lazarus, are not altered by the intervention of the house-wall between the table and the sick-being,–by the few feet of ground (how few!) which are, indeed, all that separate the merriment from the misery.” Our relation to the Overself is one of direct awareness of its presence—not as a separate being but as one’s own essence. #RandolphHarris 16 of 18
Intimate communion and personal converse with the higher self remain delightful fact. The Beloved ever companions one and never deserts one. One can never again be lonely. There is a feeling of living in a self other than the ego, although that also is present but subdued and submissive. I wanted to tell her how sorry I was that her full measure of mortal life had not been enjoyed. I wanted to tell her that destiny had marked her for great things, perhaps, and I had broken that destiny had with my careless selfishness, with an ego that could not be restrained. The awareness will be with one at all times, a part of all one’s actions and feelings. It will indeed be the essence of every experience and enable one to pass through it more happily. One has no fixed abode, no permanent address, for like the wind one comes and goes from nowhere to anywhere. Destiny or service may keep one’s body in one place for a time, or for a lifetime, but it will not keep one. For the person who has come to this understanding, who continually feels that IT IS, who is ever in remembrance of It, rituals, ceremonies, mantras, and prayers are not only unnecessary but are a waste of time. The mind emptied of all the activity of ordinary thoughts and filled with the beauty of this presence is a divinely sustained mind. #RandolphHarris 17 of 18
The owl, which sees clearly at midnight, is an old and good symbol of the sage whose mind is ever at rest in, and lighted by, the Infinite Mind. “And the did humble themselves even in the depths of humility; and they did cry mightily to God; yea, even all the day long did they cry unto their God that he would deliver them out of their afflictions. And now the Lord was slow to hear their cry because of their iniquities; nevertheless the Lord did hear their cries, and began to soften the hearts of the Lamanites that they began to ease their burdens; yet the Lord did not see fit to deliver them out of bondage,” reports Mosiah 21.14-15. Because this Mind is common to all beings, it is an inevitable and inescapable consequence of awakening to its existence that the initiate rises above a merely personal outlook and maintains a sympathetic attitude towards all beings. At this level, one is beyond bothering to listen to the discordant sounds of competing sects and cults: one is uninterested in the claims made for different teachings. One has only one concern: direct communion with the God within one as a felt, grace-giving Presence. Henceforth one is able to return one’s consciousness and retract one’s attention from the ego—and this, not only at will, but throughout one’s lifetime. #RandolphHarris 18 of 18
Cresleigh Homes
We are stirring up something exciting in Rancho Cordova, California America… Mark your calendars for our #CresleighRanch Grand Opening on 14 September 2019! Come visit us between 11am-1pm to check out this new community.
Whilst there are Parts of Our Nature which Remain Still Undeveloped, We are Not Complete Beings!
I felt very sophisticated on account of this education. However, I had no warmth from it, not lasting warmth, and it seemed my loneliness was worse than guilt, worse than the feeling of being damned. Indeed it seemed to replace that old feeling. I feared it, being utterly along. As I sat there looking up at the tiny margin of black Heaven, at the few stars that drifted over the roofs of the houses, I sensed how utterly terrible it would be to lose both my Master and my guilt simultaneously, to be cast out where nothing bothered to love me or damn me, to be lost and tumbling through the World with only those humans for companions, those boys and girls, the English lord with his dagger, even my beloved Bianca. Anxiety is generated by a repressed hostility and it in turn again generates hostility, in other words, anxiety and hostility are inextricably interwoven, one is able to recognize the self-deception in the neurotic’s thinking and the reasons for one’s failures. Without knowing it the neurotic person is in the dilemma of being incapable of loving and yet being in great need of love from others. We stumble here over one of those questions that seem so simple and are nevertheless so difficult to answer: what is love, or what do we mean by it in our culture? #RandolphHarris 1 of 18
One may sometimes hear an offhand definition of love as the capacity to give and take affection. Although this contains some truth, it is much too sweeping to be helpful in clarifying the difficulties with which we are concerned. Most of us can be affectionate at times, but it is a quality that may go with a thorough incapacity for love. The important consideration is the attitude from which affection radiates: is it an expression of a basic beneficial attitude toward others, or is it, for example, born of a fear that one will lose the other, or of a wish to get the other person under one’s thumb? In other words, we cannot take any manifest attitudes as criteria. Although it is very difficult to say what is love, we can say definitely what is not love, or what elements are alien to it. One may be thoroughly fond of a person, and yet at times between such circumscribed reactions of wrath or withdrawal and the attitude of a neurotic, who is constantly on guard against others, feels that any interest they take in third persons is a neglect of oneself, and interprets any demand as an imposition or any criticism as a humiliation. This is not love. So, too, it is not incompatible with love to offer constructive criticism of certain qualities or attitudes, in order, if possible, to help correct them; but it is not love to make, as the neurotic often does, an intolerant demand for perfection, a demand which implies a hostile “woe unto you if you are not perfect!” #RandolphHarris 2 of 18
We also consider it incompatible with our idea of love when we find a person using another only as a means for some purpose, that is, only or mainly because one fulfills certain needs. This is clearly the situation when the other person is wanted only for gratification of pleasures of the flesh, or in marriage, only for prestige. However, here too this issue is very easily blurred, especially if the needs concerned are of a psychic nature. A person may deceive oneself into believing that one loves another even if, for example, the other is needed only for the blind admiration that one gives. In such cases, however, the other person is likely to be dropped suddenly or even may be turned against, as soon as one begins to be critical, thereby failing in the function of admiration, for which one was loved. In discussing the contrast between what is and what is not love we must be watchful, however, not to lean over backward. Though love is incompatible with use of the loved one for some gratification, this does not mean that love must be completely and exclusively altruistic and sacrificing. Nor does that feeling alone deserve the name of love which does not demand anything for the self. Person who express any such convictions betray their own unwillingness to give affection rather than a thoroughly worked out conviction. #RandolphHarris 3 of 18
Of course we want something from the person we are fond of—we want gratification, loyalty, help; we may even want a sacrifice, if necessary. (Jesus Christ is the most renewed blood sacrifice.) And it is in general an indication of mental health to be able to express such wishes or even fight for them. The difference between love and the neurotic need for affection is possessed in the fact that in love the feeling of affection is primary, whereas in the cases of the neurotic the primary feeling is the need for reassurance, and the illusion of love is only secondary. Of course there are still all sorts of intermediate conditions. If a person needs another’s affection for the sake of reassurance against anxiety, the issue will usually be completely blurred in one’s conscious mind, because in general one does not know that one is fully of anxiety and that one therefore reaches out desperately for any kind of affection for the sake of reassurance. All that one feels is that here is a person who one likes or trusts, or with whom one feels infatuated. However, what one feels as spontaneous love may be nothing but a response of gratitude for some kindness shown one or a response of hope or affection aroused by some person or situation. The person who explicitly or implicitly arouses in one expectations of this kind will automatically be invested with importance, and one’s feeling will manifest itself in the illusion of love. #RandolphHarris 4 of 18
Such expectations may be aroused by the simple fact that one is treated kindly by a person who is powerful and influential, or by one who merely gives the impression of standing more securely on one’s feet. They may be aroused by erotic or advances in pleasures of the flesh, although these may have nothing to do with love. They may feed on existing ties of some sort, which implicitly contain a promise of help or emotional support: family, friends, physician. Many such relations are carried on under the camouflage of love, that is, under a subjective conviction of attachment, when actually the love is only the person’s clinging to others to satisfy one’s own needs. That this is no reliable feeling of genuine affection is revealed in the ready revulsion that appears when any wishes are not fulfilled. One of the factors essential to our idea of love—reliability and steadiness of feeling—is absent in these cases. A final characteristic of the incapacity for love has already been implied, but I wish to give it special emphasis: disregard of the other’s personality, peculiarities, limitations, needs, wishes, development. This disregard is in part a result of the anxiety which prompts the neurotic to cling to the other person. One who is drowning and clings to a swimmer does not usually consider the other’s willingness or capacity to carry one along. #RandolphHarris 5 of 18
The disregard is also partly an expression of the basic hostility toward people, the most common contents of which are contempt and envy. It may be covered up by desperate efforts to be considerate, or even sacrificing, but usually these efforts cannot prevent the emerging of certain unwonted reactions. A wife may be subjectively convinced, for example, of her deep devotion to her husband, and yet be resentful, complaining or depressed when the husband devoted his time to his work, his interests or his friends. An over-protective mother may be convinced that she does everything for the sake of the child’s needs for independent development. The neurotic person whose protective device is a drive for affection is hardly ever aware of one’s incapacity for love. Most such persons will mistake their need of others for a disposition toward love, whether for individuals or for humankind in general. There is a pressing reason for maintaining and defending such an illusion. Giving it up would mean uncovering the dilemma of feeling at once basically hostile toward people and nevertheless wanting their affection. One cannot despise a person, distrust one, wish to destroy one’s happiness or independence, and at the same time crave one’s affection, help or support. In order to achieve both ends, which in reality are incompatible, one has to keep the hostile disposition strictly removed from awareness. #RandolphHarris 6 of 18
The illusion of love, in other words, while it is the result of an understandable confusion between genuine fondness and need, has the definite function of making the pursuit of affection possible. There is still another basic difficulty which the neurotic encounters in satisfying one’s hunger for affection. Though one may succeed, at least temporarily, in getting the affection one wants, one is unable really to accept it. One should expect one to welcome any affection offered to one, as eagerly as a thirsty person takes to water. In fact, that does happen, but only temporarily. Every physician knows the effect of kindness and consideration. All physical and psychic troubles may suddenly vanish, even though nothing is being done but giving the patient hospital care and having one thoroughly examined. A situation neurosis, even through it be a severe one, may disappear altogether when the person feels loved. Elizabeth Barrett Browning is a famous example of this kind. Even in character neuroses such attention, whether it is love, interest or medical care, may be sufficient to release anxiety and thereby improve the condition. Any kind of affection may give one a superficial reassurance, or even a feeling of happiness, but deep down it either meets with disbelief or stirs up distrust and fear. One does not believe in it, because one is firmly convinced that no one can possibly love one. #RandolphHarris 7 of 18
And this feeling of being unlovable is often a conscious conviction, unshakable by any factual experiences to the contrary. It can, indeed, be taken so much for granted that it never consciously bothers the person, but even when it is inarticulate it is just as unshakable a conviction as if it had always been conscious. Also, it can be concealed by a “do not care” attitude, usually dictated by pride, and then it is likely to create difficulty in digging it out. The conviction of being unlovable is closely akin to the incapacity for love; it is, in fact, a conscious reflection of that incapacity. A person who can be genuinely found of others will have no doubts that other can be fond of one. If the anxiety is really deep, any affection offered meets with distrust, and it will immediately be assumed that it is offered from ulterior motives. In psychoanalysis, for example, such patients feel that the analyst wants to help them only for the sake of one’s own ambition, or that one makes appreciative or encouraging remarks only for therapeutical reasons. One patient of mine considered it a beneficial humiliation that I offered to see her during the weekend, at a time when she was emotionally upset. Affection shown demonstratively is easily felt as a taunt. If an attractive young lady openly shows affection toward a neurotic man he may take it as teasing, or even as a deliberate provocation, since it is beyond his imagination that the girl might be truly fond of him. #RandolphHarris 8 of 18
Affection ordered to such a person not only may meet with distrust but may arouse absolute anxiety. It is as if giving in to an affection meant being caught in a spider’s web, or as if believing in an affection meant being taken off one’s guard while living among cannibals. A neurotic person may have a feeling of terror when one approaches the realization that some genuine fondness is being offered to one. Furthermore, evidence of affection may arouse a fear of dependency. Emotional dependency, as we shall see shortly, is a real danger for anyone who cannot live without the affection of others, and anything faintly resembling it may evoke a desperate struggle against it. Such a person must at all cost avoid any kind of absolute emotional response of one’s own, because such a response immediately conjures up the danger of dependency. In order to avoid this one must blindfold oneself against the awareness that others are kind or helpful, somehow managing to discard every evidence of affection and insisting, in one’s own feelings, that the others are unkind, uninterested or even malevolent. The situation created in this way is similar to that of a person who is starving for food yet does not dare to take any for fear that it might be poisoned. #RandolphHarris 9 of 18
In short, then, for a person who is driven by one’s basic anxiety and consequently, as a means of protection, reaches out for affection, the chances of getting this so much desired affection are anything but favorable. The very situation that creates the need interferes with its gratification. Unconscious ideas of the patient are more often than not the conscious theories of therapist. In truths dependent on our personal action, then, faith based on desire is certainly a lawful and possibly an indispensable thing. However, now, it will be said, these are all childish human cases, and have nothing to do with great cosmical matters, like the question of religious faith. Let us then pass on to that. Religious differ so much in their accidents that in discussing the religious question we must make it very generic and broad. What then do we now mean by the religious hypothesis? Science says things are; morality says somethings are better than other things; and religion says essentially two things. First, she says that the best things are the more eternal things, the overlapping things, the things in the Universe that throw the last stone, so to speak, and say the final word. Perfection is eternal, and that is a good way of putting this first affirmation of religion, an affirmation which obviously cannot yet be verified scientifically at all. #RandolphHarris 10 of 18
The second affirmation of religion is that if we believe her first affirmation to be true, even now we are better off. Now, let us consider what the logical elements of this situation are in case the religious hypothesis in both its branches be really true. (Of course, we must admit that possibility at the outset. If we are to discuss the question at all, it must involve a living option. If for any of you religion be a hypothesis that cannot, by any living possibility be true, then you need go no farther. I speak to the saving remnant’ alone). So proceeding, we see, first, that religion offers itself as a momentous option. We are supposed to gain, even now, by our belief, and to lose by our non-belief, a certain vital good. Secondly, religion is a forced option, so far as that good goes. We cannot escape the issues by remaining sceptical and waiting for more light, because, although we do avoid error in that was if religion be untrue, we lose the good, if it be true, just as certainly as if we absolutely chose to disbelieve. It is as if a being should hesitate indefinitely to ask a certain woman to marry him because he was not perfectly sure that she would prove an angel after he brought her home. Would he not cut himself off from that particular angel-possibility as decisively as if he went and married someone else? #RandolphHarris 11 of 18
Scepticism, then, is not avoidance of option; it is option of a certain particular kind of risk. Better risk loss of truth than chance of error,–that is your faith-vetoer’s exact position. He is actively playing his take as much as the believer is; he is backing the field against the religious hypothesis, just as the believer is backing the religious hypothesis against the field. To preach scepticism to us as a duty until sufficient evidence for religion be found, is tantamount therefore to telling us, when in the presence of the religious hypothesis, that to yield to our fear of its being error is wiser and better than to yield to our hope that it may be true. It is not intellect against all passions, then; it is only intellect with one passion laying down its law. And by what forsooth, is the supreme wisdom of this passion warranted? Dupery for dupery, what proof is there that dupery through hope is so much worse than dupery through fear? I, for one, can see no proof; and I simply refuse obedience to the scientist’s command to imitate one’s kind of option, in a case where my own stake is important enough to give me the right to choose my own form of risk. If religion be true and the evidence for it be still insufficient, I do not wish, by putting your extinguisher upon my nature (which feels to me as if it had after all some business in this matter), to forfeit my sole chance in life of getting upon the winning side,–that chance depending, of course, on my willingness to run the risk of acting as if my passional need of taking the World religiously might be prophetic and right. #RandolphHarris 12 of 18
All this is on the supposition that it really may be prophetic and right, and that, even to us who are discussing the matter, religion is a live hypothesis which may be true. Now, to most of us religion comes in a still further way that makes a veto on our active faith even more illogical. The more perfect and more eternal aspect of the Universe is represented in our religions as having personal form. The Universe is no longer a mere It to us, but a Thou, if we are religious; and any relation that may be possible from person to person might be possible here. For instance, although in one sense we are passive portions of the Universe, in another we show a curious autonomy, as if we were small active centres on our own account. We feel, too, as if the appeal of religion to us were made to our own active good-will, as if evidence might be forever withheld from us unless we met the hypothesis half-way. To take a trivial illustration: just as a man who in a company of gentlemen made no advances, asked a warrant for every concession, and believed no one’s word without proof, would cut himself off by such churlishness from all the social rewards that a more trusting spirit would earn,–so here, one who should shut himself up in snarling logicality and try to make the gods extort his recognition willy-nilly or not get it at all, might cut himself off forever from his only opportunity of making the gods’ acquaintance. #RandolphHarris 13 of 18
This feeling, forced on us we know not whence, that by obstinately believing that there are gods (although not to do so would be so easy both for our logic and our life) we are doing that Universe the deepest service we can, seems part of the living essence of the religious hypothesis. If the hypothesis were true in all its parts, including this one, then pure intellectualism, with its veto on our making willing advances, would be an absurdity; and some participation of our sympathetic nature would be logically required. I therefore, for one, cannot see my way to accepting the agnostic rules for truth seeking, or willfully agree to keep my willing nature out of the game. I cannot do so for this plain reason, that a rule of thinking which would absolutely prevent me from acknowledging certain kinds of truth if those kinds of truth were really there, would be an irrational rule. That for me is the long and short of the formal logic of the situation, no matter what kinds of truth might materially be. I confess I do not see how this logic can be escaped. However, sad experience makes me fear that some of you may still shrink from radically saying with me, in abstracto, that we have the right to believe at our own risk any hypothesis that is lived enough to temp our will. I suspect, however, this if this is so, it is because you have got away from the abstract logical point of view altogether, and are thinking (perhaps without realizing it) of some particular religious hypothesis which for you is dead. #RandolphHarris 14 of 18
The freedom to believe what we will you apply to the case of some patent superstition; and the faith you think of is the faith defined by the schoolboy when he said, “Faith is when you believe something that you know ain’t true.” I can only repeat that this is misapprehension. In concreto, the freedom to believe can only cover living options which the intellect of the individual cannot by itself resolve; and living options never seem absurdities to one who has them to consider. When I look at the religious question as it really puts itself to concrete beings, and when I think of all the possibilities which both practically and theoretically it involves, then this command that we shall put a stopper on our heart, instincts, and courage, and wait—acting of course meanwhile more or less as if religion were not true—till doomsdays, or till such time as our intellect and senses working together may have raked in evidence enough,–this command, I say, seems to me the queerest idol ever manufactured in the philosophic cave. Were we scholastic absolutists, there might be more excuse. If we had an infallible intellect with its objective certitudes, we might feel ourselves disloyal to such a perfect organ of knowledge in not trusting to it exclusively, in no waiting for its releasing word. #RandolphHarris 15 of 18
However, if we are empiricists, if we believe that no bell in us tolls to let us know for certain when truth is in our grasp, then it seems a piece of ideal fantasticality to preach so solemnly our duty of waiting for the bell. Indeed we may wait if we will,–I hope you do not think that I am denying that,–but if we do so, we do so at our peril as much as if we believed. In either case we act, taking our life in our hands. No one of us ought to issue vetoes to the others, nor should we brandy words of abuse. We ought, on the contrary, delicately and profoundly to respect one another’s mental freedom: then only shall we bring about the intellectual republic; then only shall we have the spirit of inner tolerance without which all our outer tolerance is soulless, and which is empiricism’s glory; then only shall we live and let live, in speculative as well as in practical things. What do you think of yourself? What do you think of the World? These are questions with which all mist deal as it seems good to them. They are riddles of the Sphinx, and in some way or other we must deal with them. In all important transactions of life we have to take a leap in the dark. If we decide to leave the riddles unanswered, that is a choice; if we waver in our answer, that, too, is a choice: but whatever choice we make, we make it at our peril. #RandolphHarris 16 of 18
If a being chooses to turn one’s back altogether on God and the future, no one can show beyond reasonable doubt that one is mistake. If a being thinks otherwise and acts as one thinks, I do not see that anyone can prove that one is mistaken. Each must act as one thinks best; and if one is wrong, so much the worse for one. We stand on a mountain pass in the midst of whirling snow and blinding mist, through which we get glimpses now and then of paths which may be deceptive. If we stand still we shall be frozen to death. If we take the wrong road we shall be dashed to pieces. We do not certainly know whether there is any right one. What must we do? Be strong and of good courage. Act for the best, hope for the best, and take what comes. If death ends all, we cannot meet death better. One has chosen a path to which one has been led both by instinct and by experience. As one tries to follow it, one will meet with all kinds of difficulties but one should not turn back. Because the interrelation of outward karma to inner character is so close, one should understand that these difficulties are linked up with one’s inner state, and that one begins to solve them by removing the imperfection of that inner state. One must understand that, although this goal is not easy to obtain, one must refuse to give up hope. #RandolphHarris 17 of 18
The path is right by itself, and in allying oneself with it, one is allying oneself with what is, after all, the greatest force in the World. One will know that this is the day of one’s spiritual rebirth, that struggle is to be replaced henceforth by serenity, that self-reproach is to yield to self-assurance, and that life in appearance is transformed into life in reality. At last one has emerged from confusion and floundering and bewilderment. At last one is able to experience the blessed satisfaction, the joyous serenity of an integrated attitude wholly based on the highest truth. The capacities which have been incubating slowly and explosively during all the years of one’s quest will erupt suddenly into consciousness at the same moment that the higher self takes possession of one. What was formerly an occasional glimpse will not become a permanent sight. The intermittent intuition of a guardian presence will now become the constantly established experience of it. The divine presence has now become to one an immediate and intimate one. Its reality and vitality are no longer matters for argument or dispute, but matters of settled experience. I am a being; and beings are created after the image of God, and I am called by his Holy Spirit to teach these things unto this people, that they may be brought to a knowledge of that which is just and true; and a portion of that Spirit dwelleth in me, which giveth me knowledge, and also power according to my faith and desires which are in God,” reports Alma 18.34-35. #RandolphHarris 18 of 18
However Scarce the World May Make this Sense—In Awe One Feels Profoundly the Immense!
You simply do not know the flesh. The concept is too complex for you. What do you think taught your souls your souls in Sheol their perfection? Was it not suffering? Yes, they enter perhaps twisted and burnt if they have failed to see beyond suffering on Earth, and some may disappear. But in Sheol, over the centuries of suffering and longing, others are purged and purified. Since we generally think of aggression as being destructive, I shall not need to illustrate this beyond a brief personal example. I was engaged to speak at a conference of the junior executives of the American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation. This conference was part of a six-week training session held on the campus of a New England college and, I assumed, an expression of the humanistic interest of AT&T. I had spoken at such conferences before with gratifying results. However, I found, to my surprise and some bewilderment, that my talk was confronted with strange, invisible barriers. I have always been convinced of the truth of Walt Whiteman’s statement that the “audience makes the speech.” This audience seemed alert and fresh bur, try as I would, I just could not communicate my main ideas. #RandolphHarris 1 of 16
At a recess I discovered that, for this part of their training, these young executives (being judged for possible promotion to the few top positions in the corporation) were being trained to be “aggressive,” and that AT&T has retained a couple of professors from college to grade the men and women on how efficiently they could shoot holes in the arguments presented. What I was really facing was not an audience that wanted to learn or even a group present for the pleasures of intellectual stimulation. Its aim was entirely different; the audience was listening not to what I said, but for the errors, the weaknesses in the argument. This was, in short, a sophisticated form of listening geared toward putting down the speaker. The aggression had a weighty competitive reward, namely promotion to high office. This is an example of noncommunication. Such an attitude will successfully inhibit any speaker; you cannot bring forth your ideas unless you feel that they will at least be heard. This does not mean that they will be agreed with; but it does mean that they will be listened to for their own intrinsic merit. If I had known about the purpose of this audience at the outset I could have simply changed the whole theme of my talk to aggression and its purposes and effect; then we would at least have been communicating. #RandolphHarris 2 of 16
Many are wondering, as we speak about communication, how is the mass market formed on which popular culture is sold and perpetuated? In the first place, individual taste has become uneconomic for the purchaser and for the seller, and this effectively stunts its growth. People are prepared accordingly throughout the educational process. Group acceptance, shared taste, takes the place of authority and of individual moral and aesthetic judgment and standards. However, people often move from group to group. Any tastes therefore that cannot be sloughed off—an individual taste, not easily divided from the person in whom it dwells—becomes an obstacle to adaptation. Success is hindered by a discriminating personal taste which expresses or continues an individual personality, and success is fostered by an unselective appetite. Numerous precautions are taken, beginning in nursery school (itself hardly an individualizing institution) to avoid elaboration of personal discernment and to instill fear of separation from the group. Group acceptance is stressed through formal and informal popularity contests, teamwork, and polling. Education altogether stresses group instruction. #RandolphHarris 3 of 16
For instance, the size of one’s classes and the class average, not the qualities of individual pupils, are often considered the measure of the teacher. The student oneself is so much treated as part of a group that, except in higher education (which is only partly immune), one may be automatically promoted with one’s group regardless of individual achievement or variation. Finally, the surviving individual talent is instructed not to cultivate, but to share, itself. The writer gives a writing course, the scholar lectures and writes popularizations, the beauty models of appears on TV, and the singer deserts the concert hall for the juke box. The aggregate effect of advertising is to bring about wide sharing of tastes. The actual social function of advertising is not to mold tastes in any particular way, nor to debase it. This goes for manufacturers, publishers and movie-makers too. They are quite content to produce and advertise what people want—be it T.S. Eliot or Edgar Guest, Kierkegaard or Norman Vincent Peale, “September Morn” or mobiles. It does not matter what people want to buy as long as they want to buy enough of the same thing to make mas production possible. Advertising helps to unify tastes, to de-individualize it and thus to make mass production possible. #RandolphHarris 4 of 16
There is no evidence to support conspiracy theories which hold that wicked capitalists, through advertising and mass media, deliberately (or stupidly) debauch the originally good, natural tastes of the masses. Mass production—capitalist or socialist—demands unified taste; efficiency (or profitableness) is dependent only on its being shared by sizeable groups. Can one say anything about mass tastes beyond saying that they are widely shared? Are they homogenized on the lowest common denominator? There seem to be no good reasons to assume that the lowest tastes are most widespread. One may say something of the sort about some crowds untied temporarily by crude common appetites at the expense of reason, restraint and refinement. However, why consider consumers a crowd? Even the fare offered by the entertainment media is usually consumed by people separately or in very small groups. (Except for movies, but moviegoers are isolated from each other though they are together.) Producers have no interest in lowering tastes or in catering to low rather than high taste. They seek to provide for a modal average of tastes which through advertising they try to make as congruent with the mean average as possible. Neither average can be identical with the lowest common denominator. #RandolphHarris 5 of 16
Yet in one sense consumers are treated as a crowd: their individual tastes are not catered to. The mass-produced article need not aim low, but it must aim at an average of tastes. In satisfying all (or at least many) individual tastes in some respects, it violates each in other respect. For there are—so far—no average persons having average tastes. Averages are but statistical composites. A mass-produced article, while reflecting nearly everybody’s tastes to some extent, is unlikely to embody anybody’s taste fully. This is one source of the sense of violation which is rationalized vaguely in theories about deliberate debasement of taste. The sense of violation springs from the same thwarting of individuality that makes prostitution (or promiscuity) psychologically offensive. The cost of inexpensive and easy availability, of mass production, is wide appeal; and the cost of wide appeal is de-individualization of the relationship between those who cater and those who are catered to; and of the relationship of both to the object of the transaction. By using each other indiscriminately as impersonal instruments (the seller for profit, the buyer for sensation—or, in promiscuity, both parties for sensation and relief of anxiety) the man or woman of the night and his or her client sacrifice to seemingly more urgent demands the self which, in order to grow, needs continuity, discrimination and completeness in relationships. #RandolphHarris 6 of 16
Though profit and sensation can be achieved by depersonalization, the satisfaction ultimately sought cannot be, for the very part of personality in which it is felt—the individual self—is stunted and atrophied, at least if de-individualization continues long enough and is comprehensive. Ultimately, the sense of violation too is numbered. Now, the depersonalizing effects of the mass production of some things—say, electric clocks—may be minor as far as consumers are concerned and more than offset by the advantages of affordability. The same cannot be said for mass entertainment or education. And though some individuals may, society cannot have one without the other. The effects of mass production on people as producers and consumers are likely to be cumulative. Besides, even goods that seem purely utilitarian include elements of non-utilitarian, of aesthetic and psychic (for instance, prestige) appeal. Indeed, less than half of consumer expenditure goes for the satisfaction of simple biological needs. (More, perhaps, in the lowest income groups, and much less still in the higher ones.) One may work toward enlightenment and inner freedom, to the aspiration which draws one most. Whatever helps consciousness come nearer to high moods is a useful spiritual path to someone. #RandolphHarris 7 of 16
Distinctions of this kind are necessarily hazy, but if cigarettes, newspapers, television, drinks, shaving lotion or lipstick, the prestige location of one’s Cresleigh Home, the fashionableness of one’s clothing, and so forth, are taken to satisfy nonbiological needs—and we can do without them biologically—then we are motivated by psychic needs in spending most of our money. This, of course, is not in itself objectionable—except that the processes by which many of these needs now arise and are stilled bring to mind the processes by which bread is now mass produced. In milling and baking, bread is deprived of any taste whatever and of all vitamins. Some of the vitamins are then added again (taste is provided by advertising). Quite similarly with all mass-produced articles. They can no more express the individual tastes of producers than that of consumers. They become impersonal objects, however pseudo-personalized. Producers and consumers go through the mass production mill to come out homogenized and de-characterized—only it does not seem possible to reinject the individualities which have been ground out, the way the vitamins are added to enrich bread. The human relations industry tried to do just that and it doubtlessly supplies a demand and can be helpful, just as chemical sedatives or stimulants can be. However, it seems unlikely that any assembly line—including manned by human relations counselors—can give more than the illusion of individuality. #RandolphHarris 8 of 16
To produce more, people work under de-individualizing conditions and are rewarded by high income and leisure. Thus they can and do consume more. However, as consumers, they must once more rid themselves of individual tastes. The benefits of mass production are reaped only by matching de-individualizing work with equally de-individualizing consumption. The more discontinuous income earning and spending become physically, the more continuous they seem to become psychologically. Failure to repress individual personality in or after working hours is costly; in the end the production of standardized things by persons demands also the production of standardized persons. This intellectual preparation and emotional purification is a task that strains being’s faculties to the extreme. Nobody therefore need expect it to be other than a lifetime’s task. Few even succeed in finishing it in a single lifetime—a whole series is required in most cases. Nature has taken a very long time to bring beings to one’s present state, so she is in no hurry to complete their development in any particular reincarnation. Yet such is the mystery of grace, that this is always a grand possibility, always the sublime X-factor in every case. However, the individual aspirant cannot afford to gamble with this chance, which, after all, is a rare one. #RandolphHarris 9 of 16
One must rely on one’s personal efforts, on one’s own strivings, more than anything else, to being one nearer to the desired goal. In a material sense, this assembly-line shaping, packaging and distributing of persons, of life, occurs already. Most people perch unsteadily in mass-produced, impermanent dwellings throughout their lives. They are born in hospitals, fed in cafeterias, married in churches or castles or mansions or rose gardens. After terminal care they perish in hospitals, are shelved briefly in funeral homes, and are finally incinerated or put in the ground. On each of these occasions—how many others?—efficiency and economy are obtained and individuality and continuity stripped off. If one lives and dies discontinuously and promiscuously in anonymous surroundings, it becomes hard to identify with anything even the self, and uneconomic to be attached to anything, even the self, and uneconomic to be attached to anything, even the self, and uneconomic to be attached to anything even one’s own individuality. The rhythm of individual life loses autonomy, spontaneity, and distinction when it is tired into a stream of traffic and carried along according to the speed of the road, as we are, in going to work, or play, or in doing anything. Traffic lights signal when to stop and go, and much as we seem to be driving we are driven. To stop spontaneously, to exclaim, Verweile doch Du bist so schoen (Stay, for you are beautiful), may not lose the modern Faust his soul—but it will cause a traffic jam. #RandolphHarris 10 of 16
The egoism which falsifies our true sense of being and the materialism which distorts our true sense of reality are maladies which can hardly be cured by our own efforts. Only by calling, in trust and love, on a higher power, whether it be embodied in another man or in ourself, can their mesmeric spell ultimately be broken. Yet it is our own efforts which first must initiate the cure. Turning inward upon oneself might be retiring to a fool’s paradise or into a real one. To make progress inwardly is ultimately all that matters, everything else passes except the fruit of our spiritual efforts. Mysticism is the theory and practice of a technique whereby a being seeks to establish direct personal contact with spiritual being. The ideal here may not set at becoming a sinless saint but at becoming an enlightened and balanced human being. The ultimate point to be attained is fully humanity. One alone who has developed on all sides in this way is fully human. It is one sign of the sage who lives in perfect detachment that one does not miss an enjoyable experience which has passed away, and another sign that one is not afraid of this passing while one is enjoying it. What happened in all those earlier years is now veiled history to the enlightened being; what happens now, in the Eternal Now, is the important significant matter. Thus one’s mind is free from old burdens and errors. Yet, if needed, dead events can be resuscitated by intense concentration. #RandolphHarris 11 of 16
The background of one’s mind is far away from everyday consciousness as if invisible, but it can spring instantly forward if needed. There is no split between higher and lower mind: they are in harmony but the kind of activity is different. It would not be correct to say that one’s consciousness splits itself into two. The proficient can mentally turn inside from the busyness of one’s environment and within a few moments find the divine presence there. One part of one can enter frequently into cerebral thinking but another part can drop out of this into celestial experience. Our work remains active in the foreground of consciousness, while our wisdom remains in the background as its inspirer. One moves in the World of bodily senses and their surrounding objects without losing the Presence, being held by it rather than holding on to it. Primitive society was organized for a certain kind of production of life, a ritual technique of manufacture of the things of the World that used the dimension of the invisible. Beings used their ingenuity to fill one’s stomach, to get control of nature for the benefit of one’s organism; this is only logical and natural. However, this stomach-centered characteristic of all culture is something we easily lose sight of. #RandolphHarris 12 of 16
One reason is that beings were never content to just stop at food: they wanted more in life in the widest sense of the term—exactly what we would expect an organism to want if it could somehow contrive to be self-conscious about life and death and the need to continue experiencing. Food is only one part of that quest; being quickly saw beyond mere physical nourishment and had to conceive ways to qualify for immortality. In this way the simple food quest was transmuted into a quest for spiritual excellence, for goodness and purity. All of being’s higher spiritual ideals were a continuation of the original quest for energy-power. All morality is fundamentally a matter of power, of the power of organisms to continue existing by reaching for a superhuman purity. It is all right for a being to talk about spiritual aims; what one really means is aims for merits that qualify one for eternity. This too, of course, is the logical development of organismic ambitions. Thus the sacrificial lamb is no longer the young of an ewe slaughtered at the Paschal Feast as the embodiment of some god in order to promote the life of the crops, but a symbol expressing a sum of innocence, purity, gentleness, self-sacrifice, redemption and divinity. Doubtless many will be scandalized at any attempt to derive the cure of souls for the cravings of the stomach. #RandolphHarris 13 of 16
Even so the rising generation may find cause not for anger, but for wonder, in the rapidity with which beings, so late emerged from the brute, has proceeded from the conquest of matter to that of the spirit. No one would dare gainsay the profoundly unselfish and spiritual emotions that beings are capable of. As a creature one is most attuned to the living miracle of the cosmos and responds to that miracle with a fineness and a nobility that are in themselves wondrous; the whole thing is surely part of a divine mystery. However, the step from the stomach quest to the spiritual one is not in itself as idealistic as some would seem to make it out. The earning of spiritual points is the initial impetus of the search for purity, however much some few noble souls might transmute that in an unselfish direction. For most beings faith in spirituality is merely a step into continued life, the exact extension of the organism stomach project. Many people what is going on in the mind that ideas they were pondering should break through at a sudden moment. Most striking at first is this appearance of sudden illumination, a manifest sign of long, unconscious prior work. The role of this unconscious work in mathematical invention appears to me, incontestable, and traces of it can be found in other cases where it is less evident. #RandolphHarris 14 of 16
Often when one works at a hard question, nothing good is accomplished at the first attack. Then one takes a rest, longer or shorter, and sits down anew to the work. During the first half-hour, as before, nothing is found, and then all of a sudden the decisive idea presents itself to the mind. It might be said that the conscious work has been more fruitful because it has been interrupted and the rest has given back to the mind its force and freshness. The appearance of the illumination is not due to the relief from fatigue—for instance, simply taking a rest. It is more probably that this rest has been filled out wit unconscious work and that the result of this work has afterward revealed itself to the geometer or someone seriously considering the solution to a problem. Only the revelation, instead of coming during a walk or a journey, has happened during a period of conscious work, but independently of this work which plays at most a role of excitant, as if it were the goad stimulating the results already reached during rest, but remaining unconscious, to assume the conscious form. When it comes to the conditions of unconscious work, it is possible, and of a certainty it is only fruitful, if it is on the one hand preceded and on the other hand followed by a period of conscious work. These sudden inspirations (and the examples already cited sufficiently prove this) never happen expect after some days of voluntary effort which has appeared absolutely fruitless and whence nothing good seems to have come, where the way taken seems totally astray. #RandolphHarris 15 of 16
These efforts then have not been as sterile as one thinks; they have set agoing the unconscious machine and without them it would not have moved and would have produced nothing. The aspirant’s decision to aim for the highest Goal is the governing factor: if one sticks to this decision, one is bound to succeed sooner or later. The question now arises: What is this Goal? It is the fulfilment of the Real Purpose of life, as apart from the lower purposes of earning a livelihood, rearing a family, and so forth. The aspirant will become fully Self-conscious—as aware of the divine Overself as one now is of one’s Earthly body. And this achievement will be perpetual, not just a matter of occasional glimpse or fleeting intuitions. Even though the Quest has become more difficult under modern conditions, it has not become impossible. The timeworn means t this end must simply be brought up to date. What are the means? They are thought, feeling, will, and intuition used in a special way. This constitutes the fourfold path, or Quest. “And now, behold, my joy is great, even unto fulness, because of you, and also this generation; yea, and even the Father rejoiceth, and also the holy Angels, because of you and this generation; for none of them are lost,” reports 3 Nephi 30. #RandolphHarris 16 of 16