Home » Winchester (Page 25)
Category Archives: Winchester
Cauliflower is Nothing but a Cabbage with a College Education!
We agree completely on everything, including that fact that we do not see eye to eye. The principles of justice for institutions must not be confused with the principles which apply to individuals and their actions in particular circumstances. Now by an institution I shall understand a public system of rules which defines offices and positions with their rights and duties, powers and immunities, and the like. These rules specify certain forms of action as permissible, others as forbidden; and they provide for certain penalties and defenses, and so on, when violations occur. As examples of institutions, or more generally social practices, we may think games and rituals, trials and parliaments, markets and systems of property. An institution may be thought of in two ways: first as an abstract object, that is, as a possible form of conduct expressed by a system of rules; and second, as the realization in thought and conduct of certain persons at a certain time and place of the actions specified by the rules. There is an ambiguity, then, as to which is just or unjust, the institution as realized or the institution as an abstract object. It seems best to say that it is the institution as an abstract object is just or unjust in the sense that any realization of it would be just or unjust. #RandolphHarris 1 of 25
An institution exists at a certain time and place when the actions specified by it are regularly carried out in accordance with a public understanding that the system of rules defining the institution is to be followed. Thus parliamentary institutions are defined by a certain system of rules (or family of such system to allow for variations). These rules enumerate certain forms of action ranging from holding a session of parliament to taking a vote on a bill to raising a point of order. Various kinds of general norms are organized int a coherent scheme. A parliamentary institution exists at a certain time and place when certain people perform the appropriate actions, engage in these activities in the required way, with a reciprocal recognition of one another’s understanding that their conduct accords with the rules they are to comply with. In saying that an institution, and therefore the basic structure of society, is a public system of rules, I mean then that everyone engages in it knows what one would know if these rules and one’s participation in the activity they define were the result of an agreement. A person taking part in an institution knows what the rules demand of one and of others. One also knows that the others know this and that they know that ne knows this, and so on. #RandolphHarris 2 of 25
To be sure, the condition is not always fulfilled in the case of actual institutions, but it is a reasonable simplifying assumption. The principles of justice are to apply to social arrangements understood to be public in a sense. Where the rules of a certain subpart of an institution are understanding that those in this part can make rules for themselves as long as these rules are designed to achieve ends generally acceptable and others are not adversely affected. The publicity of the rules of an institution insures that those engaged in it know what limitations on conduct to expect of one another and what kinds of actions are permissible. There is a common basis for determining mutual expectation. Moreover, in a well-ordered society, one effectively regulated by a shared conception of justice, there is also a public understanding as to what is just and unjust. It is necessary to note the distinction between the constitutive rules of an institution, which established its various rights and duties and so on, and strategies and maxims for how best to take advantage of the institution for particular purposes. Rational strategies and maxims are not themselves part of the institution. Rather they belong to the theory of it, for example to the theory of parliamentary politics. #RandolphHarris 3 of 25
Normally the theory of an institution, just as that of a game takes the constitutive rules as given and analyzes the way in which power is distributed and explains how those engaged in it are likely to avail themselves of its opportunities. In designing and reforming social arrangements one must, of course, examine the schemes and tactics it allows and the forms of behaviour which it tends to encourage. Ideally the rules should be set up so that humans are led by their predominant interests to act in ways which further socially desirable ends. The conduct of individuals guided by their rational plans should be coordinated as far as possible to achieve results which although not intended or perhaps even foreseen by them are nevertheless the best ones from the standpoint of social justice. Bentham thinks of this coordination as he artificial identification of interests, Adam Smith as the work of the invisible hand. It is he aim of the ideal legislator in enacting laws and of the moralist in urging their reform. Still, the strategies and tactics followed by individuals, while essential to the assessment of institutions, are not part of the public system of rules which define them. We may also distinguish between a single rule (or group of rules), and institution (or a major part thereof), and the basic structure of the social system as a whole. #RandolphHarris 4 of 25
The reason for doing this is that one or several rules of an arrangement may be unjust without the institution itself being so. Similarly, an institution may be unjust although the social system as a whole is not. There is the possibility not only that single rules and institutions are not by themselves sufficiently important but that within the structure of an institution or social system one apparent injustice compensates for another. The whole is less unjust than it would be if it contained but one of the unjust parts. Further, it is conceivable that a social system may be unjust even though none of its institutions are unjust take separately: the injustice is a consequence of how they are combined together into a single system. One institution may encourage and appear to justify expectations which are denied or ignored by another. These distinctions are obvious enough. They simply reflect the fact that in appraising institutions we may view them in a wider or a narrower context. There are, it should be remarked, institutions in regard to which the concept of justice does not ordinarily apply. A ritual, say, is not usually regarded as either just or unjust, although cases can no doubt be imagined in which this would be true, for example, the ritual sacrifice of the first-born or of prisoners of war. #RandolphHarris 5 of 25
A general theory of justice would consider when rituals and other practices not commonly thought of as just or unjust are indeed subject to this form of criticism. Presumably they must involve in some way the allocation among persons of certain rights and values. However, our concern is solely with the basic structure of society and its major institutions and therefore with the standard cases of social justice. Now let us suppose a certain basic structure to exist. Its rules satisfy a certain conception of justice. We may not ourselves accept its principles of justice in the sense that for this system they assume the role of justice: they provide an assignment of fundamental rights and duties and they determine the division of advantages from social cooperation. Let us also imagine that this conception of justice is by and large accepted in the society and that institutions are impartially and consistently administered by judges and other officials. That similar cases are treated similarly, the relevant similarities and differences being those identified by the existing norms. The correct rules as defined by institutions is regularly adhered to and properly interpreted by authorities. This impartial and consistent administration of laws and institutions, whatever their substantive principles, we may call formal justice. #RandolphHarris 6 of 25
If we think of justice as always expressing a kind of equality, then formal justice requires that in their administration laws and institutions should apply equally (that is, in the same way) to those belonging to the classes defined by them. As Sidgwick emphasized, this sort of equality is implied in the very notion of a law or institution, once it is thought of as a scheme of general rules. Formal justice is adherence to principle, or as some have said, obedience to system. It is obvious that law and institutions may be equally executed and yet be unjust. Treating similar cases similarly is not a sufficient guarantee of substantive justice. This depends upon the principles in accordance with the basic structure is framed. There is no contradiction in supposing that a slave or caste society, or one sanctioning the most arbitrary forms of discrimination, is evenly and consistently administered, although this may be unlikely. Nevertheless, formal justice, or justice as regularity, excludes significant kinds of injustices. For if it is supposed that institutions are reasonably just, then it is of great importance that the authorities should be impartial and not influenced by personal, monetary, or other irrelevant considerations in their handling of particular cases. Formal justice in the case of legal institutions is simply an aspect of the rule of law which supports and secures legitimate expectations. #RandolphHarris 7 of 25
One kind of injustice is the failure of judges and others in authority to adhere to the appropriate rules or interpretations thereof in deciding claims. A person is unjust to the extent that from character and inclination one is disposed to such actions. Moreover, even where laws and institutions are unjust, it is often better that they should be consistently applied. In this way those subject to them at least know what is demanded and they can try to protect themselves accordingly; whereas there is even greater injustice if those already disadvantaged are also arbitrarily treated in particular cases when the rules would give them some security. On the other hand, it might still better in particular cases to alleviate the plight of those unfairly treated by departments from the existing norms. How far we are justified in doing this, especially at the expense of expectations founded in good faith on current institutions, is one of the tangled questions of political justice. In general, all that can be said is that the strength of the claims of formal justice, of obedience to system, clearly depend upon the substantive justice of institutions and the possibilities of their reform. Some have held that in fact substantive and formal justice tend to go together and therefore that at least grossly unjust institutions are never, or at any rate rarely, impartially and consistently administered. #RandolphHarris 8 of 25
Those who uphold and gain from unjust arrangements, and who deny with contempt the rights and liberties of others, are not likely, it is said, to let scruples concerning the rule of law interfere with their interests in particular cases. The inevitable vagueness of laws in general and the wide scope allowed for their interpretation encourages an arbitrariness in reaching decisions which only an allegiance to justice can allay. Thus it is maintained that where we find formal justice, the rule of law and the honouring of legitimate expectations, we are likely to find substantive justice as well. The desire to follow rules impartially and consistently, to treat similar cases similarly, and t accept the consequences of the supplication of public norms is intimately connected with the desire, or at least the willingness, to recognize the rights and liberties of others and to share fairly in the benefits and burdens of social cooperation. The one desire tends to be associated with the other. This contention is certainly plausible, but I shall not examine it here. For it cannot be properly assessed until we know what are the most reasonable principles of substantive justice and under what conditions humans comes to affirm and to live by them. #RandolphHarris 9 of 25
Once we understand the content of these principles and their basis in reason and human attitudes, we may be in a position to decide whether substantive and formal justice are tied together. “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, one also oneself likewise took part of the same; that through death one might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily, he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted,” reports Hebrews 2.14-18. The darkness into which the light of Christmas shines is above all the darkness of death. The threat of death, which shadows the whole road of our life, is the dark background of the Advent expectations of humankind. Death is not merely the scissors which cuts the thread of our life, as a famous ancient symbol indicates. It is rather one of those threads which are woven into the design of our existence, from its very beginning to its end. #RandolphHarris 10 of 25
The force of energy is not entirely incomprehensible: But are we not equally ignorant of the manner or force by which a mind, even the supreme mind, operates either on itself or on body? When I beseech you, do we acquire any idea of it? We have no sentiment or consciousness of this power in ourselves. We have no idea of the Supreme being but what we learn from reflection on our own faculties. Were our ignorance, therefore, a god reason for rejecting anything, we should be led into that principle of denying all energy in the Supreme Being as much as in the grossest matter. We surely comprehend as little the operations of one as the other. Is it more difficult to conceive, that motion may arise from impulses, than that it may arise from volition? All we know is our profound ignorance in both cases. Our having to die is a shaping force through our whole being of body and soul in every moment. The face of every being shows the trace of the presence of death in one’s life, of one’s fear of death, of one’s courage toward death, and of one’s resignation to death. This frightful presence of death subjects humans to bondage and servitude all their lives, according to our text. Ignorance or impotence may be pleaded for so limited a creature as humans; but those imperfections have no place in our Creator. #RandolphHarris 11 of 25
So far as I stand in fear, I stand not in freedom; and I am not free to act as the situation demands, but am bund to act as the pictures and imaginations produced by my fear drives me to act. For fear is, above all, fear of the unknown; and the darkness of the unknown is filled with the images created by fear. This is true even with respect to events on the plane of daily life: the unknown face terrifies the infant; the unknown will of the parent and the teacher creates fear in the child; and all the unknown implications of any situation or new task produce fear, which is the feeling of not being able to handle the situation. All this is true to an absolute degree with respect to death—the absolutely unknown; the darkness in which there is no light at all, and in which even imagination vanishes; that darkness in which all acting and controlling cease, and in which everything which we were is finished; the most necessary and impossible idea at the same time; the real and ultimate object of fear from which all other fears derive their power, that fear the overwhelmed even Christ at Gethsemane. However, we must ask what is the reason for this fear. Are not finite, limited and unable to imagine or to wish for an infinite continuation of our finiteness? Would that not be more terrible than death? #RandolphHarris 12 of 25
Is there not a feeling within us of fulfillment, of satisfaction, and of weariness with respect to life, as is evident in the words about the Old Testament Patriarchs? Is not the law “dust to dust” a natural law? However, then why is it used as a curse in the Paradise story? There must be something more profoundly mysterious about death than the natural melancholy which accompanies the realization of our transitoriness. Paul points to it, when he calls death the wages of sin, and sin, the sting of death. And our text, as well, speaks of “him that had the power of death, that is, the devil”—the organized power of sin and evil. Death, although natural to every finite being, seems at the same time to stand against nature. However, it is humans only who are able to face their death consciously; that belongs to their greatness and dignity. It is that which enables one to look at one’s life as a whole, from a definite beginning to a definite end. It is that which enables one to ask for the meaning of one’s life—a question which elevates one above one’s life, and gives one the feeling of one’s eternity. Human’s knowledge that one has to die is also human’s knowledge that one is above death. It is human’s destiny to be moral and immortal at the same time. All events seem entirely loose and separate. One event follows another; but we never can observe any tie between them. #RandolphHarris 13 of 25
Events seem conjoined, but never connected. And as we can have no idea of anything, which never appeared to our outward sense or inward sentiment, the necessary conclusion seems to be, that we have no idea of connexion or power at all, and that these words are absolutely without any meaning, when employed either in philosophical reasonings, or common life. And now we know what the sting of death is, and why the devil has the power of death: we have lost our immortality. It is not that we are mortal which creates the ultimate fear of death, but rather that we have lost our eternity beyond our natural and inescapable mortality; that we have lost it by sinful separation from the Eternal; and that we are guilty of this separation. To be in servitude to the fear of death during our lifetime means beings in servitude to the fear of death which is nature and guilt at the same time. In the fear of death, it is not merely the knowledge of our having lost eternity. We are slaves of dear, not because we have to ide, but because we deserve to die. Every idea is copied from some preceding impression or sentiment; and where we cannot find any impression, we may be certain that there is no idea. In all single instances of the operation of bodies or minds, there is nothing that produces any impression, nor consequently can suggest any idea, of power or necessary connexion. #RandolphHarris 14 of 25
However, when many uniform instances appear, and the same object is always followed by the same event; we then begin to entertain the notion of cause and connexion. We then feel a new sentiment or impression, to wit, a customer connection in the thought or imagination between one object and its usual attendant; and this sentiment is the original of that idea which we seek for. For as this idea arises from a number of similar instances, and not from any single instance; it must arise from that circumstance, in which the number of instances differ from every individual instance. However, this customary connexion or transition of the imagination is the only circumstance, in which they differ. In ever other particular they are alike. To be in servitude to the fear of death during our lifetime means being in servitude to the fear of death which is nature and guilt at the same time. In the fear of death, it is not merely the knowledge of our finiteness that is preserved, but also the knowledge of our infinity, of our being determined for eternity, and of having lost eternity. We are slaves of fear, not because we have to ide, but because we deserve to die! Therefore, salvation is not a magic procedure by which we lose our finiteness. It is rather a judgment which declares that we do not deserve to ide, because we are justified—a judgement which is not based on anything we have done, for then certainly we would have faith in it. #RandolphHarris 15 of 25
However, it is based on something that Eternity itself has done, something that we can hear and see, in the reality of a mortal human who by one’s own death has conquered one who has the power over death. If Christmas has any meaning, it has that meaning. Ask yourself, as you listen to the prophecies of Advent and to the stores of Christmas, whether your attitude toward death has changed; whether you are any longer in servitude to the fear of death; and whether you can stand the image of your own death. Do not deceive yourself about the seriousness of death—not death in general, not the death of somebody else, but your own death—by nice arguments for the immortality of the soul. The Christian message is more realistic than those arguments. It knows that we, really we, have to die; it is not just a part of us that has to die. And within Christianity there is only one “argument” against death: the forgiveness of sins, and the victory over Him who has the power of death. It speaks of the coming of the Eternal to us, becoming temporal in order to restore our eternity. The whole human is mortal and immortal at the same time, because the Eternal took part in flesh and blood and fear of death. That is the message of Christmas. #RandolphHarris 16 of 25
It is true; if humans attempt the discussion of questions, which lie entirely beyond the reach of human capacity, which as those concerning the origins of Worlds, or the economy of the intellectual system or region of spirits, they may long beat the air in their fruitless contests, and never arrive at any determinate conclusion. However, if the question regard any subject of common life and experience; nothing, one would think, could preserve the dispute so long undecided, but some ambiguous expressions, which keep the antagonists still at a distance, and hinder them from grappling with each other. Ambition, avarice, self-love, vanity, friendship, generosity, public spirit; these passions, mixed in various degrees, and distributed through society, have been, from the beginning of the World, and still are, the source of all the actions and enterprises, which have ever been observed among humankind. “And now it came to pass in the eleventh month of the nineteenth year, on the tenth day of the month, the armies of the Lamanites were seen approaching towards the land of Ammonihah. And behold, the city had been rebuilt, and Moroni had stationed an army by the borders of the city and they had cast up dirt round about to shield them from the arrows and the stones of the Lamanites; for behold, they fought with stones and with arrows. #RandolphHarris 17 of 25
“Behold, I said that the city of Ammonihah had been rebuilt. I say unto you, yea, that it was in part rebuilt; and because the Lamanites had destroyed it once because of the iniquity of the people, they supposed that it would again become an easy prey for them. However, behold, how great was their disappointment; for behold, the Nephites had dug up a ridge of Earth round about them, which was so high that the Lamanites could not cast their stones and their arrows at them that they might take effect, neither could they come upon them save it was by their place of entrance. Now at this time the chief captains of the Lamanites were astonished exceedingly, because of the wisdom of the Nephites in preparing their places for security. Now the leaders of the Lamanites had supposed, because of the greatness of their numbers, yea, they supposed that they should be privileged to come upon them as they had hitherto done; yea, and they had also prepared themselves with shields, and with breastplates; and they had also prepared themselves with garments of skins, yea, very think garments to cover their nakedness. And being thus prepared they supposed that they should easily overpower and subject their brethren to the yoke of bondage, or slay and massacre them according to their pleasure. #RandolphHarris 18 of 25
“However, behold, to their uttermost astonishment, they were prepared for them, in a manner which never had been known among the children of Lehi. Now they were prepared for the Lamanites, to battle after the manner of the instructions of Moroni. And it came to pass that he Lamanites, or the Amalickiahites, were exceedingly astonished at their manner of preparation for war. Now, if king Amalickiahites, were exceedingly astonished at their manner of preparation for war. Now, if king Amalickiah had come down out of the land of Nephi, at the head of his army, perhaps he would have caused the Lamanites to have attacked the Nephites at the city of Ammonihah; for behold, he did care not for the blood of his people. However, behold, Amalickiah did not come down himself to battle. And behold, his chief captains durst not attack the Nephites at the city of Ammonihah, for Moroni had altered the management of affairs among the Nephites, insomuch that the Lamanites were disappointed in their places of retreat and they could not come upon them. Therefore they retreated into the wilderness, and took their camp and marched towards the land of Noah, supposing that to be the next best place for them to come against the Nephites. #RandolphHarris 19 of 25
“For they knew not that Moroni had fortified, or had built forts of security, for every city in all the land round about; therefore, they marched forward to the land of Noah with a firm determination; yea, their chief captains came forward and took an oath that they would destroy the people of that city. However, behold, to their astonishment, the city of Noah, which had hitherto been a weak place, had now, by the means of Moroni, become strong, yea, even to exceed the strength of the city of Ammonihah. And now, behold, this was wisdom in Moroni; for he had supposed that they would be frightened at the city Ammonihah; and as the city of Noah had hitherto been the weakest part of the land, therefore they would march thither to battle; and thus is was according to his desires. And behold, Moroni had appointed Lehi to be chief captain over the humans of that city; and it was that same Lehi who fought with the Lamanites in the valley on the east of the river Sidon. And now behold it came to pass, that when the Lamanites had found that Lehi commanded the city they were again disappointed, for they feared Lehi exceedingly; nevertheless their chief captains had sworn with an oath to attack the city; therefore, they brought up their armies. #RandolphHarris 20 of 25
“Now behold, the Lamanites could not get into their forts of security by any other way save by the entrance, because of the highness of the bank which had been thrown up, and the depth of the ditch which had been dug round about, save it were by the entrance. And thus were the Nephites prepared to destroy all such as should attempt to climb up to enter the fort by any other way, by casting over stones and arrows at them. Thus they were prepared, yea, a body of their strongest humans, with their swords and their slings, to smite down all who should attempt to come into their place of security by the place of entrance; and thus were they prepared to defend themselves against the Lamanites. And it came to pass that the captains of the Lamanites brought up their armies before the place entrance, and began to contend with the Nephites, get into their place of security; but behold, they were driven back from time to time, insomuch that they were slain with an immense slaughter. Now when they found that they could not obtain power over the Nephites by the pass, they began to dig down their banks of Earth that they might obtain a pass to their armies, that they might have an equal chance to fight; but behold, in these attempts they were swept off by the stones and arrows which were thrown at them. #RandolphHarris 21 of 25
“And by pulling down the banks of Earth, they were filled up in a measure with their dead and wounded bodies. Thus the Nephites had all power over their enemies; and thus the Lamanites did attempt to destroy the Nephites until their chief captains were all slain; yea, and more than a thousand of the Lamanites were slain; while, on the other hand, there was not a single soul of the Nephites which was slain. There were about fifty who were wounded, who had not been exposed to the arrows of the Lamanites through the pass, but they were shielded by their shields, and their breastplates, and their head-plates, insomuch that their wounds were upon their legs, many of which were very severe. And it came to pass, that when the Lamanites saw that their chief captains were all slain they fled into wilderness. And it came to pass that they retuned to the land of Nephi, to inform their king, Amalickiah, who was a Nephite by birth, concerning their great loss. And it came to pass that he was exceedingly angry with his people, because he had not obtained his desire over the Nephites; he had not subjected them to the yoke of bondage. Yea, he was exceedingly worth, and he did curse God, and also Moroni, swearing with an oath that he would drink his blood; and this because Moroni had kept the commandments of God in preparing for the safety of his people. #RandolphHarris 22 of 25
“And it came to pass, that on the other hand, the people of Nephi did thank the Lord their God, because of his matchless power in delivering them from the hands of their enemies. And thus ended the nineteenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi. Yea, and there was continual peace among them, and exceedingly great prosperity in the church because of their heed and diligence which they gave unto the word of God, which was declared unto the by Helaman, and Shiblon, and Corianton, and Ammon and his brethren, yea, and by all those who had been ordained by the holy order of God, being baptized unto repentance, and sent forth to preach among the people,” report Alma 49.1-30. Excessive guru-worship provokes a reaction, a critical, sometimes sceptical attitude from which there must also be a recoil. Only after that can an honourable, honest, and true relationship be established. One should rather object to anyone’s making a cult out of one. Why not respect one’s wish and let one remain what one is—a researcher? Faith in the master is the first step, obedience to one’s injunctions is the next one, devotion toward one is the third step, and remembrance of one’s presence, name or image is the fourth. Such following of the master and practice of one’s teachings will bring one’s graces. #RandolphHarris 23 of 25
Those whose temperament is innately submissive and dependent make better disciples than the others. However, they are less likely to advance father than the others. However, if the teacher must have the capacity to point out the right way, the student, in one’s turn must have the capacity to travel every step of it in thought with one. There are some tremendously difficult problems involved in the highest Quest. The key to these problems must be placed in one’s hands by the teacher. The wisest plan for one, therefore, is to work out in detail and patiently the few hints given by the teacher, to study the books suggested and to plod on the path stringently, thinking of it as a period of patient preparation for the karmic time when one will assuredly receive what one is seeking. This one will get if one has the right mental equipment, if one has expressed the desire for guidance in the right quarters, and also if one recognizes the necessity of serving humanity. You are strong, and greatly to be praised, worthy of sacrifice, Lord of life and death. You are tough, and greatly to be praised, worthy of sacrifice, Lord of life and death. You are fortified, and greatly to be praised, worthy of sacrifice, life and death. You are solid, and great to be praised worthy of sacrifice, Lord of life and death. #RandolphHarris 24 of 25
You who are the sacrifice, you who are the Lord of life and death: Worthy are you, greatly to be praised. Declare His glory among the nations, His marvelous works among the peoples. Great is the Lord highly to be praised; He is to be revered above all who are worshipped as gods. For all the gods of the heathens are things of naught, but the Lord created the Heavens. Honour and majesty are before Him; strength and beauty are in His sanctuary. Ascribe unto the Lord, O families of humankind, ascribe unto the Lord glory and strength. Render unto the Lord the glory due unto His name; with offerings of homage, come into His courts. Let the field and all within it exult; let all the trees of the forest sing before the Lord; before the Lord, as He cometh; He cometh to judge the Earth, to judge the World in righteousness, and the nations by His truth. God is in command, ruling the herds: worthy of worship, worthy of praise. He is our anchor in the forest of spirits, ruling the wilds: worthy of worship, worthy of praise. The Lord of forests is the Lord of the city, King of the Universe, spirits, and Ancestors, king of people in this World and the next: worthy of worship, worthy of praise. #RandolphHarris 25 of 25
Cresleigh Homes
The kitchen comes fully equipped with a large eat-in island, stainless steel appliances, and quartz counters. The great room is spacious and full of natural light with a covered patio! The Owner’s suite is nestled in the rear of the home separate from the secondary bedrooms, providing maximum privacy. Enjoy a spa like experience in the Owner’s bathroom with a large walk in shower, dual vanities, and makeup counter.
If you told us you “rolled out of bed and started working” in this room, we would totally believe you. 😉 To make a room multi-functional, maximizing space is your friend! Skip the ottoman at the foot of your bed and opt for a petite desk, perfect for crushing your #WFH (Work From Home) goals. https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/
Lord, what Fools these Mortals be!
The camera makes everyone a tourist in other people’s reality, and eventually in one’s own. We ought to read books that set the tone of our lives. Most of what we read does not have that power. It either falls within the province of our special field, or it has no meaning for us at all. However, every one of us should ask ourselves: If there one book, are there two or three books that have been absolutely central to your entire development? I read not to learn, but to live. Seen by that standard, there are not many books that are truly influential for us. Any halfway decent book will, of course, have some effect on us. No book leaves us completely untouched, any more than a serious conversation or meeting with another person does. If two people speak seriously together, they will both experience something, or—as I prefer to put it—they will both undergo a change. The change will often be so minute that we cannot detect it. However, this line of thought takes back to this point: If two people talk together and both of them remain the same people they were before, then they have not really talked at all. They have simply engaged in an exchange of words. The Old Testament in the Christian Bible made a powerful and lasting impression on me. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23
As a boy I was particularly drawn to the vision of universal peace, to the vision of the lamb lying down together, and at a young age it made me believe there was a chance for World peace. In the Old Testament, one can distinguish between the psalms that reflect some inner movement, a shift from sadness to joy, and those quite different ones that maintain the same mood and that are in a certain sense, though not always, somewhat self-righteous. At the very least there is no inner conflict in them, n inner movement. There are psalms that can be understood only if we notice that the speaker begins in a state of despair. Then he overcomes his despair, but it comes back. And he overcomes it again. And only when he hits rock bottom, when his despair is most intense, does a sudden, miraculous change come about, a change accompanied by a jubilant, religious, hopeful mood. Psalm 22, which begins with the words, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” is a good example. An interesting point is that people have often wondered why Jesus spoke these words of despair at his death. That question puzzled me when I was still a child. His words do not seem in keeping with his voluntary death and with his faith. However, there really is no contradiction here, because the psalms are cited differently in the Jewish tradition and in the Christian. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23
Where the Christian tradition cites a psalm by number, the Jewish tradition evokes the entire psalm by quoting the first sentence of the first few words. So what the Bible is telling us in this passage is that Jesus recited all of Psalm 22. And if you read this psalm, you will see that it begins in despair but ends as a hymn of hope. Perhaps more than any other psalm it expresses the universalistic, messianic message of early Christianity. If we fail to see the shift that takes place in that psalm, and if we think Jesus spoke only the first sentence of it, then we overlook the message. This sentence was even changed in the Gospel later because it caused misunderstandings. Well, we are getting a bit far afield here. However, then it is nice that we are not bound by a program or schedule. So that is one of the major influences in my life, and when I read the prophets today they are as fresh and alive for me as they were when I was a child, perhaps even fresher and more alive. Youth is not chronological age but the state of growing, learning, and changing. All people must be helped to regain the conditions of youth. The matriarchal position—to state the case briefly—stands for the principle of unconditional human love. A mother loves her children without any regard for their merits. She loves them because they are her children. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23
And if a mother loved her baby only when it smiled sweetly and was well behaved, then many a child would starve to death. A father loves his children because they obey him, because they are like him. Now I am not speaking here about every mother or every father but rather about types or categories, about the classic types we see exemplified throughout the history of paternal and maternal love. Taken individually, people are so mixed that we find many maternal fathers and many paternal mothers. The difference has to do with the social order, with whether it is patriarchal or matriarchal. The conflict between the two is nowhere more beautifully articulated then in Sophocles’’ Antigone. Antigone embodies the matriarchal principle: “I am here not to hate but to love,” while Creon embodies the patriarchal one, the principle that makes the state supreme over all other human values (and a principle that we would call fascist today). Many human beings experience a longing for some extraordinary figure like a god of goddess, who will relieve one of one’s responsibilities, eliminate the risks of life, indeed, even relieve us of our fear of death, and shelter us in a kind of paradise. For that protection, we pay the price of dependence on religion and God. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23
Unlike God, we do not start with nothing and make something of it. We start with ourselves as nothing and makes something of the nothing with the things at hand. The relationship of one human being to another and to the specifically human emotions that are rooted not in instinct but rather in human’s existences, are what make us come alive. Deep in the hearts of almost all people, they want more peace than war, more life than death, more light than darkness. However, some people are sadomasochist, they are people with an unlimited passion for exerting power and control over others but also for subjection of the self. We see this more during the COVID-19 crisis with the restrictions on businesses and people, but the dependence on the federal government and people shaming others for not wearing masks. Now, in the light of more extensive study and better insight, I have come to consider another factor even more important. This factor is called necrophilia. Ordinarily that term is applied only to a sexual perversion, but in using it as I do, I am following the example of the great Spanish philosopher Unamuno, who said in a speech he gave in Salamanca in 1936 that the Falangist motto “Long live death: was a necrophiliac moto. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23
What I mean by necrophilia in a nonsexual and nonphysical sense is a fascination with everything that is dead, lifeless, with everything having to do with dismemberment, with the destruction of living relationships. The necrophiliac is motivated not by a love for the living but by an attraction to the purely mechanical. Necrophilia means love for what is dead. Nekros means corpse. Necrophilia is not a love of death but a love of dead things, of everything that is not alive. Its opposite is a love of the living, a love for everything that grows, that has structure, that forms a unity, that is not dismembered. Many necrophiliacs have a characteristic facial expression. They look as if they smell something rotten, but there is no bad odor present. What this indicates is that these people regard living things, not dead ones, as filth, and they consequently relate to them in this archaic way—by smelling and sniffing. There are some individuals who enjoy smelling foul odors. They are attracted to bad smalls or to excrement and carrion. This perversion is visible in their facial expressions. With necrophiliac types you will find that the face remains immobile. They do not react; they are frozen. With biophilic people, the face shows a great variety of expressions, and it lights up in the presence of whatever is alive. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23
Another way we can express this is to say that the necrophiliac is hopelessly boring. A biophile is never boring. It does not matter what one talks about. The subject can be quite insignificant, but whatever one says is always marked by vitality. A necrophiliac may say something intelligent, but it does not come alive. We have all had the experience of hearing an intellectual say something terribly clever, yet we are bored by it. Conversely, a much less brilliant person can say something quite simple (this is bringing us back to our starting point this evening, the subject of conversation), and we are not bored at all. On the contrary, we are stimulated, because it is life that is speaking to us. We are always drawn to what is alive. It is vitality that makes people attractive. These says people seem to think—we humans talk this way, and the cosmetic industry tries to convince women that it is true—we seem to think people can make themselves attractive and lovable if they paint their faces this way or that way or adopt a certain expression that is supposed to be modern and irresistible. A lot of people fall for that kind of thing, usually people who do not have much of a self. There is only one thing that really attracts us, and that is vitality. We can observe that in people who are falling in love. In their desire to please and attract the other, they in fact become livelier than they usually are. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23
The only problem with people becoming livelier than they usually are is once they have achieved their goal and “have” each other, their desire to be more alive is much reduced. Then they suddenly become quite different, and after a while they do not love each other anymore. They do not even know why they fell in live in the first place. Their partners are changed. They are no longer beautiful, because they no longer have the beauty that vitality brings to the face. There are two basic tendencies in people and they are a propensity for life and a propensity for death and destruction. Eros, the vital force or the force of love, strives for the integration of the whole, for union, while the goal of the death wish is disintegration or, dismemberment, dissection. Necrophilia and biophilia are two forces of equal strength. The desire to destroy is as strong in people as is their joy of life. That could be why there is so much crime and the population keeps growing so rapidly. As a result of increase competition, scarcity of resources, population growth, and crime, a lot of people have no chance to be free and to develop their own powers, people are hemmed in, and live in a class or in a society in which everything functions in a mechanical, lifeless way and people are losing their capacity for spontaneity. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23
This link between thwarted vitality and necrophilia is evident in individuals. It is by no means rare to find people whose families were so “dead” that the children never experience even bureaucratized, routine, subject rules. Life consisted solely of possessing things, owning things. The parents regarded any sign of spontaneity in their children as inherently bad. It is clear beyond any doubt that children are naturally very lively and active, a fact proved by recent neurophysiological and psychological studies. The child becomes more and more discouraged and then takes another direction a direction in which the nonliving becomes central. In the final analysis we can say that a person who finds no joy in living will try to avenge oneself and will prefer to destroy life rather than feel that one can make no sense of one’s life at all. One may still be alive physiologically, but psychologically one is dead. That is what gives rise to the active desire to destroy and to the passionate need to destroy everyone, including oneself, rather than confess that one has been born yet has failed to become a living human being. That is a bitter feeling for those who experience it, and we are not indulging in mere speculation if we assume that the wish to destroy follows on this feeling as an almost inevitable reaction. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23
I am afraid that our preoccupation with everything mechanical encourages necrophilia to increase. And COVID-19, social distancing, and masks are making it even harder to connection with people, read their emotions and enjoy life, especially with nearly 30,000,000 people and approximately 1,000,000 dead globally. We are running away from life. It is difficult to explain in any concise way why it is that things are taking the place of human beings in our cybernetic society and culture, pushing human beings aside, but perhaps in is due to the World being overpopulated ad evolution. People are becoming increasingly uncertain about their own being. When I speak of “being” here I am using a term of great importance in the history of philosophy. What is being? I am less interested in its philosophical meaning here than I am in its experiential aspect. Let me give a simple example. A woman might come to an analyst and begin describing herself something like this: Well, Doctor, I “have” a problem. I “have” a happy marriage, and I “have” two children, too, but I am “having” so many difficulties. Every sentence she produces uses the verb “to have.” The entire World is represented as an object of having. In earlier time (and I know this from my own experience in both English and German) she would have said: I feel miserable, I am satisfied, I am worried, I love my husband, or perhaps I do not love him or I doubt that I love him. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23
In any language like that, people speak about what they are, about their own activity, about the feelings they experience, not about objects or possessions. People are more and more inclined to express their being with nouns followed by some form of the verb “to have.” I have everything, but I am nothing. Some people are convinced that they must “have” things and “get” people in order to live because they do not see a future for themselves in the name of the nation or of the law or of the party or of necessity or of God or of any other authorities they may come up with. So their life has to “have” conditions in which they can “get” people and flourish. Lies can tie us to a political part, but ultimately it is only the truth that can lead to the liberation of humans. However, too many people are afraid of freedom and prefer illusions to it. They do not want to believe in God, they are to believe they are god. Because people take a party line. Party politics can put blinders on us. We could say, in a certain sense, that party politics can makes us apolitical. I do not mean that as an attack on political parties, nor do I deny their necessity, but I do feel that when our political life is dominated by party politics, we run the danger of becoming unpolitical. We need more independent people. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23
It is essential to your political lives that there be politically active people who, from their own perspectives come right out and say what they think, what they know. Private and public life cannot be separated. We cannot split off our knowledge of ourselves from our knowledge of society. Both belong together. The truth is indivisible. We cannot see reality here and remain closed to it there. That dulls our cutting edge and makes our search for the truth ineffectual. And we can see ourselves rightly only if we can see others rightly, only if we can see them in the context of their social circumstances, which is to say, only if we look sharply and critically at all that is going on around us in the World. This is what love demands of us, too. And if we love our fellow humans, we cannot limit our insight and our love only to others as individuals. That will inevitably lead to mistakes. We have to be political people, I would even say passionately involved political people, each of us in the way that best suits our own temperaments, our working lives, and our own capabilities. The intellectual has one prime task to fulfill, first, last, and always. It is one’s job to search out the truth as best one can and to speak that truth. It is not the intellectual’s primary calling, it is not one’s primary function, to draft political platforms. And to say this does not contradict what I have just been saying about political activity. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23
However, it is the intellectual’s special task—and this is what defines one’s role or should define it—to purse the truth without compromise and without regard for one’s own or anyone else’s interests. If intellectuals restrict their function of finding and speaking the whole truth in the service of any party program or any political goals, no matter how praiseworthy the program or the goals may be, then those intellectuals are failing in their own unique task and, ultimately, in the most important political task they have. For political progress depends on how much of the truth we know, how clearly and boldly we speak it, and how great an impression it makes on other people. “And when even was come, there came a rich person from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus’ disciple: This man went to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded it to be given up. And Joseph took the body, and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb, and departed. And Mary Magdalene was there, and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23
“Now on the morrow, which is the day after the Preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees were gathered together unto Pilate, saying, Sir, we remember that the deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I raise again. Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest haply his disciples come and steal one away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: and the last error will be worse than the first. Pilate said unto them, Ye have a guard: go your way, make it as sure as ye can. So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, the guard being with them,” reports Matthew 27.57-66. In the Nuremburg War-Crime Trials a witness appeared who had lived for a time in a grave in a Jewish grave-yard, in Wilna, Poland. It was the only place he—and many others—could live, when in hiding after they had escaped the gas chamber. During this time he wrote poetry, and one of the poems was a description of a birth. In a grave nearby a young woman gave birth to a boy. The eighty-year-old gravedigger, wrapped in a linen shroud, assisted. When the newborn child uttered his first cry, the old man prayed: “Great God, hast Thu finally sent the Messiah to us? For who else than the Messiah Himself can be born in a grave?” However, after three says the poet saw the child sucking his mother’s tears because she had no milk for him. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23
This story, which surpasses anything the human imagination could have invented, has not only incomparable emotional value, but also tremendous symbolic power. When I first read it, it occurred to me more forcefully than ever before that our Christian symbols, take from the gospel stories, have lost a great deal of their power because too often repeated and too superficially used. It has been forgotten that the manger of Christmas was the expression of utter poverty and distress before it became the place where the angels appeared and to which the star pointed. And it has been forgotten that the tomb of Jesus was the end of His life and of His work before it became the place of His final triumph. We have become insensitive to the infinite tension which implied in words of the Apostles’ Creed: “suffered…was crucified, dead, and buried…rose again from the dead.” We already know, when we hear the first words, what the ending will be: “rose again;” and for many people it is no more than the inevitable “happy ending.” The old Jewish grave-digger knew better. For him, the immeasurable tension implicit in the expectation of the Messiah was a reality, appearing in the infinite contrast between the things he saw and the hope he maintained. The depth of this tension is emphasized by the last part of the story. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23
After three days the child was not elevated to glory; he drank his mother’s tears, having nothing else to drink. Probably he died and the hope of the old Jew was frustrated once more, as it had been frustrated innumerable times before. No consolation can be derived from this story; there cannot be a happy ending—and precisely this is the truth about our lives. In a remarkable passage of his book, Credo, Karl Barth writes about the word “buried” in the Creed: “By a person’s being buried it is evidently confirmed and sealed—seemingly in his presence, actually already in his absence—that he has no longer a present, any more than a future. He has become pure past. He is accessible only to memory, and even that only so long as those who are able and willing to remember him are not themselves buried. And the future toward which all human present is running is just this: to be buried.” These words describe exactly the situation in which the pious old Jew payed: “Great God, hast Thou finally sent the Messiah to us?” We often hide the seriousness of the “buried” in the Creed, not only for the Christ, but also for ourselves, but imagining that not we shall be buried, but only a comparatively unimportant part of us the physical body. That is not what the Creed implies. It is the same subject, Jesus Christ, of Whom it is said that He suffered and that He was buried and that He was resurrected. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23
Jesus Christ was buried, He—His whole personality—was removed from the Earth. The same is true of us. We shall die, we—our personality, from which we cannot separate our body as an accidental part—shall be buried. Only if we take the “buried” in the gospel stories as seriously as this, can we evaluate the Easter stories and can we evaluate the words of the grave-digger, “Who else than the Messiah can be born a grave?” His question has two aspects. Only the messiah can bring birth out of death. It is not a natural event. It does not happen every day, but it happens on the day of the Messiah. It is the most surprising, the most profound, and the most paradoxical mystery of existence. Arguments for the immortality of an assumedly better part of us cannot bring life out of the grave. Eternal life is brought about only with the coming of the “new reality,” the eon of the Messiah, which, according to our faith, has already appeared in Jesus as the Christ. However, there is another side to the assertation that nobody other than the Messiah Himself can be born in a grace, a side, which, perhaps, was less conscious to the pious Jew. The Christ must be buried in order to be the “Christ,” namely, He Who has conquered death. The gospel story we have heard assures us of the real and irrevocable death and burial of Jesus. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23
The women, the high priests, the soldiers, the sealed stone—they are all called by the gospel to witness to the reality of the end. We ought to listen more carefully to these witnesses, to the ones who tell us with triumph or cynicism that Jesus has been buried, that He is removed forever from the Earth, that no real traces of Him are left in our World. And we ought also to listen to the others who say, in doubt and despair, “But we trusted that it had been He Who should have redeemed Israel.” It is not hard to hear both these voices today, in a World where there are so many places like the Jewish cemetery in Wilna. It is even possible to hear them in ourselves, for each of us to hear them in oneself. And, if we hear them, what can we answer? Let us be clear abut this. The answer of Easter is not a necessity. In reality, there is no inevitable happy ending as there is in perverted and perverting cinemas. However, the answer of Easter has become possible precisely because the Christ has been buried. If it did not come from the complete end of the old life, the new life would not really be new life. Otherwise, it would have to be buried again. However, if the new life has come out of the grave, then he Messiah Himself has appeared. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23
“And now it came to pass that, as soon as Amalickiah had obtained the kingdom he began to inspire the hearts of the Lamanites against the people of Nephi; yea, he did appoint men to speak unto the Lamanites from towers, against the Nephites. And thus he did inspire their hearts against the Nephites, insomuch that in the latter end of the nineteenth years of the reign of the judges, he having accomplished his designs thus far, yea, having been made king over the Lamanites, he sought also to reign over all the land, yea, and all the people who were in the land, the Nephites as well as the Lamanites. Therefore he had accomplished his design, for he had hardened the hearts of the Lamanites and blinded their minds, and stirred them up to anger, insomuch that he had gathered together a numerous host to go to battle against the Nephites. For he was determined, because of the greatness of the number of his people, to overpower the Nephites and to bring them into bondage. And thus he did appoint chief captains of the Zoramites, they being the most acquainted with the strength of the Nephites, and their places of resort, and the weakest parts of their cities; therefore he appointed them to be chief captains over his armies. And it came to pass that they took up their camp, and moved forth toward the land of Zarahemla in the wilderness. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23
“Now it came to pass that while Amalickiah had thus been obtaining power by fraud and deceit, Moroni, on the other hand, had been preparing the minds of the people to be faithful unto the Lord their God. Yea, he had been strengthening the armies of the Nephite, and erecting small forts, or places round about to enclose his armies, and also building walls of stone to encircle them about, round about their cities and the borders of their lands; yes, all round about the land. And in their weakest fortifications he did place the greater number of humans; and this he did fortify and strengthen the land which was possessed by the Nephites. And thus he was preparing to support their liberty, their lands, their wives, and their children, and their peace, and that they might live unto the Lord their God, and that they might maintain that which was called by their enemies the cause of Christians. And Moroni was a strong and a might man; he was a man of a perfect understanding; yea, a man that did not delight in bloodshed; a man whose would did joy in the liberty, and his brethren from bondage and slavery. Yea, a man whose heart did swell with thanksgiving to his God, for the many privileges and blessings which he bestowed upon his people; a man who did labour exceedingly for the welfare and safety of the people. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23
“Yea, and he was a man who was firm in the faith of Christ, and he had sworn with an oath to defend his people, his rights, and his country, and his religion, even to the loss of his blood. Now, if it were necessary, the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, never to raise the sword except it were to preserve their lives. And his was their faith, that by so doing God would prosper them in the land, or other words, if they were faithful in keeping the commandments of God that he would prosper them in the land; yea, warn them to flee, or to prepare for war, according to their danger; and also, that God would make it known unto them wither they should go to defend themselves against their enemies, and by so doing, the Lord would deliver them; and this was the faith of Moroni, and his heart did glory in it; not in the shedding of blood but in doing good, in preserving his people, yea, in keeping the commandments of God, yea, and resisting iniquity. Yes, verily, verily I say unto you, if all humans had been, and were, and ever would be, like unto Moroni, behold, the very powers of hell would have been shaken forever; yea, the devil would never have power over the hearts of the children of humans. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23
“Behold, he was a man like unto Ammon, the son of Mosiah, yea, and even the other sons of Mosiah, yea, and also Alma and his sons, for they were all humans of God. Now behold, Helaman and his brethren were no less serviceable unto the people than was Moroni; for they did preach the word of God, and they did baptize unto repentance all humans whosoever would hearken unto their words. And thus they went forth, and the people did humble themselves because of their words, insomuch that they were highly favoured of the Lord, and thus they were free from wars and contentions among themselves, yea, even for the space of four years. However, as I have said, in the latter end of the nineteenth year, yea, notwithstanding their peace amongst themselves, they were compelled reluctantly to contend with their brethren, the Lamanites. Yea, and in fine, their wars never did cease for the space of many years with the Lamanites, notwithstanding their much reluctance. Now, they were sorry to take up arms against the Lamanites, because they did not delight in the shedding of blood; yea, and this was not all—they were sorry to be the means of sending so many of their brethren out of the World into an eternal World, unprepared to meet their God. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23
“Nevertheless, they could not suffer to lay down their lives, that their wives and their children should be massacred by the barbarous cruelty of those who were once their brethren, yea, and had dissented from their church, and had let them and had gone to destroy them by joining the Lamanites. Yea, they could not bear that their brethren should rejoice over the blood of the Nephites, so long as there were any who should keep the commandments of God, for the promise of the Lord was, if they should keep his commandments they should prosper in the land,” reports Alma 48.1-25. God of the In-between, you I praise, you who sit at ease in the midst of chaos, you who sit at ease on the edge of a sword. Can anyone attain the mastery you should as you hold your place between life and death? Can anyone rival the poise your presence radiates as you sit in the gateway between past and future? Can anyone sit so still, but be ready to move at the exact time the moment requires? Lord who holds death and life equally in your hands, I stand in your presence today and give you my praise. Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness; revere Him all that inhabit the Earth. The Lord reigneth. Let the Heavens be glad and the Earth rejoice; let the sea roar, and all within it give praise. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23
Winchester Mystery House
We are so excited to welcome you back to the Winchester Mystery House for the Self-Guided Mansion Tour! Before you go, please take a moment to review our health & safety guidelines to help protect you and our staff.
Learn More Link in bio. winchestermysteryhouse.com
Buy Tickets Link in bio. winchestermysteryhouse.com
And it Seems Like “Everyday” Would be Every Day, Like Monday!
The most distinguished hallmark of the American society is and always has been—change. The value-life (spiritual, religious, philosophical, axiological, et cetera) is an aspect of human biology and in on the same continuum with the “lower” animal life (rather than being in separated, dichotomized, or mutually exclusive realms). It is probably therefore species-wide, supracultural even though it must be actualized by culture in order to exist. The spiritual life is part of the human essence. It is a defining characteristic of human nature, without which human nature is not fully human nature. It is part of the Real Self, of one’s identity, of one’s specieshood, of full-humanness. To the extent that pure spontaneity, is possible, to that extent will the metaneeds also be expressed. “Uncovering” or Taoistic or existential therapeutic or logotherapeutic, or “ontogogic” techniques, should never uncover and strengthen the metaneeds as well as the basic needs. Depth-diagnostic and therapeutic techniques should ultimately also uncover these same metaneeds because, paradoxically, our “highest nature” is also our “deepest nature.” The value life and the animal life are not in two separate realms as most religions and philosophies have assumed, and as classical, impersonal science has also assumed. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21
The spiritual life (the contemplative, religious, philosophical, or value-life) is within the jurisdiction of human thought and is attainable in principle by human’s own efforts. Even though it has been cast out of the realm of reality by the classical, value-free science which models itself upon physic, it can be reclaimed as an object of study and technology by humanistic science. Let me also make quite explicit the implication that metamotivation is species-wide, and is, therefore, supracultural, common-human, not created arbitrarily by culture. Since this is a point at which misunderstandings are fated to occur, let me say it so: the metaneeds seem to me to be instinctoid, that is, to have an appreciable hereditary, species-wide determination. However, they are potentialities, rather than actualities. Culture is definitely and absolutely needed for their actualization; but also culture can fail to actualize them, and indeed this is just what most known cultures actually seem to do and to have done throughout history. Therefore, there is implied here a superacultural factor which can criticize any culture from outside and above that culture, namely, in terms of the degree to which it fosters or suppresses self-actualization, full-humanness, and metamotivation. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21
The so-called spiritual (or transcendent, or axiological) life is clearly rooted in the biological nature of the species. It is a kind of “higher” animality whose precondition is a heathy “lower” animality, id est, they are hierarchically-integrated (rather than mutually exclusive). However, this higher, spiritual “animality” is so timid and weak, and so easily lost, is so easily crushed by stronger cultural forces, that is can become widely actualized only in a culture which approves of human nature, and therefore actively fosters its fullest growth. Fortunately, there are a number of recent studies of animals living in the wild which clearly show that the aggressiveness to be observed under conditions of captivity is not present when the same animals life in their natural habitat. Among the monkeys, baboons have the reputation of a certain violence, and they have been carefully studied. There is little aggressive behaviour; whatever aggressive behaviour there is, is essentially one of the gestures or threat postures. It is worthwhile to note, considering the previous discussion on crowding, it is reported that no fighting was observed between baboon troops that met at the waterhole. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21
More than four hundred baboons around were counted around a single waterhole at one time, and yet they did not observe any aggressive behaviour among them. It was also observed that the baboons were very unaggressive toward members of other animal species. The study of aggressive behaviour among chimpanzees, the primates that most resemble humans, is of particular interest. Until recent years almost nothing was known of their way of life in Equatorial Africa. However, three separate observations of chimpanzees in their natural habitat have by now been carried out and offer very interesting material with regard to aggressive behaviour. Exceedingly low incidence of aggression was reported among the chimpanzees of the Bodongo Forest. During 300 observation hours, 17 quarrels involving actual fighting or displays of threat or anger were seen and none of these lasted more than a few seconds. Only four of these seventeen quarrels involved two adult males. The threatening behaviour that was seen on 4 occasions was when a subordinate male tried to take food before a dominant one. Instances of attack were seldom observed and mature males were seen fighting only on one occasion. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21
On the other hand, there are a number of activities and gestures like grooming and courting behaviour, whose main function is apparently to establish and maintain good relations between the individual chimpanzees of the community. Their groups are largely temporary, and no stable relationships other than mother-infant could be found. A dominance hierarchy proper was not observed among these chimpanzees, alt though there were seventy-two clear-cut dominance interactions observed. There is an observation concerning the uncertainty of chimpanzees which is very important for the understanding of the evolution of human’s “second nature,” their character. All the chimpanzees observed were cautious, hesitant creatures. This is one of the major impressions one carries away from studying chimpanzees at close range in the wild. Behind their lively, searching eyes one senses a doubting, contemplative personality, always trying to make sense out of a puzzling World. It is as if the certainty of instinct has been replaced in chimpanzees by the uncertainty of intellect—but without the determination and decisiveness that characterizes humans. There also seems to be some indecision in male chimpanzees to select food or a female mate when both are present. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21
The incapacity of the male chimpanzee to come to a decision whether first to eat the bananas or mount the female is striking. If we observed this same behaviour in a man, we would say that he was suffering from obsessional doubt, because the normal human would have no difficulty in acting according to the dominant impulse in his character structure; the oral receptive character would first eat the banana and postpone the satisfaction of his pleasures of the flesh impulse; the “private area character” would let the food wait until he was gratified in pleasures of the flesh. In either case he would act without doubt or hesitancy. Since we can hardly assume that the male in this example is suffering from an obsessional neurosis. The chimpanzee’s remarkable tolerance toward the young as well as their deference toward the old, even when they no longer had physical power. Chimpanzees normally show a good deal of tolerance in their behaviour toward each other. This is especially true of males, less so with females. A typical instance of tolerance of a dominant to a subordinate animal occurred when an adolescent male was feeding from the only ripe cluster of fruits in a palm tree. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21
A mature male climbed up but did not try to force the other away; he merely moved up beside the younger and the two fed side by side. Under similar circumstances a subordinate chimpanzee may move up to a dominant one, but before attempting to feed, it normally reaches out to touch the other on the lips, thigh, or in the private area. Tolerance between males is particularly noticeable during the mating season, as for example on the occasion described above when seven males were observed copulating with one female with no signs of aggression between them; one of these males was an adolescent. On gorillas in the wild, it was reported on the whole “interaction” between groups was peaceful. Aggressive bluff charges were made by one male as noted above, and I once observed weak aggressiveness in the form of incipient charges towards intruders from another group by a female, a juvenile and an infant. Most intergroup aggressiveness in the form of incipient charges towards intruders from another group aggressiveness was confined to staring and snapping. Serious aggressive attacks among gorillas were not witnessed. This is all the more remarkable because the gorilla group home ranges not only overlapped, but seem to have been commonly shared amongst the gorilla population. Hence there would be ample occasion for friction. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21
Special attention should be paid to reports on feeding behaviour because it uncovers carnivorous or predatory character of chimpanzees. The chimpanzees of the Gombe Stream Reserve (and probably in most places throughout the range of the species as a whole) are omnivorous. The chimpanzees is primarily vegetarian; that is, by far the greatest proportion of foods constituting his diet as a whole is vegetable. There were certain exceptions to this rule. During the course of field study by scientists, it was observed chimpanzees feeding on the flesh of other mammals in twenty-eight instances (goes without saying, other animals in rainforest may eat humans besides lions and tigers). In addition, examining occasional samples of feces during the first two and a half years and regular samples in the last two and a half years, altogether the remnants of thirty-six different mammals were found in dung, over and above those chimpanzees were observed eating. In addition it was reported in four instances, during these years, in which in three cases a male chimpanzee caught and killed an infant baboon, and in one the killing involved a, probably female, red colobus monkey. Furthermore it was observed sixty-eight mammals had eaten (mostly primates) within forty-five months, or roughly one and a half per month, by a group of fifty chimpanzees. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21
These figures confirm that chimpanzees’ diet on the whole is vegetable and hence that meat eating is exceptional. Yet, in Jane Goodall’s book In the Shadow of Man, the author states flatly that she and her husband “saw chimpanzees eating meat fairly frequently,” but without quoting the qualifying data in her previous work that show the relative infrequency of meat eating. I stress emphasizing the “predatory” character of chimpanzees. However, chimpanzees are as many authors had stated, omnivorous; they live mainly on a vegetable diet. That they eat meat occasionally (in fact rarely), does not make them carnivorous and surely not predatory animals. However, the use of the words “predatory” and “carnivorous” insinuate that humans are born with an innate destructiveness. Pleasures and gratifications can be arranged in hierarchy of levels from lower to higher. So also can hedonistic theories be seen as ranging from lower to higher, id est, metahedonism. The B-values, seen as gratifications of metaneeds, are then also the highest pleasures or happiness that we know of. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21
I have suggested elsewhere the need for usefulness of being conscious that there is a hierarchy of pleasures, ranging from exempli gratia, relief from pain, through the contentment of a hot tub, the happiness of being with good friends, the joy of great music, the bliss of having a child, the ecstasy of the highest love-experiences, on up to the fusion with B-values. Such a hierarchy suggests a solution of the problem of hedonism, selfishness, duty, et cetera. If one includes the highest pleasures among the pleasures in general, then it becomes true in a very real sense that fully-human people also seek only for pleasure, id est, metapleasure. Perhaps we call this “metahedonism” and then point out that at this level there is then no contradiction between pleasure and duty since the highest obligations of human beings are certainly to truth, justice, et cetera, which however are also the highest pleasures that the species can experience. And of course at this level of discourse the mutual exclusiveness between selfishness and unselfishness has disappeared. What is good for us is good for everyone else, what is gratifying is praiseworthy, our appetites are now trustworthy, rational, and wise, what we enjoy is good for us, seeking our own (highest) good is also seeking the general good, et cetera. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21
Everybody can say the Lord’s prayer and it is recited millions and millions of times every day. However, how many of those who say it have received the power to pray it? The fatherhood of God, which is the greatest and most incredible concept of Christianity, has become one of the most usual and insignificance phrases of daily life. Christianity has forgotten that in every invocation of God as Father the enmity against God must be overcome, the ecstatic certainty of our childhood must be given by the Spirit. Many of those outside Christianity know more about it than those within it. They know how paradoxical and impossible it is to call God “Father.” However, where it happens that humans have gained freedom, “the spirit of bondage” to fear is overcome by “the spirit of adoption.” When a child has a moment that we could call a moment of grace, one suddenly does the good freely, without command, and more than had been commanded; happiness glows in one’s face. One is balanced within oneself, without enmity, and is full of love. Bondage and fear have disappeared; obedience has ceased to be obedience and has become free inclination; ego and super-ego are untied. This is the liberty of the children of God, liberty from the law, and because from the law, also from the condemnation to despair. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21
Those who have the Spirit walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit. The power of infinite desire and unlimited will to power is broken. It is not extinguished; the hunger and thirst for life remain. However, when, for us, the Spirit is present, desire is transformed into love and will to power into justice. In the great chapter on live in First Corinthians, Paul makes it clear that love is the fruit of the Spirit, and that there is no love without the Spirit. Love is not a matter of law. As long as it is commanded, it does not exist. Neither is it a matter of sentimental emotion. It is impossible for the natural human; and it is ecstatic in its appearance, like every gift of the Spirit. And finally, Spirit is life. “To be carnally minded is death.” There is a human of our time who discovered the truth of this profound statement. Dr. Sigmund Freud recognized that at the root of our infinite desire lies the will to death. The individual, feeling the impossibility of fulfilling one’s desire, wants to rid oneself of it my losing oneself as an individual. Death is inevitable, but it is also chosen. Not only must we die, we also want to die, “for to be carnally minded is death.” “But,” continues Paul, “to be spiritually minded is life.” #RandolphHarris 12 of 21
Spirit is life, creative life, as the ancient hymn Veni Creator Spiritus, declares. The word “spirit” has largely disappeared from our daily language and entirely from our scientific terminology. It is replaced by “reason.” However, reason argues about what it has received; it analyzes life and often kills life. It is not life itself; it is without creative power. However, the Spirit is power as well as reason, uniting and transcending them. It is creative life. Neither power alone, nor reason alone, creates the works of art and poetry, of philosophy and politics; the Spirit creates them individually and universally, powerful and full of reason at the same time. In every great human work we admire the inexhaustible depth of its individual and incomparable character, the power of something which happens but once and cannot be repeated and that, nevertheless, is visible to century after century, universal and accessible in every period. No argument of reason can give certainty. The finite cannot argue for the infinite; it cannot reach God and it can never reach its own eternity. However, there are two certainties. One dwells in every soul which knows about itself. It is certainty which the law imposes that no life and no death, no courage and no flight, can liberate us from the command to be what we ought to be and the impossibility to be so, the condemnation of which is despair. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21
The eternity of despair encompasses us in the moment that we are conscious of our witness to the law. The other certainty dwells in those who have Spirit; they are beyond their own finiteness and they cannot use arguments, for their eternity is present to them. It is not a matter of a future life after death; it is the convincing presence of the Spirit Who is Life, beyond life and death. In the story of Pentecost, the Spirit of Christ shows its creativity in both directions, the individual and universal. Each disciple receives the fiery tongue that is the new creative Spirit. Members of all nations, separated by their different tongues, understand each other in this New Spirit, which creates a new peace, beyond the cleavages of Babel—the peace of the Church. Furthermore, for Paul, the Spirit is eternal life. It is obvious that the certainty that we are children of God, that we are united with the eternal meaning of life, is either itself eternal or is nothing. There is no rational argument for the immortality of our souls. Here and now we are encompassed in the never-ending despair brought on us by law. Here and now we are encompassed in the eternal and inexhaustible life created by the Spirit, which witnesses to the fact that we are the children of God. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21
However, someone may say: “I have not received this witness. I have not experienced the Spirit of which Paul speaks. I am not Christian in this sense.” Listen to Paul’s reply. Perhaps it is the most puzzling and mysterious of all his sayings. “Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities. For we know not what we should pray for as we ought; but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered; and one that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because one maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.” Paul recognizes the fact that usually we are possessed by weakness which makes the experience of the Spirit and the right prayer impossible. However, he tells us that in these periods we must not believe that the Spirit is far from us. It is within us, although not experienced by us. Our sighing in the depth of our souls, which we are not able to articulate, is taken by God to be the work of the Spirit within us. To the human who longs for God and cannot find Him; to the human who wants to be acknowledged by God and cannot even believe that He is; to the human who is striving for a new and imperishable meaning of one’s life and cannot discover it—to this man Paul speaks. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21
We are each such a human. Just in this situation, where the Spirit is far from our consciousness, where we are unable to pray or to experience any meaning in life, the Spirit is working quietly in the depth of our souls. In the moment when we feel separated from God, meaninglessness in our lives, and condemned to despair, we are not left alone. The spirit, sighing and longing in us and with us, represents us. It manifests what we really are. In feeling this against feeling, in believing this against belief, in knowing this against knowledge, we, like Paul, possess all. Those outside that experience possess nothing. Paul, in spite of the boldness of his faith and the depth of his mysticism, is most human, most realistic—nearer to those who are strong. He knows that we, with all other creatures, are in the stage of expectation, longing and suffering with all animals and flowers, with the oceans and winds. The soundless mourning of these other creatures echoes the soundless longing of the human soul. Paul knows that what we are to be has not yet appeared. And yet he has written his triumphant and ecstatic letter on Spirit and Life. It is not his spirit which inspired him to write those words, but rather the Spirit which has witnessed to his spirit and which witnesses to our spirit that we are the children of God. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21
“My son, give ear to my words; for I swear unto you, that inasmuch as ye shall keep the commandments of God ye shall prosper in the land. I would that ye should do as I have done, in remembering the captivity of our fathers; for they were in bondage, and none could deliver them except it was the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; and he surely did deliver them in their afflictions. And now, O my son Helaman, behold thou art in thy youth, and therefore, I beseech of thee that thou wilt hear my words and learn of me; for I do know that whosoever shall put their trust in God shall be supported in their trials, and their troubles, and their afflictions, and shall be lifted up at the last day. And I would not that ye think that I know of myself—not of the temporal but of the spiritual, not of the carnal mind but of a God. Now, behold, I say unto you, if I had not been born of God I should not have known these things; but God has, by the mouth of his holy angel, made these things known unto me, not of any worthiness of myself; for I went about with the sons of Mosiah, seeking to destroy the church of God; but behold, God sent his holy angel to stop us by the way. And behold, he spake unto us, as it were the voice of thunder, and the whole Earth did tremble beneath our feet; and we all fell to the Earth, for the fear of the Lord came upon us. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21
“However, behold, the voice said unto me: Arise. And I arose and stood up, and beheld the Angel. And he said unto me: If thou wilt of thyself be destroyed, seek no more to destroy the church of God. And it came to pass that I fell to the Earth; and it was for the space of three days and three nights that I could not open my mouth, neither had I use of my limbs. And the angel spake more things unto me, which were heard by my brethren, but I did not hear them; for when I heard the words—If thou wilt be destroyed of thyself, seek no more to destroy the church of God—I was struck with such great fear and amazement lest perhaps I should be destroyed, that I fell to the Earth and I did hear no more. However, I was racked with eternal torment, for my soul was harrowed up to the greatest degree and racked with all my sins. Yea, I did remember all my sins and iniquities, for which I was tormented with the pains of hell; yea, I saw that I had rebelled against my God, and that I had not kept his holy commandments. Yea, and I had murdered many of his children, or rather led them away unto destruction; yea, and in fine so great had been my iniquities, that the very thought of coming into the presence of my God did rack my soul with inexpressible horror. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21
“Oh, thought I, that I could be banished and become extinct both soul and body, that I might not be brought to stand in the presence of my God, to be judge of my deeds. And now, for three days and for three night was I racked, even with the pains of a damned soul. And it came to pass that as I was thus racked with torment, while I was harrowed up by the memory of my many sins, before, I remembered also to have heard my father prophesy unto the people concerning the coming of one Jesus Christ, a Son of God, to atone for the sins of the World. Now, as my mind caught hold upon this thought, I cried within my heart: O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me, who am in the gall of bitterness, and am encircled abut by the everlasting chains of death. And now, behold, when I thought this, I could remember my pains no more; yea, I was harrowed up by the memory of my sins no more. And oh, what joy, and what marvelous light I did behold; yea, my soul was filled with joy as exceeding as was my pain! Yea, I saw unto you, my son, that there could be nothing so exquisite and so bitter as were my pains. Yea, and again I say unto you, my son, that on the other hand, there can be nothing so exquisite and sweet as was my joy. Yea, methought I aw, even as our father Lehi saw, God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels, in the attitude of singing and praising their God; yea, and my soul did long to be there. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21
“However, behold, my limbs did receive their strength again, and I stood upon my feet, and did manifest unto the people that I had been born of God. Yea, and from that time even until now, I have laboured without ceasing, that I might bring souls unto repentance; that I might bring them to taste; that they might also be born of God, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. Yea, and now behold, O my son, the Lord doth give me exceedingly great joy in the fruit of my labours; for because of the word which he has imparted unto me, behold, many have been born of God, and have tasted as I have tasted, and have seen eye to eye as I have seen; therefore they do know of these things of which I have spoken, as I do know; and the knowledge which I have is of God. And I have been supported under trials and troubles of every kind, yea, and in all manners of afflictions; yea, God has delivered me from prison, and from bonds, and from death; yea, and I do put my trust in him, and he will still deliver me. And I know that he will raise me up at the last day, to dwell with him in glory; yea, and I will praise him forever, for he has brought our fathers out of Egypt, and he has swallowed up the Egyptians in the Red Sea; and he led them by his power into the promised land; yea, and he has delivered them out of bondage and captivity from time to time. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21
Yea, and he has also brought our fathers out of the land of Jerusalem; and he has also, by his everlasting power, delivered them out of bondage and captivity, from time to time even down to the present day; and I have always retained in remembrance their captivity; yea, and ye also ought to retain in remembrance, as I have done, their captivity. However, behold, my son, this is not all; for ye ought to know as I do know, that inasmuch as ye shall keep the commandments of God ye shall prosper in the land; and ye ought to know also, that inasmuch as ye will not keep the commandments of God ye shall be cut off from his presence. Now this is according to his word,” report Alma 36.1-30. The Serpent King s stirring within me, awakening, his fire and force growing. The raving one awakes, who is spendthrift with his fire and force growing. The raving one awakes, who is spendthrift with his power, breaking through, breaking down, breaking apart what is outworn. Do what you must, thunder and lightning, but leave behind a newly ordered creation, an oak growing from the wet ground. I pray to God who is Father of All and ask his presence today. Lord, God, Almighty, Most High: I call to you by these ancient names. I call to you by these names you are known by and ask you to come to me. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21
Winchester Mystery House
Long-time maintenance worker Denny reported that one morning, after entering the water tower, he heard the patter of footsteps above. He ascended to let the trespasser know the three-story structure was off-limits. But the footsteps always seemed to be one step ahead of him, and, one floor above. His search culminated on the roof, with no one in sight.
Open tonight from 8PM – 11PM for the Walk With Spirits Tour!
Buy Tickets http://ow.ly/YAsd50Bc0xx
Sober, Serious, Understated and Elegant–Come Ye Out from Among them and be Ye Separate!
Success is a drug in itself. When you strive to become somebody and you become that person, it is difficult to give it up. Other persons behave in dubious ways which we do not approve in our family. Many of them play cards, go o movies, smoke, dance, drink, and engage in other activities—some unmentionable. So the best thing to do is to be tolerant of them, since they may not know better, and to keep away from any close communication with them and live your life within the family. “Come ye out from among them and be ye separate” is a good Biblical text to follow. Self-actualizing individuals (more matured, more fully-human), by definition, already suitably gratified in their basic needs, are now motivated in other higher ways, to be called “metamotivations.” This is to say that they have a feeling of belongingness and rootedness, they are satisfied in their love needs, have friend and feel loved and loveworthy they have status and place in life and respect from other people, and they have a reasonable feeling of worth and self-respect. If we phrase this negatively—in terms of the frustration of these basic needs and in terms of pathology—then this is to say that self-actualizing people do not need (for any length of time) feel anxiety-ridden, rootless, or isolated, nor do they have crippling feelings of inferiority or worthlessness. #RandolphHarris 1 of 27
Of course this can be phrased in other ways and this I have done. For instance, since the basic needs had been assumed to be the only motivations for human beings, it was possible, and in certain contexts also useful, to say of self-actualizing people that they were “unmotivated.” This was to align these people with the Eastern philosophical view of health as the transcendence of striving or desiring. It was also possible o describe self-actualizing people as expressing rather than coping, and to stress that they were spontaneous, and natural, that they were more easily themselves than other people. Each of these phrasings has its own operational usefulness in particular research context. However, it is also true that for certain purposes it is best to ask the questions, “What motivates the self-actualizing person?” Clearly we must make an immediate distinction between the ordinary motives of people below the level of self-actualization—that is, people motivated by the basic needs—and the motivations of people who are sufficiently gratified in all their basic needs and therefore are no longer motivated by them primarily, but by “higher” motivations. It is therefore convenient to call these higher motives and needs of self-actualizing persons by the name “metaneeds” and also to differentiate the category of motivation from the category of “metamotivation.” #RandolphHarris 2 of 27
(It is now more clear to me that gratification of the basic needs is not a sufficient condition for metamotivation, although it may be a necessary precondition. I have individual subjects in whom apparent basic-need-gratification is compatible with “existential neurosis,” meaninglessness, valuelessness, or the like. Metamotivation now seems not to ensure automatically after basic-need-gratification. One must speak also of the additional variable of “defenses against metamotivation.” This implies that, for the strategy of communication and of theory-building, it may turn out to be useful to add to the definition of the self-actualizing person, not only [a] that one be sufficiently free of illness, [b] that one be sufficiently gratified in one’s basic needs, and [c] that one be beneficially using one’s capacities, but also [d] that one be motivated by some values which one strives for or gropes for and to which one is loyal.) All such people are devoted to some task, call, vocation, beloved (“outside themselves”). Generally the devotion and dedication is so marked that one can fairly use the old words vocation, calling, or mission to describe their passionate, selfless, and profound feeling for their “work.” We could even use the words destiny or fate. #RandolphHarris 3 of 27
I have sometimes gone so far as to speak of obligation in the religious sense, in the sense of offering oneself or dedicating oneself upon some altar for some particular task, some cause outside oneself and bigger than oneself, something not merely selfish, something impersonal. I think it is possible to go pretty far with the notion of destiny or fate. This is a way of putting into inadequate words the feeling that one gets when one listens to self-actualizing people (and some others) talking about their work or task. One gets the feeling of a beloved job, and, furthermore, of something for which the person is “natural,” something that one is suited for, something that is right for one, even something that one was born for. It should be said that this all seems to hold true for my female subjects even though in a different sense. I have at lease one women subject who devoted herself entirely to the task of being the mother, the wife, the housewife and the clan matriarch. Her vocation, one could very reasonably call it, was to being up her children, to make her husband happy, and to hold together a large number of relatives in a network of personal relations. This she did very well and, as nearly as I could make out, this she enjoyed. She loved her lot completely and totally, never yearning for anything else so far as I could tell, and using all her capacities well in the process. #RandolphHarris 4 of 27
Other women subjects have had various combinations of home life and professional work outside the home which could produce this same sense of dedication to something perceived simultaneously, as both as beloved and also as important and worthwhile doing. In some women, I have also been tempted to thing of “having a baby” as fullest self-actualization all by itself, at least for a time. In this ideal instance, inner requiredness coincides with external requiredness, “I want to” with ‘I must.” I often get the feeling in this kind of situation that I can tease apart two kinds of determinants of this transaction. One can be spoken of as the responses within the person, exempla gratia, “I love babies (or painting, or research, or political power) more than anything in the World. I am fascinated with it…I am inexorably drawn to…I need to…” This we may call “inner requiredness” and it is felt as a kind of self-indulgence rather than as a duty. It is different from and separable from “external requireness,” which is rather felt as a response to what the environment, the situation, requires of the person, as a fire “calls for” putting out, or as a helpless baby demands that one takes care of it, or as some obvious injustice calls for righting. Here one feels more the element of duty, or obligation, or responsibility, or being compelled helplessly to respond no matter what one was planning to do, or wished to do. It is more “I must, I have to, I am compelled” than “I want to.” #RandolphHarris 5 of 27
In the ideal instance, which fortunately also happens in fact in many of my instances, “I want to” coincides with “I must.” I hesitate to call this simply “purposefulness” because that may imply that is happens only out of will, purpose, decision, or calculation, and does not give enough weight to the subjective feeling of being swept along, of willing and eager surrender, or yielding to fate and happily embracing it at the same time. Ideally, one also discovers one’s fate; it is not only made or constructed or decided upon. It is recognized as if one had been unwittingly waiting for it. Perhaps the better phrase would be “Spinozistic” or “Taoistic” choice or decision or purpose—or even will. The best way to communicate these feelings to someone who does not intuitively, directly understand them is to use as a model “falling in love.” This is clearly different from doing one’s duty, or doing what is sensible or logical. And clearly also “will,” if mentioned at all, is used in a very special sense. And when two people love each other fully, then each one knows that it feels like to be magnet and what it feels like to be iron filings, and what it feels like to be both simultaneously. This ideal situation generates feelings of good fortune and also of ambivalence and unworthiness. #RandolphHarris 6 of 27
This model also helps to convey what is difficult to communicate in words, that is, their sense of good fortune, of luck, of gratuitous grace, of awe that this miracle should have occurred, of wonder that they should have been chosen, and of the peculiar mixture of pride fused with humility, or arrogance shot through with the pity-for-the-less-fortunate that one finds in lovers. Of course the possibility of good fortune and success also can set into motion all sorts of neurotic fears, feelings of unworthiness, countervalues, Jonah-syndromes dynamics, et cetera. These defenses against our highest possibilities must be overcome before the highest values can be wholeheartedly embraced. At this level the dichotomizing of work and play is transcended; wages, hobbies, vacation, et cetera, must be defined at a high level. And then, of course, it can be said of such a person with real meaningfulness that one is being one’s own kind of person, of being oneself, or actualizing one’s real self. An abstract statement, an extrapolation out from this kind of observation toward the ultimate and perfect ideal would run something like this: This person is the best one in the whole World for this particular job, and this particular job is the best job in the World for this particular person and one’s talents, capacities, and taste. One was meant for it, and it was meant for one. #RandolphHarris 7 of 27
Of course, as soon as we accept this and get the feeling of it, then we move over into another realm of discourse, id est, the realm of being, of transcendence. Now we can speak meaningfully only in the language of being (“The B-language,” communication at the mystical level, et cetera.). For instance, it is quite obvious with such people that the ordinary or conventional dichotomy between work and play is transcended totally. That is, there is certainly no distinction between work and play in such a person in such a situation. One’s work is one’s play and one’s play is one’s one. If a person loves one’s work and enjoys it more than any other activity in the whole World and is eager to get to it, to get back to it after any interruption, then how can we speak about “labour” in the sense of something one is forced to do against one’s wishes? Such vocation-loving individuals tend to identify (introject, incorporate) with their “work” and to make it into a defining-characteristic of the self. It becomes part of the self. If one asks such a person, id est, self-actualizing, work-loving, “Who are you?” or “What are you?” one often tends to answer in term of one’s “call,” exempli gratia, “I am a lawyer.” “I am an architect.” “I am a psychiatrist.” “I am an artist,” et cetera. #RandolphHarris 8 of 27
Or, if one asks one, “Supposing you were not a scientist (or a teacher, or pilot), then what would you be?” Or, “Supposing you were not a psychologist, then what?” It is my impression that one’s response is apt to be one of puzzlement, thoughtfulness, being taken aback, id est, not having a ready answer. Or the response can be one of amusement, id est, it is funny. In effect, the answer is, “If I were not a father (anthropologist, industrialist), then I would not be me. I would be someone else. And I cannot imagine being someone else.” This kind of response parallels the confused response to the question, “Supposing you were a lawyer rather than a doctor?” A tentative conclusion is then that in self-actualizing subjects, their beloved calling tends to be perceived as a defining characteristic of the self, to be identified with, incorporated, introjected. It becomes an inextricable aspect of one’s being. The task to which they are dedicated seem to be interpretable as embodiments or incarnation of intrinsic values (rather than as a means to ends outside the work itself, and rather than as functionally autonomous). The tasks are loved (and introjected) BECAUSE hey embody these values. That is, ultimately it is the values that are loved rater than the job as such. #RandolphHarris 9 of 27
For these people the profession seems to be not functionally autonomous, but rather to be a carrier of, an instrument of, or an incarnation of ultimate values. For them the profession of, exempli gratia, law is a means to the end of justice, and not an end in itself. Perhaps I can communicate my feeling for the subtle difference in this way: for one human the law is loved because it is justice, while another human, he pure value-free technologist, might love the law simply as an intrinsically loveable set of rules, precedents, procedures without regard to the end of products of their use. Often when a modern person looks at nineteenth-century architecture, it seems like a confusing babble of warning styles. The “modern” movement in architecture, also known as the “International Style,” fostered this view of the nineteenth century by condemning all “historical” styles and ornament. The modernists of the twentieth century disdained all applied decoration. They condemned it as shallow, fake, and contrary to good principles of proportion, honesty of materials and structure, and creative shaping of space, all of which were held to be the proper measures of architecture. In doing this, the modernists were guilty of a present-mindedness and reductionism that caused them to condemn an entire century without bothering understand it. #RandolphHarris 10 of 27
Historical styles had a lot of content to nineteenth-century people. Architects like the Adam brothers in England adopted the new slim and elegant classicism, and it can to be used in the United State of America as well. In England, Adamesque ornament had very little ideological content. It was just decorative. In the United States of America, after the Revolution it came to represent republican government. The new capitol at Washington was filled with Federal-style buildings in direct reference to republican Rome. The Roman classical style was adopted by the revolutionaries in France as well, to symbolize the break with the old monarchy. In time the new Roman style was adopted by Napoleon and made showier and more bombastic to represent the Roman Empire in its new incarnation under the Emperor Napoleon. This was the background, then, in the 1830s. Americans were well acquainted with classicism and associated Roman classicism with the generation of the founding fathers. The nation was turning away from the Eastern seaboard and focusing on the trans-Appalachian West. In 1825, the Erie Canal was opened, encouraging commerce in the West. #RandolphHarris 11 of 27
In 1807, Robert Fulton had demonstrated his steamboat, and by 1830s dozens of steamboats plied the Hudson. In 1830, Peter Cooper displayed his midget engine, the Tom Thumb, and began a transportation revolution in railroads. In 1827, Americans rose up and elected Andrew Jackson president and threw out the last vestige of the Founding Fathers in the person of Jon Quincy Adams. Americans believed the age of Jackson to be the era of the common human, and the 1830s to be an American social revolution. It is no wonder that the elegance and refinement of the Federal style now seemed wrong. The Greek Revival style in America pervaded the smallest details of everyday life. Women wore light muslin dressed with Empire waists and no crinolines. They put their hair up in Greek style. Houses and public building were erected as little temples in small frontier towns in western New York and Ohio and Georgia. The town themselves were named Athens, Syracuse, Troy, and Rome. A lamp to ready by, a fork to eat with, a chair to sit on were all Greek inspired. Why Greek? Because the Greeks invented democracy. However, in classical ties, democracy meant mod-rule, and a republic meant rule by the people. #RandolphHarris 12 of 27
It did not matter that only a small proportion of ancient Greeks actually got to participate in government. It was only during the Enlightenment that the attitude toward the common human changed from “the mob” to the “noble savage,” and democracy became desirable. Sober, serious, understated, and elegant, every parlor is a Parthenon in 1832. How much different could a parlor be from the late Victorian riot of objects and patterns? To Americans, however, democracy was a Greek concept and the rule of the common human was democracy. The Greek Revival in interiors is usually called American Empire, and it was a style admirably suited to the new realities of American life. Empire furniture is usually made of mahogany veneer sheathing substantial monumental shapes. Carving, which has been such a prominent feature of the Federal style, practically disappeared. The furniture achieved its effect of beauty of its surfaces and the drama of its silhouette. A modern viewer might not realize that it is the first mass-produced, machine-made furniture in America. New steam and water-powered sawmills could cut Honduras mahogany into inexpensive veneers. New, machine-tooled casters and nuts and bolts joined bed parts into a whole. New transportation opened larger markets and made large-scale furniture factories profitable. #RandolphHarris 13 of 27
The simplicity of American Empire furniture appealed to the common human of Jacksonian American. The affordable prices also appealed to the common humans as well. Americans saw themselves as noble, honest democrats, founding a new egalitarian system in the wilderness. What better furnishings could there be than simple, sturdy, egalitarian Greek? This feeling was very profound, but fleeting. The country changes so quickly between the 180s and 1850s that new needs had to be met by a new architecture and a new furniture style. It is safe to say that the second most important room in the Victorian home was the dining room, where not only the family gathered, but where social interaction took place among family and visitors. “In the family it should be observed as a rule to meet together at all meals of the day around one common table where the same rules of etiquette should be as rigidly observed as the at the table of a stranger,” said Almon Verney in his Our Homes and Their Adornments. Up to the Elizabethan period, no one room was specifically designated for eating. Meals took place in sitting rooms, kitchens, or hall/entrance ways (which were sizable) in which tables and chairs, or benches, were set up for meals, then removed afterward. #RandolphHarris 14 of 27
Grand mansions, of course, had their banquet halls. It was when a room convenient to the kitchen and pantry evolved, that the dining room, as we know it, came to be. Dining rooms were also public rooms in which the best in furniture and décor was displayed. Typical dining room furniture would be a table, if possible with extensions (an invention that occurred during the Victorian period), dining chair, and a sideboard or chiffonier for storing serving pieces and presenting food. During this period, the dining rose to the most elegant state. Etiquette books prescribing serving and dining behavior down to the smallest detail. Serving pieces and dining utensils had very specific purposes such as pickle tongs, celery dishes, and syllabub-sticks. Sideboards of walnut, oak, or mahogany could include features like carved columns and friezes, pediments, and cornices, and were small works of architecture in themselves. Styles ranged from the intricately carved Jacobean and Gothic or Rococo Revival, to the clean lies of a Sheraton or Chippendale piece. Beginning around the 1860s, the sideboard was the most important piece of furniture in the dining room, equal in relevance to the parlor’s center table. Families with sufficient means had built in sideboards. #RandolphHarris 15 of 27
An 1892 Ladies Home Journal article tells what the sideboard is for, “Several people have asked me about the uses of the sideboard. The drawers are for the silver and cutlery, the closets for wine, if they be used, and often for such things as preserved ginger, confectionary, cut sugar, and indeed, any of the many little things that one likes to have in the dining-room yet out of sight. The water pitcher and other sliver and pretty bits of china can be placed on the sideboard. Cracker jar and fruit dish also belong there. At dinner time the dessert dishes are usually arranged upon it.” Life’s unfairness is not irrevocable; we can help balance the scales for others, if not always for ourselves. “Behold, now it came to pass that after the people of Ammon were established in the land of Jershon, yea, and also after the Lamanites were driven out of the land, and their dead were buried by the people of the land—Now their dead were not numbered because of the greatness of their numbers; neither were the dead of the Nephites numbered—but it came to pass after they had buried their dead, and also after the days of fasting, and mourning and prayer, (and it was in the sixteenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi) there began to be continual peace throughout all the land. #RandolphHarris 16 of 27
“Yea, and the people did observe to keep the commandments of the Lord; and they were strict in observing the ordinances of God, according to the law of Moses; for they were taught to keep the law of Moses until it should be fulfilled. And thus the people did have no disturbance in all the sixteenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi. And it came to pass that in the commencement of the seventeenth year of the reign of the judges, there was continual peace. However, it came to pass in the latter end of the seventeenth year, there came a man into the land of Zarahemla, and he was Anti-Christ, for he began to preach unto the people against the prophecies which had been spoken by the prophets, concerning the coming of Christ. Now there was no law against a human’s belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring humans on to unequal grounds. For thus saith the scripture: Choose ye this day, whom ye will serve. Now if a human desired to serve God, it was one’s privilege; or rather, if one believed in God it was one’s privilege to serve him there was no law to punish one. However, if one murdered one was punished unto death; and if one robbed one was also punished; and if one committed adultery one was also punished; yea, for all this wickedness they were punished. #RandolphHarris 17 of 27
“For there was a law that humans should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a human’s belief; therefore a human was punished only for the crimes which one had done; therefore, all humans were on equal grounds. And this Anti-Christ, whose name was Korihor, (and the law could have no hold upon him) began to preach unto the people that there should be no Christ. And after this manner did he preach, saying: O ye that are bound down under a foolish and a vain hope why do ye yoke yourselves with such foolish things? Why do ye look for a Chris? For no human can know of anything which is to come. Behold, these things which ye call prophecies, which ye say are handed down by holy prophets, behold, they are foolish traditions of your fathers. How do ye know of their surety? Behold, ye cannot know of things which ye do not see; therefore ye cannot know that there shall be a Christ. Ye look forward and say that ye see a remission of your sins. However, behold, ye cannot know of things which ye do not see; therefore ye cannot know that there shall be a Christ. Ye look forward and say that ye see a remission of your skins. However, behold, it is the effect of a frenzied mind; and this derangement of your minds becomes because of the traditions of your fathers, which lead you away into a belief of things which are not so. #RandolphHarris 18 of 27
“And many more such things did he say unto them, telling them that there could be no more atonement made for the sins of humans, but every human fared in this life according to the management of the creature; therefore every human prospered according to one’s genius, and that every human conquered according to one’s strength; and whatsoever a human did was no crime. And thus one did preach unto then, leading away the hearts of many, causing them to lift up their heads in their wickedness, yea, leading away many women, and also men, to commit whoredoms—telling them that when a human was dead, that was the end thereof. Now this human went over to the land of Jershon also, to preach these things among the people of Ammon, who were once the people of the Lamanites. However, behold they were more wise than many of the Nephites; for they took one around, and bound one, and carried one before Ammon, who was a high priest over that people. And it came to pass that one caused the one should be carried out of the land. And one cam over into the land of Gideon, and began to preach unto them also; and here one did not have much success, for one was taken and bound and carried before the high priest, and also the chief judge over the land. #RandolphHarris 19 of 27
“And it came to pass that the high priest said unto him: Why do ye go about perverting the ways of the Lord? Why do ye teach this people that there shall be no Christ, to interrupt their rejoicings? Why do ye speak against all the prophecies of the holy prophets? Now the high priest’s name was Giddonah. And Korihor said unto him: Because I do not teach the foolish traditions of your fathers, and because I do not teach this people to bind themselves down under the foolish ordinances and performances which are laid down by ancient priests, to usurp power and authority over them, to keep them in ignorance, that they may not lift up their heads, but be brought down according to thy words. Ye say that this people is a free people. Behold, I say they are in bondage. Ye say that those ancient prophecies are true. Behold, I say that ye do not know that they are true. Ye say that this people is a guilty and a fallen people, because of the transgression of a parent. Behold, I say that a child is not guilty because of its parents. And ye also say that Christ shall be come. However, behold, I say that ye do not know that he shall be slain for the sins of the World. And thus ye lead away this people after the foolish traditions of your fathers, and according to your own desires. #RandolphHarris 20 of 27
“And ye keep them down, even as it were in bondage, that ye may glut yourselves with the labours of their hands, that they durst not look up with boldness, and that they durst not enjoy their rights and privileges. Yea, they durst not make use of that which is their own lest they should offend their priests, who do yoke them according to their desires, and have brought them to believe, by their traditions and their dreams and their whims and the visions and their pretended mysteries, that they should, if they did not do according to their words, offend some unknow being, who they says is God—a being who never has been seen or known, who never was nor ever will be. Now when the high priest and the chief judge saw the hardness of his heart, yes, when they say that he would revile even against God, they would not make any reply to his words; but they caused that he should be bound; and they delivered him up into the hands of the officers, and sent him to the land of Zarahemla, that he might be brought before Alma, and the chief judge who was governor over all the land. And it came to pass that when we was brought before Alma and the chief judge, he did go on in the same manner as he did in the land of Gideon; yea, he went on to blaspheme. #RandolphHarris 21 of 27
“And he did rise up in great swelling words before Alma, and did revile against the priests and teachers, accusing them of leading away the people after the silly traditions of their fathers, for the sake of glutting on the labours of the people. Now Alma said unto him: Thou knowest that we do not glut ourselves upon the labours of this people; for behold I have laboured even from the commencement of the reign of the judges until now, with mine own hands for my support, notwithstanding my many travels round about the land to declare the word of God unto my people. And notwithstanding the many labours which I have performed in the churches, I have never received so much as even one senine for my labour; neither has any of my brethren, save it were in the judgment-seat; and then we have received only according to law for our time. And now, if we do not receive anything for our labours in the church, what doth it profit us to labour in the church save it were to declare the truth, that we may have rejoicings in the joy of our brethren? Then why sayest thou that we preach unto this people to get gain, when thou, of thyself, knowest that we receive no gain? And now, believest thou we deceive this people, that causes such joy in their hearts? #RandolphHarris 22 of 27
“And Korihor answered him, Yea. And then Alma said unto him: Believest thou that there is a God? And he answered, Nay. Now Alma said unto him: Will ye deny against that there is a God, and also deny the Christ? For behold, I say unto you, I know there is a God, and also that Christ shall come. And now what evidence have ye that there is no God, or that Christ cometh not? I say unto you that ye have none, save it be your word only. However, behold, I have all things as a testimony that these tings are true; and ye also have all things as a testimony unto you that they are true; and will ye deny them? Believest thou that these things are true? Behold, I know that thou believest, but thou art possessed with a lying spirit, and ye have put off the Spirit of God that it may have no place in you; but the devil has power over you, and he doth carry you about, working devices that he may destroy the children of God. And now Koihor said unto Alma: If thou wilt show me a sign, that I may be convinced that there is a God, yea, show unto me that he hath power, and then will I be convinced of the truth of thy words. However, Alma said unto him: Thou hast ad signs enough; will ye tempt your God? Will ye say, Show me a sign, when ye have the testimony of all these thy brethren, and also the holy prophets? #RandolphHarris 23 of 27
“The scriptures are laid before thee, yea, and all things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form do witness that there is a Supreme Creator. And yet do ye go about, leading away the hearts of this people, testifying unto them there is no God? And yet will ye deny against all these witnesses? And he said: Yea, I will deny, except ye shall show me a sign. And now it came to pass that Alma said unto him: Behold, I am grieved because of the hardness of your heart, yea, that ye will still resist the spirit of the truth, that thy soul may be destroyed. However, behold, it is better than thy soul should be lost than that thou shouldst be the means of bringing many souls down to destruction, by thy lying and by the flattering words; therefore if thou shalt deny again, behold God shall smite thee, that thou shalt become dumb, that thou shalt never open thy mouth any more, that thou shalt not deceive this people any more. Now Korihor said unto him: I do not deny the existence of a God, but I do not believe there is a God; and I say also that ye do not know that there is a God; and except ye show me a sign, I will not believe. Now Alma said unto him: This will I give unto thee for a sign, that thou shalt be struck dumb, according to my words; and I say, that in the name of God, ye shall be struck dumb, that ye shall no more have utterance. #RandolphHarris 24 of 27
“Now when Alma had said these words, Korior was struck dumb, that we could not have utterance, according to the words of Alma. And now when the chief judge saw this, he put forth his hand and wrote unto Korihor, saying: Art thou convinced of the power of God? In whom did ye desire that Alma should show forth his sign? Behold, he has showed unto you a sign; and now will ye dispute more? And Korihor put forth his hand and wrote, saying: I know that I am dumb, for I cannot speak; and I know that nothing save it were the power of God could bring this upon me; yea, and I always knew that there was a God. However, behold, the devil hath deceived me; for he appeared unto me in the form of an angel, and said unto me: Go and reclaim this people, for they have all gone astray after an unknow God. And he said unto me: There is no God; yea, and he taught me that which I should say. And I have taught his words; and I taught them because they were pleasing unto the carnal mind; and I taught them, even until I have much success, insomuch that I verily believed that they were true; and for this cause I withstood the truth, even until I have brought this great curse upon me. Now when he had said this, he besought that Alma should pray unto God, that the curse might be taken from him. #RandolphHarris 25 of 27
“However, Alma said unto him: If this curse should be taken from thee though wouldst again lead away the hearts of this people; therefore, it shall be unto thee even as the Lord will. And it came to pass that the curse was not taken off of Korihor; but he was cast out, and went about from house to house begging for his food. Now the knowledge of what had happened unto Korihor was immediately published throughout all the land; yea, the proclamation was sent forth by the chief judge to all the people in the land, declaring unto those who had believed in the words of Korihor that they must speedily repent, lest the same judgments would come unto them. And it came to pas that they were all convinced of the wickedness of Korihor; therefore they were all converted again unto the Lord; and this put an end to the inequity after the manner of Krihor. And Korihor did go about from house to house, begging food for his support. And it came to pass that as he went forth among the people, yes, among a people who has separated themselves from the Nephites and called themselves Zoramites, being led by a man whose name was Zoram—and as he went forth amongst them, behold, he was run upon and trodden down, even until he wad dead. #RandolphHarris 26 of 27
“And thus we see the end of him who perverteth the ways of the Lord; and thus we see that the devil will not support his children at the last say, but doth speedily drag them down to hell,” reports Alma 30.1-60. Various writer bear witness to the majesty and the preciousness of our Anglican Collects. These beautiful Collects, which has soothed the griefs of forty generations of Christians. It is some of the most passionate, proper, and most elegant comprehensive expressions that any language ever afforded with the gifted Iayman, who said that for 1200 years they had been as the manna in the wilderness to devout spirits, and were, next to Scriptures itself, the clearest standards whereby genuine piety might de discerned; and with divines of our own day, who dwell on the stores of exact theology which are laid up in the Collects, and on their power to deliver our worship from incoherency, and to sustain it with strong and satisfying views of the Divine love. It is, indeed, this wonderful blending of strength and sweetness in the Collects, which has called forth so much love and admiration, and has made them such a bound of union for pious minds of different times and countries; even as the same imagery, in regard to their effect, naturally occurs to a bishop of Treves in the sixth century, and to an Anglican poet in the nineteenth. #RandolphHarris 27 of 27
Prayers to the Ancestors—the ancient Celts honoured their ancestors. Most cultures have such a day, and you should use whatever one is right for your ancestry. I have chanted your names each Samian as is my duty. I have offered thanksgiving gifts. I have never forgotten where I came from, and have kept the old ways, as is only proper. I therefore turn in confidence to you, spirits of my Ancestors, and ask your protection for my family and all its property. The ground which we stand, the starter block of our race; the slate on which we write, the pattern behind our lives. You who have lived in the times before us, who laid down the way on which we travel, who established traditions that guide our people, whose blood flows red within us, whose genes have engendered us: a gift for you, a small one in return for the great ones you have given us. Even the greatest, life itself, is your gift to us. A gift, then, from life to the dead. Old Ones who grace our shrine, who grace our line, who grace our lives: we honour you with right living, making you proud of us; the best offering you could receive. However, today a small offering, a token.
Winchester Mystery House
Looking for something fun to do with the family this weekend? Experience the Winchester Mystery House in-person or from the comfort of your own home. Use code WMH13 for a $3.99 rental of the Video Tour, and enjoy $6 access to the 360° Tour! Offers expire tonight.
Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat—God Moves in a Mysterious Way, Survival of the Fittest!
Half of the reporters in town are looking on you as a Pulitzer Prize waiting to be won. The word norm means an authoritative standard, and correspondingly, normal means abiding by such a standard. It follows that a normal personality is one whose conduct conforms to an authoritative standard, and an abnormal personality is one whose conduct does not do so. However, having said this much we immediately discover that there are two entirely different kinds of standards that may be applied to divide the normal from the abnormal: the one statistical, the other ethical. The one pertains to the average or usual, and the other to the desirable or valuable. These two standards are not only different, but in many ways they stand in flat contradiction to one another. It is, for example, usual for people to have some noxious trends in their natures, some pathology of tissues or organs, some evidences of nervousness and some self-defeating habits; but though usual or avege, such trends are not healthy. Or again, society’s authoritative standard for a wholesome love life may be achieved by only a minority of American males. Here too the usual is not the desirable; what is normal in one sense is not normal in the other sense. #RandolphHarris 1 of 24
Certainly, unless they are taught what is legal, ethical, moral and Godly, no system of ethics in the civilized World holds up as a model for its children becoming productive members of society. It is not the actualities, but rather the potentialities, of human nature that somehow provide us with a standard for a sound and healthy personality. One hundred years ago this double meaning of norm and normal did not trouble psychology so much as it does today. In those days psychology was deeply involved in discovering average norms for every conceivable type of mental function. Means, modes, and sigmas were in the saddle, and differential psychology was riding high. Intoxicated with the new-found beauty of the normal distribution curve, psychologists were content to declare its slender tails as the one and only sensible measure of “abnormality.” Departures from the means were abnormal and for this reason slightly unsavory. In this era there grew up the concept of mental adjustment, and this concept held sway well into the decade of the 1920s. While not all psychologists adjustment with average behaviour, this implication was pretty generally present. It was, for example, frequently pointed out that an animal who does not adjust to the norm for one’s species usually dies. It was not yet pointed out that a human being who does so adjust is a bore and a mediocrity. #RandolphHarris 2 of 24
Now time have changed. Our concern for the improvement of average human behaviour is deep, for we now seriously doubt that the merely mediocre human can survive. As social anomie spreads, as society itself becomes more and more sick, we doubt that the mediocre human will escape mental disease and delinquency, or that one will keep oneself out of the clutch of dictators or succeed in preventing atomic or biological warfare. The normal distribution curve, we see, holds out no hope of salvation. We need citizens who are in a more beneficial and optimistic sense of normal, healthy and sound. And the World needs them more urgently than it ever did before. It is for this reason, I think, that psychologists are now seeking a fresh definition of what is normal and what is abnormal. They are asking questions concerning the valuable, the right, and the good as they have never asked them before. At the same time psychologists know that in seeking for a criterion of normality in this new sense they are trespassing on the traditional domain of moral philosophy. They also know that, by and large, philosophers have failed to establish authoritative standards for what constitutes the sound life—the life that educators, parents, and therapist should seek to mold. #RandolphHarris 3 of 24
And so psychologist, for the most part, wish to pursue the search in a fresh way and if they can, avoid the traditional traps of axiology. During the past few months two proposals have been published that merit serious attention. Both are by social scientists, one a psychologist in the United States of America, the other a sociologist in England. Their aim is to derive a concept of normality (in the value sense) from the condition of humans (in the naturalistic sense). Both seek their ethical imperatives from biology and psychology, not from value-theory directly. In short, they boldly seek the ought (the goal to which teachers, counsellors, therapists should strive) from the is of human nature. Many philosophers tell us that this is an impossible undertaking. However, before we pass judgment let us see what success they have had. Humans are expected to maximize those attributes that are distinctively human. The first is human’s capacity for the use of propositional language (symbolization). From this particular superiority over animals derives several specific guidelines for normality. With the assistance of symbolic language, for example, humans can delay their gratifications, holding in mind a distant goal, a remote reward, an objective to be reached perhaps only at the end of one’s life or perhaps never. #RandolphHarris 4 of 24
With the assistance of symbolic language, one can imagine a future for oneself that is far better than the present. One can also develop an intricate system of social concepts that leads one to all manner of possible relations with other human beings, far exceeding the rigid symbiotic rituals of, say, the social insects. A second distinctive human quality is related to the prolonged childhood in the human species. Dependence, basic trust, sympathy and altruism are absolutely essential to human survival, in a sense and to a degree that is maybe not always true for animals. The conception of normality has to do with a model of integrative adjustment. It follows that a sense of personal responsibility marks the normal human, for responsibility is a distinctive capacity derived from holding in mind a symbolic image of the future, delaying gratification, and being able to strive in accordance with one’s conception of the best principles of conduct for oneself. Similarly social responsibility is normal; for all these symbolic capacities can interact with the unique factor of trust or altruism. Closely related is the criterion of democratic social interest which derives from both symbolization and trust. Similarly, the possession of ideals and the necessity for self–control follow from the same naturalistic analysis. #RandolphHarris 5 of 24
A sense of guilt is an inevitable consequence of human’s failure to live according to the distinctive human pattern, and so in our concept of normality we must include both guilt and devices for expiation. Every psychologist who wishes to make minimum assumptions and who wishes to keep close to empirical evidence, and who inclines toward the naturalism of biological science prefers fact-based evidence that has not been manipulated. Manipulated and prejudice science is worthless junk. It is must like fake news and has no value other than propaganda. Nonetheless, our philosopher friends will arise to confound us with some uncomfortable questions. Is it not a distinctively human capacity, they will ask, for a possessive mother to keep her child permanently tied to her apron strings? Does any lower animal engage in this destructive behaviour? Likewise, is it not distinctively human to develop fierce in-group loyalties that lead to prejudice, contempt, and war? Is it not possible that the burden of symbolization, social responsibility, and guilt may lead a person to depression and suicide? Suicide, along with all the other destructive patterns I have mentioned, is distinctly human. #RandolphHarris 6 of 24
A philosopher who raises these questions would conclude, “No, you cannot derive the ought from the is of human nature. What is distinctively human is not necessarily distinctively good.” What are the minimum conditions for survival? When we know these minimum conditions we can declare that any situations falling below this level will lead to abnormality, and tend toward death and destruction, which COVID-19 could be symbolic of—humanity falling below minimum conditions needed to sustain a developing nation like America, and others around the World. This criterion is called the abnorm and we can define it, even if we cannot define normality, because people in general agree more readily on what is bad for humans than on what is good for them. They agree on the bad because all mortals are subject to the basic imperative of survival. The need for survival is connected to our need for growth and the need for social cohesion. These two principles are the universal conditions of all life, not merely of human life. Growth means autonomy and the process of individuation. Cohesion is the basic fact of social interdependence, involving, at least for human beings, initial trust, heteronomy, mating and the founding of family. #RandolphHarris 7 of 24
By taking an inventory of conditions deleterious to growth and cohesion we may establish the “abnorm.” As a start, the first and foremost disorders of child training is the continued or repeated interruption of physical proximity between mother and child and emotional rejection of the child by the mother are conditions that harm survival of the individual and the group. In the first criterion of abnormality lies in a rupture in the transmutation of cohesion into love. Most of what is abnormal can be traced to failures in the principle of cohesion, so that the child becomes excessively demanding and compulsive. It is abnormal (inimical to survival) if repetition of conduct occurs irrespective of the situation and unmodified by its consequences; also when one’s accomplishments constantly fall short of one’s potentialities; likewise when one’s psychosexual frustrations prevent both growth and cohesion. Normality requires a balance between individuation and socialization, between autonomy and heteronomy. When an individual identifies oneself to an extreme degree with a group, the effect is that one loses one’s value. On the other hand, a complete inability to identify has the effect that the environment loses its value for the individual. #RandolphHarris 8 of 24
In both extreme cases the dynamic relationship between individual and environment is distorted. An individual behaving in such a way is called neurotic. In a normal group each member preserves one’s individuality but accepts one’s role as participator also. While there is much agreement that the normal personality must strike a serviceable balance between growth as an individual and cohesion with society, we do not yet have a clear criterion for determining when these factors are in serviceable balance and when they are not. However, Philosophers, I fear, would shake their heads at us and ask us, “How do you know that survival is a good thing?” Further, “Why should all people enjoy equal rights to the benefits of growth and cohesion?” And, “How are we to define the optimum balance between cohesion and growth within the single personality?” We also have to worry about the relationship between abnormality and creativity. It was Nietzsche who declared, “I say unto you: a human must have chaos yet within one to be able to give birth to a dancing star.” Have not many meritorious works of music, literature, and even of science draw their inspiration not from balance but from some kind of psychic chaos? In effect that creativity and normality are not identical values. #RandolphHarris 9 of 24
On the whole the normal person will be creative, but if valuable creations come likewise from people who are slipping away from the norm of survival, this fact can only be accepted and valued on the scale of creativity, but not properly on the scale of normality. In this day of existentialism I sense that psychologist are becoming less and less content with the concept of adjustment, and correspondingly with the concepts of tension reduction, restoration of equilibrium, and homeostasis. We wonder if a human who enjoys these beatific conditions is truly human. Growth we know is not due to homeostasis but to a kind of “transiistasis.” And cohesion is a matter of keeping our human relationships moving and not in mere stationary equilibrium. Stability cannot be a criterion of normality since stability brings evolution to a standstill, negating both growth and cohesion. Dr. Freud once wrote to Dr. Fliess that he finds “moderate misery necessary for intensive work.” When people have a zero correlation between self and ideal self, it is too low for normality; it leads to such anguish that the sufferer seeks therapy. At the same time normal people are by no means perfectly adjusted to themselves. There is always a wholesome gap between self and ideal self, between present existence and aspiration. On the other hand, too high a satisfaction indicates pathology. #RandolphHarris 10 of 24
When individuals reach an extremely high coefficient for self-satisfaction, it is clear that one is pathological. Perfect correlations we might expect only from smug psychotics, particularly paranoid schizophrenics. And whatever our definition of normality turns out to be it must allow for serviceable imbalances within personality, and between person and society. There is an approach dear to the psychologist’s heart. The established criterion of normality or otherwise known as soundness, leads us to identify people who are “sound.” Teachers of graduate students in the University of California nominated a large number of people whom they considered sound, and some of the opposite trend. In testing and experimenting with these two groups, whose identities were unknow to the investigators, certain significant difference appeared. For one thing the sounder human had more realistic perceptions; they were not thrown off by distortions or by surrounding context in the sensory field. Further, on adjective check-lists they stood high on such traits as integrated pursuit of goals, persistence, adaptability, good nature. On the Minnesota Personality Inventory they were high in equanimity, self-confidence, objectivity and virility. Their self-insight was superior, as was their physical health. Finally, they came from homes where there was little or not affective rupture. #RandolphHarris 11 of 24
A healthy person will be able to “love” and to “work.” On the schedule of other qualities a healthy person possesses include among others: efficient perception of reality, philosophical humour, spontaneity, detachment, and acceptance of self and others. A normal person has a strong ego, an abnormal person has a weak ego. Whether one is normal or abnormal depends on the degree to which one can manage one’s relationships successfully. Furthermore, the earlier enthusiasm of psychologist for the normal distribution curve helps to entrench the theory of continuum. Extreme withdrawal and escape constitute psychosis. However, you may ask, do no we all do some escaping? Yes, we do, and what is more, escapism may provide not only recreation but may sometimes have a certain constructive utility, as it has in mild daydreaming. Only if the dominant process is confrontation, the process of escape can still be harmless. Left to itself escapism spells disaster. In the psychotic this process has the upper hand; in the normal person, on the contrary, confrontation has the upper hand. Following this line of reasoning we can list other processes that intrinsically generate abnormality, and those that generate normality. #RandolphHarris 12 of 24
The first list deals with catabolic (energy used to break down) functions. I would mention: Escape or withdrawal (including fantasy), repression or dissociation, other “ego defences,” including rationalization, reaction formation, projection, displacement, impulsivity (uncontrolled), restriction of thinking to concrete level, fixation of personality at a juvenile level, all forms of rigidification. The list is not complete, but the process in question, I submit, are intrinsically catabolic. They are as much so as are the disease mechanisms responsible for diabetes, tuberculosis, hyperthyroidism, or cancer. A person suffering only a small dose of these mechanisms may appear to be normal, but only if anabolic (requires energy to grow and build) mechanisms predominate. Among the latter I would list: Confrontation (or, if you prefer, reality testing) availability of knowledge to consciousness, self-insight, with its attendant humour, integrative action of the nervous system, ability to think abstractly, continuous individuation (without arrested or fixated development), functional autonomy of motives, frustration of tolerance. I realize that what I have called processes, or mechanisms, are not in all cases logically parallel. However, they serve to make my point, that normality depends on the dominance of one set of principles, abnormality upon the dominance of another. #RandolphHarris 13 of 24
The fact that all normal people are occasionally afflicted with catabolic processes does not alter the point. The normal life is marked by a preponderance of the anabolic functions; the abnormal by a preponderance of the catabolic. Investigations have told us much concerning the nature of human needs and motives, both conscious and unconscious. Much is known concerning the pathologies that result from frustration and imbalance of these needs. We know much about childhood conditions that predispose toward delinquency, prejudice, and mental disorder. A moralist might do well to cast one’s imperatives in terms of standards for child training. I can suggest, for example, that the abstract imperative “respect for persons” should be tested and formulated from the point of view for child training. The distinction between the anabolic and catabolic processes in the formation of personality represents a fact of importance. Instead of judging merely the end-product of action, perhaps the moralist would do well to focus one’s attention upon the process by which various ends are achieved. Conceivably, the moral law could be written in terms of strengthening anabolic functions in oneself and in others whilst fighting against catabolic functions. #RandolphHarris 14 of 24
Apriorism, belief in a priori principles or reasoning specifically: the doctrine that knowledge rests upon principles that are self-evident to reason or are presupposed by experience in general, is a legitimate tool of philosophy. Up to now this method as yielded a wide array of moral imperatives, including the following: so act that maxim of thy action can become a universal law; be a respecter of persons; seek to reduce your desires; harmonize your interests with the interest of others; thou art nothing, thy folk is everything; thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind…and thy neighbour as thyself. Psychologists who in their teaching and counselling follow the lines now laid down will not go far wrong in guiding personalities toward normality. “Do not speak evil against one another, brethren,” reports James 4.11. God forbids any speech (whether true or false) which runs down another person. Certainly no Christian should ever be a party to slander—making false charges against another’s reputation. Yet some do. However, even more penetrating is the challenge to refrain from any speech intends to run down someone else, even if it is totally true. Personally I can think of few commands that go against commonly accepted conventions more than this, for most people think it is okay to convey negative information if it is true. #RandolphHarris 15 of 24
Some people have had to defend themselves because no one else would. Still, no innocent person should be physically attacked and terrorized by a violent mob and forced to defend themselves. We understand that lying is immoral. However, is passing along damaging truth immoral? It seems almost a moral responsibility! By such reasoning, criticism behind another’s back is thought to be all right as long as it is based on fact. Likewise, denigrating gossip (of course it is never called gossip!) is seen as okay if the information is true. Thus many believers use truth as a license to righteously diminish others’ reputations. Related to this, some reject running down another behind one’s back, but believe it is okay if done face to face. These persons are driven by a “moral” compulsion to make others aware of their shortcomings. Fault-finding is, to them, a spiritual gift – a license to conduct spiritual search-and-destroy missions. What people like this do not know is that most people are painfully aware of their own faults – and would like to overcome them – and are trying very hard to do so. Then someone mercilessly assaults them believing they are doing their spiritual duty – and, oh, the hurt! This destructive speaking down against others can also manifest itself in the subtle art of minimizing another’s virtues, and accomplishments. #RandolphHarris 16 of 24
After being with such people, your mental abilities, athletic accomplishments, musical skills, and domestic virtues seem not to be quite as good as they were a few minutes earlier. Some of this feeling came perhaps from their words about your Ultimate Driving Machine—“what a nice little BMW”—or from surprised exclamations about what you did not know. It was also the tone of the voice, the cast of the eye, and the surgical silences. There are many sinful reasons why humans in Christ talk down to one another. Revenge over some slight, real or imagined, may be the motivation of “Christian” slander. Others imagine that their spirituality and sensitivity equips them to pull others from their ivory towers and unmask their hypocrisies. Gideon once rightly cried, “A sword for the Lord and for Gideon!” (Judges 7.20), and we may do the same, but in our case it is too often a sword of self-righteousness. Condescending words and actions may also come from the need to elevate oneself – like the Pharisee who thanked God he was not like other sinners “or even like this tax collector” (Luke 18.11). We thus enjoy the dubious elevation of walking on the bruised head of others, and coming down on innocent heads. #RandolphHarris 17 of 24
Sometimes this diminishing of others simply comes from too much empty talk. People do not have much to talk about, so they fuel the fires of conversation with the flesh of others. The abilities and motivations of the Body of Christ to run itself down could fill a library. We are all skillful in rationalizing such talk, but God’s Word still speaks: “Christians do not speak against one another.” Verbal cyanide comes in many forms. Gossip, innuendo, flattery, criticism, diminishment, are only a few of the venoms with which Christians inject each other. And the results are universal: toxic gastric juices a Devil’s feast – the swill of souls. Dear Lord in Heaven, please eat what is offered to you and transform it, as food is transformed, into blessings for me, and for all my household. The fire that burns on my hearth is the very heart of my Cresleigh Home. By feeding the fire with wood and with air, I am feeding my Cresleigh Home with what it needs most. I give you these things, fire on my hearth and more gifts will follow as we live our lives together. I light a fire on my family’s hearth and praise the God of our home. I pray to the Most High and praise the Ancestors. Hear my words, see me as I perform the rites, receive the gifts I offer you. Threshold Spirit, guardian and protector of my Cresleigh Home’s entrance, I honour you as I pass through the beautiful door. #RandolphHarris 18 of 24
God of doorways, bless my goings out, bless my comings in. Lord of the threshold, of doors and gates Lord, place where inside and outside meet: God is my threshold. Please Guard my doors, God, keeper of the keys. Watch it with care, please keep my Cresleigh Homes safe. May the blessings of God guard this door. God it is who guards our doors. The Lord commands Ammon to lead the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi to safety—upon meeting Alma, Ammon’s joy exhausts his strength—the Nephites give the Anti-Nephi-Lehies the land of Jershon—they are called the people of Amon. About 90-77 Before Christ. “Now it came to pass that when those Lamanites who had gone to war against the Nephites had found, after their many struggles to destroy them, that it was in vain to seek their destruction, they returned again to the land of Nephi. And it came to pass that the Amalekites, because of their loss, were exceedingly angry. And when they saw that they could not seek revenge from the Nephites, they began to stir up the people in anger against their brethren, the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi; therefore they began again to destroy them. Now this people again refused to take their arms, and they suffered themselves to be slain according to the desires of their enemies. #RandolphHarris 19 of 24
“Now when Amon and his brethren saw this work of destruction among those whom they so dearly beloved, and among those who had so dearly beloved them—for hey were treated as though they were angels sent from God to save them from everlasting destruction—therefore, when Amon and his brethren saw this great work of destruction, they were moved with compassion, and they said unto the king: Let us gather together this people of the Lord, and let us go down to the land of Zarahemla to our brethren the Nephites, and flee out of the hands of our enemies, that we be not destroyed. However, the king said unto them: Behold, the Nephites will destroy us, because of the many murders and sins we have committed against them. And Ammon said: I will go and inquire of the Lord, and if he say unto us, go down unto our brethren, will ye go? And the king said unto him: Yea, if the Lord saith unto us go, we will go down unto our brethren, and we will be any slaves among them; therefore let us go down and rely upon the mercies of our brethren. However, the king said unto him: Inquire of the Lord, and if he saith unto us go, we will go; otherwise we will perish in the land. #RandolphHarris 20 of 24
“And it came to pass that Ammon went and inquired of the Lord and the Lord aid unto him: Get this people out of this land, that they perish not; for Satan has great hold on the hearts of the Amalekites, who do stir up the Lamanites to anger against their brethren to slay them; therefore get thee out of this land; and blessed are this people in this generation, for I will preserve them. And now it came to pass that Ammon went and told the king all the words which the Lord had said unto him. And they gathered together all their people, yea, all the people of the Lord, and did gather together all their flocks and herds, and departed out of the land, and came into the wilderness which divided the land of Nephi from the land of Zarahemla, and came over near the borders of the land. And it came to pass that Ammon said unto them: Behold, I and my brethren will go forth into the land of Zarahemla, and ye shall remain here until we return; and we will try the hearts of our brethren, whether they will that ye shall come into their land. And it came to pass that as Ammon was going forth into the land, that he and his brethren met Alma, over in the place of which has been spoken; and behold, this was a joyful meeting. #RandolphHarris 21 of 24
“Now the joy of Ammon was so great even that he was full; yea, he was swallowed up in the joy of his God, even to the exhausting of his strength; and he fell again to the Earth. Now was not this exceeding joy? Behold, this is joy which none receiveth save it be the truly penitent and humble seeker of happiness. Now the joy of Alma in meeting his brethren was truly great, and also the joy of Aaron, of Omner, and Himni; but behold their joy was not that to exceed their strength. And now it came to pass that Alma conducted his brethren back to the land of Zarahemla; even to his own house. And they went and told the chief judge all the things that that happened unto them in the land of Nephi, among their brethren, the Lamanites. And it came to pass that the chief judge sent a proclamation throughout all the land, desiring the voice of the people concerning the admitting their brethren, who were the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi. And it came to pass that the voice of the people came, saying: Behold, we will give up the land of Jershon, which is on the east by the sea, which joins the land Bountiful, which is on the south of the land Bountiful; and this land Jershon is the land which we will give unto our brethren for an inheritance. #RandolphHarris 22 of 24
“And behold, we will set our armies between the land Jershon and the land Nephi, that we may protect our brethren in the land of Jershon; and this we do for our brethren lest they should commit sin; and this their great fear came because of their sore repentance which they had, on account of their many murders and their awful wickedness. And now behold, this will we do unto our brethren, that they may inherit the land Jershon; and we will guard them from their enemies with our armies, on condition that they will give us a portion of their substance to assist us that we may maintain our armies. Now, it came to pass that when Ammon had heard this, he returned to the people of Anti0Nephi-Lehi, and also Alma with him, into the wilderness, where they had pitched their tents, and made known unto them all these things. And Alma also related unto them his conversion, with Ammon and Aaron, and his brethren. And it came to pass that it did cause great joy among them. And they went down into the land of Jershon, and took possession of the land of Jershon; and they were called by the Nephites the people of Ammon; therefore they were distinguished by that name ever after. #RandolphHarris 23 of 24
“And they were among the people of Nephi, and also numbered among the people who were of the church of God. And they were also distinguished for their zeal towards God, and also towards humans; for they were perfectly honest and upright in all things; and they were firm in the faith of Christ, even unto the end. And they did look upon shedding the blood of their brethren with the greatest abhorrence; and they never could be prevailed upon to take up arms against their brethren; and they never did look upon death with any degree of terror, for their hope and views of Christ and the resurrection; therefore, death was swallowed up to them by the victory of Christ over it. Therefore, they would suffer death in the most aggravating and distressing manner which could be inflicted by their brethren, before they would take the sword or cimeter to smite them. And thus they were a zealous and beloved people, a highly favoured people of the Lord,” reports Alma 27.1-30. O God, Whose will it runs down the order of all the ages; come to me, please look favorably on your servant’s sake. I try to live up to the order of Godly people and promote the messages in the scripture. You are the one and only God, and I approve of dedicating my service to you, Lord. Thank you for your gifts and take pity of me. #RandolphHarris 24 of 24
Cresleigh Homes
We might have found the coziest reading spot in #PlumasRanch. 😍📚
Visit our website to take a virtual tour of our homes at Plumas Ranch. Link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-riverside-at-plumas-ranch/
#CresleighHomes
Look down from Heaven, O Christ, on Thy flock and lambs, and bless their bodies and souls. Grant those who have received Thy sign, O Christ, on their foreheads, to be Thine own in the day of judgment.
Do Any Human Beings Ever Realize Life While they Live it? —Every, Every Minute?
It is more comfortable to the ordinary wisdom of nature to secure so necessary an act of the mind, by some instinct or mechanical tendency, which may be infallible in its operations, may discover itself at the first appearance of life and thought, and may be independent of all the laboured deductions of the understanding. As nature has taught us the use of our limbs, without giving us the knowledge of the muscles and nerves, by which they are actuated; so has she implanted in us an instinct, which carries forward the thought in a correspondent course to that which she has established among external objects; though we are ignorant of those powers and forces, on which this regular course and succession of objects totally depends. Yet, we can recognize an imaginative product. Suppose a person had been thinking about a problem of practical conduct, had been turning it over in mind, analyzing it for some time. Then, intending to advise someone else, “This will be evil for you.” The speech would be that of reason. Suppose furthermore, another statement emerged: “Your enemies will be glad of this.” The speech would be that of imaginative or insinuative reason. The entire difference between reason and imaginative reason is this illustrated. The case invited interpretation. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23
In the first place, the idea or thought-aspect of the first statement is, strictly speaking, the work of reason, and the appearance of the statement to ear or eye is the work of the imagination. We have already observed that the act of representing entails verbal imagery and that verbal imagery constitutes the sensory accompaniment of thought. Yet unlike the sense of image, the image that imagination creates for reason, or with reason, is the embodiment of thought, not of sensations. We must try to see what imagination was supposed to do when it did ore than embody the work of reason, when it joined with reason and moved from “This will be evil for you,” to “Your enemies will be glad for this.” The illustration of discourse, assigned to the art of rhetoric, consisted in applying the dictates of reason to imagination. To illustrate reason is to illuminate it. So imagination may bring illumination to the support of reason, and in the case before us the second statement by be more illuminating than the first in a literal, no figurative, way. The imagination, however, does more than light up abstractions. It fills out, amplifices, and ornaments reason. This it does, not as unneeded froth and embellishment, for fun and frolic, but as something necessary to assist communication and secure understanding. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23
The word ornament applied to the process of illustrating is being used in the old sense of equipment. Clothes ornament the person because they render the body fit for civilized life. Imagination ornaments reasons because it makes the organ, the body, of discourse fit to influence conduct. When teamed with reason, inventive, creative activity prompted rhetorical occasions, imagination is responsible for that feature of argument and example we recognize as fitting and appropriate. The effect of that which is fitting is insinuative; it opens human’s minds, as if one were fitting a key into a lock. In teaming up with reason, the imagination also invents something we term a type, fable, parable, and similitude. One kind of poetry, the parabolical, is typical history, and it, like rhetoric, teaches us by illustration. It is produced when imagination joins with memory. The implication is that when persuasion, rather than instruction, is at issues, imagination works with reason and produces the same kind of product. Accordingly, imaginative creativity in both poetry and rhetoric is the same in kind, though its consequences may be different. In illuminating the creative role of imagination, we can be no more clear and precise simply because we have not been more descriptive and explicit. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23
Perhaps these are so notoriously difficult to influence because of the powerfully suggestive effect emanating from the archetype. Consciousness is fascinated by it, held captive, as if hypnotized. Very often the ego experiences a vague feeling of moral defect and then beaves all the more defensively, defiantly, and self-righteously, thus setting up a vicious circle which only increases its feeling of inferiority. The bottom is then knocked out of the human relationship, for, like megalomania, a feeling of inferiority makes mutual recognition impossible, and without this there is no relationship. It is easier to gain insight into the shadow than into the anima (the part of the psyche that is directed inward, and is in touch with the subconscious) or animus (a usually prejudiced and often spiteful or malevolent ill will). With the shadow (unconscious aspect of the personality, the unknown side), we have the advantage of being prepare in some sort by our education, which has always endeavoured to convince people that they are not one-hundred-per-cent pure gold. So everyone immediately understands what is meant by “shadow,” “inferior personality,” et cetera. And if one has forgotten, one’s memory can easily be refreshed by a Sunday sermon, one’s wife, or the tax collector. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23
Indeed, it is a bad idea to deny any reality, of which the great power of thought over life is one. Rather, we should carefully inquire what “thought” is, and what can really—no hype!—by accomplished by thought and by practice based solely on its natural efficacy. And then we should thoughtfully and prayerfully look into whether such practices actually are sufficient to meet the human need for spiritual formation. Especially, are they really equivalent to or better than spiritual formation in the way of Christ, wen it is correctly and fully practiced? The biblical way of personal transformation must be set in clear contrast to other ways, even if they utilize what looks like biblical language. Honesty and thoroughness is required. Many “alternative” paths of human help and healing offer themselves today only because Jesus’ formation is not widely and powerfully available to human beings—or even known about. The transformation of our thought life by taking on the mind of Christ—his ideas, images, information, and patterns of thinking—opens the way to deliverance of every dimension of the human self from the oppressive powers of darkness. Lord of the Pathway, to you I call; Lord of the Pathway, who crushes all obstructions, I call you in my hour of need, I lift my voice to you. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23
You never know what you might appear to be when you Walk With Spirits 👀👻
Randolph Harris II International Institute 