Foundations For Freedom

Foundations For Freedom Finding Reasons For Our Feelings

A Comprehensive Treaty On Freedom And Morality

By Allan Sztab © 1997 Allan Sztab First Edition Edited by B.Kurz. Cartoons by Whale (Jerry Van Heerden)

Freedom is one of the most cherished yet illusory ideals of all. Many people have fought and died for it yet others give it away. Freedom varies from person to person but absolute freedom is at odds with both human nature and morality. The range and scope of our actions are limited by the beliefs we have and our moral conscience that is based on them. In order to make our dreams come true we must have as few restrictions as possible and this can only be achieved by creating a solid moral foundation with which to do so. These foundations may be built on three pillars of knowledge: physiology-psychology, history and philosophy. The complexity of these subjects stands in marked contrast to the simplicity of the assumptions upon which they are based. Here for the first time is a comprehensive treaty on freedom that brings these simple assumptions within the reach of anyone who can read well. Liberating ourselves from the many unnecessary limitations imposed on our personal freedom enables us to soar to heights from which anything is possible. It would appreciate it if you are able to assist by distributing original and unmodified copies of this file or its printed counterpart. You may use any portion of this text subject to the usual acknowledgements. Constructive criticism is also welcome and will be taken cognisance of in future editions. Best wishes and happy reading Allan Sztab 17 April 1998 Notice: This book is given away for free without any warranties express or implied. It may only be distributed on its own in its original format free of any charges and may not © 1997 Allan Sztab

1

form part of any other scheme of distribution without the prior written consent of the author.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

3

Contents Foreword How To Use This Book Introduction

Part One - Human Behaviour Chapter One - Information S1 The great divide Interaction between organism and environment. Life, action and accurate information. S2 Collecting and storing information Environmental sensitivity and the central nervous system. Fixed and flexible responses. S3 The power of language Language and its power to expand the conscious mind. Imagination and thinking. S4 The subconscious mind Dreams, fantasies and the key motives of human behaviour.

Chapter Two - The Behavioural mechanism S5 Biological signals or stimuli The internal and external source of signals. Needs, drives and their conscious or subconscious satisfaction. S6 The key role of learning and association The association of behaviours with the satisfaction of a drive. The mechanisms of habituation and sensitisation. Values as a determinant of behaviour. S7 The natural incentives The innate incentives which underlie human behaviour. S8 The role of the emotions The incentives engage our emotions to prepare us for action. Limitations and excessive emotional expressions. Pain can endure but pleasure wanes.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

4

Chapter Three - Mechanisms Of The Mind S9 Processing speed and defence Short cuts in processing information. Relegation of fearful experiences to the subconscious. The ties that bind us to the past. S10 The formation of character concerns Varying degrees of sensitivity towards the natural incentives. Dispositions to behaviours that binds us to the past. S11 The rational mind The sequence of events, prediction and security with the familiar. Belief and distortions of reality. Conformity, guilt, rationality and their pitfalls. Thoughts & Things To Remember

Part Two - Human History Chapter Four - The Dawn S12 The spread and development of ideas The similarity of human innovation and the spread of ideas. S13 Rights and wrongs, do's and don'ts Controlling behaviour by means of the taboo. S14 The quest for certainty and the development of religion The fertility of women and ideas of re-birth. The attempt to understand and control the unknown forces of nature. S15 Ritual and myth Communication by means of gestures and rituals. Cultural myths and their resemblance. S16 The changing climate The transition from a nomadic to a settled existence. Chapter Five - Civilisation and Power

S17 Agriculture and a surplus of food Population growth and the distinction between civilised and barbarian. S18 Communal and Private property The growing dependency, investment and attachment to land. © 1997 Allan Sztab

5

S19 The commencement of theft, war and conquest Wealth, non-productive labour and standing armies. S20 The consolidation of power The accumulation of wealth and power. The demise of democracy and the advent of centralised control. S21 The voice of democracy Equality of power and the development of modern democracy.

Chapter Six - The Rise of the Major Religions S22 The moral significance of the afterlife myths The notion of an afterlife and its relationship to a persons behaviour. S23 The forces of change Suffering at the hands of nature and conquerors. S24 The dawn of scepticism, pessimism, messianism and monotheism The inadequacy of cherished beliefs to explain change. S25 Monotheism and the first religious revolution The linking of military successes with a universal God. S26 Judaism The rise to domination of the Jewish God Yahweh. The prophets as spokesmen for the poor. S27 Religious reform and the Old Testament The reinterpretation of history. Suffering as a punishment for disobedience to the laws of God. S28 Jesus The historical life of Jesus and the Gospels. S29 The death of Jesus The death of Jesus and the belief in his resurrection. S30 The rival Christian doctrine of Paul The Gospel of Mark accepted by other disciples. S31 Zoroastrianism Many original religious concepts can be traced to Zarathustra who attempted to reconcile the forces of good and evil.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

6

Part Three - Philosophy Chapter Seven - The attempt to understand change S32 What is truth? The desire for consistency and stability fuels the quest for truth. S33 The first philosophers Their attempt to understand change. The constancy and inevitability of change. The notion of universal laws governing change. S34 Parmenides and the illusion of appearances The paradoxes of Zeno. S35 Anaxagoras The immaterial mind. S36 Leucippus, Democritus, materialism and idealism Atoms and space. Reality and happiness created in the mind. S37 The Sophists or Intellectuals The relativity of moral behaviour. Justice as an artificial set of convenient standards. Might is right. S38 Socrates The essences of objects, actions and their definitions. Variations in behaviour due to ignorance. S39 Plato The reality of essences or ideas versus mere appearance. Intuition as perfect knowledge. Change as decay. S40 Aristotle Change as progress according to a things potential. S41 The Cynics And Self-sufficiency The common nature of humankind and their cultural disguise. S42 The Sceptics An open mind in the face of many dogmatic claims to the truth. S43 Epicurus The natural striving to seek pleasure and minimise pain. © 1997 Allan Sztab

7

Chapter Eight - The entrenchment of superstition S44 The power of belief Belief, suffering and hope as an effective means of behavioural control. S45 The marriage of Religion and Politics Religion offered rulers a means of obtaining legitimacy. S46 Religious Faith and Philosophy The ideas of philosophers and their use by the church. Chapter Nine - Science and Reason S47 The myth of impartial observation The survival value of quick, subconscious judgements and intuition. S48 Science And Faith Science requires a faith in the truth of its generalisations. S49 The bridge between what is and what ought to be Facts don't convey any moral information. S50 Logic, reason and rationalism The rules of logic. The belief that knowledge can be obtained independently of experience. S51 A mediator between mysticism and science Reaching for truth by attempting to uncover the hidden rules of the mind.

Chapter Ten - Utopian Ideals S52 Utilitarianism The greatest happiness for the greatest number. Pragmatism and that which works. S53 Socialism And Marxism Humanitarianism and Socialism. The class struggle and laws of history. S54 Analytical Philosophy The body-mind problem as the misuse of language. S55 Nietzsche Pioneer of the human mind and arch-critic of Christianity. S56 Existentialism The individuals responsibility for creating meaning in life.

Part Four – Foundations For Freedom © 1997 Allan Sztab

8

Chapter Eleven - Freedom And Morality S57 The Origin Of Morality Might is right. Voluntary agreement between parties of equal power. S58 Errors Of Reason Imaginary causes and freedom of will. S59 Moral Relativity, guilt, justice and punishment Obligations and responsibility. S60 Equality, reciprocity, prestige and redistribution Voluntary and involuntary distributions of wealth. S61 Three Laws For The New Millennium Moral obligations, freedom and limitations. Self-interest, order and rationality. S62 The Greatest Obstacles To Freedom Habituation to obey, fear and the ties to the past. S63 Mysticism, Superstition And Manipulation Fear, suffering and manipulation by faith, hope and love. Chapter Twelve - Towards Freedom With A Clear Conscience S64 Pitfalls on the road to freedom Isolation as the price for individuality. S65 Determining the obstacles to our freedom Rationality and order versus irrationality and disorder. Critical appraisal of obligations. S66 Freedom and the Individual Pleasure and the fear of losing it. Overcoming fear. The moderation and satisfaction of desires through wisdom. S67 Freedom and society Protection as the primary role of government. Freedom of choice and the growth of government power. Education, sound information, critical debate and the danger of losing democracy. In A Nutshell

© 1997 Allan Sztab

9

Appendix A - A Brief Introduction To Popular Theories Of Psychology A 1 Sigmund Freud A 2 Alfred Adler A 3 Eric Erikson A 4 Henry Murray A 5 BF. Skinner A 6 Albert Bandura A 7 Gordon Allport A 8 George Kelly A 9 Abraham Maslow A10 Carl Rogers

Appendix B - A brief guide to The Major religions B1 Hinduism, the caste system and the Vedas B2 Rival interpretations of the Vedas B3 Buddhism and Jainism B4 Islam B5 Confucianism and Taoism B6 Confucianism B7 Taoism Appendix C - A guide to fears, phobias and paranoia Appendix D - A guide to modifying behaviours and controlling desires Appendix E - A guide to some tricks and traps of language Appendix F - The myths of racial prejudice and the eugenic experiment Appendix G - The danger of surrendering to popular opinion Appendix H - The danger of over-population References Bibliography

© 1997 Allan Sztab

10

© 1997 Allan Sztab

11

Foreword 'It is good to repeat oneself and thus bestow on a thing a right and a left foot. Truth may be able to stand on one leg; but with two it can walk around.' (Nietzsche) This work is a collection of information that is often encountered on a search towards a better understanding and enjoyment of life. It borrows heavily from countless experts in their fields who are acknowledged by the incorporation of their works in the bibliography. There are nevertheless certain authors whose works stand out as bright beacons of light on an otherwise desolate landscape. Men such as Karl Popper whose vision of truth sees clearly through the mystical cant of philosophers like Hegel and detects a lack of intellectual integrity in Plato. It was Nietzsche in particular whose unsurpassed yet easily accessible prose and penetrating insights into the workings of the human mind, history, logic and science provided the inspiration and guidance for this endeavour. This would not have been possible but for the accurate translations of his works into English. No apology is made for having to repeat what has already been said so many times before but the truth must be repeated many times and in many ways for it has much to overcome.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

12

© 1997 Allan Sztab

13

How To Use This Book This book had been designed to place key psychological and philosophical concepts within the grasp of the interested reader. The constraints imposed by the attempt to keep things simple is evident in the style which is at all times exceptionally brief and to the point. Unlike a novel that provides entertainment, this book is intended to provoke thought. However, knowledge is power and the exercise of power is pleasurable in itself. It is possible to find your way around this book quickly without wasting time covering areas you are already familiar with. It consists of four parts and is broken up into sections which makes cross-referencing far easier. If you are already familiar with the details of any sections then you might find it easier to omit them at first. Appendices have been used in an effort to keep the main body of the text short. However, they should be read when first referred to in the text. The underlying concepts they illustrate are easy to recall and it is unlikely that you will find it necessary to read them more than once in conjunction with the text. An index to sections has been provided for your convenience. Combined with the search facility in MS Word this should make it far easier to navigate the document. In order to minimise eye-strain the windows system colours (text and background) can be modified at intervals of a chapter or as you desire (Settings Control Panel - Display - Appearance) When viewing the appearance is also enhanced if the non-printing characters are hidden (Ctrl + Shift + *) and if the spelling checker is set off (Tools - Options - Spelling & Grammar [clear Check spelling as you type]) No complex terminology or philosophical jargon has been used in this text and when a concept is introduced it will always be followed or preceded with an explanation. When a concept is used in the text that has some relevance to another section then a reference to that section will be found as a footnote. During a first reading it may be distracting to refer to other sections on the fly. However, when reading the text for a second time it is recommended that you do so in order to gain an ever deeper insight into the far-reaching implications some of these concepts have.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

14

One of the primary purposes of this book is to cast doubt on some of the beliefs and opinions that are widely held by many of us. It is only possible to gauge the success with which it does so by committing your first thoughts or comments to writing with suitable references to the particular page or section. This will make it far easier to recall the reasons for your comments in the future. Recording our beliefs and opinions is useful as a gauge to measure our personal growth. To derive the maximum benefit from this book you should always consider the ways in which the information might be applied to ourselves, those people and animals around us and the society which we are part of. The subjects we are going to cover are vast and could never be fully covered in any detail in a work of this size. The purpose of this book is to provide a basic foundation upon which you may continue to build on your own. It is no mistake that names such as Heraclitus, the Sophists, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Buddha, Hume, Locke, Kant, Hegel and others are mentioned in current articles, books and discussions on philosophy. This seems to be the customary way of acknowledging the original source or inspiration of certain ideas. The same applies to discussions concerning psychology and here the names of pioneers in the working of the mind such as Nietzsche, Freud and Skinner emerge to take credit for ideas that permeate the work of many theorists who followed after them. Only those parts of the works of these great thinkers that were considered original within the context of this text have been dealt with. The price to be paid for presenting their ideas in this fashion is that it isn't possible to obtain a well-balanced perspective of their life-works. However, if this is required there is no substitute for the original texts themselves.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

15

Introduction Whenever an opinion is expressed by someone it is obvious from our own experience that somebody else might have a different one. For this reason many of us obtain a second and even third opinion, especially concerning things that are important to us. If a doctor recommended surgery as the only solution to our backache we would feel far more comfortable if their opinion was confirmed by another doctor and the chances are very good that this will be the case. However, if we sought out the opinion of someone who holds a different set of beliefs such as that of a Chiropractor we might be offered a non-surgical treatment. Differences of opinion like this are common and, as in this example, the stakes are often high. What we tend to find in all areas of life is that people who belong to different schools of thought will consider their beliefs to be right. In the face of conflicting beliefs it is clearly in our best interests to make wellinformed decisions for ourselves. However, we too belong to many specific groups depending on our nationality, religion, cultural background and occupation. For each group we belong to there are other groups who are likely to hold different beliefs to those of our own. If we are honest with ourselves we might accept that many of the opinions we have aren't really our own in the sense that we haven't compared them with the opinions of others and then decided for ourselves, as we might do in the above example. Taken to its logical conclusion we might even find that the path we have chosen to tread in life has in fact not been determined by ourselves at all. We have become accustomed to acting in accordance with conceptions of right and wrong that we have never really determined for ourselves. Today there is an overwhelming amount of information and with it the problem of determining how it all fits together. There is no shortage of books written by highly qualified professionals offering sound advice on topics of general interest such as how we can achieve our career and financial objectives, improve our love lives, escape from fear and modify our behaviours. However, in the vast majority of cases a single truism or insight is taken and literally beaten to death. When we put these books down we still find that we have no answer to questions such as, 'I now know how to do x, but is it right or wrong for me to do © 1997 Allan Sztab

16

x?', 'why do I feel like doing x at all?', 'what guiding principles should I adopt in reaching a moral decision?', or 'how does this fit in with the world I see around me?' This book provides the foundations upon which we can develop an individual morality that can be consistently applied throughout our lives. Life would be simple if we were free to behave exactly as we pleased. However, the laws of society restrict our freedom in ways that are supposed to be beneficial to us although many of them aren't. The obeying of traffic regulations is clearly beneficial to us as the results of not doing so are obvious. However, in many other cases laws are made that confer a benefit to other people at our expense. The problem we are faced with is that freedom without any laws would soon lead to disorder and conflict as there wouldn't be anything to stop people from harming each other. This is the paradoxical nature of freedom - to avoid conflict and ensure the safety of our person and possessions we have to sacrifice certain of our freedoms. The primary objective of this book is to free ourselves from as many unnecessary restraints to our freedom as we possibly can. The range of human behaviour is unlimited and the laws and moral codes of all societies vary markedly from one another. There is no objective way to determine which laws and moral codes are right or wrong without being influenced by the opinions we already hold. Nature is indifferent and provides no clues for us. It is obvious that no law or moral code is of any use if it cannot be enforced and this duty is normally granted to government. There are many forms of government which range from military dictatorships to various forms of democracy and each one is representative of the way in which power is shared amongst its citizens. All conflicts, whether between citizen and citizen, citizen and government, or one government and another, arise because each party believes that they are right. Conflicts are nothing other than a clash of beliefs. Beliefs therefore play a very important part in our lives and underlying all our behaviour is a belief that it will enable us to satisfy one or more of our needs or desires. As humans we are geared towards overcoming harsh, dangerous and difficult environmental conditions. It was primarily the immense power of language that enabled us to become master over much of our environment in a very short © 1997 Allan Sztab

17

period of time. However, we still have the same old desires and many of them are ill-suited to the lives of comfort that we now lead. These desires cannot be turned off so despite the fact that we are now masters of our environment they actively seek for satisfaction. This only becomes obvious when we compare our behaviour with those of other animals or humans. Most animals are satisfied when they have a full meal in their bellies and are safe from other predators. Until fairly recently hunter gatherers like the Bushmen also lived in a very simple fashion. However, for many of us who live in the fast lanes of modern society, life has lost its simplicity. The attempt to satisfy insatiable desires can go on indefinitely unless we realise that it is our desires themselves that are the greatest obstacles of all. The attempt to control and guide our desires is the most difficult task we face. It is only in death that our desires cease but there are some who nonetheless strive to attain this state while they are still alive. The elusive state they seek is often called enlightenment or nirvana. Their attempt to do so is elusive because it is a desire or combination of desires which is behind their attempt. Certain people call this elusive state heaven and find no shortage of others who believe they hold the key to it. However, it simply isn't possible or necessary to extinguish the desires, for they are life itself. Overcoming our desires is merely an attempt to give them a form and a shape, a process which is an art. It is a never-ending process and one that must of necessity be undertaken alone because we are all unique. On our journey through life there are many potholes and if we can illuminate some of them we will be able to avoid them or get back on our feet if we should stumble and fall. Whether we care to admit it or not we are natural scientists because we continually adapt our behaviour to take account of the regularities we observe in nature. From our observations of nature it seems that some events are connected to others and this leads us to assume that their relationship is one of cause and effect. Based on this assumption we look at nature and ascribe to it a set of rules or laws that seem to govern its behaviour. In today's modern society we make use of many things like radios, telephones and electricity that are based on these laws. We know how to operate them even though we know © 1997 Allan Sztab

18

very little about the laws that govern their operation. However, from our observations we have learnt that they do work and we do so by trusting our senses. That we trust our senses is evident because we don't let things escape from the grip of our hands as we know they will fall. We walk around obstacles because we know we cannot walk through them. Every animal has unknowingly arrived at many of these conclusions. Despite this obvious trust there are many people who distrust their senses and cling firmly to a belief in things which cannot be sensed. These beliefs impose unnecessary restrictions on those who hold them. No attempt to explain human actions can be made successfully without a good understanding of what it really means to be human so the first part of this book deals with human behaviour and the inner workings of the human mind. This will enable us to see why people cling so strongly to their beliefs, even to the extent of fighting and dying for them. While other animals are only consciously aware of their surroundings as they appear from one fleeting moment to the next, we are capable of conscious awareness, not only of our present but of our past and future. No other living organism is capable of doing so and this extra dimension is brought to us by the unique power of human language. If we look at a cow grazing contentedly in a field we could enquire whether it was happy. If it was free of pain and capable of satisfying its immediate needs we might conclude that it is. However, because of the power of conscious thought even these two conditions wouldn't be adequate when applied to a person because a person could be suffering from unpleasant memories of the past or imaginary visions of the future. Not being able to forget is often a source of suffering even though it has enabled us to build upon the observations of the past and to penetrate the mysterious workings of nature. Our brain is like a sponge and from birth onwards it soaks up information indiscriminately and interprets it according to our infantile level of understanding. These interpretations form the behavioural guidelines that enable us to survive and are made according to rules we don't know or fully understand but which are beyond our power to control. These guidelines are essential because without them we wouldn't be able to avoid situations that had © 1997 Allan Sztab

19

proved harmful to us in the past. We begin to form them some time before birth and the process is completed at about the age of six. As we age it becomes progressively more difficult to change them. If these guidelines are unable to lead us successfully towards the satisfaction of our present desires then frustration, unhappiness and suffering are the result. Unless we can critically reinterpret the information of the past in terms of our present level of understanding, or learn to modify the responses we make that are based on them, we will never break free from their hidden strands. This is our objective and what we discover on this journey is unique for each one of us. There might only be 26 letters in the alphabet and 8 musical keys but the stories they can tell and the music they can play are limited only by our imagination. Similarly, even though there are only a handful of incentives that govern the expression of our emotions, the range of human behaviour is limited only by our environment. There are two incentives that play a particularly noticeable role in guiding our behaviour and these are the incentives of pleasure and pain. If we analyse any behaviour we are sure to find one of them at its core. Our parents are the primary source of the information on which we base our guidelines and they have modified this information during their lifetime of experiences from information they received from their parents in a cycle that commenced ages ago. Right from the outset the information we obtain is never the unique product or interpretation of any single person but rather the collective information of the past. This information has enabled us to survive throughout the ages and its usefulness in this task is of considerable importance because the environment we rely on for our basic requirements is often dangerous - it is necessary to distinguish between those actions which favour our survival and those which don't. Those which do will be encouraged by society whilst those which don't will be forbidden under threat of punishment. These do's and don'ts are the rules or emotional restraints that society imposes on us and are the key to our survival. They account for the majority of information which is passed from one generation to the next and their overriding purpose is to channel our emotions into socially acceptable behaviour. © 1997 Allan Sztab

20

History enables us to trace the development of socially acceptable behaviour and the methods that were developed to enforce them. Society itself functions in accordance with traditions and institutions which are its guidelines from the past. When our social institutions are no longer capable of guiding society successfully then frustration and conflict are inevitable. In the same way that we, as individuals, must critically re-interpret our personal history to break free from its hidden strands, so too must society. We are members of society and when we attempt to break free from our past we often find ourselves challenging some of its institutions and traditions. We are brainy animals and our capability for logical thinking is unrivalled in the animal world. A brief tour of western philosophy will enable us to get to grips with the fundamental assumptions that form the foundation of many systems of belief. History is the human track record, and interpreting it in terms of the forces that govern human behaviour enables us to understand the events and errors of the past and the reason they continue to be repeated. Many unsuccessful attempts have been made to interpret and alter the course of history as though it unfolded according to certain laws. These attempts are reflections of the human desire and craving for certainty which leads us to search for a complete understanding of the world around us and, more importantly, our place and purpose for being in it. The failure of this quest, despite many ingenious attempts to do so, sets many of us adrift with a sinking feeling that life has no meaning or purpose, and the temptation is always there to grab and hold onto anything that might save us from drowning in a sea of despair. So we grab, often without being consciously aware of it, and seldom by choice for the full range of options is seldom presented to us.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

21

PART ONE HUMAN BEHAVIOUR

© 1997 Allan Sztab

22

© 1997 Allan Sztab

23

Chapter One Information 1 The great divide The subject of our enquiry is to find the truth and eliminate the possibility of being fooled by those who claim to have found it. This task is best undertaken by each individual for the simple reason that there is no objective yardstick by which to measure the truth. This approach is resisted by almost every figure of authority who would prefer us to believe that they know what the truth is. Not surprisingly we find that there are many different claims to the truth. Every religious group and political party claims to know what it is but we can be certain that not all of them can be right. There are a few unique features that distinguish humans from other animals. One of these is our ability to reason and the means by which we do so is well understood. If we can grasp only a basic understanding of this process we will learn not only how we are able to reason but also the errors of reason that we have an overriding tendency to make – errors that easily lead to our manipulation. Being able to reason is a two-edged sword because while it has distinct advantages the downside is that it condemns humans to an anguish that no other animal experiences to the same degree if at all. This anguish is the result of being consciously aware of the certainty of our own death and never knowing why, what or even if there is any purpose to our being here at all. The attempt to find the truth and to furnish us with a meaning to life has been almost the sole occupation of philosophers throughout the ages. I will not bore you with the details of their works or even attempt to summarise them. This is a task that has already been done by many other authors before me and their works are readily available. What I believe would be far more instructive is to examine the basic assumptions that all of them made and which will be found under the surface of any ideology. We begin our journey by dividing the vast majority of thinkers into two schools of thought.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

24

On the one hand are those who believe in imaginary things and explanations which are not in any way demonstrable to the senses. It is interesting to note that of all living organisms only humans place their trust in imaginary things. On the other hand are those who accept the world of appearances and rely principally on explanations that are in some way demonstrable to their senses - here we find a far smaller group of humans together with every other living organism. The key words that differentiate these two schools of thought are 'imaginary things' and a belief in imaginary things was considered by the philosopher Nietzsche to be one of the greatest errors of reason. Only humans can reason and dream of imaginary things and this is why only humans are capable of placing their trust in them. A deity, spirits, ghosts, heaven, hell, aliens and a whole host of imaginary things have never been seen by any group of impartial witnesses. They have also never been recorded or captured on video or any other storage device. This doesn’t necessarily mean that they don't exist but only that there is no evidence to support or back the many contradictory claims that hinge on their alleged existence. We only know for sure that there were once dinosaurs roaming the earth because we have discovered their bones and fossils. Without this evidence dinosaurs would also be regarded as one more mythical entity together with the unicorn and a host of others. Whenever we rely on the evidence or claims of any other people, institutions or the media without subjecting them to critical appraisal we open ourselves to being manipulated. It isn't surprising that an uncritical obedience to the commands of authority figures is the primary cause of almost every crime against humanity. This brings us to our first task which is to understand why so many humans cling to their beliefs in imaginary things and why this opens them to manipulation. We need to know why humans are geared towards the uncritical obedience of others irrespective of what horrors they are asked to perform. In short, we need to know why trusting our senses is the best possible avenue in our pursuit of the truth. A brief excursion into the basics of physiology will make this far easier to grasp and this occupies the balance of part one. © 1997 Allan Sztab

25

2 Collecting And Storing Information For any organism to live it must be able to satisfy all its requirements for things like food and shelter from the environment that surrounds it. Should its environment change then it must be able to adapt to these changes or else it will perish. To survive an organism must be active. It must move in some way. Inactivity, a lack of movement or a lack of action are merely other words for death. Survival could easily be achieved if all the requirements of an organism were readily available in the environment around it. However, this ideal situation is seldom the case and survival usually means having to deal effectively with less than ideal conditions. It is often necessary to search for food or a mate and avoid predators or dangerous situations. Even a simple single-celled organism can move towards food and away from danger. In order to do so information about its immediate environment is required. Because there is so much information available it has to be carefully examined and processed to select only that information which can be used. To process information it must first be collected and there are many ways in which this can be done. It isn't surprising to find in nature a great variety of specialised organs and mechanisms with which insects, plants and animals are able to select highly specific pieces of information. This information may be chemical, magnetic, electrical and even gravitational. The greater the sensitivity to detect, the greater the advantage for the organism. This sensitivity is even found in metals which react to extremely small variations in light and temperature. Single-celled organisms have to pack all their life-sustaining functions, including sensitivity, into one cell which has the advantage that communication between one part of the cell and another isn't difficult. However, in more complex organisms these functions are performed by other specialised cells which no longer have to maintain this sensitivity along their perimeter as long as they can communicate with other cells. Those cells that specialise in distributing information form amongst themselves communication lines known as nerves. Over short distances this communication can be achieved by chemical © 1997 Allan Sztab

26

signalling. Over greater distances a wave of electrical activity is passed along the nerve cell membranes to signal a chemical release at the nerve end. In this way a sensory mechanism that detects the presence of food or danger can relay this information to other mechanisms within the organism so that a suitable response can be made. These communication lines form a network of connections within the organism. The network could be a very simple one with the message being relayed throughout the organism, or it could be a highly complex one whereby various messages are relayed directly to a specific part of the organism, which is the case in humans. The human brain is housed in a central location and is connected to all the other parts of the body by an intricate pathway of nerves. The primary duty of the brain is to guide and control responses to external and internal stimuli.

Figure 2.1 The brain is connected to every part of the body by an intricate pathway of nerves.

An organism can respond to specific information in the same way every time. This fixed behavioural response is incorporated into its genetic development program and no trial and error or learning experience is required for its use. The obvious disadvantage is that this behaviour isn't capable of being modified within the lifetime of the organism should conditions require it. In an everchanging world an ability to adapt would be advantageous. To achieve this the ability to adapt could be fixed within the organism's genetic development © 1997 Allan Sztab

27

program leaving some of the responses to be determined according to the experiences of the organism during its development. The concept of flexibility can be easily understood if we take the case of a simple telephone system that consists of a cable that can only link two telephones to each other permanently, say phones 1 and 2. The only conversations that are possible will be between these two phones. This is a fixed and inflexible system and if it was necessary to connect phone 3 to phone 1 instead of phone 2 to phone 1 a new system would be required. On the other hand, if we had millions of telephones that were all connected to a central exchange that only linked them to each other as circumstances demanded then this would provide the flexibility and power to connect phones to each other without requiring a new system each time. The human brain consists of approximately 20 billion brain cells or neurons which can form amongst themselves an almost unlimited number of unique connections or memories, and has the ability to cross-reference and compare them. '... memory lies within the topography - the wiring diagram - and dynamics of the neuronal system. This means that the cellular mechanisms of say, remembering a telephone number and remembering a car wouldn't differ it would just be that different cells, connected up in different ways with other parts of the brain, are involved.' (Rose)

Figure 2.2 The neurons form chemical bonds between each other

These unique connections or memories are the end result of processing vast amounts of information that have been channelled into the brain by the senses and each of them have a specific meaning. '... brains do not work with information in the computer sense, but with meaning.' (Rose)

© 1997 Allan Sztab

28

The first step in learning is to record information which can be used later and this is performed by the formation of these unique connections. Like each frame in the sequence of a film these unique connections become part of our memory system. They include sight (the shape and spatial relationship between objects), colour, smell, taste, sound, touch and the ability to manipulate them. The merging, modifying and association of these images with each other gave humans a mind, one that could imagine or dream of new images. 'The difference between brain and mind is surely as great as that between a phonograph and the music that comes forth from it. There is no hint of music in the disc's micro-groove or the amplifier, except through the vibrations induced via the needle by the record's rotation: but these physical agents and events do not become music until a human ear hears the sounds and a human mind interprets them. For that purposeful act, the whole apparatus, physical and neural, is indispensable: yet the most minute analysis of the brain tissue, along with the phonograph's mechanical paraphernalia, would still throw no light upon the emotional stimulation, the aesthetic form and the purpose and meaning of the music. An electroencephalograph of the brain's response to music is void of anything that even slightly resembles musical sounds and phrases - as void as the physical disc that helps produce the sound.' (Mumford) With a memory information such as the location of a food supply or of danger can be stored. Having information or knowledge about a food that made you sick allows you to avoid eating it again. It is this ability to store and use information about our experiences that we call learning. Learning enables us to adapt to a far wider range of environmental conditions. At the forefront of this learning ability stands the human being who is born in ignorance and must learn almost everything from its parents and society. To achieve this flexibility the human brain had to undergo much development and today there is evidence of the continuous growth in its size and complexity. More than any other organ in the body, the brain has such an excess capacity of power that even today we cannot fully utilise it.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

29

The size of the human brain in relation to the rest of the body is remarkable and 'in fishes the brain weighs 1/5668 of the body; in reptiles, 1/1321; in birds, 1/212; in mammals, 1/186; in a two-year-old chimpanzee, 1/25; in a two-year-old child, 1/18.' (Will Durant) The human brain has a capacity for storage that is so large there is even the possibility that no memory is ever erased - it is only the inability to recall information to the conscious mind that we call forgetting. Subjected to various internal mechanisms memories may be relegated to the deepest recesses of the mind where they are difficult to recall. The brain isn't dedicated to any one task but is connected to all the other organs in the body. Having such a huge capacity for storing data requires the capacity to process all this information. The processing power and capabilities of the brain are so great that not even the super-computers of today can match it. When it comes to making judgements the human brain is in a class all of its own. It has been estimated that for each second of vision the brain performs 100 million floating-point calculations. Despite these huge requirements the processing capabilities of the brain easily exceed the demands which are normally made of it and its capacity is almost limitless. The immense power and capacity of the brain is required for the complex and simultaneous processing of new information with the vast amounts already stored. The end results of these complex calculations form an internal representation of the external world. It is this moment by moment representation that we call consciousness - a small window through which we view the world around us. It is through this window of consciousness that humans, along with many other animals, are able to see and respond to the external world with either a fixed or a learned response.

Figure 2.3 An internal representation of the external world. © 1997 Allan Sztab

30

Some people believe that animals don't have a conscious mind and many of them arrive at this conclusion because they confuse consciousness with selfawareness. At this point in time self-awareness is unique to humans because only humans have managed to exploit the tremendous power of a complex language and the next section will explain why this is so.

3 The Power Of Language Without a spoken language the only means of communication are gestures and crude noises. It is fairly easy to see and hear when an animal is in pain by the noises or screams it makes and the grimaces that accompany them. This also applies to the emotions of anger, fear or hostility. All animals share these basic means of communicating with each other to share their experiences, co-operate in the identification of common dangers, or for finding food. Initially humans developed a whole range of complex gestures and noises which enabled them to communicate these simple meanings to each other. It took considerable time before they became commonly understood by all the members of a specific family or tribe. This common understanding is essential to any language. We learn largely by our ability to imitate or act in a manner that is consistent or in conformity with those around us. By constantly repeating what we have learnt to perform the behaviour is slowly drummed into the mind until it becomes habituated and may be recalled without any conscious effort.1 Some theorists claim that speech is another faculty much like vision but there isn't yet any scientific evidence to confirm this. It is only when we attempt to convey a story or feeling without speaking that we begin to appreciate the great difficulty involved in communication. A series of gestures and noises that we use in an attempt to convey a story or a particular meaning are known as rituals and the failure to grasp this underlying purpose of early ritual ruined many philosophical attempts to understand language. '... meaning is a historically and developmentally shaped process, expressed by individuals in interaction with their natural and social environment.' (Rose) 1

Refer to the consistency incentive in section 7. © 1997 Allan Sztab 31

The first rituals were held in the highest esteem and some even became sacred due to their powers of communication. Any attempt to tamper or meddle with them was resisted. This desire to cling strongly to what is familiar, even to the extent of idolising it, is evident throughout the ages. Some societies felt so indebted to their ancestors for passing on their valuable experiences and customs that they even worshipped them as gods.1 Those who were practised at performing rituals became the first shamans or priests who were entrusted with teaching these lessons to the next generation. Over time our ancestors learnt how to co-ordinate their lips, tongue and palate to create a new range of noises which we now call words, but it took a long time before complex ideas and behaviours were ultimately reduced to single words such as those we are familiar with today. Many words were introduced to represent abstract concepts and feelings, such as the words 'jealous' or 'possessive', that describe the mental state or behaviour of a person. Complex associations like these are only possible with a massively powerful brain and the image that is produced in one's mind when a person is said to 'eat like a pig' is a uniquely human ability. At the time this abbreviation was taking place it would be clear to all concerned exactly what each word meant as they could recall their precise context and history and possibly the gestures that may have originally accompanied them. However, as time went by a series of gestures would be continually abbreviated until they could be abbreviated no further. The history of language is essentially a continual process of abbreviation that made it possible to convey complex meanings in a fraction of the time it previously took.2

1

Refer to the common ancestors of tribes or clans in section 13. In many cases the particular history of a word was forgotten with the result that the precise circumstances and series of gestures surrounding its original use vanished with it. A factor contributing to the loss of the original meaning of words was the fact that it wasn't yet possible to record this history independently of the human mind. The history and practical circumstances that led to the encouragement or discouragement of specific behaviours were also lost in a similar manner even though the behaviour or taboo itself continued to be practised. (Refer to the cycle of ritual warfare of the Maring tribe in section 19.) © 1997 Allan Sztab 32 2

Figure 3 The power of language to compress vast amounts of information into single words and sentences.

Naturally the larger the memory with which to record these generally accepted meanings or words the larger the vocabulary that was possible and as we saw earlier humans do have large brains. A large brain combined with the ability to compress large amounts of information into single words are the secrets behind the tremendous power of human language. According to scientists our ancestors, the Ramapithecus, had a brain capacity of about 400cc which was more or less the same size as that of a chimpanzee. Australopithecus had an increased brain capacity of about 600cc and were the first of our ancestors to make use of weapons. Not long after this Homo Habilus emerged with a brain capacity of about 700cc. During the next one million years the brain capacity almost doubled in size with the emergence of Homo Erectus. In the course of the next half million years the capacity of the brain increased even further until it reached its present size of approximately 1,750cc. So rapid was the increase in the capacity of the brain that most of the pain associated with childbirth is attributable to the size of the baby's head. The human brain now had a virtually unlimited capacity which could be utilised for language. It is possible that the sudden increase in its size was a direct response to an urgent demand for rapid communication which would enable people to co-operate as part of a team. In nature such a radical change is almost always a response to conditions that threaten the very survival of the species. The shark is a good example of a species that hasn't changed in over 150 million years because it is so well adapted that it has never had to. It is perhaps no coincidence that most of the rapid development of the human brain took place © 1997 Allan Sztab

33

during the Pleistocene age which commenced about two million years ago and was characterised by unprecedented droughts, floods and ice ages. Our early ancestors of 100,000 years ago were equipped with almost the same powerful brain we have today. One-word associations made it possible to compress large amounts of information or meaning structures into the conscious mind where it could be manipulated. Together with the speed at which this could be done the power and scope of the conscious mind is magnified considerably. It is the rapid stringing together of words or meanings in the conscious mind that is called thinking and with it came the capability for intelligent thought. It is not so long ago that those who were deaf and couldn't speak were referred to as 'deaf and dumb'. By observing and memorising how things worked in nature the brain could now manipulate an ever-expanding vocabulary of meanings and imagine doing new things which could then be performed at their discretion. Humans had now become thinkers and it is no coincidence that the activity of thinking takes place in the new part of the brain called the neocortex. There was always something mysterious about the magical power of words. They enabled people to share a far wider range of experiences and feelings than was previously possible. Words enabled a person to command and receive immediate obedience. They allowed people to co-operate and plan future joint ventures such as hunting expeditions which were previously difficult, if not impossible, to organise. The more people could communicate their intentions to each other without being misunderstood, the more they could co-operate and promote order and stability amongst themselves. Words had the power to make someone laugh or cry. They could evoke the emotions of joy, sadness and anger. They had the power to persuade, seduce, whip a crowd into a frenzy and instil courage into warriors before a battle.1 Words had an element of immortality to them and the ritual recitation of a family or tribe's history conveyed the lessons of the past to the present. Being able to compress large amounts of information into the conscious mind enabled humans to scrutinise the past and identify the long-term consequences of present actions, thereby making the external world far more certain and 1

Refer to the tricks and traps of language in Appendix E.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

34

predictable. The ability to bring our own experiences into consciousness led indirectly to the discovery of the subconscious mind – a mind that is geared towards operating without any conscious intervention at all. The ratio between the conscious mind and that of the subconscious mind is estimated to be 1 to a billion. It was through this small window to the external world that humans emerged as the first organisms capable of being aware of themselves and the universe around them.

4 The Subconscious Mind With the power of language humans were now capable of exploring the workings of the subconscious mind and it was dreams that provided the first clues. With a newly expanded consciousness and the ability to think it might not have been so easy for our ancestors to distinguish between dreams, day-dreams and conscious reality as is common in young children. We can still observe the effect of dreams on animals which often twitch, whimper and growl in their sleep. Nightmares must have terrified our early ancestors and, as with animals, the only means of escape they had was to return to wakefulness. Numerous observations of other dead people, animals, plants and insects must have led them to an awareness of their own mortality and humans have always struggled to accept this. It is possible that the appearance of a dead relative or ancestor in a dream may have led them to believe that it was the dead persons spirit which had come to them from 'another world'.1 Dreams thus had a profound influence on our ancestors and they were interpreted by some as the revelations of gods, supernatural beings, spirits and demons. Today we know that dreams are an interaction of memories and their meanings which the brain manipulates and modifies, often into new and imaginary images. Dream interpretation has been practised throughout the ages. It wasn't uncommon for some dreams to be interpreted as instructions which were then executed. Those old and possibly more experienced people whose dream interpretations seemed to be better than others became the first priests and soothsayers. The priests would also offer assistance in the form of chants and spells in an effort to prevent certain dreams. There has never been a shortage of 1

See the various mythical explanations of the unknown in section 15.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

35

people who claim to have divinely inspired dreams, or the ability to foretell the future. Divinely inspired dreams, visions and prophecies feature prominently in most mystical texts and commentaries. Today dream interpretation and prophecy is still based, for the most part, on superstition and wishful thinking. One only has to recall the dreams of the dictator Saddam Hussein during the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait which he claimed were divinely inspired and instructed him to point his guns towards Israel. Dream interpretation is far from scientific and may be based on something like the phase of the moon during which the dream occurs or on the interpretation of the first letter of a book that is opened at random. As in years gone by there are still many books available on dream interpretation. Some of them claim that there are certain techniques which enable us to intervene and determine the course of our dreams. Dream interpretation in modern times features prominently in the work of Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung and is still practised by many professional psychiatrists. Their research suggests at the least that recurring themes of dreams are the result of subconscious and persistent concerns relating to past events, fears, or future concerns. It isn't beyond reason to consider the possibility that conscious and persistent thinking, coupled with a strong desire for or regarding a specific outcome, could lead to the stimulation of dream activity concerning the desired subject, although there is little valid scientific evidence to support this. There is research which suggests that dreams are largely a product of our sensory-motor systems which continue to interpret both internal and external stimuli while we sleep. It isn't uncommon for external sounds and sensations to be incorporated into our dreams and we might find, upon awakening, that a loud noise such as a cat knocking something over or a person knocking at the door has been incorporated into our dream as an accident or gunshot. Dreams and fantasies provide invaluable insights into human behaviour because in them no censorship exists and behaviours such as those relating to the sexual drive, which is normally controlled and enforced by the laws and customs of our

© 1997 Allan Sztab

36

society, are freely expressed. It is this aspect of dreams and fantasies which makes them so useful. I mentioned earlier how even some scientists today confuse self-awareness with consciousness and a similar but far more profound misunderstanding can be made if we are led to believe that our ability to survive is in any way dependent on our conscious mind – the subconscious mind is all that we or any other animal requires. If this statement is correct then we will be drawn one step closer to accepting that we do not have anything like the Freedom Of Will we believe we have.1 We must remember that almost every other animal has a conscious mind in the sense that it is a window to the external world. We are certainly no exception in this respect and without the tremendous power of spoken language we would be an integral part of the food chain once more. It is beyond dispute that at some time in the past (approximately 100,000 years ago) we never had spoken language. This leads us to consider how it is possible for us and other animals to survive without a thinking mind. Not surprisingly we find that the basic behavioural mechanisms that make this possible are almost the same and the balance of part one is dedicated towards obtaining a better understanding of them.

1

The implications of a belief in Freedom Of Will are covered later in section 58. © 1997 Allan Sztab 37

Chapter Two The Behavioural Mechanism 5

Figure 5 shows the sequence of events that are required in the performance of an action. Columns 1 and 2 illustrate how a natural incentive to perform an action is aroused in response to an internal or external stimulus. Columns 3 and 4 reflect how the emotions amplify the stimulus and engage the learning mechanism to determine an appropriate action that will satisfy or consummate the stimulus that gave rise to it. The determination of a response may take place consciously or subconsciously. Column 5 illustrates that the response itself also generates stimuli which help to determine whether the incentive is satisfied. These stimuli may turn on the same incentive once more or engage a different one.

The amount of literature and information dedicated to human behaviour is vast. There are literally thousands of books on the subject. Whether the literature relates to inter-personal relationships or the economic choices people make, the behaviour of other people is of interest to most of us. It isn't surprising that the majority of magazines are virtually guaranteed to contain at least one article that attempts to explain some aspect of human behaviour. We are social beings and because of our interaction we often attempt to understand and even alter the behaviour of other people towards us or our behaviour towards them. As a result it isn't surprising to find that most people have certain ideas or explanations to account for the actions of both themselves and others. However, human © 1997 Allan Sztab

38

behaviour may be the result of many different, sometimes interacting factors. This complexity and the lack of sufficient scientific evidence makes a comprehensive account of human behaviour very difficult. Without evidence no explanation, irrespective of its worth, can bridge the gap between speculation and scientifically demonstrated fact. Direct research on human behaviour has been far slower than similar research performed on animals due largely to the different moral and ethical considerations imposed on researchers when conducting experiments with human subjects. However, by studying animals and insects in the laboratory or in the wild, valuable insights are made into the various determinants that are responsible for certain behaviours. Although it is not always possible, or reasonable, to make assumptions about humans from research on other animals, the mechanisms responsible are in many cases similar enough to be able to do so. The fact that there are so many functional similarities between various human and animal organs is the reason that many medical trials are first performed on animals. To survive any organism has to perform certain functions such as eating and avoiding danger. For a function to commence a biological signal, stimulus, or turn-on is required and may originate internally or in the external environment. There are literally thousands of bodily functions which we are unaware of and many of them don't require any conscious behaviour to satisfy them. These various functions may be referred to as drives. The stimuli or biological signals of specific bodily functions are particularly noticeable during the course of our physical development when specific hormones are released into the bloodstream to stimulate bone growth and the development of the reproductive organs. The process of sun-tanning illustrates clearly the silent interaction between the environment and our body. The production of melanin is turned-on by the stimulus of ultra-violet light in order to protect us. As soon as the exposure to ultra-violet light is reduced or eliminated the body again responds and our protective tan is lost. In many cases the signals that arouse us are unknown but once turned-on a drive is satisfied either automatically or by learning how to satisfy it. Many biological requirements such as breathing are performed © 1997 Allan Sztab

39

automatically or subconsciously without having to learn how to satisfy them. Those drives that don't have a fixed response can only be satisfied by learning how to do so. A drive like hunger is more powerful than most of us realise. It is absolutely essential for life that certain functions are performed, and to ensure that they are, the drives are capable of becoming powerful and ruthless tyrants as the following story illustrates: Faced with starvation after their plane had crashed in the Andes mountains in 1972, the survivors resolved (after 10 days of small rations) to eat the dead bodies of their friends who had died in the crash. One of them concluded that a body '... is meat. That's all it is. ... All that is left here are the carcasses, which are no more human beings than the dead flesh of the cattle we eat at home'. Later on after cutting off some meat '... he hesitated. Even with his mind so firmly made up, the horror of the act paralysed him. His hand would neither rise to his mouth nor fall to his side while the revulsion which possessed him struggled with his stubborn will. The will prevailed. The hand rose and pushed the meat into his mouth. He swallowed it. He felt triumphant. His conscience had overcome a primitive, irrational taboo. He was going to survive'. Eventually they all ate. It became necessary to ration the remaining bodies and after about 45 days the thawing snow revealed more. 'It would have been possible now to avoid eating such things as rotten lungs and the putrid intestines of bodies they had cut up weeks before, but half the boys continued to do so because they had come to need the stronger taste. It had taken a supreme effort of will for these boys to eat human flesh at all, but once they had started and persevered, appetite had come with the eating, for the instinct to survive was a harsh tyrant which demanded not just that they eat their companions but that they get used to doing so'. After two of the survivors had made contact with other people they were given food. 'No sooner had the bread and cheese passed their lips than some of the early revulsion they had felt for their former diet returned to them.' (Read)

© 1997 Allan Sztab

40

6 Learning And Association Over the years theorists like Freud attempted to explain human behaviour in terms of certain basic drives such as sex, aggression and the anxiety produced when these drives are frustrated. He used concepts such as 'id', 'ego' and 'superego' to explain behaviour and pioneered the analysis of dreams, word association and fantasies to uncover hidden motives.1 Dreams provided the first clues as to the influence and power of the drives and the emotions that helped to satisfy them. 2 However, because of the difficulty involved in scientifically measuring these drives, it isn't possible to test them against rival personality theories with the result that there is still no consensus as to what the key drives are. Early theorists accepted the biological basis of certain key drives which, according to them, produced a tension which was released by an activity that had been learnt. According to their theories more complex drives could be acquired by a process of learning whereby they are associated with the key drives. As with hunger, people learn to associate the behaviours that satisfy or consummate a drive and the greater the extent to which a behaviour satisfies a drive the greater the association between the behaviour and the drive. The opposite also applies. The greater the discomfort or pain associated with a behaviour the weaker the association.3 It is in this way, for example, that people learn to associate the eating behaviours that satisfy the hunger drive. Learning is essential because not all foods are good. The ability to memorise and recall information is vital to learning.

1 2 3

Refer to Freuds theory in appendix A1. Refer to dreams as the key to the discovery of the subconscious mind in section 4. Refer to the theory of B.F Skinner in appendix A5.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

41

The learning process takes place both consciously and subconsciously. For example, it had long been known that humans and other animals display a natural curiosity to explore their surroundings, often for no apparent reason. However, from studying this activity in animals researchers realised that exploratory activity allowed them to gather information which might prove useful at some later stage. If a source of food was discovered nearby then this knowledge would be valuable when food was required; faced with sudden danger a good hiding place to flee to would ensure survival. Thus the mind operates on its own and we learn subconsciously, whether it is from the lyrics of a song or the background chatter of the evening news on radio or television. Our ability to learn subconsciously is exploited by the media because if a message is repeated often enough it will sink into our subconscious. Because we aren't aware of this we might later express these same messages or opinions in the mistaken belief that they are our own.1 Without the ability to memorise our past experiences and observations we would be unable to recognise similar situations and to recall the best way of dealing with them. Our behaviour is therefore, of necessity, always based on the past2 . If a drive, such as hunger, isn't satisfied then an emotional state of distress is produced. As infants we learn to associate eating with pleasure because of the relief from distress that the eating brings. These associations stay with us throughout our lives and many eating disorders can be traced to early experiences in childhood. Abnormal associations towards food could lead to disorders such as anorexia or bulimia. It is well known that people sometimes 1 2

Refer to the learning theory of Albert Bandura in appendix A6.

The oft heard phrases like 'breaking away from the past' etc may now be viewed in a new light. © 1997 Allan Sztab 42

eat, not to alleviate the distress caused by hunger, but in an attempt to alleviate some other distress. This might be due to an association formed as a child between the stressful situation and eating. Parents often feed a child when it is distressed irrespective of the real cause, and if the pleasure of eating provides it with some level of comfort then an association between distress and eating may be formed. It is interesting that a sate of emotional distress such as that of hunger can sometimes be alleviated without the hunger being satisfied as is the case when a distressed baby is picked up and comforted. It isn't uncommon at all to attempt to comfort other people who are distressed by hugging them, holding their hands and speaking gentle reassuring words to them. There are other non-associative forms of learning like habituation and sensitisation. Habituation is a process whereby we grow accustomed to a stimulus until we no longer respond to it. When we put on our clothes we may initially be consciously aware of them but shortly thereafter we become accustomed to them. Sensitisation is almost the opposite process. If a weak stimulus is coupled with an unpleasant one we may become highly sensitive to it. While associative learning tends to be specific, sensitisation is generalised. For example, if we are on a hike and feel something biting us on our arm and look down to see a mosquito on it, we will specifically associate any further biting sensations with mosquitoes. However, if we look down and cannot see anything we will tend to exaggerate our responses to other stimuli whether they are actually related or not. We might now respond to anything that moves or touches us even if this is the person walking next to us or the shadow of a bird flying overhead. The longer the biting sensation continues the more exaggerated and generalised our responses might become. Both habituation and sensitisation are usually short-lived but are the first steps towards the formation of permanent associations and learning. The power of association is used with great effect by modern marketers who attempt to influence our behaviour in ways that might even be harmful to us. For example, certain advertisements attempt to form associations in people's minds between something that is desired or valued by their prospective customers and their product. Cigarette advertisements are a good example - the attempt is often made to associate physical prowess and ability in sport with smoking. Their success illustrates the important influence of values in human behaviour © 1997 Allan Sztab

43

especially since values are learnt. Values are sometimes called secondary or acquired drives. We begin to appreciate how strong an influence values have when we consider that, irrespective of the drive to survive, there are many values such as honour that people are prepared to sacrifice their lives for. 7 The Natural Incentives For Action From their observations of animals scientists realised that there were certain behaviours that couldn't be accounted for by the satisfaction of biological drives alone. Certain behaviours indicated the presence of other more basic motivating factors, such as natural curiosity, which seemed to be rewarding or satisfying in themselves. These basic motivating factors are referred to by ethologists as 'natural incentives' and they serve to direct behaviour in ways that will ensure survival. From their studies ethologists gained an indication of the role these natural incentives play. They demonstrated clearly that many behaviours or responses are brought about by certain environmental cues or stimuli such as colours and exposure to sunlight. The cues may be certain sights, sounds or the smells given off by certain chemicals. There is now strong evidence that even though human behaviour is more variable we are also influenced by environmental cues, albeit in very subtle ways. It is known that certain sensations are instinctively favoured over others: sweet things are preferred to bitter, smooth to rough, low intensity sounds to loud sounds, low intensity light to bright light. Food that tastes sweet is more likely to be safer to eat than food that tastes bitter. It is the interaction of factors like these that make human behaviour so complex. Our senses select only specific stimuli that have a survival value to us. This is the reason we can only see light and hear sounds of specific wavelengths. Of course, other animals have different capabilities. To interact with the environment an organism has to be able to move, either towards food or shelter or away from danger. It is the natural incentives like curiosity that form the foundation upon which the emotions and all our actions are based. They are innate or fixed within our genetic development program. It isn't known how many of them there are and extensive research has only been undertaken on a few of them. One of the most compelling reasons for favouring one scientific theory over another is the scope of its explanatory © 1997 Allan Sztab

44

power which means not only its power to account for what is already known, but also for what is unknown. This was the power of Sir Isaac Newton's theories and those of Einstein after him. The importance, from a scientific point of view, is that unlike biological drives the natural incentives are capable of being measured.1 Their explanatory power is also unequalled and most other theories can be incorporated into them.2 Over the years various theorists have claimed that there was one overriding drive upon which all the other drives were based. Thus Nietzsche claimed it was the drive for power, Freud the drive for sex, Adler the drive for superiority and Rogers the drive towards self-actualisation. It is always tempting to speculate in this regard and perhaps Nietzsche and Adler were correct because survival of necessity implies exerting power or influence over other things - so much so that any activity of an organism may always be reduced to the constant struggle to maintain, extend, or terminate some aspect of its influence over things outside or even inside itself. Power concerns play a major role in any society or personal relationship. However, there isn't sufficient research to confirm any one drive as a master drive and it is far more likely that there are several basic incentives from which other incentives are derived. There is also evidence that the incentives interact with each other. It is known, for example, that introducing the variety of a new sexual partner increases the sexual responsiveness of both humans and animals. When anger is aroused it may also be accompanied by sexual arousal. The opposite also applies and sexual arousal may be accompanied by anger as is the case in many rapes. Natural incentives are broadly defined so they account for many specific behaviours. For example, aggression and attaining a higher status, although vastly different activities, are both ways of expressing the desire to have an impact on things or people around us. A natural incentive such as that for having an impact is accompanied by an emotional state which prepares us for an action that is necessary to satisfy it. Studies of the facial expression of infants indicate that there are a limited number of basic emotions which can be turned-on by specific stimuli. These emotional states seem to be common to babies from all

1 2

Refer to the measurement of character concerns in section 10. Refer to the various theories of psychology in appendix A.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

45

cultures although there is no consensus as to the precise number of emotions or combinations of emotions there may be. NATURAL INCENTIVE Pain and discomfort Inconsistency Unpleasantness Variety Impact Contact

EMOTIONAL STATE -ve Feeling afraid, anxious -ve Feeling apprehensive -ve Feel like expelling +ve Feeling curious +ve Feeling strong, excited +ve Feeling happy, loving

FACIAL EXPRESSION Fear Sadness - distress Disgust Interest-surprise Anger-excitement Joy-happinesspleasure

Figure 7 shows the natural incentive and the corresponding emotional state and facial expression that is thought to be derived from it.

The incentive of pain or discomfort The incentive of pain or discomfort is one of the so-called negative incentives and to escape from pain those activities that cause any pain or discomfort whatsoever will be readily and strongly associated with it, to such an extent that the slightest hint of the activity concerned is enough to produce fear or anxiety. 1 In a capitalist society much hardship and discomfort is felt if people do not have sufficient money to provide for the comforts of a home and a full stomach. Lack of money is therefore associated with pain and discomfort. This is probably one of the most compelling reasons that money has acquired such an important value in these societies. By association, many other values may be related to pain or discomfort. The avoidance of pain or discomfort is one of the most powerful teachers and the pace of learning increases greatly if pain is involved. It isn't surprising to find that the use or threat of inflicting pain is therefore one of the most commonly used methods to control or regulate the behaviour of others. The Consistency incentive An organism can only survive by interacting with its environment. Our observations over a long period of time lead us to accept many consistencies such as the fact that the sun always rises in the East and sets in the West. We come to accept that during particular seasons certain plants bear fruit and that if their fruits are edible one day they don't mysteriously become poisonous the next. If this were the case we wouldn't be able to rely on them as a stable supply of food. If there were many of these inconsistencies in our environment then food and shelter might be readily available one day and absent the next. Never 1

Refer to fears, phobias and paranoia in appendix C. © 1997 Allan Sztab 46

knowing what to expect we would be trapped in an almost constant state of anxiety or fear. Fortunately nature changes slowly and for the most part behaves consistently from one day to the next. It is this consistent behaviour that has enabled life to gain a foothold and our survival is largely dependent on being able to take advantage of it. Being able to learn which things behave consistently makes it far easier to avoid danger and obtain reliable sources with which to satisfy our needs. The consistency incentive enables us to observe and distinguish between those things that behave consistently and those that don't. An ability to distinguish the slightest variation in sound, colour, or movement is useful because the sound of a breaking twig, inconsistency in the colour of a tree-trunk, or movement against an otherwise stationary background might reveal the presence of a predator. If people behaved in a markedly different way from one day to the next we would forever be uncertain as to what we could expect from them and this would also lead to a state of anxiety and fear whenever they were around us. 1 The inability of people to co-operate with each other to face a common threat or to achieve a common objective would make survival very difficult. People therefore conform to a specific set of behaviours and traditions that they believe enhance their survival prospects. As we mentioned earlier, it is even possible that our language-learning ability is determined to a certain extent by the incentive to conform to the speech patterns of others. It is by conforming or acting consistently with the behaviours of others that we come to learn those behaviours that are socially acceptable, those that are frowned upon and those that will be strictly enforced under threat of punishment. We usually feel safe and secure provided people and things around us continue to behave in a consistent and therefore predictable manner. (We saw earlier how language gave us the ability to compress vast amounts of information into the conscious mind and this enabled us to determine the long-term consequences of our present actions, thus making our environment more predicable.) When something behaves inconsistently it is a signal for danger and might be feared. 2 1

Refer to the dangers of behaving differently to others in section 64. Refer also to the resistance of other people towards those who change in appendix D. 2 In section 11 we see how fear can lead us to distort our reality. In section 14 we see how fear leads to superstitious and mystical beliefs. © 1997 Allan Sztab

47

Over time we develop a set of expectations as to how the world and people around us behave, together with a set of expectations concerning our abilities, strengths and weaknesses. Any change that threatens to disrupt the consistency of our expectations can lead to confusion, disorientation and an overwhelming fear for the potential of pain that the unfamiliar brings with it. Therefore there is a strong disposition towards resisting new ideas and behaviours on both an individual and social level, to such an extent that even the slightest hint of disruption could be regarded as a serious threat that is often met with violence or hostility.1 This tendency to resist new ideas and behaviours makes it difficult for people to accept change and we will deal with some of the more significant attempts to stop change in chapter seven. On a personal level this resistance to change often makes it difficult for a person to develop or behave independently, and especially resistant to the attempt by others to change or have an impact on them. The value of a consistent environment may also be instrumental in the formulation of the strongly held belief that for every event there is something that caused it.2 The Variety incentive Closely allied to the consistency incentive is the variety incentive. We mentioned earlier how natural curiosity plays an important role in learning about our surroundings. However, once we have familiarised ourselves with something, boredom sets in. We become habituated or used to it and it ceases to amaze us. After listening to the same music repeatedly it might even become unpleasant. If we eat the same food continuously it soon loses its appeal. The boredom we experience if confined in isolation is extremely unpleasant and for very good reason - our survival depends on our ability to move around. At the same time that significant changes to our expectations might create distress, things that are moderately different to what we expect are highly desirable because they are familiar enough to understand without creating distress but sufficiently different to arouse our curiosity. It isn't surprising to find that innovations which rapidly achieve widespread acceptance in art, music and design often adhere to these basic requirements. Novelty or variety is actively 1 2

For the resistance to ideas in science see section 48. Refer to section 58 for the error of imaginary and false causes.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

48

sought after and the amount of stimulation required varies from person to person and may often be reflected in their choice of career. The desire to do things progressively better is known as the achievement motive and it is thought to be derived from the variety incentive. The Impact incentive The impact incentive or the ability to influence people and things around us is essential if we are to satisfy our needs. In order to do so we must be able to overcome any obstacles that might be in our way, and this is one of the reasons that freedom from any restraints is so highly valued. Today there is evidence that specific chemical reward mechanisms exist for the successful manipulation of the environment; and this is particularly evident with infants who derive much pleasure from dropping, pushing, pulling and manipulating things. It is known that adrenaline is always present with anger or aggression and drugs such as amphetamines and alcohol enhance these feelings. As in almost every instance where it is vital that something be done there will usually be some reward to encourage its fulfilment. Researchers now agree that many chemical reward systems exist and they have established a link between angerexcitement, sex and pleasure, and it is possible they are all served by the same chemical reward system. The brain produces its own opiates such as the encephalins and endorphins which may be released due to emotional arousal. These opiates are similar in effect to that of morphine. Many athletes, such as runners, sometimes report feeling a high during training and this is probably due to the release of these natural opiates. The survival value of painkillers is obvious because if we were injured they would allow us to function and if necessary to flee from danger. The power motive is thought to be derived from the impact incentive and it is possible that the use of power may be pleasurable and satisfying in itself. The Contact or Sexual incentive The contact or sexual incentive is necessary for any species to survive. As infants we form an attachment to the parent or person that nurtures us as our survival depends on it. Freud was the first to draw attention to the pleasures that are produced by the erogenous zones, the primary ones being the mouth, anus © 1997 Allan Sztab

49

and genitals. These are probably the first pleasures that infants experience and the associations that are formed with the erogenous zones tend to be complex because they serve other functions as well. Once again, these early associations may accompany us throughout our lives1 . Sexual pleasure is the incentive that ensures reproduction and the stimuli vary. In animals certain smells, sensations and visual stimuli are utilised. The peacock uses a brilliant display of colours to attract a mate. The sound of a person's voice may be a turn-on and experiments with music indicate that the sexual excitement in women produced by male singers is greater than the sexual arousal in men that is produced by female singers. Music that is arousing tends to contain a pronounced emphasis on rhythm, themes with comparatively large tonal ranges and a gradual build-up to a climax. It is thought that the need for affiliation and intimacy is derived from the contact or sexual incentive. Survival and reproduction wouldn't be possible unless common members of a species can be identified. Infants identify strongly with their parents and will adopt many characteristics and behaviours from them. This process has been likened to the imprinting that occurs in certain animals such as ducklings which will follow any moving object shortly after birth provided it has not already seen a member of its own species - the object may even be a box or a dummy. Imprinting as a means of identifying common members of a species has obvious survival value but the interesting fact is that no ready-made responsiveness is built in as this would require the ability to recognise the parent from many different angles and positions. It seems far easier to evolve a learning ability and, unlike most other animals, humans must learn who to identify with - who is friend and who is foe. Identity, or a lack thereof, plays a leading role in human aggression. 2 Motivational theorists have identified many other possible incentives and a few of them are shown below. INCENTIVE Autonomy Deference Dominance Exhibition

DEFINITION To be independent, unattached, and free To praise, support and be influenced by others To influence and direct the behaviour of others To entertain, shock, amuse and intrigue others

1

Refer to Freuds theory in appendix A1. Refer to section 11 for the role of identity in aggression. Refer to section 63 for the ways in which the suffering of people can be manipulated into aggression. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

50

Harm avoidance Play Succorance

To avoid pain, suffering and illness To laugh, participate in games, sports, dancing, and parties To be nursed, supported, protected, loved, advised, guided

8 The Role of the Emotions The emotions are engaged by the natural incentives to prepare us for an action that will satisfy them. Amongst the many emotional states we experience are joy, anger, hate, love, tranquillity, wonder, guilt and amazement. All the emotions are geared towards our survival. We feel intense pain if we hurt ourselves and this motivates us to remove the cause. We experience pleasant feelings when we satisfy our other needs such as the pleasure of eating a tasty meal or making love. Under certain circumstances even fear and anxiety may be pleasurable. We enjoy roller coaster rides, parachuting and bungi-jumping, feelings that may perhaps be beneficial in dangerous situations or when exploring the unknown. The biological signal or turn-on for food or hunger is a low blood-sugar level. Similarly, the biological signal or turn-on for oxygen is the build up of carbon monoxide in the blood. However, hunger can also be turned on by the sight or smell of a good meal. Hunger ensures that we obtain food while sex ensures that we can reproduce and survive as a species. Biological signals or stimuli activate a particular drive to perform some function. The emotions amplify these signals and utilise our learning capacity to prepare us for a behaviour that will consummate or satisfy the particular drive. The word emotion is derived from the Latin movere - to move or set in motion.

Figure 8 The human brain may be viewed as consisting of three parts - the oldest or reptilian brain, the next oldest or limbic system and the latest or neocortex.

Biological signals are thought to originate in the older or reptilian part of the brain. The emotions have been linked to the next oldest or limbic system of the © 1997 Allan Sztab

51

brain while the processes of thinking and rationalising take place in the latest part of the brain or neocortex. The triangle represents a hierarchy of control and the reptilian part of the brain is geared towards operating without any conscious intervention by the neocortex or thinking part of the brain. It is possible, by thinking or rationalising, to control some of the biological signals or emotions but the degree to which we can do so varies greatly from person to person. We saw earlier how the tremendous power and capacity of the brain is necessary to meet the demands that are made on it by spoken language. It is no coincidence that thinking takes place in the neocortex which is the most recently developed portion of the brain. Our ability to reason is nothing other than the thinking of the emotions. Reasoning is a tool that enhances our emotional ability to satisfy our needs and is the servant of the emotions. The ability to control conscious reactions to external events isn't found to the same extent in animals whose cortex is not as fully developed as that of humans. Research suggests that with certain judgements 'the older part of the brain is responding more quickly or immediately, before the newer, cognitively oriented part of the brain has time to function.' (McClelland) Because they stem from the older or more primitive part of our brain emotions can be impulsive or instantaneous and it isn't necessary to summon the rational or thinking part of our brain. 1 There is evidence that the emotional response to a stimulus occurs before the stimulus is even consciously recognised, and the rapid emotional response we give to all types of physiological arousal is determined entirely by the meaning or understanding we give to a particular situation. Some people might find the gentle rocking and swaying of a train or ship to be sensual or comforting as do infants who are rocked to induce sleep. Some people find the relief that follows the build-up of anxiety in certain sports and activities pleasurable and this sensation can often lead to sexual stimulation. Once in an emotional state of preparedness such as anger or joy, that particular emotion tends to override any other concern. The presence or absence of stimuli can also override the ability to consciously control the emotions. For example, 1

Refer to section 61 for the possibility of making logical, rational and moral responses.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

52

the knowledge that some pleasures today may be dangerous in the future will not evoke any fear, so warnings about the threat of Aids or the dangers associated with smoking and cholesterol may not be heeded. On the other hand, stimuli can evoke emotions despite any information we may have concerning them. Knowing that spiders are harmless may easily be overridden by the sight of one. Knowing that planes are safe will not prevent our pulse from racing when we take a flight. Our reaction to stimuli are powerful enough to override an emotional impulse. For example, if we interpret a remark from someone as an insult then this could result in anger. On the other hand, if the remark comes from an aggressive person and there are inhibitory stimuli present such as the possibility of retaliation, then fear could arise instead. The emotions are primitive and universal. They apply to people everywhere. They are innate or fixed within our genetic development program and cannot be learnt. For example, we generally express the emotion of anger in frustrating situations where there is some obstacle that prevents us from doing something that we want to do. Similar principles apply equally to all the emotions. All that it is within our power to do is to give expression to them in accordance with how we have been taught to do so. As with internal stimuli, some people are capable of learning how to control the situations or stimuli that arouse them. Some of the emotional responses of people are so predictable that tears can easily be drawn in films or stories, especially when personal or family relationships and attachments are considered. Some favoured situations are the parting of lovers, the loss of a parent, an abandoned child finding a new home, the reuniting of a child with a lost father, mother or grandparent. The emotion of love is notorious for overriding any practical or rational considerations. There are many reasons why people fall in love - the satisfaction of sexual desires, to provide excitement or variety, or to combat loneliness. The view has even been expressed that loneliness plays a very great role because at birth we are at one with the world and haven't yet developed a sense of identity, of being separate from other objects and people. This sense of identity and feeling of aloneness grows as we develop. Falling in love with somebody else provides the illusion that we are no longer alone and that in this sense two © 1997 Allan Sztab

53

identities have now merged. It is believed that this merging of identities provides an escape from loneliness, the feeling that there is someone else who thinks and feels the same way that we do. This is the feeling that provides the exhilaration and euphoria that accompanies love, the feeling that anything is now possible. However, this feeling wanes over time and ties in with other theories which suggest that physiologically men and women may not be geared towards a lifetime of monogamy.1 Some researchers believe that the courting ritual of people is little different to that of other animals and they have identified a five-fold sequence of events leading to the pairing of couples from their observations of people at singles clubs. First a person makes their presence known. This could be as simple as walking into a room full of people. Like many other animals such as the peacock, appearances are important and much time is spent on looking attractive. The second step is to seek out and obtain a look of approval from a member of the opposite sex. This is performed by gestures and body language, a language that existed before verbal language. It is estimated that the facial muscles are capable of over 2,000 different expressions. These gestures are also subject to cultural influences. Once again this body language is common to other animals. The third step is to communicate verbally with the interested party. A voice conveys much information and we have already mentioned the different effects that particular sounds have on males and females. If all goes well the fourth step is to make physical contact and, interestingly enough, it is the female who will most often make this first contact by touching the man's hand or patting his arm. The fifth step is for the touch to be returned and once this has been completed the male and female begin to mimic or co-ordinate their gestures. Having satisfactorily completed these five steps the couple have now paved the way towards a more intimate and possibly long-term relationship. There is little doubt as to the power of love, yet any need that remains unsatisfied can become very unpleasant. If we are hungry our behaviour will be dominated by attempts to satisfy it.2 It is essential in a case like this that we are able to tolerate some degree of frustration or else it could interfere with the 1 2

Refer to section 13 for research that seems to support this conclusion. Refer to the experience of the Andes survivors in section 5.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

54

attempt to satisfy our needs. A hungry hunter must therefore be able to maintain some control over the frustration relating to the delay in satisfying his hunger. In some cases if an incentive is turned on but not satisfied then after some length of time the desire to satisfy it might even diminish and disappear. The need for some control is also required because we have to determine and give priority to the satisfaction of that incentive which is most important at any given time, be it the desire for food, sex or to avoid danger. Once an incentive has been turned-on and an emotion engaged it is also essential that the emotion is turned-off when it has been satisfied. This is often achieved by producing the opposite emotion. There is evidence 'showing that not only is pain often followed by pleasure but pleasure is often followed by pain'.1 If we are hungry and eat a meal, the mere sight of more food might repulse us. A pleasure taken to excess might become painful. Malfunctions in any of these regulatory mechanisms could lead to over-reactions to stimuli, resulting in excessive rage, misery, jealousy or depression. Pleasure depends on the change from one state to another, and the degree of pleasure will vary to the extent of the change. For example, if we had been pensively waiting for the results of an examination, job application, or medical test, the relief we would feel on obtaining a positive result could vary from a state of joy to that of elation, depending on the importance and significance to us of the results, and on the length of time we had been waiting for them. A pleasurable sensation would be enhanced if we were in a state of severe pain before it commenced. However, pleasure disappears with continuous satisfaction, unlike pain which persists until the underlying cause is removed. Continuous pain is necessary because until the source is removed a response is required, while with pleasure no further response is required so the signalling system is shut off. What this means is that the body is geared more towards the avoidance of pain than that of providing continuous pleasure. Besides the impossibility of attaining a state of perpetual pleasure, the fact that there are no regulatory mechanisms for other emotions poses a far more sinister problem. Anger and aggression have always proved useful and there are no self-imposed 1

Refer to the inability of the body to maintain a constant state of pleasure in section 66.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

55

limitations on them other than those of the environment. The survival strategy of sheer size is successfully used by the elephant, and the size of pre-historic animals is another case where sheer size proved useful. In other animals what proves useful may be speed, agility or disguise. It can only be surmised that human anger, cruelty, hate, greed, lust, possessiveness and jealousy all proved useful at one time and that no internal limitations to the scope of their expression were required because environmental forces were capable of imposing limits on them. However, when humans developed the power to control and mould the environment these limitations were no longer so effective. Thus the way was paved for the unlimited expression of greed, hatred, resentment and aggression.1 In addition, there are certain mechanisms of the mind that, even when functioning normally, can nevertheless prove hazardous as their powerful yet necessary grip can keep us tied to behavioural patterns of the past.

1

Section 63 illustrates how people can be manipulated if their desires are strong.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

56

Chapter Three Mechanisms Of The Mind 9 Processing Speed And Defence Mechanisms The more information we have at our disposal the easier it is for us to understand and give meaning to the many situations and events that affect us. The capacity of the brain is unlimited and the vast amount of information it contains creates a problem when it is required to process all this information quickly. Researchers have only recently begun to understand some of the mechanisms the brain employs to achieve this speed and some of the short cuts it takes to do so. The complicated process of vision serves as a good illustration: To produce a continuous and internal representation of the external world the brain has to process and interpret vast amounts of information almost instantaneously so that we can understand what it is we are actually seeing. We see colour, detect motion, identify shapes, gauge distance and speed and judge the size of faraway objects. We see in three dimensions even though images fall on the retina in two. We fill in blind spots, automatically correct distorted information and erase irrelevant images such as our nose and the blood vessels of the eye. This complex processing is handled by different parts of the brain that work simultaneously - a malfunction or injury can lead to specific deficits such as the ability to recognise faces, see in colour, detect motion, or the misinterpretation of visual clues. The brain has to guess at the true nature of reality by interpreting a series of visual clues that help us to distinguish near from far, objects from background, motion in the outside world from motion created by the turn of the head. The brain makes certain assumptions such as the fact that objects which are close to us are larger than distant ones or that lightning comes from above. Researchers don't know whether these assumptions are built up from experience or are part of our genetic development program.(Discover) In taking short-cuts the features of a familiar face are recalled from stored images and aren't studied from scratch. This may be one of the reasons we sometimes fail to notice changes in another person's appearance such as the © 1997 Allan Sztab

57

absence of a moustache or the presence of a new hairdo. We saw in sections 2 and 3 that each memory and the meaning associated with it consists of a specific interconnection of certain neurons within the brain. The fact that our memory of specific events isn't stored in any one particular site within our brain compounds the problem of processing this vast amount of information. For us to respond quickly the brain not only has to process a continuous stream of new information but must at the same time refer to all our previous experiences in order to determine a suitable response. This process of recording and then recalling or remembering this information and the meanings associated with it is the heart of the learning process.1 If the brain never took short-cuts or made assumptions, and performed each step of a complex process such as that of vision in the conscious mind, then quick responses wouldn't be possible at all. Our very survival often requires quick responses and this is why the emotions are geared to react spontaneously. This also explains the ease with which the emotions can override or bypass the conscious and thinking parts of our brain. Driving a motor car, operating complex machinery, or avoiding danger in a competitive and hostile environment often requires quick responses. Taking the time to think about something is a luxury that we cannot always afford.2 At the same time that we have to recall past experiences it is also necessary to forget past experiences, because being consciously aware of terrifying or unpleasant experiences might lead to a constant state of fear. The ability to forget is therefore almost as important as the ability to remember. Freud called the emotion or feeling of fear anxiety and identified certain defence mechanisms that are responsible for keeping unpleasant experiences from our conscious minds. However, the benefit of having a memory is to make use of our experiences, especially those we don't wish to repeat and to do so they are confined to our subconscious minds. This mechanism is called repression or selective forgetting, and works so well that some people are unable to recall unpleasant experiences at all. The defence mechanism of repression makes it 1

Refer to section 6. Refer to section 11 for the blocking out of fear-producing stimuli, section 47 for the myth of the impartial observer and section 61 for the habituation of rational actions. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

58

very difficult to go back and correct or eliminate associations that we have formed as infants. The more information we have at our disposal the easier it is for us to understand and give meaning to the many situations and events that affect us. The powerful meaning structures of language enhance our ability to do so, but as infants we haven't yet learnt to talk. As infants we understand and respond to our first experiences primarily in relation to the pleasure, discomfort or pain they give us with the result that the meanings we give to these first experiences are based on ignorance. The mechanism of repression ensures that many of these first associations and meaning structures remain with us all our lives, sometimes in the form of complexes. It isn't surprising that many adults behave like children. There is as yet no way to re-learn all previously formed associations, with the result that the old simply cannot adapt to new situations as well as the young can. It is so difficult to break away from the associations and meanings of the past that death itself could well be essential for the long-term survival of the human species. These are the physiological mechanisms that tie us to the past. As an indication of how powerful these ties are we can consider a circus elephant that is kept from wandering by a rope that is tied around its back leg and secured to the ground by a peg. It is a very powerful animal and it isn't actually the peg that keeps it there but its memory. When the elephant was young it was tied to a heavy concrete block with a slip-chain that tightened its grip as it struggled to move away. In its attempt to escape the chain would cut into the elephants foot causing it much pain which it has never forgotten. The human tendency is also never to forget. However, it is possible to modify the meaning of past childhood events by applying our present level of knowledge and understanding to them. The attempt to recall our past experiences in order to do this is an approach that is common to many schools of psychology, but isn't, of itself, necessary for us to modify or eliminate the behaviours we may have adopted as a result of them.1 Besides taking short-cuts the brain employs other mechanisms to free our consciousness for other activities. Habituation and sensitisation are two 1

Refer to the theory of Carl Rogers in appendix A10. Refer to the possibility of selfchange in section 66 and appendix D. © 1997 Allan Sztab

59

forms of non-associative learning. 2 Performing repetitive tasks such as driving a motor car or operating a piece of machinery takes effort to concentrate on them. The mechanism of habituation relegates repetitive tasks like these to the subconscious mind and allows the conscious mind to indulge itself in other activities such as day-dreaming. The lack of concentration while performing repetitive tasks can sometimes allow small variations in our surroundings to go unnoticed by our conscious minds. In the case of a pilot, train driver, or machine operator who might be day-dreaming this can be a recipe for disaster. Another common defence is that of blaming other people or things for our anxiety, a process known as projection. A golfer who hits a bad shot might look at his club in dismay. A student who fails an examination might attribute the cause to an unfair test and not to a lack of study. Certain impulses which might be unacceptable can be projected onto others. People who are afraid of their own sexual and aggressive impulses might attribute these feelings to other people - it is they who are aggressive and sexual. Projection offers people an excuse for their actions and we are rewarded to the extent that our excuses help us avoid bearing the responsibility for them.

10 The Formation Of Character Concerns Our actions are geared towards the satisfaction of our physiological needs. The natural incentives and the emotions are the tools with which we are able to do so. Our physiological needs are continually being ranked according to their importance to our survival at any given time. When the satisfaction of a need is delayed it grows in importance and if not satisfied will eventually dominate our concerns entirely. The only way we know how to satisfy such demands is from our collection of personal experiences. From them we have learnt those actions that are likely to meet with success and those which will result in failure. Our parents and society teach us to perform certain actions which will ensure not only our survival but that of our species. To ensure we learn these right and wrong behaviours our parents and society might punish us by inflicting pain because pain is the quickest and most effective teacher of all. 2

Refer to section 6 for learning based on association.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

60

Figure 10 The formation of character concerns. Our first efforts at satisfying the incentives are guided by the natural rewards of pleasure (positive +ve) and pain (negative -ve) together with the approval, disapproval, rewards and punishments of our parents and society. These experiences are instrumental in the formation of our character concerns and self-image.

Our actions are determined to a large extent by the ranking of our physiological needs at any given time and the values or ways we have been taught to satisfy them. Thus amongst the majority of societies we learn not to eat our own kind. However, an extreme physiological need, such as hunger, is able to overcome such values as we saw in section 5 when the survivors of a plane crash decided to eat their dead companions. They were able to do so not only because their hunger was so great but because there was no immediate possibility of punishment. The certain guarantee of pain is often the only thing that prevents us from performing certain actions. In almost the same way that our physiological needs are ranked in order of importance, so too are the natural incentives. From birth onwards our immediate environment and the experiences we have in it determines the extent or importance that each incentive or combination of incentives has to play in satisfying our needs. The greater the resistance or frustration an incentive encounters, the greater the effort and attention that will be accorded to it. We thus develop a greater sensitivity or concern towards those incentives that are weakest or which require most of our attention and effort. The fact that we display a greater sensitivity or concern towards particular incentives is the primary reason that makes it possible to arouse them and accurately measure their strength. Our concerns operate at a subconscious level and, in the same way that we are able to express our desires freely in dreams, we reveal the importance to us of these subconscious concerns by the number of times they occur in our thoughts. For example, stories written by someone highly motivated © 1997 Allan Sztab

61

by power concerns will tend to contain references and words concerning power imagery such as prestige, winning, being the best etc. Our memory will also tend to be selectively biased in favour of those incidents that are associated with our strong concerns. Someone who was strongly motivated by power concerns would recall more incidents relating to issues or events that concerned power. A strong concern that a person has for an incentive will aid learning if the stimuli that turns it on are present during the learning situation. Thus, in general, a person who has a high concern for power might learn a game far easier if there is a chance of them winning. In contrast, a person who has a strong concern for pleasing others might learn the same game far easier if this would enable them to please someone. However, being more concerned with a particular incentive doesn't necessarily imply any stereotyped behaviour. These concerns are only subconscious dispositions or inclinations. Unlike our physiological needs, which vary constantly throughout our lives, the behaviour we perform to satisfy them grows progressively more difficult to change as we get older. More significantly, the concerns we have are almost fully developed by about the age of six and remain fairly constant thereafter. These are the behavioural mechanisms that tie us to the past. There are only a few natural incentives, yet the concerns we develop for them are sufficient to account for the rich diversity we find in human behaviour. There are some people whose dominant concerns can be summarised in only a few words. Jim might be accurately referred to as a 'control freak' who is dominated by a desire to control others. Jack might be referred to as 'Mr feel good' who is dominated by a desire to please others. Sandra might be referred to as a 'perfectionist' who is dominated by the desire to achieve. Brian might be referred to as a womaniser who is dominated by a desire for sexual contact. A concern might be positive or negative depending on the pleasure or pain associated with it. (See Figure 7) The association with pleasure and pain is a natural one but our interpretation of success or failure depends on the values or preferences we have learnt from our parents and society. Thus in one society a person who has strong concerns about power might express this by being the best hunter © 1997 Allan Sztab

62

whilst in another society they could display this by attempting to be the best athlete or the most wealthy. Here the concern will be associated with positive rewards or pleasures and the tendency will be towards action. The concern could equally be negatively associated with pain or discomfort and the tendency could then be towards the avoidance of action.1 The same principle applies to all the incentives, and a person could thus be positively motivated towards achieving success, or negatively motivated to avoid success because of a fear of its consequences. For example, some people might fear the jealousy of other people or the responsibilities that might accompany success. A person could be positively motivated to seek intimacy or negatively motivated to avoid intimacy because of a fear of rejection. Thus pain and pleasure ultimately guide both the behaviours we undertake and the formation of our character concerns. Positive motivations are characterised by a pleasurable sense of anticipation whilst negative motivations or fears are accompanied by a state of anxiety. Our first efforts at achieving, conforming, having an impact on, and making contact with other people and other things are therefore of prime importance in the formation of our character concerns. The first experiences, pleasures, frustrations, discomfort or pain we have are related to the satisfaction of our physiological needs and our parents play a key role in our success or failure in satisfying them. For example, it is with toilet training that we first attempt to control our bodily functions, and our experience in this regard has a marked influence on the development of our achievement concerns. Toilet training is usually the first time that our parents impose discipline on us and this experience influences the formation of our concerns for power and our attitude towards authority. We depend on our parents and other authority figures for feedback as to our effectiveness at achieving and performing tasks, and the exclamation 'look at me' is commonly heard at the poolside, beach or sports field. Such feedback is instrumental in the determination of how we come to perceive our capabilities, strengths and weaknesses. Positive confirmations of success instil in us the desire and expectation of even greater successes. This positive motivating effect 1

Refer to Fears, Phobias and Paranoia in appendix C.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

63

created by receiving encouraging feedback is something that casino operators have honed to a fine art. Every one-armed bandit is scientifically programmed to give rewards that are sufficient to encourage the expectation of bigger rewards, and anyone who has ever played one will be familiar with the power and enticement of such feedback which almost always results in our ploughing back every last coin! Our parents serve as role models and the ways in which they speak and behave towards each other, towards us and other members of our family, towards their employees and other people, are important determinants of what we will come to regard as good, bad, acceptable or unacceptable behaviour. Our parents instil in us an expectation as to the role that hard work, discipline and good fortune play in our lives. Some people might be led to believe that success or failure depends largely on good or bad fortune whilst others might come to associate success with hard work and discipline, and attribute failure to a lack of effort or ability. This is why some women fear excelling in certain activities that society considers unladylike and their performance is often inhibited when in competition with men. The values and expectations of our parents and society play a major role in the formation of our characters and moral conscience.1 The way in which our parents express their love and concern for us determines to a large degree the way in which our concerns for contact, sex and affiliation develop. Some parents turn their love and care into rewards that are conditional upon their children's behaviour.2 Some parents verbally abuse their children under the guise of scolding them but after being repeatedly told something along the lines of 'you will never amount to anything', a child might come to expect that it rightfully deserves such a fate. Another common form of abuse is to compare them with others by saying things like 'why can't you be like little Jimmy' who might have a specific talent or ability in sports or academia that they don't possess. Such admonishments can lead to the development of a low

1

Refer to section 13 for the values of society and sexual behaviour. Refer to section 59 for the values of society and punishment. 2 The behaviours referred to here are those of non-moral concern. Refer to sections 57, 61 and 65. © 1997 Allan Sztab

64

self-esteem and, to complicate matters even further, the opposite views of parents could easily lead to confusion. Right throughout this process the underlying pain or pleasure related to these concerns and behaviour is a guiding light. It is a combination of complex and little-understood factors such as these that determine the manner in which we develop a set of expectations of the way in which the external world functions, our abilities and most importantly, our self-esteem or self-worth. It is thus common for people to blame their parents for many of their shortcomings and in many cases they are justified in doing so. Besides disciplining children with real or imaginary threats of pain other far more subtle forms of coercion often commence from birth. An example of this might be when a parent tells a child from the moment of birth that 'with hands like this you can only be a doctor'. This kind of wishful thinking might be expressed throughout the child's life and it wouldn't be surprising to find that when it comes to selecting a career they choose one in medicine. It is beyond the scope of this book to explore the large and continually growing number of theories which attempt to explain how these concerns might be influenced during a person's development. In this respect a variety of psychological theories of behaviour are briefly outlined in appendix A and illuminate some of the possibilities governing their formation although there is insufficient research to confirm any one of them. Researchers have identified certain characteristics that seem to be indicative of people who have developed strong concerns towards certain of the incentives such as those for achievement, power, variety and contact, and some of these are briefly outlined below. Achievement and power concerns Studies on achievement indicate that achievement concerns are strongly influenced by the way we cope with toilet training and feeding schedules as these are the first experiences infants have with controlling their bodily functions. What still remains unknown are the reasons a person high in achievement concerns will continually seek ever greater challenges. People who display high levels of achievement concerns tend to prefer moderately difficult tasks that shouldn't be so easy that anyone could do them or so difficult that they © 1997 Allan Sztab

65

will fail. In moderate risk tasks they prefer to take personal responsibility and like to be able to see how well they are doing so they can attribute their success to their own effort. They like to take short-cuts and are more likely than others to resort to cheating. Studies suggest that if children learn to associate pleasure with aggressive or sexual impacts they could develop strong power concerns. However, if they are punished for these behaviours they could develop negative associations and inhibitions with having impacts in these areas and possibly in other areas as well. This could lead to them developing a negative self-image. A fear of failure is strongly associated with being punished or criticised for failing. Unlike those with high achievement concerns those who fear failure will tend to avoid moderate tasks. They will choose either easy tasks with a low risk of failure or very difficult tasks where their failure can then be attributed to the level of difficulty involved. They will tend to perform better at tasks if they believe they are succeeding at them. However, if they hold a strong belief that they will be negatively judged then their performance will be poor. Child rearing practices will also vary from culture to culture and the experiences of a particular cultural group can exert an influence. The children of 'parents who have lost power and been oppressed, like the Jews in Nazi Germany or unemployed black males in the United States, tend to develop a strong power motive, perhaps in retaliation.' (McClelland) In societies where people were suppressed such as Blacks in America and South Africa, assertiveness was fraught with danger and often led to the development of a fear of success. People with high power concerns strive to be assertive and have more emotional problems. Socially they are able to exercise their influence by pursuing careers in politics, 'teaching, psychology, the ministry, business, or journalism'. They also tend to collect symbols of power such as prestigious luxury goods and credit cards. They tend to select friends they can lead who are not in a position to compete with them. Men are more likely to drink and fight despite the fact that the power motive generally functions in the same way for both sexes. The reason is probably because women are generally taught to adopt © 1997 Allan Sztab

66

more passive values that prepare them for the social responsibilities of nursing and taking care of children. This emphasises the importance of social values as determinants of our behaviour, particularly when we consider that unlike most physiological drives such as hunger and sex there are no builtin mechanisms to signal their satisfaction. This paves the way for unlimited hatred, aggression, resentment, greed and jealousy1 . People who are highly motivated by power concerns stand a good chance of one day becoming influential politicians. 'The fact that Nixon was forced to resign for using illegal short-cuts [theft, burglary and tapping of telephone calls] to reach his goals is dramatic confirmation of the tendency of individuals who have high achievement concerns to behave dishonestly if necessary to achieve their goals.. Winter also showed that the higher a presidents concern for power.. the more likely it was that the country would go to war during his administration and the less likely that he would favour strategic arms limitation.' (McClelland) Possibly the most disturbing thing of all is that after Nixon was impeached he never admitted that he had done anything wrong but held firmly to the belief that his actions were fully justified. He died never having apologised for betraying the trust of a nation.

1

Refer to section 60 for the social value accorded to high achievers who distributed their excess wealth amongst the community. © 1997 Allan Sztab

67

Variety concerns Inquisitiveness or curiosity, novelty and the need for stimulation are all derived from the need to have to get up and move about in order to survive. As we saw earlier, exploratory activities play an important role in obtaining information which could be of use either immediately or at some time in the future. Slight variations in things could indicate the presence of a predator so they are sought after. Manufacturers of products as diverse as motor cars and vacuum cleaners are forever introducing new models which cater for this incentive. The danger is that unlike most physiological drives such as hunger or sex, which have a point of satisfaction, curiosity is insatiable. As soon as something new has been uncovered boredom sets in once more. In much the same way that we habituate repetitive tasks we become habituated to a situation, be it of pleasure or hardship, and the greater the change from one situation to another the greater the emotion that will accompany it.1 Extreme boredom is often a major factor that leads people to seek new and novel ways to find excitement by way of gambling, sexual experimentation, drink and drug abuse. Some people may even turn to crime to alleviate the pangs of boredom. It is novelty that sells Sunday newspapers and many magazines: novel accidents and deformities, ordinary people doing extraordinary things and extraordinary people doing ordinary things. It is excitement that draws crowds to accident scenes and blood sports, and many accidents have been caused by people trying to alleviate boredom whilst performing mundane or routine tasks. In one instance the crew of a DC10 airliner decided to race an engine just for the hang of it with the result that the engine exploded. The explosion created a hole in the aircraft next to a passenger who was promptly sucked out of it when the cabin lost its pressure. Contact concerns The incentive for contact is evidenced by our concerns towards affiliating or making social contact with others, seeking their approval and intimacy and a fear of rejection. If a person is deprived of interaction with others whom they wish to affiliate with then their desire to do so will be intensified. Being denied 1

Refer to section 66 for the practical effect of these swings on our actions.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

68

membership of a specific or exclusive club or social circle can intensify the desire to join it. The learning skills of people who are motivated by strong concerns for approval are enhanced if their performance will lead to the pleasing of others. Some people will even go so far as to take up a new sport or hobby in an effort to please those whose affiliation is desired. People high in affiliation concerns fear rejection or disapproval and are so anxious about their relationships with others that they constantly seek reassurance. People who fear rejection will tend to favour people of lower prestige or status than themselves. A loss of love as a child due to the death, illness, divorce or abandonment by a parent can also lead to a loss of self-esteem and a concern with the approval of others. Those with a low sense of self-esteem will be more likely to give in towards the inferior decisions of group or peer pressure. A fear of failure and rejection could be closely related and both may be derived from a need for social approval. It is known that people who are anxious or fearful get relief by being in contact with others. A desire or concern to please others can be dangerous in a person who also has a high concern for power, especially if they manage to obtain a position of influence or leadership. This was the case with Neville Chamberlain the Prime Minister of Britain in 1937. He had lost both his mother and grandmother at the age of six. It is possible that his concern for approval was instrumental in leading him to conclude that Hitler liked him and could be trusted. After his third visit to Hitler he returned with an agreement and the now famous words 'Peace in our time'. Shortly thereafter Hitler invaded Poland which event led to the commencement of World War II. In contrast with those who have a concern for approval, those who have a desire for intimacy are not concerned with pleasing others, and will favour the recollection of memories concerning intimate moments as opposed to those of pleasing others. They will tend to be more selective in the people they choose to be intimate with and display more empathy towards them. A particularly noticeable characteristic of people with a high concern for intimacy is their tendency to touch other people affectionately in a non-threatening way.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

69

11 The Rational Mind 'Men are only slightly different to animals. Most of them throw this difference away.' (Confucious) The natural incentive of consistency enables us to observe the regularities in our environment. By associating one event with another we are able to anticipate the approach of danger or pain before it actually arrives. Language gives us the power to consciously manipulate large tracts of our experiences. We are thus capable of tracing a sequence of events and predicting the future outcome of our present actions with a degree of certainty and clarity that is unique amongst all animals.1 This ability to observe and predict was a key factor in the separation of behaviours into those which proved useful or good and those which proved harmful or bad. Learning enables us to utilise the experiences of our past and for this reason the very first interpretation we make is that of recognition. Whenever we look at something or find ourselves in a particular situation the brain subconsciously determines whether we recognise or are familiar with it. Let's say we meet someone in the street. If we recognise them the meanings that are associated with them will be subconsciously recalled. These meanings might be pleasant or unpleasant, and we will respond accordingly. This entire process takes place subconsciously and at such a speed that it is almost instantaneous despite the fact that a comparison is being made between all the images of faces that we know. If we don't recognise the person then they represent a potential danger to us because we have no way of knowing if they are friend or foe. Immediately we begin to interpret the visual clues they provide us with. We study their features, mannerisms or body language, to see whether we recognise any of them. If these visual clues can be associated with those of someone we already know then those meanings, pleasant or unpleasant, that we associate with them will surface and form the foundation for our assessment of this total stranger. This is the reason that some people seem to have friendly and trusting faces whilst others look aggressive or foreboding. If we have been taught that people who have dark skin or long hair are dangerous then we will be suspicious or wary of them.

1

Refer to section 58 for the belief that everything has a cause.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

70

Faced with the unfamiliar we make snap judgements, irrespective of how irrational they are, and often we stick dogmatically to them. The proverb 'first impressions last the longest' is not without substance. This is the bias and prejudice we project onto the external world - one that is in accordance with the most important function of memory - to learn from it. These snap judgements or feelings of intuition, despite being biased or prejudicial are often useful because taking the time to think things over carefully might be fatal when a speedy response is required - procrastination is a luxury that we are scarcely suited for.1 If we are familiar with our surroundings it is comforting, because we are in a better position to anticipate or predict what might happen from one moment to the next. If we are unfamiliar with our surroundings or with other people we feel slightly anxious and remain alert and cautious. Learning more about an unfamiliar place or stranger helps us to overcome these feelings. Like two boxers sizing each other up during the early rounds of a fight, we converse with strangers to discover their intentions. Faced with an obstacle, such as a stream of water, we test to see how deep it is or what lies below its surface. However, if we are unable to obtain answers to our questions, and there is no way to obtain any appropriate response, the object of our attention will remain unknown. What cannot be known always carries the potential for harm. In such a case we can avoid what is unknown or comfort ourselves by distorting our reality we make guesses and generalisations to reduce the fear or anxiety we may feel. 'It is far easier to stay with what is familiar than to change. We tend to fabricate or colour our experiences based on what is most familiar - we are from the very first accustomed to lying or to express it more pleasantly we are more of an artist than we realise. To see and retain what is new requires more strength - more morality.' (Nietzsche) The desire to reduce fear and anxiety is the natural incentive we have to distort reality - we want to believe we know or are familiar with what is unknown. These distortions usually evolve through three stages which could vary in time from a day to that of a few generations. In their infancy we call them opinions, in their teens we call them beliefs and when mature we call them faith or 1

Refer to section 47 for the myth of impartial observation.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

71

convictions. Belief is the uncritical acceptance of an opinion as being true, while faith or conviction is the placing of our complete trust in a belief or system of beliefs.1 Distortions of reality will nearly always arise out of a fear of things which are unknown, especially if there is little chance of acquiring any information about them. In this category we have the fear of death, the fear of losing anything which is valued, such as a herd of animals and a harvest which is dependent upon the vagaries of the elements. Fear and anxiety are therefore the source of much superstition, prejudice, self-delusion and crooked thinking.2 Fear is the force behind free enterprise and capitalism because without money a person could suffer from a lack of food and shelter. Money can bring security concerning our basic needs together with the power to influence and control people and events. The power of money to gain influence was amply demonstrated by the presidential candidate Ross Perot who self-financed his first attempt to enter politics in the 1992 American elections. Because we conform and adhere to an accepted set of beliefs and expectations our range of behaviour is kept within their boundaries so that we continue to play the same tune over and over again, like a gramophone with a needle that is stuck in the groove of a record. The desire to reduce fear and anxiety is the force that glues us to them and if we are not happy or content within the boundaries they impose upon us then we should consider changing them by subjecting them to critical appraisal. Our ancestors were confronted with many things that they never knew or understood, and began to make assumptions about them. Pain and discomfort were their guides. Those actions which led to the satisfaction of their needs, or that of their family, group, or society, without creating any obvious pain or discomfort, were valued and became established or customary ways of behaviour.3 Explanations for their continued use and effectiveness were based on their limited knowledge and were believed to be true. In the same way that the meanings and interpretations an infant gives to its first experiences are based on ignorance, so too were those of our ancestors. It was only through 1

Refer to section 32 for belief and truth. Refer to section 66 for the importance of escaping from fear and appendix E for habits of thought that might reinforce our fears. 3 Refer to section 13 and the factors that influence the sexual values of society. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

72

bitter experience that doubt or scepticism concerning many of these customs arose. Human history is riddled with rival claims to certain knowledge and the right way to behave.1 Customs are passed down from parent to child and vary from one group of people to another, as we would expect, due to differences in their experiences and environment. However, they all provided stability and a sense of certainty in an ever-changing world - an anchor of understanding in a sea of doubt; a set of beliefs and expectations, or a frame of reference from which to view the world. Customs and the beliefs that accompany them furnish us with a sense of individual and group identity, of who and what we are. As such they are often regarded as sacred or unchangeable, and any new idea that questions them may be viewed as an attack against life itself. The behaviour of any person or thing which is inconsistent with our beliefs or expectations of them alerts us to the possibility of danger. It is only when faced with suffering at the hands of powerful and uncontrollable forces or events, that both individuals and society often have no choice but to question the adequacy of their cherished system of beliefs, and to accept the delusional quality of many of the expectations, hopes and dreams upon which they are based. History never fails to bear testimony to this fact, particularly during times of upheaval brought about by events such as climatic changes, wars, the agricultural and industrial revolutions and the information revolution which has only recently commenced.2 A close scrutiny of our own past will also never fail to reveal this same process which surrounds events such as divorce, death, illness and changes in one's fortunes. In short - we rely on these painful experiences to hurt and shock us into learning. Customs vary depending on the experiences of a group or tribe. However, in the same way that the history of language was lost in the mists of time, so too are many of the practical and mundane circumstances that gave rise to a particular custom or belief.3 There is no shortage of myths based on an ignorance of these factual circumstances and rather than determine what these may be it is far easier to believe in myths. Many of our beliefs and the behaviours they tie us to 1

Refer to section 32 for the division of thinkers into two schools of thought. Refer to section 23 and 24 for changes in belief due to conquest and suffering. 3 Refer to the history of language in section 3 and to the ritual warfare of the Maring in section 19. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

73

could thus be based on myths which are rooted in the distant past and whose value is no longer capable of satisfying our present needs. As children we conform to the customs, beliefs and regulations that are set down by our parents. We are trained to obey them without question and we have little choice as our lives depend on them. They have the ability and a variety of means to punish us, ranging from the withholding of food or privileges to acts of physical violence. This process continues from birth and intrudes into almost every area of our private and social life. Thus we first learn how to walk safely on the roads and later, if we become motorists, to obey traffic rules and regulations. Learning to stop at traffic lights and drive on the correct side of the road makes for a stable and predictable environment. Each time we drive through an intersection we trust and expect that others will conform to the same rules and regulations. We thus become accustomed to acting in conformity with others especially when we aren't sure how to act. 'In a well-known experiment Asch (1951) demonstrated that if subjects hear three or four others say a shorter line is equal in length to a longer line, most will conform to the group opinion despite clear visual evidence to the contrary.' (McClelland) We are taught to trust, obey and respect figures of authority be they politicians, religious leaders, policemen or traffic officers. In the animal world leaders have to constantly earn their positions by displays of superiority, but this is seldom the case with humans, where people are conditioned to accept competence based on a person's title or position. At war crimes trials, such as that at Nuremberg after World War II, the most oft-cited reason for perpetrating horrific crimes was the 'following of orders'. In a now famous experiment conducted by Millgram, volunteers continued to administer large shocks to other volunteers, despite knowing they were dangerous and while being able to hear their screams - again for the same reason, 'following orders'. The incentive to conform or obey 'is a fatal flaw nature has designed into us and which in the long run gives our species only a moderate chance of survival.' (Millgram)

© 1997 Allan Sztab

74

In the same way that we are accustomed to obeying orders from figures of authority we can also be persuaded that there is a danger even when there isn't1 . Being able to create or imagine situations or things that are non-existent is unique to humans who are encouraged to do so by their parents and society. Unlike animals who can only perceive immediate danger, humans have imagination and foresight and will react against imaginary threats. It isn't even necessary for the threats to be real as long as they are thought or believed to be real. 'In animals, intraspecific fighting is usually of distinctive advantage. In addition, all species manage as a rule to settle their disputes without killing one another; in fact, even bloodshed is rare. Man is the only species that is a mass murderer, the only misfit in his own society' (Tinbergen) We can react to a threat in one of two ways - we can either flee or fight. Aggression is a natural response but fleeing is the most life-preserving action. It isn't surprising that to get people to fight in wars it is often necessary to manipulate them with threats of certain death, fear of being called a coward, promises of rewards such as women and gold, and even by the use of drugs. 2 Because our language, customs and beliefs provide us with an identity, a sense of who we are and who we belong to, they present us with a great problem. Animals use their instincts to determine friends from foe while humans must rely on what they have been taught. The failure to identify and empathise with other people who speak a different language, dress differently and have different customs nullifies a fundamental natural barrier to killing our own kind. It is difficult to kill anything or anyone with whom you can identify, even a pet insect. We may have been taught any number of prejudices about people who dress in a specific way or have certain features, so that when we meet them we automatically attribute these features to them. This is how we can be manipulated into projecting the prejudices of other people onto strangers and this makes it easy to justify acts of unprovoked and unwarranted aggression against them.3 In contrast, most other animals survive by behaviour that is to a 1 2 3

Refer to section 54 and appendix E for the tricks and traps of language. Refer to manipulation by the offering of rewards and punishments in section 63. Refer to section 66 for suspending judgement as a means of overcoming prejudices.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

75

large extent fixed or innate. Their actions are geared solely towards survival and in this sense are rational. No other living organism will die for abstract ideas such as honour, glory and pride. No other living organism will die to further the objectives of abstractions such as God, nation, fatherland, or state. It isn't possible to persuade or convince any other living organism to act today for what may or may not come tomorrow; to accept suffering today for a promise of something bigger or better tomorrow; to accept the existence of things which it cannot sense; or to believe that they are in some way superior to others of their own species.1 Acting contrary to our set of beliefs and expectations is the source of guilt.2 Soldiers who are taught 'not to kill' may suffer terribly from guilt as a result of having to kill the enemy in battle. Politicians misleadingly refer to these guilty feelings as 'post combat trauma'. To combat these guilt feelings some distortion of reality or rationalisation is required, and in almost every human conflict aggression is justified either before or after the action by dragging up some old grievance or allegations or holding beliefs like 'it is for their own good' or 'for the greater glory of x'. To avoid guilt it is common for the enemy to be dehumanised first. This is easily accomplished by calling them names such as sub-humans, dogs, vermin, geeks or huns, and once completed the stage is set for the most vile acts of barbarism and cruelty which the participants seem to enjoy. Researchers have established a link between anger-excitement, sex and pleasure, and this could well explain the pleasure that seems to be obtained from violent acts of rape, torture and cruelty. With humans the context or surroundings in which the excitement or stimuli occurs is of paramount importance. For example, sexual arousal cues such as being gently massaged mightn't lead to sexual arousal in the context of receiving treatment by a physiotherapist as opposed to being gently massaged by our partner at a party. Interpretation and context thus play a key role and in the context of war it is easy to see how barbarous acts might easily be committed and enjoyed. Paradoxically, many displays of power actually reveal the weakness of the perpetrators who feel they have no option other than to resort to these methods. 1 2

Refer to section 58 for errors of reason and section 63 for manipulation. Refer to section 59 for guilt as punishment.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

76

Because we tend to form strong concerns based on our success or lack of success at satisfying the natural incentives, we could find that people who seek power do so to make up for an inability or weakness to have an impact or control events during their development.1 The powerful force to conform to a set of beliefs and expectations is therefore enhanced by the guilt and suffering that is felt when we don't comply with them. So much so that people will specifically distort their reality to keep their beliefs and expectations intact. People who have been abused or assaulted at the hands of a person whose authority they have been taught to respect often feel guilty and personally responsible for the act. Questioning such a major part of their beliefs and expectations is often resisted because it could lead to confusion and a loss of orientation which might be severe enough to drive a person to suicide. A resistance to questioning accepted beliefs is also common to society as a whole.2

The powerful tendency to rationalise or justify our past and future actions is well researched. A particularly strong attempt will be made to justify or rationalise those actions or decisions that have been voluntarily undertaken, especially if a person has invested time or money in doing so. In one study it was found that one person could be led to dislike another whom they had voluntarily given an electric shock in order to justify having done so. The greater a persons sense of self-esteem the greater the reliance they will place on their actions, and the more likely they will be to justify or defend them. In a nutshell - the negative incentive of pain and the fear or anxiety it engenders leads to the adoption of a set of behaviours and beliefs. Guilt and the rational mind work together to ensure that we continue to perform and justify them. It is beliefs that create reason and not reason that creates belief. The rational mind can distort our perception of reality in an attempt to protect us from unpleasant or fear-producing stimuli and any other activities that might be associated with them. The fear of the unknown is so powerful that a belief in a fictitious cure is even capable of alleviating suffering. Although our ancestors 1

Refer to section 10 for the development of character concerns. Refer to section 64 for some of the difficulties experienced in questioning our system of beliefs. Refer to appendix G for the resistance of society towards the theories of Freud and the effect on children of being sexually abused. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

77

never knew the complexities of human behaviour as we know it today, they discovered this quirk of human nature and in time refined it into one of the easiest yet most effective methods of behavioural control and manipulation ever developed. They noticed that if a person was sick or suffering they could be comforted merely by kind words or human contact and modern research confirms this. There was something else which was even more interesting to them: even if a sick or suffering person was given an ineffective remedy to take it would nevertheless alleviate their suffering provided they believed it would cure them. Their desire to get better was so strong that they would follow the prescribed remedy without question. Moreover, even if they never recovered of their own accord they would still continue to follow the prescribed remedy, as long as its failure to work could never be blamed on the remedy itself but on their failure to observe it faithfully. (Today our bookstores are full of books selling the concept that the power of belief can cure.) It didn't take these early psychologists long to discover that this basic principle had an almost unlimited range of applications. If they wanted to get people to follow a prescribed set of rules which they had devised, then all that was required was to disguise them as a remedy for a common ailment. The more common the ailment or the suffering the larger the number of people there would be to take the cure, and the more effective or comforting it would be for them. We shall see in part two how such conditions arose and the ways in which the exploitation of this serious flaw first commenced in earnest.1

1

Refer to section 26 for the establishment of suffering as punishment and to section 63 for the manipulation that such a belief opens us to. © 1997 Allan Sztab

78

Thoughts Memory or the meaning of our experiences are all unique connections that are formed between our brain cells. Our characters are determined primarily by our earliest experiences. Our personal identity or the I we refer to is based on a lifetimes accumulation of memories or experiences. What would happen if we lost our memory? Would we be the same person with the same character and sense of identity? Would it ever be possible to become the same person again? When our brain dies our memory dies with it - how is it possible for our personal identity to survive, be resurrected or reincarnated?

Things To Remember Any living organism collects, interprets and processes information in order to interact with the environment around it. Sensory organs are the primary means of collecting this information and survival is a measure of their success in doing so. A key survival strategy is that of learning which enables an organism to make variable responses to environmental conditions. Verbal language enables humans to communicate rapidly by the conscious manipulation of vast amounts of information and thereby to discover regularities in nature and the long-term consequences of actions. We learn from our parents, society and our own experiences. Pain or punishment enhances learning and instils in us the habit of giving unconditional obedience. We are comfortable with the familiar and fear the unfamiliar to such an extent that we colour our world and in some cases distort our sense of reality so as to live with the familiar. This is the source of bias, prejudice and selfdeception which may or may not be beneficial to us. We develop a set of beliefs and expectations of how people and the world around us behave and become habituated to live in accordance with them. Pain or discomfort is for the majority of people the only way in which they will be prepared to change or modify their beliefs and expectations. © 1997 Allan Sztab

79

PART TWO HISTORY

© 1997 Allan Sztab

80

© 1997 Allan Sztab

81

Chapter Four The Dawn 12 The Spread And Development Of Ideas

Any form of life must interact with the environment that surrounds it. Changes in the environment must be adapted to, and this adaptation will in turn have an impact on the environment. Climatic changes could lead to the intensification of competition for other sources of food which might lead to the extinction of less competitive species and any species that are reliant upon them in a complex domino-like effect. Nowhere else is this continuous cycle of action-reactionaction demonstrated more clearly than in human history. Freed from their biological strait-jacket, and with an immensely powerful brain, humans were now able to shape their environment and express their emotions with an ever increasing force. It seems almost to be a law that any change will be certain to produce unexpected and sometimes unknown consequences. In adapting to the forces of nature humans put into play forces of their own such as those attending the commencement of agriculture and commercial trade which would have farreaching effects. The earliest writings known are those Mesopotamian and Egyptian texts which were written on rolls of papyrus and etched onto the walls of monuments, tombs and tablets. They take us back to approximately 4,000BC. However, from archaeological excavations, artefacts, utensils and other remains that have been unearthed, we are able to penetrate even further into the past. Here we catch glimpses of the lives and thoughts of our ancestors and the events which moulded their attitudes and influenced their behaviour - the forerunners of many © 1997 Allan Sztab

82

of the beliefs and attitudes we still have today. Researchers have fortunately had the advantage of studying many ancient cultures at first hand. Although they vary considerably, cross-cultural influences are evident. There have always been divergent opinions as to whether a new innovation in one part of the world could spread to other parts, or whether there were multiple but similar innovations. Some things, like the type and style of housing a tribe chose to build, would be influenced by the materials available in any given area. However, ideas are free from any restrictions and can travel easily over vast distances. The similarity of stories and myths from all quarters of the world bears testimony to this. In many instances they have been modified, perhaps to suit local conditions; yet the underlying idea or principle remains. Those ideas, inventions and stories that impressed people with their practical application, wisdom or wit, were almost surely to be the favoured topics of conversation with other strangers. In this way beliefs, practices and the inventions of one culture were often borrowed by other cultures. In 1987 an American professor on tour in China was shown 113 mummies in a museum which had been dug up by Chinese archaeologists. Some of them were estimated to be 4,000 years old. A family of man, woman and child stood out - they were white Europeans. Their clothes displayed weaving techniques similar to that found in Europe in the same period. Two cartwheels found where they were buried were similar to wheels found in the Ukraine dating to approximately 2,000BC. The find provides further evidence that even before recorded history there was contact between East and West, shattering the myth that Chinese civilisation developed independently. (You) People moved around over vast distances and took their possessions with them. Identical solutions to problems are few and far between. However, it is possible that humans would respond in almost the same way to similar conditions. It is almost certain, for example, that agriculture originated in more than one location. While it isn't possible to give an accurate account of the past there is sufficient evidence of the way in which humans reacted to climatic changes. A good account of the early Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilisations is recorded © 1997 Allan Sztab

83

in the texts they left behind. Egypt was a large, centrally-controlled and regulated society presided over by a king or pharaoh. Under his command a host of officials and advisors saw to it that orders were carried out. Many of the problems and concerns they had still beset us today, and the business of war and conquest was already far advanced. However, our story begins much earlier than that. As long ago as 30,000BC our ancestors had already mastered the crafting of utensils and weapons out of stone and bone. It is possible that they first learnt to hunt animals by observing the techniques of predators such as lion, whose diet consists mainly of high-protein meat. As hunter-gatherers they would have lived on a diet consisting mainly of fruits, nuts, edible plants, seeds, vegetables and grubs. When possible they ate meat and fish, which is almost the exclusive diet of the Eskimo. Animal hides provided warmth and comfort. Fire caused by volcanic action and lightning or other natural causes led to the discovery that it enhanced the taste of meat. The harnessing of fire provided warmth and added security, and was also used to drive animals over cliffs. Hunting larger animals required the skills of initiative, self-confidence, patience and the willingness to kill. The bow and arrow, spear and dart enabled the killing of animals at a distance while at close quarters a club could be used. Temporary shelters were constructed which supplemented the natural shelter provided by caves and rock overhangs. Although this may seem a difficult style of life we are fortunate to be able to make comparisons with the Bushmen who are hunter-gatherers and whose lifestyle has been very well studied. They are estimated to spend roughly 3 hours per day per adult to secure an adequate food supply, despite the fact that they live on the fringe of a desert. It is also well known that primates manage to spend as much time playing and grooming as they do feeding, and for a considerable time our ancestors probably found it equally as easy to secure a living. Families and small groups were constantly on the move as the seasons or other requirements dictated, and were scattered thinly over vast territories. An argument with family, tribe or clan could be settled merely by parting and going separate ways. Compared to the majority of subsequent lifestyles it is most © 1997 Allan Sztab

84

likely that when ancient texts referred to a 'golden age' or 'garden of Eden', this was the period they were referring to - a time when there was plenty of easily obtainable food, land and shelter. However, the ease or difficulty of life probably varied considerably from region to region and from age to age, depending on circumstances, much as it does today. As opposed to a 'golden age' some could plausibly argue that life was characterised by a continual struggle against predators, disease, the elements and rival tribes.

13 Rights and wrongs, do's and don'ts From the very outset humans had to learn how to behave. Pleasure and pain were their guides and successful or useful behaviours were encouraged and enforced. The most effective means of controlling or directing behaviour that was used by our ancestors was that of the taboo which means 'that which is forbidden'. The taboo served the same role as the modern laws we are familiar with today, and were passed on from generation to generation by gestures and rituals, then verbally, and later in written form. In certain instances some of the taboo's and practices associated with them were incorporated into the religions of a particular culture or society while others formed part of their law. As with the origin of words, the original reasons or purposes for them often became clouded in myth or legend, or were forgotten completely even though the practice remained. When a religious taboo is broken it is called a sin and an example of this would be of a Catholic person who eats meat on a Friday. When a non-religious taboo is broken it is supposed to bring bad luck; an example of this would be the spilling of salt. To rectify the sin the sinner must confess and obtain absolution, while to prevent bad luck some of the spilt salt must be thrown over the shoulder. The fact that a specific practice or belief was accepted or performed by their parents, grandparents and great-grandparents before them is even today usually deemed sufficient reason for continuing the practice or accepting the belief, despite being inappropriate for the times, and often in the face of glaring inconsistencies. Humans turned to nature for moral guidance and every natural disaster, configuration of the night sky, creature and plant was thought to carry a © 1997 Allan Sztab

85

message which could be deciphered. It is evident from a comparison of the taboo's and practices of different societies that interpretations of human behaviour vary markedly from each other. The taboo with respect to sexual relations is one such example that illustrates some of the factors that are involved in these interpretations, and the far-reaching effects they can have. Reproduction is one of the most important functions of any living organism and the human sex drive is regulated by almost every society. While marriage to more than one partner is taboo in most western civilisations, it is permitted in many other societies. The Mormons and Eskimos may have multiple wives whilst the Tibetans and Toda of India may have multiple husbands. Premarital sex and wife-sharing for hospitality are also not uncommon. In many societies in Africa and Indonesia it is common for a man to pay his wife's family to marry her, and this payment is a form of compensation to her family for the loss of her fertility to anothers family. The value of big families is clearly reflected in this custom which is still widely practised today despite over-population problems. In some societies if a man died his brother might inherit or be required to marry the widow so as to keep the children in the family. A woman might also be required to marry her dead sisters husband in similar fashion, and in both cases sexual privileges were often enjoyed beforehand in anticipation of such an event. 'This handy practice occurs in all parts of the world among peoples of the most diverse levels of cultural development. The ancient Australians made it a rule; the biblical Hebrews approved of it; and the civilised Incas provided for the inheritance of all a mans secondary wives by his younger brother, or perhaps his sons.' (Hoebel) According to researchers all living primates are promiscuous and all pairs of mammals which vary in size between male and female have more than one mate. When males are bigger than females in the animal world it is referred to as dimorphism. The variation in size is most often the result of competition between males for sexual partners. Male primates like the orang-utan and gorillas are bigger and therefore stronger than their female counterparts and also have multiple mates. Recently anthropologists have produced evidence that men © 1997 Allan Sztab

86

between 1 to 3 million years ago may have been significantly bigger than women. 'There is a social system among monkeys and apes called the multi-male troop which is essentially a promiscuous free-for-all in which one group of females and one group of males share each other, though not equally. Some such species are not dimorphic - the chimpanzee being the best example but others are highly dimorphic, such as the baboon. It is not yet possible to say whether ape-men lived in harems or multi-male troops. But a monogamous pair bond can probably be ruled out... '(Economist) It is thought that reduced competition for sex between males may have led to a reduction in their size. It is not uncommon among primates for a male to assist a female by offering protection and other forms of assistance in raising her young so as to be favourably considered as a sexual partner. There is no doubt that a woman would require assistance due to the long period of nurturing that humans require and as with primates and other mammals some organisation and control is necessary. Throughout history men have been relied upon for protection and to this extent they are physically better equipped than women. There are theories that attempt to explain the tendency for men and women to fall in love with each other and then to drift apart after a period of four to seven years. According to some theorists the love between men and women leads to their union which if successful produces offspring. Love from both is then focused on the child. However, after about four to five years an infant is able to walk on its own and to assist in the gathering of food and any other duties. As a result the assistance of the male would no longer be vital and both partners would be free to select different partners if they so desired, a practice which might even be beneficial to the species. In fact, some theorists claim that sexual reproduction serves the specific purpose of spreading genetic material to enable people who are naturally immune to a particular disease to pass their immunity onto their children. Although there are rival theories the evidence thus far seems to favour this theory. Prohibitions against ethnic mixing would obviously prevent this mixing from occurring. This theory also explains the marked tendency within humans and most other animals to produce offspring with different partners. (Economist) © 1997 Allan Sztab

87

Irrespective of the size of a group of people, as long as there are children in it there comes a day when sexual partners will be required for them. Because of their close proximity to each other there would be ample opportunity for sexual encounters between family members. The taboo on incest, whether between brother and sister or parents and children, is common in almost every culture. It is a myth that this taboo is motivated to prevent handicapped offspring. It is more likely that it exists to prevent the power of the sexual emotions from destroying the unity of the family in much the same way as it would affect the relationship between two friends today. No deterioration occurs due to inbreeding and only the favourable and unfavourable traits which are already present can be passed onto the children. 'Cleopatra, the last of the Ptolemies, product of twelve generations of brother-sister marriages, was hardly a specimen of physical degeneration.' (Hoebel) The obvious choice of sexual partners for the children of a group would be from within the family, the extended family of uncles, aunts, nieces, nephews and cousins or from outside the family. Love and personal compatibility play a small role in many cultures and often the prime concern is the continuation of the family and its traditions. The rules or religious practices relating to the incest taboo varies but generally the prohibition extends as far as first cousins. Marriage between members of different cultural groups is not uncommon, and has the benefit of merging or uniting the forces, wealth and power of two different groups. However, marrying outside of one's cultural or religious group is often prohibited and subject to social censure. Restrictions against intermarriage may be found in the Indian caste system, amongst Catholics and Protestants. Orthodox Jews who marry out of their faith are supposed to be cast out and treated as if they were dead, even to the extent of mourning for them. The limitation of the choice of partners to those within a specific group, whether this is based on ethnicity, religious belief, nationality, or within any other arbitrary defined group may be the reason that certain distinctive features can readily be associated with persons of such groups. Even certain diseases are more common in these groups and Tay-Sachs, for example, is a genetic disorder © 1997 Allan Sztab

88

that is found almost exclusively amongst French Canadians and Orthodox Jews. Beta Thalassemia is found mainly in Mediterranean regions, Alpha Thalassemia is found mainly in the Far East, and Cystic Fibrosis is common amongst West Europeans.1 The major factors which have an influence on the rules relating to sexual relations are religious practices or taboo's, prestige and property. Religion is an influence because mixing out of one's cultural group may not be permitted; prestige because of the existence of different social classes and property because of inheritance considerations. Marriage formed an alliance between two families or groups. Then (as is often the case today) you got a lot more from marriage than merely a mate. As the family grew the problem arose as to which family a person owed their allegiance to. If they were organised by identifying with both parents then the family could grow so large within a short period of time that conflicting loyalties would be inevitable. In organising families by identifying with either the mother (matrilineal) or the father (patrilineal) these problems were overcome. The children of both sexes would belong to the group of their father, grandfather, great-grandfather ad infinitum or their mother, grandmother or great-grandmother ad infinitum. If it was the intention to keep the property of a particular group within the group then this could easily be achieved provided only men or women were allowed to inherit property as the case may be. In such a system the children of a brother and sister (cross-cousins) wouldn't be in the same family and as a result they might be permitted to marry. When a couple married they might stay with or close to the mans family in which case the lineage would probably be patrilineal and matrilineal if they stayed with or close to the womans family. Often the location of residence would be governed by economic factors. If the main activity was the working of a family-held piece of land, then the family would probably live in close proximity to each other. Inheritance of this land might pass down to the next senior family member, which would be a son in a patrilineal system or a daughter in a matrilineal system. The Iroquois Indians stayed in long houses with separate bedrooms for each family. Long houses may still be seen today in 1

Refer to section 65 for non-moral restrictions as obstacles to freedom.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

89

Malaysia. A large house is representative of a large family and may once have served as a deterrent to any would-be attackers. It has even been suggested that an advantage of a matrilineal lineage is that men from different families are forced into close contact with one another which fosters friendship and cuts down inter-family conflict. This would make it easier to organise large groups of men who could leave their homes for extended periods of time to wage war or to hunt. When the founding member of a group is so far in the past that he/she cannot be traced, we then speak of a clan as opposed to a lineage where the common ancestor is known. Because the clan couldn't trace this common ancestor there was often a myth surrounding him/her and according to these myths such an ancestor may have been a great warrior or an animal. Some of them were regarded as gods and the leader of a clan might have been a priest who served as an intermediary between the clan and their god. The clan or lineage offered security and a united front. Intermarriage between clan families provided additional clan affiliations. Tribes are made up of a number of independent clans or lineages. It was usual for each family, tribe or clan to have a representative. Initially this was a person who possessed some characteristic that was favoured by the tribe. This could have been the possession of superior strength, wisdom, talent for performing rituals or making dream interpretations.

14 The quest for certainty and the development of religion Our ancestors realised they were totally dependent on the forces of nature which held the power of life or death over all animal and plant life. The howling wind could uplift trees and if it never rained there would be no food for them or the animals they preyed upon. Erupting volcanoes would destroy everything for miles around them while molten lava annihilated everything in its path. Earthquakes were terrifying and opened holes in the ground from which nothing returned. Humans stood before nature in fear, awe and submission. These tremendous forces were called gods. It was the sun that seems to have made the most profound impression on them. As long as everyone could remember it had always risen daily in the East and moved across the sky to set in the West. If © 1997 Allan Sztab

90

there were storms the sun would always succeed in pushing the rain and wind aside. It brought warmth and its rays spread out to claim vast areas as its kingdom. The never failing appearance and action of the sun may have given rise to the first thoughts of immortality which could account for the fact that heaven is in the sky with the sun-god. Because birds could fly high into the sky and close to god they were used as symbols depicting the heavens and often appear symbolically in myth and art. The lush vegetation which grew out of the fertile earth was likened to the fertility of women who also created and nurtured life. The cycle or seasons of nature, the menstrual cycle of women and the cycle of the moon were all symbolic of the process of life. A woman bleeds and heals herself every moon and when she gives birth. Red, the colour of blood, came to symbolise life. Plants live and die and their seed, once returned to the soil would bring forth new life. It was probably this observation that led to thoughts of re-birth and the Neanderthal who lived approximately 15 to 25 thousand years ago would sometimes bury people in their homes. The snake which sheds its skin to be 'reborn' became a symbol of re-birth and often features prominently in myth and art. The myth of Adam and Eve depicts a snake as responsible for humanity's loss of immortality, while in the Epic of Gilgamesh it is a snake that takes the plant of everlasting youth away from Gilgamesh who has been seeking immortality. A womans breasts were likened to that of a storage vessel and the protection of a cave to that of her womb. Any opening in the earth came to symbolise an entrance to the womb of mother earth. It was in their capacity to give and maintain life that women were revered as the Goddesses of creation. The art and artefacts our ancestors left behind reveal the feminine force of creation and many of the oldest carvings were only of women - in some cases only her sexual organs are shown.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

91

'The close association of the Goddess with wild beasts is also evident... This theme appears repeatedly for thousands of years and in every culture: the Goddess with her wild lions, wolves, deer, snakes, birds and bears, who seem to offer themselves into her service. Perhaps initially she was a clan mother who actually suckled the young leopards, as the Ainu of Japan are known to suckle and raise bear cubs. The Australian Tiwi people also bring young orphaned animals into camp and suckle them; if the animal survives the night they become part of the clan, are given a name, and are even provided with funeral rites when they die...' (Getty) Faced with the sometimes terrifying, destructive and unpredictable forces of nature the desire to understand and control them was great. Being able to do so would reduce their fear and bring them an element of certainty in an ever-changing world. In order to do so they made use of the crude yet common psychology that we covered in section 11 - they found beliefs and reasons to support them. If an action or activity could in some way be linked either favourably or unfavourably with a natural event such as rain or wind, it might have been adopted as a belief - a general rule of behaviour that was to be practised or avoided. Causes or reasons for everything were sought for and led to the adoption of entire systems of superstitious belief. Suffering at the hands of nature may have led them to equate this as a form of punishment which followed the breaking of these superstitious beliefs and the equation of ill-fortune with punishment was made. Even today we are conditioned to apportion blame for any suffering we endure, even if we blame ourselves. We accept without question that there are reasons for everything, because this shields us from the discomfort that accompanies pure chance. Jumping to conclusions regarding the cause of things still abounds.1 For a long time it was thought that thunder causes lightning when it is exactly the other way around. Often a particular explanation would be favoured for practical or self-serving reasons. Few people today would readily admit to being superstitious, but many carry charms or lucky objects which are considered responsible for some stroke of personal good fortune or for preventing bad luck. Some buildings don't have 1

Refer to section 58 for imaginary and false causes.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

92

thirteenth floors and lucky chants can be heard in casinos as the dice are rolled, often accompanied by strange gestures and facial expressions. Our ancestors were deeply superstitious and their desire to stay on the better side of the powerful forces of nature was strong because they knew their lives depended on them. To impose their own conditions on nature, or in an attempt to improve it, they even began to modify their own bodies, sometimes by removing the male foreskin and testicles while other organs would be pierced, pricked, painted, tattooed and punctured. The body would often be decorated with necklaces made from shells or teeth, hair trimmed and fashioned, the skin dyed, its texture and smell changed. The naive attempt was also made to obtain the powers of certain animals by eating their hearts or other bodily parts. This belief is still practised today and is responsible for the virtual extinction of many animals whose body parts are believed to confer some benefit to those who eat or ingest them. In South Africa the body parts of children are still used by certain witch doctors to make potent muti or medicine. 'In the recent anarchy in Liberia young heavily armed teenagers ransacked villages. "They killed my brother.. opened up his body and took his heart out. They put it in a big pan and cooked it in palm butter. Then they ate it." Dozens of Liberians in refugee camps outside Monrovia described similar acts of cannibalism, believed to endow those who partake with supernatural powers. One woman had seen young warriors.. extract the heart and private parts of five boys and eat them.' (Guardian) The attempt to control the forces of nature also illustrates the cunning of vanity.1 The gods were said to have human characteristics such as the emotions. They were said to get angry, happy and sad. Giving the gods human characteristics meant that they would be able to relate to them in the same way they could relate or act towards other humans. Later the Egyptian kings would become gods. This set the stage for the first of many attempts to influence and control the gods in ways that humans might be influenced. This was attempted by means of worship and sacrifice using the logic that if the gods accepted a gift or sacrifice they would then be obliged to return the favour by providing good 1

Refer also to vanity and the reinterpretation of history in section 27.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

93

weather or anything else that was desired. The particular gifts or sacrifices the gods might appreciate were similarly based on those that might appeal to humans - things such as food and drink. The most precious sacrifice was life either that of an animal or a human. It was not only the forces of nature that were referred to as gods - various animal spirits were also worshipped so as to ensure a plentiful supply of animals to hunt. Behaviour was regulated and controlled so as not to offend the gods. The success in controlling people by making their behaviour comply with 'gods will' proved so successful that its use in society was assured.

15 Ritual and Myth The superstitious practice of linking events to natural occurrences was made in the belief that if their cause could be determined then it would be possible to control them. The illusion of being able to control these forces of nature had the effect of alleviating any fear and anxiety concerning them. The appearance of deceased relatives in dreams gave rise to ideas of spirits and a spirit-world. The planting of seeds to create life gave rise to ideas of re-birth and the constantly rising sun gave rise to ideas of immortality. A specific set of gestures and actions are called rituals and many of them are repetitive in nature. Before language they were used as a means of communication. When attempts were made to communicate with the gods or spirits, they were also made by means of rituals. Rituals were performed in the same way and at the same time by those people who were deemed proficient at performing them. These people were to become the first shamans or priests. The rituals consisted first of sounds and later of spoken words which are called myths. Myths told the story of the ritual. The repetition of sounds and the new-found power of words were believed to be capable of influencing or bringing about a desired event ranging from good harvests to the curing of an illness. Not all myths are ritual myths and other myths, together with folk stories, provide imaginary explanations of the origins of things, ranging from the universe to objects as mundane as a pickaxe. Some attempt to predict coming events such as the end of the world, while others

© 1997 Allan Sztab

94

provide a sense of mystery and wonder surrounding popular heroes, gods or tribes. Myths, like ideas, spread around the world by travel, trade, migration and invasion, or by independent imagination in similar circumstances. It is not surprising that most of the religions in existence today bear a striking similarity to each other. Myths or stories of creation or birth include those of cities, gods, consciousness, the earth and the universe. The mother of creation is often reflected by the use of female symbols. Life is seen as a creation either out of chaos or out of nothing with death being a return to that original state. Myths of creation may be re-enacted in an attempt to return to these origins either to be re-born or cured of an illness and certain religious ceremonies commence with these re-enactments. Myths of floods are very common probably due to the world-wide occurrence of destructive floods or the deluge of water due to melting glaciers. Water is also symbolic of life. After the destruction of a flood or the watering of land new life would appear. It isn't surprising to find that many purification and cleansing rituals such as that of baptism make use of water. The sun rising and setting or going down into the underworld, and the cycle of birth, death and re-birth of vegetation all gave rise to the conception of some form of existence or consciousness after death. Myths of an afterlife and a day of judgement where we will be punished or rewarded for our deeds in this life are common and in one form or another have been incorporated into most religions. There are literally thousands of myths and their similarity is striking. Ancient Mesopotamian myths tell of: a sea goddess who gives birth to heaven and earth; the creation of primary gods and lesser gods such as a god of cattle and a god of grain, a sun god, moon god, water god, plant goddess and a god of wisdom; a union of gods that produced plants which caused illness when eaten and the creation of a goddess known as 'the lady of the rib' to cure the illness of the rib; a scorpion-man and centaur, of conflicts between settlers and nomads; the descent into a netherworld or underworld where the dead are trapped; demons and ghosts; © 1997 Allan Sztab

95

an incestuous relationship between father and daughter; ritual slayings and banishments; the hero Gilgamesh who is superhuman, being two parts god and one part man; the slaying of a fire-breathing giant; the gods reserving immortality for themselves; the creation of humans from clay and from the blood of a god in order to serve the gods; the intention of the gods to destroy mankind by floods and other means; a paradise where immortals live, where there is no sickness or old-age and animals don't kill each other; the seven 'tablets of destiny' that relate the creation of gods of heaven and earth by the mixing of salt and fresh water oceans; the creation of a god-king whose responsibility is to care for the calendar; a destructive flood and the instructions to build a boat for all the seeds of living things; and the creation of god-kings to represent the gods here on earth. Ancient Egyptian myths tell of: the sun god Re who created the world from water and created lesser gods of earth and sky; the king who is the son of Re; the slaughter of disobedient men; the darkness that shelters the enemies of Re; the moon-god that shines at night; the vegetation god Osiris, son of the earth god, king of the underworld who determines the fate of departed souls on judgement day; and the god Khnum who fashions the first man and woman on a potters wheel. Ancient Canaanite myths tell of: Baal the god of fertility, his fight with the god of the seas and rivers and with Mot the god of sterility and the underworld; the gods sanction of bestiality and the practice of brother-sister marriage; and seven years of famine and drought.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

96

Hittite myths tell of: the rivalry between young and old gods; purification rituals and spells; and the slaying of dragons. Many religious stories are based on these ancient rituals, myths and folk-lore and the best example is that of the Old Testament. What is unique in the Old Testament is the further development of ritual myth to incorporate historical events and in many cases it is difficult to discern the historical from the mythical.1 Before writing was invented the traditions and history of a tribe were recorded in the minds of people. The oral recitation of these traditions and history was the only means of conveying this information to younger generations. Even after the commencement of writing, the observation of ritual myth gave rise to the idea of reciting history at seasonal festivities and other occasions. This practice, including the verbal participation of worshippers, is still in use today.

16 The change in climate After many thousands of years our ancestors who had lived as hunter-gatherers began to settle down and commenced life as primitive farmers. To many this might be seen as progress towards an easier style of life. However, in contrast to hunting and gathering which left ample time for recreation, life as a primitive farmer was difficult. A piece of land would first have to be cleared and the soil broken in order to plant it. Both were difficult tasks considering the primitive tools they had. In addition, a plentiful supply of water was required which dictated where they could settle. This probably meant the building of permanent dwellings, as suitable natural shelters might not be located in the same area. Crops would have to be tended so the freedom to move around at will was no longer possible. Security was also compromised by having to remain in the same place. It was unlikely to have been a voluntary decision as hunter-gatherers like the Bushmen, Aborigine and Eskimo have always been loathe to give up their lifestyles which are certainly far easier compared to that of primitive farming. Their lifestyles can even be favourably compared to modern workers who must 1

Refer to the reinterpretation of history and the Old Testament in section 26.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

97

often work a whole year and are then considered fortunate if they are able to escape for a few weeks to the country to get 'back to nature' and breathe clean air once more. It was probably a change in climate that was responsible for the transition from hunter-gathering to that of farming, a change which was to forever alter their way of life. The vast territories of open grassland in the Northern hemisphere, which supported many large herds of animals, were fed by the melting waters of glaciers. Global warming around 13,000BC heralded the final stages of the last ice-age. Over a long period of time mountainous glaciers began to melt and retreat towards the poles, leaving massive floods of water behind them. It was probably these floods that provided the inspiration for the ancient stories of a universal flood. Their effect was to change the grasslands of Europe and Asia into swamps and forests, which in turn reduced considerably the herds of grazing animals that had already become an essential part of the human diet. In an attempt to maintain this diet certain slow breeding animals like the woolly rhinoceros and giant elk were hunted to extinction. Population growth alone could have accounted for the increased pressure on food resources, but various studies show that population control was successfully used by hunter-gatherers. The quickest and surest means of increasing resources was simply to reduce the population. There were ways of controlling population such as waging war, female infanticide, geronticide, the use of plant and animal poisons to induce abortion and prolonging the lactation period by feeding infants for a longer period of time. It was known that ovulation only commences once a sufficient weight gain has been achieved and this could be delayed by dieting. There were other more brutal methods of inducing abortion, such as jumping on a woman's stomach, even though they often resulted in her death. The effects of a change on global weather would have different effects throughout the world. In the North of Africa for example, the vast once-fertile plateau was slowly transformed by declining rainfall into what we know today as the Saharan desert. It is more than likely that the basics of farming were already widely known for a long time before farming became necessary. The © 1997 Allan Sztab

98

grains of wild plants were eaten and probably first tended on a part-time basis by removing weeds. It was the observation of nature at work that led to the first experiments of planting seeds instead of eating them. However, planting required a plentiful supply of water which would most likely be found in fertile areas where vegetation already existed. People began to settle alongside rivers such as the Tigris and Euphrates of Mesopotamia which emptied into the Persian Gulf, the Nile in Egypt and the Yellow river in China. The population density, type and availability of wild grains and domesticable animals varied from area to area, and this might account for the fact that settled village life and civilisation in Europe, Asia and North Africa took place several thousand years earlier than that in the Americas. If settling down permanently meant going without meat then it wouldn't have been attractive. On the other hand, if it were possible to combine farming with hunting then permanent settlements would have been a better proposition. It was probably factors such as these that influenced the decision and not a lack of knowledge concerning the planting of seeds. The domestication of animals and plants was a slow and gradual process. However, the change from life as a nomadic hunter-gatherer to that as a settled agriculturist set into motion forces so great that social life as it was known up to then would never be the same again.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

99

Chapter Five Civilisation And Power 17 Agriculture and a surplus of food As would be demonstrated over and over again in human history, hardship seems to go hand in hand with ingenuity. Farming proved to be so successful that soon a steady and sustainable surplus of food was produced. It was this surplus of food that would prove to be one of the most significant influences in determining the course of human history. A surplus of food meant that it would no longer be necessary to rely on hunting for food, with the result that the number of animals available was no longer a factor in determining the size of the human population. The restraint of carrying children around fell away. A woman could now nurse an infant while at the same time work in the fields. As children grew up they too could help with the farm work. The result was a steady increase in population, fuelled by even more innovations.1 The idea that a seed would have the same desirable characteristics as the plant it came from led to selective planting.2 The idea also occurred that there might be other uses for animals, and experiments led to their domestication which provided a ready supply of meat, hides, wool and milk. Animals were to become in many senses the first slaves. The domestication of animals also had an unexpected consequence. Living closely with animals led to the outbreak of new diseases to which humans would ultimately develop an immunity. Later, the spreading of these new diseases to the Americas by European settlers would be responsible for the decimation of local Indian populations who weren't immune. This proved to be a decisive factor in overcoming Indian resistance. Without this biological weapon earlier Vikings who attempted to settle in North America many centuries before were easily overcome. Whereas hunting was mostly left to the men who were stronger and more aggressive, it was the women who took over as cultivators of the soil, probably because women were also fertile. It even occurred to them that if there was a god of fertility to worship then this god would surely be female. This 1 2

Refer to over-population in appendix H. Refer to the history of eugenics in appendix G.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

100

might explain why they began to worship female goddesses. The dependence on herds of wild animals was replaced by a dependence on the seasons; this heralded a swing away from the worship of animal spirits and gods to new gods of fertility and nature. The priests who had already been chosen to guess what would please or displease the older animal spirits or gods, designed a new set of ceremonies in the hope of securing good rains and bountiful harvests. Knowing when to plant and when to harvest required an understanding of the movement of the moon and stars and the evidence suggests it was this priestly class who first specialised in predicting the seasons. Any success they had in doing so would enhance even further their authority as messengers of the various spirits and gods who the people worshipped. Later they extended their range of predictions to incorporate other human affairs. It had become necessary to measure the size of a piece of land and how much seed would be needed for it, and these requirements led to the development of precise measurements and a calendar.1 The change from life as hunter-gatherers to that as farmers was a gradual one and many tribes were reluctant to give up their nomadic way of life which they equated with freedom. The domestication of animals provided them with an alternative lifestyle as pastoralists, moving from pasture to pasture to graze their herds and their hunting skills were combined with herding. However, it was inevitable that as time passed new ways of behaviour emerged that suited life in a settled community, as for example, the worship of new gods of nature and fertility. Where conditions permitted large scale settlements the changes to their previous ways of life were more radical, especially when they came into contact with tribes whose customs and religions were different to their own. This entire process of change provided a fertile ground for the cultivation of new ideas. The new ways of settled life were called civilised and the old ways barbaric. However, they were only reflections of the comforts which settled life now provided, and the words soft and hard are far more descriptive of what happens to people as life becomes comfortable. The hardy barbarians would continually invade settled communities and this is evident right throughout history. 1

Refer to section 32 for truth as that which proves useful or beneficial.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

101

18 Communal And Private Property Humans and all animals are totally dependent on land for survival. For this reason most human and animal societies are territorially based, and ways of sharing the land have evolved with time and changing circumstances. In a natural state no such thing as the ownership of land exists - land belongs to nobody. The exclusive use of land can be achieved only if nobody else wants it, by fighting for it, or by agreement.1 The continued use of a piece of land would have to be constantly enforced. Naturally as food resources shrink or populations increase the value of land would increase accordingly. It was only in response to their particular requirements that humans created the concept or idea of property ownership, and more significantly, that of private property. Those societies living a more settled type of existence would naturally be more bound to their territory as opposed to that of a nomadic society. A territory might be favoured due to the fertility of its soil, the type of fruit-producing trees it supported or the variety of animals living on it. Humans sometimes form an intimate bond with their land because their dead are buried on it and other animals such as elephants are also known to have specific burial sites. With the exception of the Eskimos who have no land use restrictions, and certain other Indian societies, most land was held in common, and generally the chieftain or leader would allot land to various tribes for their use and grant special privileges to outsiders. Tribal chiefs would then allocate the 'right to use' specific pieces of land to its members. The failure to use the land as it was intended to be used would often lead to the loss of the right. The right could even be passed down along the family line, but the land would always belong to the community. This fact would later be used by communists to support their argument for communal property. The principle that a weapon or farming instrument created by someone belonged to them, was also a long-established practice that would later be applied by political philosophers such as Locke and Marx.2 This principle was applied equally to the rewards of working a piece of land or hunting an animal. However, most of the time these rewards would be 1

Refer to section 57 for the origin of morality in superior force. Refer to section 50 for the views of Locke and section 53 for those of Marx. Refer to section 61 for the limitation to freedom that is required for private property. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

102

shared with others because it was advantageous to everyone concerned; if someone's crop failed or they were unsuccessful in hunting they wouldn't starve. It was also common to contribute food towards a communal pool to use in times of drought or at specific feasts. Besides the principle of reaping the fruits of one's labour, a personal relationship between farmer and land was bound to arise. The domestication of animals led to the development of a personal relationship between the herders and their animals in much the same way that a personal relationship is formed between people and their pets. It is probable that the nature of these personal relationships was also instrumental in the formation and acceptance of the concept of private property.

19 The commencement of theft, war and conquest Large-scale agriculture and private property now made it possible to measure the wealth of a family, tribe, or village by the size of their herds and/or the size of their crops. For the first time there were now commodities to steal in the form of grain that was stored or lay ready for harvest, and herds of animals. It was far easier for a hunter to raid and steal than to go hungry. Theft also suited those who were too lazy to work. Theft and armed robbery with all the conflicts that accompanied them would soon become a regular part of life. The skills and weapons for armed conflict were already present. Hunters had long mastered the art of hunting and killing at a distance. These same skills and weapons were easily put to use against people. Nomadic tribes had never given up their hunting skills and would often raid villages. Either in isolation or by forming alliances with other tribes these barbarians would continue to invade civilised communities, villages, cities, states and even empires for many centuries to come until most of them were eventually assimilated into civilised life.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

103

There had always been inter-tribal, village or group warfare. At a basic level a war between two clans or villages might be initiated by hostilities between individuals which eventually escalated until everyone was involved. Of course there would usually be a lot of threats, insults and scuffles and some primitive tribes such as the Australian Aborigines even have set procedures so that hostilities of this sort can be settled by the venting of anger and frustration, often with no loss of life. Sometimes a conflict would result in permanent hostilities leading to war raids in which entire villages would be destroyed and hundreds killed in battle, but these wars seldom resulted in the expansion of a tribes territory. A war party would return with a few scalps, and possibly a few utensils, as there were no possessions of any value. If anything, such warfare caused tribes to create a 'no-mans' land in-between them to distance themselves from each other. The ways humans modify their behaviours in response to environmental pressures and the unanticipated results that such modifications bring, are often mysterious and little understood. The opinion has even been expressed that 'warfare is an ecologically adaptive lifestyle among primitive peoples..' For example, the entire cycle of ritual warfare which has been adopted by the Maring tribe of Papua New Guinea, has been found to have the desirable effect of protecting the resources of their precious forests. Their customary cycle of pig feast, war and peace has been found to have an interval of roughly twelve years. The conditions that herald the commencement of the cycle depends on the population growth of men and pigs, who both consume more than they produce, and the return of forest growth to gardens that were abandoned at the cessation of the previous war. Yet the Maring themselves are completely unaware of the facts which underlie such a major part of their social life, and the myths that surround them remain intact. These strange customs may have been the bright innovation of one of their ancestors in response to the destruction of their forests, but the simple and practical circumstances which originally led to their adoption were lost in the mists of time. 1 1

Refer to the loss of the history of words in section 3 and of the history of customs in section 11. Refer also to the practicalities behind the primitive method of redistributing wealth in section 60. © 1997 Allan Sztab

104

In any fight for scarce resources the brute strength and aggressiveness of men are an indispensable and valuable means of survival. This is reflected in a preference for male children, which was also encouraged by the fact that the most effective way of limiting births is to reduce the number of women as one man is sufficient to father an almost unlimited number of offspring. In its turn a shortage of women has the effect of creating conflicts amongst competing males and the offer of women as rewards was often one of the most enticing motivations to induce men to fight in wars. It will almost always be found that when competition for resources is keen it will be accompanied by a preference for male offspring. This could be a factor in the preference for male children in China today. Innovations in agriculture, such as the irrigation of lands that sloped away from river banks, made it possible to feed even more people. In large settlements dependencies arose, as the supply of water to anothers land could always be cut off. Naturally this would lead to conflicts, and many clashes between communities revolved around the supply of water. As populations increased even further, a shortage of suitable land led to the creation of a working class. Labourers would work the land in exchange for a share of the harvest. Faced with starvation and no prospect of finding or obtaining suitable land, a person had little choice but to beg, steal, rob, or become a paid labourer. Increasing populations made it necessary for some sort of administration. It was a surplus of food that permitted the introduction of administrators or managers, who became the first class of non-food producing labour. With a centralised administration it was now possible to run large-scale irrigation schemes. It was most likely the priests who took on the role as managers of these schemes, as this was suited to their role as weather diviners. They were also authorised to settle disputes and allocate land. A central administration soon led to a change of loyalty from one's tribe towards that of the community. A food surplus also made it possible to support other non-food producing classes such as artisans, who now had the time to produce better farming implements, weaponry and other luxury goods. As soon as a village or community

© 1997 Allan Sztab

105

prospered they became a target, either to other villages, bands of opportunistic raiders, or nomadic tribesmen. It was only with an increasing population density and the surplus of food provided by large-scale farming that warfare, in the sense of armies of men plundering, occupying and increasing the boundaries of their own territories, was possible. Only a large surplus of food that was not perishable would present the opportunity to feed an army or band of men. A smaller or unsuitable surplus might perish or be given away. To be able to feed an army or band of men required wealth in terms of land, livestock, surplus grain and luxury goods. Most of the historical events that would now unfold can be explained in terms of the basic physiology and psychology we have already covered. Faced with hunger, water and land acquired an ever increasing value. Competition for these valuable resources mounted due mainly to increases in the size of population, natural disasters such as drought, or bad harvests due to insects. Having an army or band of raiders meant being able to exercise and project one's influence or power far into the territory of other tribes. This reduced the fear of hunger and deprivation considerably, because it was now possible to obtain and defend supplies of food, water, livestock and land, even if one had to steal or kill in order to do so. A surplus of grain would ensure survival even in bad times, while hired or slave labour would eliminate the necessity to work. With wealth it was now possible to afford a whole range of new and prestigious luxury goods. Of greater significance was the fact that the accumulation of wealth had the effect of disrupting the equilibrium of power by concentrating it in the hands of the wealthy. There is no built-in limitation to the desire for power, greed, hatred, anger, jealousy and the extent to which a person will go to satisfy them. The emotions of greed, hatred, anger and jealousy would now have the opportunity to express themselves with an ever-increasing force, one that would continue to grow as society evolved, reaching a peak with the modern advent of nuclear weapons capable of annihilating every living thing on earth. The power and easy access to small yet extremely powerful weapons that we find today is another cause for concern.1 1

Refer to the possibility of losing democracy in section 67.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

106

20 The consolidation of power In the earliest times there was an equal distribution of power as everyone could obtain a spear, bow and arrow. In a fight it was only the superior skill or strength of an individual that would be decisive in victory over an opponent, who also had the option to flee. This equality of power was reflected in the democratic systems that many nomadic tribes had evolved.1 A leader or representative of a tribe or clan would possess something extraordinary that was valued by the tribe, such as strength or wisdom. All this would change as more and more people opted for a settled life. Being dependent on a plot of land meant that a person no longer had the option to flee. The private ownership of property, be it land, surplus grain, livestock or luxury goods led to the steady accumulation of wealth or power into fewer and fewer hands, with the result that tribal forms of democracy tended to be abandoned as soon as settled territories were conquered. The accumulation of wealth was also inevitable by the sheer nature of private property itself. As soon as a person died someone stood to inherit their possessions. In addition, trading surplus grain for land was inevitable. In bad times loans would be made using the land as security. The failure to repay would then lead to forfeiture of the land. Even if it were possible to redistribute every piece of available land in equal portions to every living person, the process of accumulation into fewer and fewer hands would commence almost immediately. Not all primitive people valued the collection of private property as an end in itself, and in some societies a persons wealth and prestige in the community was judged not on how much a person had but on how much they could give away.2 From this time on the affairs of humans would be dictated by the accumulation and exercise of power. Warfare would ultimately lead to a continual pattern of the rise and fall of powerful states and empires. The earliest evidence of largescale warfare are the remains of fortresses such as that of Jericho, which dates to approximately 7,500BC. The amount of power a person could acquire was limited by the strength of their opponents, their economic resources which determined the number of men in their pay, the weapons they had and their 1

Refer to section 21 for ancient Greek forms of democracy and section 67 for modern democracies. 2 Refer to section 60 for the notions of equality and redistribution. © 1997 Allan Sztab

107

battle skills and tactics. Natural defences such as mountains, deserts and rivers would make some villages more difficult to attack than others. Geographical factors like these were often decisive in determining the fate of village communities. In Mesopotamia, villages had no natural defences and were separated from each other by marshes, so it wasn't easy for villages to cooperate or consolidate to ward off attacks. Communication wasn't easy either because the Tigris and Euphrates rivers were difficult to navigate. In contrast, the Nile valley was bounded by the Saharan desert on one side and the Red Sea on the other, which made it secure from outside attack. The Nile was also easy to navigate both upstream and downstream. This ease of communication, together with the desirability for a central control to manage flood waters, made it possible for a powerful Egyptian chieftain or king to consolidate his rule over a vast territory. It was only the accumulation of such power that made it possible to undertake huge construction projects on the scale of the pyramids. Agricultural innovations, such as the harnessing of animal power to plough fields, made it possible to farm on suitable rain-irrigated land as opposed to alluvial flood plains. The more land that was farmed the greater the surplus of food and the greater the increase in population. A surplus of food and a shortage of certain raw materials led to a growth in trade. Trade in turn led to the meeting of strangers and the cross-pollination of ideas. The harnessing of animal power led to a greater involvement of men in the production of food, as animals were traditionally their responsibility and it was men who manned the ploughs. The fact that men were now back in the fields soon led to their domination in food production, and probably influenced the swing from female goddesses back to a predominance of male gods. It was possibly the domestication of animals that led to the discovery by men of their important role in producing children, which could have given further impetus to the domination of women by men. 'Women began to be viewed as a receptacle for the male seed... Until this moment sex was something to be enjoyed, without social stigma attached. There were no illegitimate children or scarlet women, because there was no value in paternity.. Along with the pleasure of sex there must have been a mystical element as well, for numerous accounts of sacred sex or Tantra © 1997 Allan Sztab

108

come down to us from classical times.. When a Jesuit missionary reprimanded a Montagnais Indian for not stopping his wife from sleeping with another Indian, by saying "How will you know that her children are your own?", the Indian's poignant reply was "Thou hast no sense. You French love only your own children, but we love all the children of our tribe'.'' (Getty) As the number of farming communities increased, so too did the number of raids at the hands of nomadic tribes. Once a village had been conquered it was advantageous to occupy it instead of razing it to the ground. Villagers could now be kept on as slaves or as peasant farmers, who were required to pay a portion of their harvest in the form of a tribute or tax. Thus the conquerors were now assured of a continuous supply of food. However, this asset of theirs now required protection from other robbers and it never took long before they themselves began to equate this protection for their own benefit with the taxation that was paid to them. Governments and robbers are not really as different as we have been taught especially when they cannot even provide this most basic of services to their taxpayers.1 It wasn't long before powerful chieftains or kings extended their rule to cover ever bigger territories, and villages were consolidated to form states. The obedience of conquered villagers to the laws of the conqueror was achieved by the use of brute force and the offer of protection, but in many cases the attempt was made to justify it on religious grounds. Self-imposed leaders would claim either to be the appointed representative of god, or of being given a mandate from heaven to exercise political control.2 However, an occupying force was faced with an ever-present danger. If their occupation was resented, villagers might jump at the opportunity to revolt or form allies with other potential conquerors to gain their liberation or better terms from a new master. As a result of this danger, conquerors were reluctant to give arms to all their subjects because they knew that force obtains obedience - not loyalty. This often meant they could easily be outnumbered and were less able to repel attacks from rival 1

Refer to the inability of modern democracies to provide protection in section 67. Refer to the marriage of religion and politics in section 45 and the error of imaginary causes in section 58. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

109

tribesmen. As uncivilised nomadic tribes came into contact with civilised villagers, either by trade or conquest, it was inevitable that they would be influenced by the luxury and comforts of civilised life. After a few generations the once hardy nomads would become accustomed to a more luxurious and gentle lifestyle. Their fighting skills and will to fight weakened, and the threat of conquest by other uncivilised or barbaric tribesmen grew until they eventually succumbed. This pattern would repeat itself continually. Elaborate fortifications like the Great Wall of China, which is over 2,000 km long, 6 to 9 metres high and 4.5 to 6 metres wide, bears testimony to the ever-present fear of invasion. Not even the larger resources of civilisation could put an end to it, as the barbarians were quick to learn and apply the latest skills. In 1,700BC they perfected the art of chariot warfare which increased the rate of invasions. They also mastered the art of smelting ore and the manufacture of iron and semi-steel weapons. Iron-ore was widely available and therefore cheap. Its introduction into warfare only had the effect of making superiority in numbers more decisive because most people could afford them. As the territories under the rule of a king or chieftain grew, another problem arose - how to control them. In an attempt to do so, artificial provinces were made and given to trusted family and friends to oversee1 . A new class of people were created - nobles or aristocrats, who supervised the collection of taxes and settled disputes. They formed what may be referred to as a ruling elite. There was a danger in this too, for in certain cases these aristocrats would become so powerful that they maintained almost total independence, and could even pose a threat to their king. This occurred for the first time in Egypt around 2,500BC and led to the collapse of the Old kingdom. Similar problems would be faced by civilisations everywhere. In China around 790BC the central Chou state was surrounded by more than a dozen Chinese princes. Princes on the outer perimeter were able to conquer and assimilate barbarian tribes around them and

1

Much of this wealth has been passed down over generations and is still in many cases in the hands of the same families. Since they never paid for it some people believe this wealth should be returned to the government. Land restitution can be a thorny issue to say the least. © 1997 Allan Sztab 110

so grew larger and more powerful than their more civilised and centrally located neighbours.1 Other methods were used to prevent rebellion. Loyal soldiers were stationed in special military colonies and given a plot of land in return for active service when this was required. Rebellious people were forcibly removed to more remote and distant areas where they would no longer pose a danger. However, conquest was a threat to one of the most vital interests of people - their freedom. Freedom has always been sacred, and for the first time cries for freedom were heard. These cries were to be heard right throughout history, up to and including the present time, and would fuel rebellions, revolutions and wars of liberation such as those in ancient Egypt by the Hebrews and more recently by the Germans, French, Russians, Chinese, Algerians, Vietnamese and South Africans2 . In the majority of cases the rebellions are a protest against things such as over-regulation, over-taxation, an unfair legal system, or the forced conscription of citizens into the military. The human desire for freedom and equality was often the rallying cry of nationalistic movements, which would result not in freedom but in new forms of enslavement.3

1

Refer to appendix B5 for the period of change that influenced the religions of Confucianism and Taosim. 2

The Vietnamese war of liberation was fought and won against the French and U.S.A.

3

Refer to section 67 for the historical cycles of government.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

111

21 The voice of democracy It was only a shift towards equilibrium in the balance of power that would spearhead the movement towards greater freedom and democracy. Such a movement was mostly the result of a combination of unique circumstances such as those that prevailed in ancient Greece.1 The decisive factors were those of geography and military advances. Commercial trade with others also played a role as it led to the realisation that customs and taboos differed from tribe to tribe and none could be said to be better or worse than others. For this reason sea-communications and trade were regarded as dangerous developments by some of the wealthy rulers of Athens. Plato was hostile to democracy which he viewed as the rule of the poor, and favoured the rule of philosophers instead.2 The mountainous country of ancient Greece was difficult to farm and farmers tended to work small plots of increasingly precious land. The long coastline made it difficult for anyone to control access to markets. These two factors made it attractive to plant commercial crops such as olives and wine which the mountainous and rocky slopes were well suited to. Although the work was hard and the olive trees took a few years to harvest, olive oil and wine were assured of a good reception in export markets where they could be traded for grains, metal and timber. The relative prosperity of these farmers meant they could afford the latest armaments and when necessary join forces and fight together to ward off a common threat or enemy. It was thus possible for the development of separate political units which made it difficult for the emergence of a central power. Even though there was a large population of slaves or labourers, the equal distribution of power amongst a large number of farmers found political expression in the polis. The polis was basically a small town surrounded by farms, and each farmer or landowner would represent himself in them. Thus village life came to be dominated by these relatively wealthy aristocrats or landowners. This form of Greek village life was unique compared to other European villages, which tended to be populated by merchants and tradesmen. This was particularly evident in the fact that it was largely in Greece that 1

Refer to section 67 for the unique circumstances that gave rise to democracy in America. 2 Refer to Plato in section 39. © 1997 Allan Sztab

112

aristocratic ideals flourished. A good citizen was someone who had the spare time to engage in politics and other leisurely pursuits. Commercial traders and artisans never commanded social respect in ancient Greece. However, military advances also played a significant role. Initially battles were fought on foot by infantrymen, but the advent of the stirrup enabled fighting while at full gallop, and saw the introduction of armed cavalry. This was yet another advantage that favoured the wealthy because armour was expensive, horses required food, and it took a lengthy training period to acquire the skills for mounted battle. Stories of armed knights are legendary. These advantages would normally result in the consolidation of power into the hands of an ever smaller group of landed nobility. This was the pattern in most other centres of civilisation but for an important development in military tactics - the phalanx. The phalanx was a large formation of heavily armed infantrymen trained to operate in unison and thus able to withstand cavalry charges. The significance of the phalanx was that each member was dependent on the other for his life, and this tended to encourage feelings of equality. Small farmers could afford the weaponry and were always on call for active duty. This had profound political consequences, as the new-found power of the small farmers, or hoplites as they were called, now gained them a political voice in local affairs. Extravagant displays of wealth were no longer favoured and in their place the virtues of a simple life took hold. It was in the interests of the polis to maintain the strength of its phalanx and special laws were even passed to ensure the hoplites retained possession of their farms. When commercial cities like Athens acquired a large fleet of ships, rowers took over a role similar to that of members of a phalanx, and they too obtained political representation. The pattern of population growth following a growth in food supply was also noticeable in Greece, due specifically to the surplus of grain which arose as a result of the favourable trading terms that olive oil and wine enjoyed. These benefits were more evenly spread amongst a democratic population than they were in other trading centres like those of the Middle East or the Orient. Population pressures soon led to emigration, colonisation, and a growth in the class of artisans and manufacturers who, together with farmers too © 1997 Allan Sztab

113

small to achieve hoplite status, soon requested political representation. These pressures led to outbreaks of tyrannical rule which were almost always shortlived. However, the demands for representation ultimately resulted in various forms of democracy, and at one time even landless citizens won representation. It is interesting that there was never a total democracy in Greece, as women and slaves were not given any political rights.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

114

Chapter Six The Rise Of The Major Religions 22 The moral significance of the afterlife myths Humans everywhere have always feared the unknown, especially death and a loss of consciousness. Myths of an afterlife and a day of judgement, when we will be punished or rewarded for our deeds in this life, are common in the vast majority of religions. The Egyptians were obsessed with an afterlife. Excavations of ancient Egyptian graves revealed bodies surrounded by artefacts and jars of food. Mother earth was fertile and new life grew from it in a continuous cycle. They held the simple belief in an underground 'kingdom of the dead' where the vegetation god of the earth, Osiris, ruled. There were many gods in ancient Egypt, but two gods in particular made an everlasting impression on the people. These were the sun god Re and the vegetation god Osiris. To followers of the Osirian faith the 'kingdom of the dead' was underground. Later, when the sun god Re reigned supreme as the official state religion, life in the hereafter was depicted as being a solar kingdom in the sky, with Re, whose birthday was celebrated on 25th December, to coincide with the beginning of the suns journey northwards. This solar festival was later appropriated by the Christians. Initially entrance to the heavenly kingdom was reserved for kings, who would first have to undertake a purification by water, but this privilege was extended to nobles. However, for a people so concerned with death the appeal of a life beyond the grave was so popular that the Osirian and state religions eventually merged. This time the heavenly kingdom remained, a kingdom open to all. Re was the god of the living and Osiris the god of the dead. Re passed through the netherworld at night only to rise again in the morning. Imaginative priests would later describe this journey as one passing through twelve caverns, each with a gate and one for each hour. In about 3,000BC victory on the battlefield led to the emergence of a unified Egypt under king Menes, who became the first Pharaoh, which essentially means 'king of the great house'. A centralised government made the construction and administration of large-scale irrigation works possible. The Pharaoh was © 1997 Allan Sztab

115

identified with the sun god Re and became the earthly representative or son of Re and, as such, a god in his own right. A further identification was made between the Pharaoh and the vegetation god Osiris who, as legend had it, was re-born or resurrected after death in the same way that new life burst out of the fertile soil after planting seeds in it. By performing a specific ritual of actions/ gestures/ dances/ sounds they hoped to identify or assimilate themselves with Osiris in the hope that they would also be re-born or resurrected. This belief proved to be exceptionally popular. It would later find expression in the rival Christian doctrine of Paul.1 The ancient Egyptians never believed in a soul as existing with the body and then going on to achieve immortality. They believed that a persons soul was reconstituted piece by piece from their body after it had been resurrected after death. This could only be accomplished by means of rituals that were performed primarily by the mortuary priests. This soul would be aided by a protecting spirit that came into being with the person and passed before them into the hereafter. Food and drink would be required for the reconstitution of the body into a soul. The simple burial procedures of the ancients soon give rise to the construction of elaborate tombs and to the great pyramids themselves, which were attempts to immortalise the human body by sheer force of material means. It was clear that the deceased would require the assistance of the living, who were required to bring them food and drink so they could partake in all the important feasts and ceremonies, some even receiving daily meals which would be placed before statues bearing their likeness. Details of service contracts and festivals were even etched into the tomb and pyramid walls as a permanent record. These texts came to be known as the Pyramid and Coffin Texts. The significance of an afterlife on moral development arose from the notion that it was the gods who had the power to grant eternal life. At first the idea of judgement was more like that of a court, where a person would have to answer to any accusations of wrongdoing brought by injured parties against them, but gradually developed into judgement of a persons life, including that of the kings. However, the preparation of people for this day of judgement created an entire 1

Refer to section 30.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

116

industry which was fuelled by a corrupt priesthood and a gullible public. Priests were quick to take advantage of the opportunity to exploit the belief of the effectiveness of prayer and ritual to ensure a safe passage to the afterlife. They produced numerous prayers and spells that were intended to influence the gods sitting in judgement. They sold these to the common people, written on scrolls which could be taken to their graves with them or inscribed into their coffins. Charts depicting the journey of the dead were also sold and placed on the bottom of coffins so the deceased could find their way. The scrolls were sold with blank spaces where the names of the dead could be written in. The more dangers the dead were to face the more charms, spells and prayers would be required and the dangers soon multiplied to include poisonous serpents, fires, demons, losing one's heart, head, mouth and memory. The priests concocted fearful scenes that the dead would have to face, such as a 'Hall of Truth' with 42 demon-gods, to each of whom they would have to confess their innocence of a particular sin. The number of gods coincided with the number of administrative districts in Egypt at the time, so that at least one of them would be sure to know the deceased and judge whether he was indeed innocent. Blessings were also available so that the dead would be able to procure the same lifestyle in the hereafter as they had on earth - perhaps a comfortable home, pool, a wife and servants. Many tombs had inscriptions at their entrances imploring passers-by to read prayers that would assist in supplying their requirements in the afterlife. To arouse their sympathy appeals were made not to their riches and position but rather to the good deeds they had performed. Extracts from the Coffin Texts went into the making of a 'Book of the Dead' which described the journey the dead would take and the day of judgement. From these texts we obtain the very earliest ideas of those behaviours that were considered to be good, sinless, or moral. Amongst these, and not in order of importance, were devotion and obedience to one's parents, giving food and clothes to the needy, modesty, humility, not stealing, killing, harming, lying, creating fear or speaking badly of others, not blaspheming the gods, not committing adultery and paying a fair wage.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

117

23 The force of change For over 1,000 years the ancient Egyptian empire would remain unified with the rule of one king. The policy of appointing family members or nobles to administer portions of the country was initiated, and by 2,500BC these officials were not even required to be family. In addition, gifts of land were awarded to courtiers as endowments for the upkeep of their tombs and the provision of funeral services. These gifts were often exempt from tax. The power and independence of the noble landowners grew, and eventually laid the foundation for a feudal state. Conflicts between these nobles were sure to occur, aggravated by the commencement of a long period of drought and famine. Shortly after 2,500BC a noble family seized power in the South, and the Old kingdom was split into a North and South. Bands of starving people searched for food and widespread civil disobedience ensued. The famine attracted immigrants from Libya in the West and Canaanites and Hebrews from the East in their search for the comparative prosperity of the Nile. The Hyksos crossed the Sinai and invaded in force around 1,730BC to conquer and occupy the northern territories, where they remained for about 200 years until they were expelled by a united Egypt. Until this time there would be a long period of struggle by successive strongmen to restore the divine power of the pharaoh. A document authored by a wise sage known as the Admonitions of Ipuwer records clearly the miseries of these times when brother killed brother, a son was regarded as an enemy, a shield was necessary when working in the fields, crops and cattle were stolen by invaders, taxes weren't paid, trade ceased and shortages of imported goods arose, travellers were robbed and slain, those who were rich were now poor and those who were poor were now rich. For all the talk of moral worthiness there was now little to show for it. Concern with moral conduct could always be put to rest by the knowledge that a safe passage to the afterlife could be purchased from the priests. In addition, there was now a growing doubt as to the effectiveness of pyramids and tombs, as it wasn't possible to continue their maintenance indefinitely. A 100 kilometre stretch of these ruins now stood as a glaring © 1997 Allan Sztab

118

monument to the futility of securing immortality by material means. Those kings and gods who had been buried in their tombs for hundreds of years were long forgotten, and none of them had returned with news of their journey. When faced with suffering at the hands of powerful and uncontrollable forces society and individuals begin to question their beliefs and expectations. This is precisely what the ancient Egyptians began to do.1

24 The dawn of scepticism, pessimism, messianism and monotheism Perhaps it was inevitable that sooner or later comparisons would be made between the ideals of justice, morality, afterlife and loyalty with the reality of everyday life. Those individuals who began to think and cast doubt on practices and beliefs that had been accepted without question for long periods of time, would be called sceptics. This period of social upheaval and hardship would lead to the development of new ideas. Change is almost always resisted, but when faced with forces that are beyond control, society becomes willing to question its sacred beliefs and either modifies or accepts new one's which are more appropriate. This tendency of society to accept radical changes in times of disorder is a well-used political strategy so that the people concerned will be willing to accept terms during a crisis which they might otherwise reject out of hand. In economic terms this principle is none other than the law of diminishing marginal utility, which simply states that it is the extent of a persons desire for something that determines what they will pay for it. In politics this desire is usually that for order out of chaos. One of the earliest examples we have was the social upheaval that now took place in Egypt, an upheaval which would ultimately result in the first expressions of scepticism or doubt, the idea of a messiah who would restore order, and the idea of monotheism or a universal god. This period of social upheaval led to an era of pessimistic literature such as that of the 'Righteous Sufferer' which told the story of a person who suffered despite being good. This story later served as the inspiration for the Book of Job in the Old Testament. 2 The corruption of well-paid officials, injustice, unfaithfulness, the lack of 1 2

Refer to section 66 and the questioning of personal beliefs and expectations. Refer to section 27.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

119

brotherly love and family loyalty, were denounced. It was also made perfectly clear that a person in need couldn't be expected to remain impartial as they would serve their own interests first. Although this sound advice served to justify the unbiased judgements of the wealthy who weren't needy, it also led to the practice of paying officials generous salaries to ensure their impartiality. The 'Tale of the Eloquent Peasant' put this false optimism to rest by telling of a wealthy but nevertheless corrupt official who stole a peasants donkeys. However, the lesson that you can never pay officials sufficient to ensure their impartiality has yet to be learnt.1 There were those who arrived at the conclusion that life is a 'long sickness from which we recover at death', a sentiment that was expressed by Socrates on his death-bed fifteen hundred years later. Scepticism was cast on ideas of an afterlife, and in its turn people were encouraged to 'eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die', to forget sorrow and pursue pleasure. To those whose desire and belief in immortality was still unwavering, scepticism nevertheless had the effect of shifting the emphasis from a reliance on material or external forces towards those that resided within the individual. Falling short of the sceptics rejection of established practice and belief was the introduction of messianism - the hope that the sun-god Re, who once reigned supreme, would return to impose order, justice and reunify the land. The belief of a messiah still forms the basis of many religions today. To the Egyptians, and even those who are today obsessed with an afterlife, literature casting doubt on this belief may have seemed pessimistic. In contrast, the Mesopotamians believed only in a descent into a 'land of no return'. While harbouring the hope of immortality they had already reached the conclusion that its pursuit was in vain, for they had been created to serve the gods who had reserved immortality for themselves. The Epic of Gilgamesh of about 2,000BC tells of the hopeless quest of Gilgamesh to find immortality, and offers the advice to 'eat, drink and be merry', to find happiness and joy in whatever one can, as humans are mortal and must learn to accept this. The ancient Hebrews also held a belief in the mortality of humans, and it is only in the book of Job that we witness a struggle 1

Refer to the error of an unrestricted freedom of will and section 67 for its relevance to modern political systems. © 1997 Allan Sztab

120

to find reassurance in an afterlife. Pessimism is certainly relative to the beliefs one has to begin with.

25 Monotheism and the first religious revolution After the fall of the Old Kingdom it was a Thebian prince Amosis who finally managed to expel the Hyksos invaders and unify Egypt. After suffering at foreign hands, the Egyptians were no longer content with a unified Egypt and embarked upon an expansion of Egyptian rule far into Asia. Their victories were attributed to a previously unknown local Thebian god called Amun who now came to power and was identified with the sun god Re by calling him Amun-Re. This was small consolation to the old priesthood who had now lost much of their influence, and with it their revenues. The Thebian kings proved to be excellent warriors and with the expansion of the Egyptian empire there arose the idea of monotheism or one universal god for everyone. If their god could reign in Egypt and every territory they conquered then surely it could reign everywhere. It was one of these kings, Amenhotep IV who made a daring and courageous attempt to introduce these concepts into a new monotheistic state religion, one that would be based on the universality of the sun god whose rays cast light and warmth throughout his kingdom and who was the creator of everything. The first prophet would naturally be none other than Amenhotep IV himself. The sun god was now to be called Aten and the attempt was made to remove all references to other gods, even to the extent of chiselling their names out of monuments. A new capital was built where the popular Osirian burial rituals were abandoned in favour of prayers to the new sun god. This was probably the first attempt to impose a new set of ideas and values onto the public, and it was doomed to failure. The change was far too abrupt, and underestimated the popular appeal and sentiment of the public for their old superstitious beliefs and rituals, which were more than 2,000 years old. It proved particularly unpopular with almost an entire industry that had developed to cater for the old forms of worship, and included priests who prepared blessings and performed mortuary rituals, bakers who prepared special food for feasts and artisans who sold © 1997 Allan Sztab

121

trinkets. In addition, the Egyptian empire was slowly eroding and this caused further discontent. It isn't known how his fall occurred, but soon thereafter the old gods and priesthood resumed their former positions. This lesson to all potential revolutionaries would be elegantly stated by Vilfredo Pareto some 3,500 years later – not to spend one's time fighting a popular sentiment but to use it to one's advantage - a lesson which modern politicians have mastered.1

26 Judaism In the Middle East by the year 1,500BC all the ideas that would finally find expression in the Old Testament of the Hebrews were already present, such as animal spirits, nature gods, souls, afterlife, immortality, sacrifice, ritual worship, a day of judgement, underground and heavenly kingdoms, a universal god, the resurrection of god, the ritual assimilation with god and prophesies of a messiah who would come to restore order and justice. The culture, commercial and business practices of the Babylonians and the Laws of Hammurapi were well known throughout the region. For example, all who traded with them were sure to be aware that they never traded on the Babylonian Sabbath. Unlike the Babylonians, who dispensed justice according to the social class of the complainants, the Egyptian concept of equal justice for all was also known throughout the region. There was thus a rich legacy of myths, folk-stories, mortuary rituals and numerous other texts recording the wisdom, customs and experiences of Egyptian, Babylonian, Phoenician, Persian and Syrian civilisations, covering a period of at least 2,500 years, with each certainly having some influence on the other. The Hebrew people were originally nomadic herdsmen before they conquered Canaan. Like other primitive tribes they practised ritual sacrifice, even of the first-born child, and worshipped local gods which the Semites called 'els', a word which is today appended to names such as 'Isra-el' and 'Micha-el'. Amongst those who emigrated to Egypt during the lengthy period of famine that beset the Middle East, were some Hebrews and Canaanites. The Hyksos who 1

Refer to Pareto and his observations in section 67.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

122

invaded and settled in Egypt also had numerous Semites amongst them. When the Hyksos were conquered by the Egyptians it is possible that the Canaanites and Hebrews were regarded as allies of the Hyksos, and were therefore enslaved with them. Moses, the Egyptian name for 'child', was their first leader. Moses was thus well versed with the customs of Egypt, including that of the circumcision ritual and the writings of their social prophets. Because the Hebrews were from different tribes, the original twelve Hebrew tribes formed a military pact to escape from Egypt and settle in Canaan, one that was to prove successful. Amongst these tribes was a tribe known as the Midianites, whose god Yahweh was familiar to Moses and thus became the patron god of the Israelite confederation. The various tribes had always worshipped different gods, and this certainly wouldn't have created an environment that would be conducive to maintaining unity within the confederation. In addition, during their long period of slavery much of their tradition was sure to have eroded, thus paving the way for new laws. Moses ascended Mount Sinai to make a covenant with Yahweh, and returned with the Ten Commandments. Not surprisingly, the first commandment forbade the worship of any other god but Yahweh. United under one god the Hebrews managed to escape from the Egyptians and make their first successful incursion into Canaan territory. The Hebrews took no credit for their success on the battlefield, but attributed it entirely to their unity under one god and this became a strongly entrenched belief. Celebrations to commemorate the confederation of Israel would later be held at the old Canaanite cult centres of Schechem and Shiloh where the ark of Yahweh was kept. It was at these celebrations that the oral recitation of the history of the Israelites took place. As the Hebrews settled in Canaan they underwent the same social upheavals that accompanied the transition from nomadic herdsmen to settled agriculturists which the Babylonians, Egyptians and Persians had experienced 2,000 years before them. They had two role models to follow, the Mesopotamian and the Egyptian. Once again this process of adaptation to a civilised and agricultural way of life provided a fertile ground for the cultivation of new ideas, and it was the Hebrew prophets who emerged as the spokesmen © 1997 Allan Sztab

123

for Yahweh. They had very strong neighbours and this led to the development of a Monarchy or Kingship that would be better able to resist them. However, a settled lifestyle led to the development of new classes of merchants, landowners and artisans, and with it a division between rich and poor. Unity under one god was weakened and the various tribes soon began to worship their old fertility gods according to their old customs. The prophets denounced this practice and in defence of the religion of Yahweh, the prophet Elijah even went so far as to slaughter the priests of Baal. The prophets also spoke out against the monarchy, who couldn't resist the temptation to abuse their power by acquiring wealth under the guise of taxation, and became spokesmen for the poor against the injustice of the rich and powerful. The prophets now declared that their suffering was a punishment for their failure to follow the laws of Yahweh - they had sinned and prophesied more suffering if they continued to disobey the laws of Yahweh.1 Canaan was situated on a major trade route of the Middle East, wedged between the powerful Egyptians, Mesopotamians and Assyrians, so it wasn't long before this prophesy would be fulfilled. They were first conquered by the Assyrians and then the Babylonians. As a result of the conquests many prominent families were exiled and later played a prominent role in the rise of Christianity.

27 Religious reform and the Old Testament After suffering at the hands of their conquerors and the bitter fight for freedom that followed, a new set of beliefs and expectations was called for, one that incorporated these new experiences. It was particularly the success of the Jews, when united under one god, which finally culminated in the first attempt to reinterpret human history according to the laws of their god Yahweh. So great was their uncertainty and fear in the midst of these forces that a great distortion of reality was called for - one so great that the idea took root that the entire universe and everything in it revolved entirely around themselves and their god Yahweh.2 For the first time in history the entire suffering of a people was 1

Refer to section 63 for the notion of suffering as a punishment for disobedience. Refer to section 11 for the psychology of how beliefs find reasons to justify them even at the expense of distorting reality. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

124

claimed to be a punishment for their failure to follow the laws laid down by their god. Yahweh's love is purely conditional upon obedience.1 The story of Adam and Eve shows that Yahweh is an unforgiving and merciless god who, for a single act of disobedience, condemned all future generations of his chosen people to perpetual suffering. However, this belief provided the Jews with an explanation for the suffering of the conquered and the poor, together with a remedy to prevent its recurrence by the strict observance of a set of laws.2 The reality was simply their inability to win the day on the battlefield or to successfully resist the corruption and abuse of their leaders. The novel idea of the Old Testament that history develops according to specific rules had a great future in the hands of others. Although their interpretations were also instances of wishful thinking they at least contributed towards a greater understanding of the forces of change. The philosopher Plato would look back on history and explain its development according to the conflicts between different social classes, a sentiment which was echoed by Karl Marx 2,500 years after him. The reality of defeat or punishment by the Assyrians and Babylonians led to the development of a religious reform movement, whose task was to reform and purify the laws of Yahweh. It was these reforms that led to the finalisation of much of the Old Testament and the rich heritage of myth, folk-lore, religious and social experience, including that of their own, was incorporated into it. The Old Testament was moulded by many different authors over a period of about 1,500 years and in its final form would contain the religious interpretations of all the Jewish prophets. The Old Testament can rightly lay claim to be the most creative work of literature to come from this period. It is an intricate tapestry of myth, blended with history, that tells of the creation of the universe, the creation of life from water or rain, the moulding of man from the moist earth, a paradise called the 'garden of Eden', the creation of woman from a rib of man, punishment for eating prohibited fruit, destructive floods, the building of a boat or ark and ritual slayings.3 The twelve tribes were provided with a common ancestor called Abraham. In return for loyalty Yahweh promised them greatness and the land of Canaan - a destiny which victory under the patronage of Yahweh seemed to confirm. Conquests by outsiders were continually interpreted by the Hebrew prophets as 1

Refer to section 10 for the effect of conditional love on a childs development. Refer to section 63 for the offering of rewards and punishments in order to manipulate and control people. 3 Refer to section 15 for the similarity between parts of the Old Testament and ancient myths. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

125

punishment for their disobedience to Yahweh. This led to an even stricter interpretation of his laws, and to the desire for a messiah who would deliver Israel from its enemies and establish a kingdom of god on earth, a sentiment that had already been echoed by the Egyptians before them. This vision wasn't of a peaceful messiah but a militaristic and powerful one, who would lead them to victory over their enemies on the battlefields as they had achieved when united under Yahweh. Anyone who claimed to be this messiah had no chance of acceptance unless they fitted this role. The prophets of Israel, as spokesmen for Yahweh, now upheld Yahweh as a universal god, the same status the Egyptians had claimed for their sun god Re, and that Zarathustra claimed for Ahura Mazda.1 Yahweh originally promised a prosperous and long life for obedience, and a short and miserable one for disobedience. Experience soon put this wishful thinking to rest, for the bad seemed to thrive and in the Book of Job we find the same pessimism as was expressed in the Egyptian story of the 'Righteous sufferer' from which it no doubt drew its inspiration. Here again we see the force of reality leading to the questioning of beliefs and expectations. Here again we witness not the outright rejection of beliefs but their modification. The Hebrews originally had the same conception of an afterlife as had the Mesopotamians after death there was a descent into 'the land of no return' which the Hebrews called sheol. If there was no salvation from injustice in this life, then this was sure to lead to the despair expressed by Job; in Ezekiel we see the emergence of a 'national revival' which could only be contemplated in similar form to the popular ancient Egyptian belief of the reconstitution of the soul or 'ba' which the Hebrews called a 'nephesh'. This reconstitution is followed by the rejection of the descent to sheol in Daniel, but it was only in AD70 that in the rabbinic Tractate Sanhedrin it was considered heresy to deny a physical resurrection in another world to come. The much admired guidance to right conduct contained in the Book of Proverbs has a 'whole section of about a chapter and a half... largely drawn verbatim from the Wisdom of Amenemope', a wise Egyptian, and includes 1

Refer to section 25 and 31 for the origins of monotheism.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

126

proverbs from other wise men whose non-Hebrew names testify to their foreign origins.' (Breastred)

28 Jesus Not much is known about the historical life of Jesus, so much so that it has even been necessary to refute the suggestion that he was a mythical figure. Most of the information about Jesus is contained in the Gospels, which were written by his disciples and therefore written from a religious point of view. A further complication is the fact that the gospels are inconsistent with each other on some major points. For example, there is no agreement as to where the resurrected Jesus was seen. What is known beyond doubt is that Jesus was a Jew who was executed by the Romans on a charge of preaching rebellion against them. He held himself out as the Jewish messiah, and protested against the leadership of the Jewish Temple who were corrupt and under the direct control of the Romans. This made his protest a political one, which led to his arrest by the Jewish leaders; they feared it might spread and provoke the Romans into destroying their nation and Temple. The gospels agree that the disciples of Jesus offered armed resistance to prevent his arrest. It is certain that anyone who claimed to be the Jewish messiah must have come to deliver Israel from its enemies, and this could only be achieved by defeating their Roman conquerors on the battlefield.1 This liberation struggle from the yoke of Roman colonialism had commenced from the time of their occupation, and was no different to the anti-colonial liberation struggles fought against colonial powers such as the Spanish, British and French in more modern times. Jesus was himself a disciple of John the Baptist, who used to create anti-Roman sentiments by bathing people to cleanse them of their sins in preparation for the coming kingdom. Having tried Jesus and finding him guilty, he was then handed over to Pontius Pilate, who sentenced him to be crucified along with two other lestai or Zealots, as the Romans called them. Significantly, the cross of Jesus was placed in-between them with the words 'King of the Jews' written on it. The protest of Jesus also coincided with a Zealot rebellion against 1

Refer to section 27 for the Jewish requirement of a militaristic messiah.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

127

the Romans, and it is certain that Simon who was one of his disciples, was a Zealot. The Zealots were a fanatical Jewish sect who derived their name from the zealousness with which they fought to defend their faith. It was their leader and founder Judah, a rabbi, who in 6AD originated the philosophy 'No Lord but God', based on the first commandment. The military success of the Israelites under the patronage of Yahweh had convinced them of his devotion. Fresh in their minds was the recent Israeli success under the leadership of the Maccabaean family when they managed to overcome the superior forces of the Seleucid leaders. Despite much suffering their faith had never wavered, and they were eventually rewarded. As a result, the willingness to risk their lives in defence of their faith took root in a new-found martyrdom for Israel. The zealots were thus dedicated to fight to the death against Roman domination, including the persecution of all those who collaborated with them. They refused to pay taxes from Judaea, which belonged to their god Yahweh, to the Romans who worshipped Caesar as a god. According to them this would be blasphemous. In reply to whether he was in favour of paying a tribute to Rome, Jesus is said to have replied: 'render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to god the things that are gods, or in other words 'don't pay''.

29 The death of Jesus The crucifixion of Jesus posed a problem to his followers for the Jewish Messiah was supposed to free them from suppression and establish a kingdom of god on earth. This was the reason so many Jews refused to accept him as their messiah. Other Jews turned to their scriptures to find an explanation for it. 'They found it in Isaiah's mysterious prophecy of the Suffering Servant of Yahweh'. There had been many other military leaders spanning a period of over 100 years who, like Jesus, had claimed to be the Jewish messiah. It was only the belief of his disciples, that god had raised him from the dead so that he would soon be able to return and restore the kingdom to Israel, that kept them going. This belief is thought to be responsible for the fact that no written records were made. If the second coming would herald the end of the present order, there would be no © 1997 Allan Sztab

128

point in doing so. It was only when the entire Christian community was destroyed by the Romans in response to defiance by the Zealots in 66AD that the necessity for such a record was required. The Zealot rebellion led to the destruction by the Romans of the entire Jewish-Christian community of Jerusalem, including many eye-witnesses to the life of Jesus and not a single document about its teachings or policy remain. The rebellion finally culminated in the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70AD. For the Israelites the rebellion resulted in the loss of their state which they would only regain in 1948. Far more significantly was the fact that the success and foresight of the early Jewish Christians in absorbing Jesus into Judaism was now lost and set the stage to change Christianity for ever through the rival Christian doctrines of Paul.

30 The rival Christian doctrine of Paul From the time of the crucifixion all Christians had been controlled by the Jewish Christians based in Jerusalem. Having found confirmation in the scriptures about the suffering of their Messiah Jesus, who they now considered a martyr, their faith was restored and they continued to practice as Orthodox Jews. They prepared for the second coming, and managed to convert many other Jews. Paul was a Greek Jew who developed a rival version of Christianity. He was not one of the original disciples of Jesus nor was he converted. He became a disciple after the crucifixion, when he allegedly had a revelation of Jesus. He claimed that his version of Christianity was revealed to him by god and was specifically adapted for a mainly non-Jewish audience who had many different religious ideas. Specifically, the Greeks believed in a soul that survives the body after death. When they heard of a crucified messiah and his physical resurrection they laughed at him, so he attempted to accommodate them. As we have already seen, from ancient times burial procedures and rituals indicated the belief that the dead would in some way live on in their graves. These ideas evolved and many different conceptions of the soul were developed. The ancient Egyptians believed that a persons soul was reconstituted piece by piece from their body after it had been resurrected after death. The Mesopotamians believed the dead dwelt in the 'land of no return', as did the © 1997 Allan Sztab

129

ancient Hebrews before they adopted the doctrine of a physical resurrection. The cult of Orpheus gave rise to the mystical philosophy of Orphism and Paul developed a unique idea that was based on it. The history of Orpheus and Orphism isn't very clear but essentially they believed that the spiritual soul is created by god and is therefore immortal. As punishment for a sin the soul is forced to reside in the human body, wherein it is exposed to corruption in a world ruled by demonic powers. This idea may be found in various forms, especially in the ancient Gnostic religions which claimed that by obtaining a secret knowledge the soul could be purified and liberated. In ancient Greece its influence was evident as they believed that at death the immortal soul escapes once more to its non-material world. This sentiment in various guises is also found in Hinduism, varieties of Buddhism, and Jainism. The Christian doctrine now preached by Paul was that humans are 'enslaved by demonic powers, from whom they are redeemed through the death and resurrection of a divine saviour'. The original sin might have been that committed by Adam when eating the forbidden fruit. By crucifying Jesus the demonic powers make a grave error and lose their hold over humankind. Furthermore, by the baptism ritual the new convert would be 'assimilated to Christ in his death in order to be one with him in his resurrection'. At the second coming of Christ the present world will end, the dead will be resurrected and judged before him. Not surprisingly, the Jerusalem Christians were opposed to this version which offered redemption to non-Jews, amongst whom were those very people who had crucified Christ and now oppressed them. This made a mockery of their claims to be the chosen people. Paul was also prepared to baptise non-Jews without insisting on their circumcision. They therefore sent their own followers to preach to his converts, who were mostly Jews who understood the Old Testament.1 Their success at reverting his converts prompted Paul to go to Jerusalem where he accepted the validity of Judaism. His interpretation would surely have died but for the elimination of the Jerusalem Christians during the zealot-inspired rebellion that ended with the destruction of the Temple in 70AD. With their demise the Jewish Christians in other parts of 1

Refer to section 26 for the Jewish families that were exiled due to conquest.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

130

the world were now left on their own. It was at this time that the gospels were written and, together with the writings of Paul, formed the basis for the New Testament. It was the doctrines of Paul that finally emerged as the work of a saint and came to be recognised as the official doctrine of Christianity. Much confusion about Jesus relates to the fact that the earliest gospel was the Gospel of Mark which was written in Rome during or shortly after the rebellion. The Romans regarded their victory as a triumph and were intent on making an impression on the Roman people. The gospel could hardly disagree with the Roman version of the political nature of the crucifixion, for fear of being similarly persecuted. The blame for the execution of Jesus was therefore apportioned to the Jewish leaders, and a fictitious account given both of their motivation for doing so and of the trial of Jesus who was now portrayed as a peaceful messiah who would never contemplate overthrowing the Romans by force. Anti-Semitism was also rife in Rome and this led to even further repressive measures against the Jews who now had an added incentive to convert. The Gospel of Mark was accepted by other disciples who continued to add to it. One such addition by Matthew has Pilate saying: 'I am innocent of this man's blood', and the Jewish people answering: 'His blood be on us and on our children'. It was these words that would justify persecution of the Jews for hundreds of years to come. 'It is significant that only recently in the Vatican Council has a formal declaration been made, exonerating subsequent generations of Jews from responsibility for the murder of Christ.' (Brandon)

31 Zoroastrianism Probably the first religious movement to stress the moral choice one had between Good and Evil was that founded by a prophet called Zarathustra, who came from an area bordering Iran and Afghanistan. Not much is known of his personal history, and estimates of his birth date range anywhere from 1,000 to 570BC. Zoroastrianism is one of the oldest religions and is still practised today in certain parts of Iran and India. His original writings are found in the Gathas © 1997 Allan Sztab

131

but many changes were made to his original doctrines and are known as the Avestas. He rejected the traditional religious practice of his time which was formal and ritualistic, often involved blood-sacrifices, but had no answers for the existence of evil. These ancient religious beliefs, based on the worship of many different nature gods and spirits, were derived from common Aryan ancestors who migrated from the plains north-east of Mesopotamia southeastwards into India and further east into China. The Aryans used to trade with the Mesopotamians, so it is very likely they were also influenced by their religious ideas. The forces of evil were most likely impressed upon Zarathustra by the attacks of nomads upon his people, who were caught up in the process of adapting to a civilised and agricultural mode of life. He was a religious reformer but many of his ideas can be traced to a more ancient religious belief, one that was morally indifferent by its acceptance of two forces, one good and the other evil, both seen as necessary aspects of life. His achievement was to make one universal god, Ahura Mazda, the creator of Good Order in the universe. Like so many other self-proclaimed prophets before and after him, Ahura Mazda is alleged to have spoken to him personally. According to Zarathustra two spirits emanate from Ahura Mazda, a Good spirit called Spenta Mainyu and an Evil spirit called Angra Mainyu, Satan or Ahriman. How they came to be is never clarified and later modifications of his doctrine had Spenta Mainyu assisted by angels and Satan assisted by demons. Zarathustra considered other 'pagan' gods as forces of Evil but according to him each person has the moral choice between following Good or Evil (the Lie), a choice on which their destiny depends. By way of contrast, no choice exists in Christianity, where everyone is born in sin, or in Islam where everything is determined by Allah. In return for obedience to Zarathustra and the supreme god Ahura Mazda, followers were promised prosperity in this life and immortality hereafter. Immortality could be obtained not by magic or ritual but only in a judgement after death when their lifetime of moral deeds would be considered.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

132

If necessary, the followers of Zarathustra were to fight against the Lie and the evil practices of other religions.1 Immortality in a judgement after death had the benefit of rewarding those who never prospered in this life and of punishing the bad who might have prospered. In promising immortality he was in effect accepting the ancient Aryan belief that some element of a person survives physical death, a belief that derived from early ideas of ancestral spirits. In the Avestas it is those whose good thoughts, words and deeds outweigh their bad one's that go to heaven, while all others go to hell with the exception of those whose good equals their bad - they remain in limbo, a place of the shadows. The earth, fire and water were considered sacred and their pollution was evil. Later this doctrine was developed further and led to the adoption of the ritual disposal of a persons body at death by its exposure to vultures on top of a specially created tower - a ritual which ensured that the elements wouldn't be polluted. A prophesy was also made of a final day of judgement when good would triumph over evil. Later this was further developed by other priests to include a future saviour born of a virgin impregnated by water in which the sperm of Zarathustra was deposited. Over time these modifications even led to the inclusion of some of the ritual practices which Zarathustra had denounced. It was the Iranian concept of dualism such as that of good and evil, light and dark, angels and demons that was significantly modified by the priestly Magi clan. According to the Magi all beginnings, all conflicts such as those between good and evil, were all part of the principle of 'Time as Destiny' - time from which nothing can escape. The Pahlavi name for time is Zurvan and according to the myth it is the god Zurvan who is the father of twins Ohrmizd or Ahura Mazda, the force of Good, and Ahriman or Satan, the force of Evil. The High God Zurvan is therefore 'Beyond Good and Evil'. Ahura Mazda is associated with good, light and infinite time, while Ohrmizd is associated with evil, dark and limited time. Infinite time or good will conquer limited time or evil on the final day of judgement. These concepts of time can be found in the cult of Mithraism where it is combined with astrological concepts, the cults of Orphism, Gnosticism and in the Western tradition of Father Time. 1

Refer to the Islam and war against non-believers.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

133

While it is accepted that the Zoroastrian religion exerted a definite influence on other religions, the extent to which it did so isn't known. When the Persian emperor Cyrus conquered Babylon about 538BC many Jews came under his control. It is significant that only after this period does the Old Testament speak about an evil force called Satan and of immortality as a reward for the good. The New Testament also accepts the existence of Satan. Jesus is also a saviour born of a virgin. The idea of angels as allies of the forces of good, and demons as allies of the forces of evil, as recorded in both the Old and New Testaments, also derive from ancient Iranian concepts that were incorporated by Zarathustra. A brief outline of some of the other major religions of the world is provided in Appendix B.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

134

© 1997 Allan Sztab

135

PART THREE PHILOSOPHY

© 1997 Allan Sztab

136

The Path Of Western Philosophy.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

137

Chapter Seven Truth And Change 32 What is truth? The fourth, fifth and sixth centuries BC were in general a period of great political and social upheavals, a time when more than ever before humans attempted to make sense out of the stormy events that threatened to drown them in a sea of despair. It is more than coincidence that this period gave us Buddhism, Confucianism, Jainism, Taoism and Zoroastrianism. The word Homo Sapiens is a rough translation from the Latin 'thinking or knowing being'. It was in this period too that the exploitation of the human potential for thought first commenced in earnest - the attempt to find in the guise of human reason what others believed they had discovered in myth, superstition and mysticism. Behind all human actions is a desire or need to be fulfilled and there can be little doubt that the desire for certainty, for a stable, consistent and familiar environment, is the driving force behind all the diverse attempts to determine the truth.1 This continual quest for consistency and familiarity dominates our lives, and all the more so because we live in a world that is constantly changing. The nature of change is puzzling and we need only look at ourselves to see why. We are born and grow up into adults but, despite the obvious changes in our appearance, we claim the same identity throughout our lives. In addition, things are not always what they appear at first sight to be, and the more information we have about something the more we can see. For example, a radiologist who reads an x-ray can see far more than we can, and what might only appear to us as an indistinguishable pattern of different shades could actually represent the detailed state of health of a persons lungs. A farmer might look up at the sky and see a hailstorm coming when all we might see are dark clouds. We all tend to see in things a lot more or less than others do. If things are constantly changing and appearances can deceive us, then how can we ever know the absolute truth about anything?

1

Refer to section 11 for the desire to eliminate the fear of uncertainty.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

138

The fact that appearances can be deceptive is the first argument used by those who want to convince people that the truth can be obtained without any reference to the senses The question 'what is truth?' is therefore one of the most profound questions ever asked and the quest to answer it defines to a major extent the course which philosophy has taken. Right at the outset the attempt by philosophers to explain the nature of change divided thinkers into the two distinct schools of thought mentioned in section one.1 On the one hand are those who believe in imaginary things and explanations which are not in any way demonstrable to the senses. It is interesting to note that of all living organisms only humans place their trust in imaginary things. On the other hand are those who accept the world of appearances and rely principally on explanations that are in some way demonstrable to their senses - here we find a far smaller group of humans together with every other living organism. With the vast amounts of information and experience that we have today we are able to see far more than our early ancestors. We know that vast quantities of information are channelled into the brain from our senses and then processed while at the same time taking into consideration all the information obtained from a lifetime of previous experiences. It is only after all this processing and interpretation that a meaning is given to it. Because we all have unique experiences the meanings we give to things will vary from person to person. We are no longer surprised that people have different tastes, opinions and behaviours. There are three objective requirements for the senses - an object or thing, an intermediary or light and the sensory organs. However, there is so much information available that it has to be carefully selected. With vision, for example, of all the possible light rays that convey information pertaining to a particular 'state of affairs', only 150 million are selected by light-sensitive cells in the retina. These cells are connected to optic nerves which consist of only 1 1

Refer to the error of imaginary causes in section 58 and non-moral obligations as obstacles to personal freedom in section 65. © 1997 Allan Sztab

139

million fibres. Thus, in the very first step of visual processing all the available light carrying information has been pared down from billions to a million. It is only after a great deal more processing, during which a persons unique experiences and the meanings they have placed on them are utilised, that a final meaning or interpretation of the information is made. All this is performed subconsciously and the rules governing the selection and processing of information are still unknown. There are thus many difficulties to consider concerning the senses but it is nonetheless possible to reach two obvious conclusions - it isn't possible to obtain all the information concerning any 'facts' or 'state of affairs' in the world, nor is it possible to make any sense of this information without interpretation. As soon as interpretation is required there is always room for error and disagreement. This is particularly evident when we attempt to recall the details of past events with the result that no history can ever be entirely honest.1 This is the second argument used by those who want to convince people that the truth can be obtained without any reference to the senses. It is with language that we think and pose questions, and all the knowledge we have is expressed in terms of it. The question 'what is truth?' is really the question of how we can determine whether an opinion, statement, or proposition is true. Language requires social agreement as to the meaning of words and is therefore objective - a private or subjective language isn't possible. If we attempted to define a true proposition we could say that a proposition may be said to be true if it describes a 'state of affairs' that exists, did exist or will exist in the future. The problem is that 'a state of affairs' can only be described by referring to certain facts, and whatever information we have about any fact we have either learnt from our immediate sensations or from previous sensory experiences. In the case of an individual the truth is consistent sensation. However, truth on this level is subjective and depends on the interpretation and reasoning given to it by the individual. If an individual claims to have seen a unicorn there is no way to disprove their claim. Only if a unicorn is present so 1

Refer to the Old Testament reinterpretation of history in section 26, the controversy surrounding the life and teachings of Jesus in sections 28 to 30 and the myth of the impartial observer in section 47. © 1997 Allan Sztab

140

that a number of people can see and touch it and agree that it indeed has only one horn will it become accepted that such a thing as a unicorn exists. When we require OBJECTIVITY we require social consensus or agreement and in this case the truth will be socially consistent sensation. This is the reply to any attempt to slander the senses. In other words, if we all agree that something is the case based on the evidence presented to our senses and this evidence is available to anyone who cares to examine it we then have social consensus or agreement which is a far more accurate messenger of the truth than the subjective interpretation of any one person, irrespective of who they may be. The fact that our own personal interpretations of events might be mistaken and that our senses can in certain circumstances be deceiving does not mean that we should abandon them. What it does mean is that anyone can misinterpret an experience with ease so when extravagant claims are made they should be taken lightly. It is only when the same experience can be had by any interested person that such claims deserve to be taken seriously and their truth status investigated according to the specific knowledge that exists at the time. Social consensus is a very powerful force and we only need to look at language to realise this. Without social consensus as to the meanings of words and the rules for their use language wouldn't be possible at all. The same goes for mathematics. It wouldn't matter who it was who wanted to develop their own words or calculus – without social consensus their best efforts would be in vain. Take the example used earlier of dinosaurs - we only know for sure that they once roamed the earth because we have discovered their bones and fossils. Without this evidence dinosaurs would also be regarded as a myth together with the unicorn and a host of other mythical entities. A lack of evidence surrounds most mystic and superstitious claims and when we forego the evidence of our senses we lose the only standard of truth by which we can objectively measure reality. That truth and morality are relative was evident to the Sophists 2,500 years ago, but philosophers such as Socrates and Plato refused to accept this simplicity. They were followed by Aristotle and many others after him who set out to © 1997 Allan Sztab

141

discover systems of knowledge that would lead to the discovery of a universal morality. Socrates and Plato were the first to propose the existence of a knowledge so special and elusive it would allow them to claim that all wrongdoing was based on an ignorance of it. Fierce philosophical debates raged for hundreds of years on this issue. So strong is the desire for certainty that it was perhaps inevitable that philosophers would attempt to discover some indisputable and absolute truth in the attempt to develop an indisputable and solid foundation for knowledge and with it a precise conception of how humans should behave. Many placed their hopes in the power of human intuition, reason and logic. However, all interpretations are made to satisfy our desires and for this reason it isn't surprising to find in these truths precisely the kind of irrationality that accompanies belief, faith and conviction. Belief is the acceptance, usually without any further consideration, of an opinion as being true. No matter how strongly we believe something is true our belief alone can never make it so. Something may be either true or not true but there may be as many beliefs as there are opinions, irrespective of their truth status. Having faith or conviction is the giving of our complete trust or confidence to a belief or a system of beliefs. A theistic interpretation of the truth would be one that is in accordance with the laws of a particular god. Another interpretation of the truth might be 'whatever is of the best value to a community or nation'. The truth may also be 'whatever works'. However, we can always ask which god, for which community or nation, and works for whom?1 Having a conviction regarding something is to believe that one is in possession of the truth, and most conflicts are really clashes between people who hold different beliefs. Progress almost of necessity requires the discovery that previous truths were in fact errors, even though they may have been 'useful errors'. Most innovations have their roots in practical considerations. It was probably the need for speedy communication that led to the development of language and the rapid growth of the human brain. Changes in climatic conditions led to the development of agriculture. Arithmetic and mathematics were born out of the necessity for accurate measurements 1

Refer to the Utilitarian philosophers in section 52.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

142

concerning the apportionment and allocation of land, the collection of taxes and the keeping of accurate trading records. However, search wherever you like and you will never find a number 2 or a number 4 because they are only abstractions or ideas despite the fact that they can help us to accurately describe the content of a box of apples. But don't ever be fooled - irrespective of how useful something may be its usefulness is no criterion of the truth. We shall see later that science and logic also require a faith in the truth of the assumptions that they are based on. 1 In the next few sections we will see how the senses were slandered and how certain extremely influential ideas developed – ideas that are still in vogue despite their failure in practise as the recent demise of Soviet communism bears testimony to.

33 The first philosophers and their attempt to understand change The first philosophers occupied much of their time in an attempt to explain change and so get to the truth behind its elusive nature. All things are in a perpetual state of change, from children who grow into adults to political change as a result of wars and conquest. Following an age-old tradition they were tempted to assume that there were forces or laws responsible for these changes. Each new war and conquest brought with it changes in personal fortune which led people to question whether this was fair or just. If there were forces that determined how things in nature changed were there also forces or laws which determined political change? Were there forces or laws which governed human behaviour and morals? The most influential theory on change was that proposed by an aristocrat called Heraclitus who was born in about 504BC. During his lifetime the aristocratic form of government was threatened by democratic revolutionary forces. The impact of these forces of change on a persons position and prestige were firmly impressed upon him. He concluded that everything is in a constant process of change and coined the often used phrase 'you can't step into the same river twice' (because there is always fresh water flowing past). It seemed to Heraclitus that although people and other things are constantly changing there is something in them that remains 1

Refer to section 48 for science and section 50 for logic.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

143

essentially the same.1 This something is common to everything and is like a fire which constantly transforms whatever is fed into it. This basic substance he called the One or God and believed that it was divisible into many different things in a relentless process of change, change that was inevitable and determined by a law of universal reason. To Heraclitus change was a constant process of decay and regeneration, driven by the struggle between opposite forces or contradictions. Nothing is lost in this struggle and the opposites are combined to form something different. This process is best illustrated by considering how cold mixes with hot to produce warm. He viewed war as a natural struggle between opposites that produced masters and slaves. Because war was natural the outcome was always just. The forces of good and evil only appear to be contradictory but they are in fact unified in the One. 'The good and the bad are identical'.2 The ideas of Heraclitus can be seen in the works of Plato, Hegel and Marx.

34 Parmenides and the illusion of appearances A contemporary of Heraclitus by the name of Parmenides accepted the idea of one underlying substance, but rejected the notion that it could be divided by change into many things. According to him a thing could only be what it is and couldn't change into something that wasn't there before it. He concluded that the appearance of change is an illusion - appearances can only produce opinions of the world, and not truth. Zeno was a pupil of Parmenides and set out to defend his master by developing four paradoxes. Firstly he demonstrated how misleading the senses can be:- if one millet seed falls silently to the ground but 1,000 seeds makes a sound, it seems to suggest that 1,000 times nothing makes something. According to Zeno we can only use thinking to determine the truth of the matter, and he therefore concluded that it is better to rely on thinking than on our senses. The paradoxes or puzzles of Zeno attempt to demonstrate how difficult it is to describe or even think rationally of motion in a world that was divisible into many things. According to Pythagoras everything was divisible 1

Refer to section 38 for Socrates and his belief in essences and universals. Refer to the belief of Zarathustra of the co-existence of good and evil in section 31 and the moral indifference of nature in section 57. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

144

into small units. This meant that a sports track was divisible into an infinite number of points and it should be impossible to cover it in a finite or specified amount of time because each point would first have to be crossed before arriving at the next one. This process should proceed indefinitely and take an infinite amount of time. Thus, if a tortoise got a head start in a race with an athlete, the athlete would never be able to pass because the distance between them would always be divisible into an infinite number of points, each one having to be crossed by the athlete. The paradoxes of Zeno were intended to illustrate the absurdities that arise when things are divided into small units. Zeno's paradoxes are intellectually stimulating and his intention in developing them were clear. However, they should not confuse people to such an extent that they no longer trust their senses because when we go against our sensations we lose the only standard of truth by which we can objectively measure reality.1 Zeno's paradoxes illustrate this clearly because irrespective of how confused we might be our common sense and practical experience indicate clearly that we can cover the distance between two points without any difficulty and beat any tortoise in a race. Our sensory experience tells us that this is the truth and should alert us to the strong possibility that the error and confusion lies elsewhere. The rational solution to his paradoxes lies in the assumptions they make. All of them rely on the abstract concept of division which was created by mathematicians to assist them in describing nature. However, we know that usefulness is no criterion of the truth and in nature, or reality, objects are not broken up into units or points - a track or stick is one continuous whole. Similarly, there is no such thing as units or moments of time. In reality time is continuous and flows in a continuous, never-ending stream. The next paradox of Zeno was based on the division of time. According to Zeno, an arrow at rest occupies a space equal to its length. If it is shot at a target it still continues to occupy the same space as its length, and at any point or moment during its flight it should therefore always be at rest. Once again, our senses tell 1

Refer to section 2 for the basic function of any organism to collect environmental information, section 32 for truth as consistent sensation and section 58 for the error of imaginary causes that cannot be sensed. © 1997 Allan Sztab

145

us that the arrow does move, and this alerts us to the possibility that the error lies with time that had been divided into moments and, in addition, a static definition of motion. (Einstein later showed that any object in motion changes its dimensions although at the speeds we are normally accustomed to these differences are indiscernible.) He next demonstrated the relativity of motion which can only be explained by thinking. There are three trains. Train A is stationary whilst trains B and C are moving in opposite directions. A passenger seated in the first coach of train B and looking out of his window will see three coaches of train A pass him as we move from position 1 to position 2. Another passenger seated in the first car of train C and looking out of his window will see six coaches of train B pass him as we move from position 1 to position 2 despite the fact they have both travelled the same distance. The solution is simple - an object that is moving in the opposite direction to us will pass us by far quicker than a stationary one. A

1 2 3 4 5 6

1 2 3 4 5

6

B 6 5 4 3 2 1 >

6 5 4 3 2

1

C

1 2 3 4 5

6

1 2 3 4 5 6 < -

POSITION 1

© 1997 Allan Sztab

POSITION 2

146

35 Anaxagoras Around the same time another philosopher called Anaxagoras proposed that there isn't only one indivisible substance but four - water, fire, air and earth. He claimed it was the different composition of these four substances that accounted for the diversity of things in nature. Change only altered their mixture and in doing so nothing is ever destroyed. He claimed that it was reason or mind that was responsible for ordering matter into the many different things of nature. Mind, being distinctly different to matter, 'is mixed with nothing, but is alone, itself by itself'. This concept that mind is immaterial would in time have an enormous influence on philosophical thought.1

36 Leucippus, Democritus, materialism and idealism In about 440BC Leucippus and Democritus claimed that everything consisted of space and solid particles called atoms. According to them there was no creator, designer or purpose behind things - it was the movement of atoms in space that formed the objects we experience. This is the classical position known as materialism and its implications laid the foundation of epistemology which concerns itself with how we acquire our knowledge of things. Democritus also laid the foundation for idealism when he said that it is only by our actions that we determine what is good and bad; similarly it is only by tasting something that we can determine what is sweet or sour. However, 'in reality there are only atoms and the void'. To idealists we create reality in our minds.2 The prophetic theory of atoms was still used by Isaac Newton some 2,000 years later, and the ethical views of Democritus would be perfected by Epicurus some 150 years later - the view that mental happiness is the most important goal and can best be achieved by freeing oneself from fear and anxiety.3

1

Refer to Descartes in section 50 and errors of context in section 54. Refer to the opposite view of the Sophists in section 37 that without our sensory organs there is nothing at all. 3 Refer to Epicurus in section 43 and the quest for happiness in section 66. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

147

37 The Intellectuals Or Sophists In the midst of this debate about substances, laws of reason and mind, a new line of thought was developed by a group of Intellectuals or Sophists who came to Athens from countries with different religious traditions and customs. They had an entirely practical approach to philosophy. While debate raged over the composition of things in the universe, Protagoras claimed that the extent to which we could accurately interpret nature was limited to what our senses reported to us. For this reason it was impossible to know anything about the gods or even whether they existed at all. We know that our senses are subjective and it isn't possible to accurately determine reality because we can only select that information which our organs are capable of selecting. We also know that this information is channelled into our minds where we give it a meaning. If each individual interprets things differently there is no objective reality or independent yardstick with which we can tell whose perception is correct or whose actions are right or wrong. All our concepts such as those of space and time are also subjective - time trebles in the dentists chair and 'flies when you're having a good time'. It is only in this sense that we create the world although one could always ask how much of reality is actually there and not constructed by the mind1 . The Sophists held the view that without sensory organs there is nothing at all. According to them the role of reason is to order the sensations into knowledge and harmonious conclusions which stand to be verified or rejected by the senses. The more we drift away from the senses the more we drift away from the truth. Whether we can ever know the absolute and indisputable truth about things has always been and still remains open to doubt. Protagoras knew there were many different cultures with their own laws, moral rules and customs, none of which were right or wrong but merely different. He therefore concluded that there is no universal law of nature relating to human behaviour. It was obvious to him that if people ran around doing what they pleased without any 1

According to idealists it is by interpreting our sensations that we create the qualities in things such as their colour, shape, smell and texture. Taking this view to its extreme leads certain idealists to dispense altogether with the external world! © 1997 Allan Sztab 148

rules then society would never be stable. Rules were therefore desirable, but this didn't necessarily make them correct. To achieve stability amongst people he advised them to follow the laws of their society and advocated freedom of worship. Thrasymachus took a cold look at history and at events around him and came to the conclusion that crime pays, especially for the powerful who ruled over cities and nations. He concluded that might was right and that laws were made to suit the rulers who made them - it was they alone who determined what was right or wrong. He recommended that everyone should pursue their own interests and many Sophists did exactly that in much the same way as the majority of us do today.1 The Sophists had an in-depth knowledge of many different customs, which made it clear to them that it was prejudice and not fact behind the Athenian distinction between Greek and barbarian, master and slave.2 They also questioned the moral and religious views of their time and held strong doubts about the many claims to truth, justice and a universal code of moral behaviour, especially since reasons could be found to support any moral code. According to them morality was an artificial set of standards created for the sake of convenience. Knowing that truth was relative, they could argue effectively by finding good reasons for both sides of an issue and it wasn't surprising that before long they would make enemies. Even today they are still unjustly labelled as nihilists, but claiming that there is no universal code of morals and that morality is relative doesn't imply that all laws are of equal merit or that no laws are desirable. The relativity of truth and morals led directly to the realisation that rules or laws are made by humans and could always be modified or changed. Their contribution towards the tolerance of other peoples' views is still not appreciated today. Their obvious verbal skills led to the derivation of the somewhat derogatory word 'sophistry', which means a false argument used to deceive. However, history and every advance in morals has lent added support to their claims, 1

Refer to the principle of might is right as the origin of morality in section 57 and the pursuit of self-interest in sections 66 and 67. 2 Refer to the tricks and traps of language in appendix E. © 1997 Allan Sztab

149

and, ironically, it has always been those who seek to ground moral systems in reason or logical thinking that could rightfully be accused of sophistry. The first to do so would be Plato. The Sophists charged for teaching to earn a living, and Socrates even attended one of their shorter courses. However, charging for teaching was regarded by Plato as conduct unbecoming of philosophers. It was Socrates and Plato, more than any other philosophers, who refused to accept the simplicity of their conclusions. To admit relativity would be to sacrifice both certainty and the security that dogmatic claims to the truth provided. To admit relativity was to admit the risk of misfortune that chance introduces into events, and this was something that both Socrates and Plato refused to accept. Socrates turned to definitions in the hope that defining things would usher in absolute truth and certainty, while Plato created another real and unchanging world, and suggested a rigid political system where change wouldn't be possible at all. Whatever their other merits these errors must surely rank foremost amongst the most elementary blunders in the history of philosophy; errors that are drowned out by the unqualified adoration of the majority of historians and academics.

38 Socrates Socrates was born in 470BC. He claimed to have heard voices, which he referred to as his daimon. He never wrote, and everything we know about him comes from the recollections of others, foremost amongst them being Plato. The Sophists claimed that their experience with many diverse cultures indicated clearly that there was no right or wrong behaviour. Socrates disagreed and claimed it was possible to define what was right or wrong in the same way that he could define what a person was. He thought this was possible because even though people are different there is still something essential that they have in common which makes them people. Similarly, there may be thousands of different flowers but when we think of no particular flower, but of a flower in general, we have an idea of what the word flower means. This idea or general concept of flower is universally applicable to all flowers. Socrates believed it © 1997 Allan Sztab

150

was possible to define what these general ideas of things were. In this way he would be able to define other ideas such as right, wrong and justice. It would then be evident that the behaviour of different peoples varied due to their ignorance of what these ideas were! He developed a means of argumentation that he called dialectic which is the repeated questioning and correcting of an argument or definition in order to bring out any contradictions in a persons position and so awaken them to self-criticism. However, the concept of a general 'idea of things' that is applicable universally, is a purely verbal construction. It would go on to bewitch many of the most highly esteemed philosophers into arriving at far-reaching but unfounded conclusions. The first to do so would be Plato. It would later be claimed that mathematical concepts such as 2 x 2 = 4 are applicable universally and are selfevident truths.1 The quest for the certainty of having precise and accurate definitions in an attempt at obtaining certain knowledge about things is an illusion that has trapped the minds of many thinkers ever since. However, to define one word other words must be used which in their turn must be defined, and this process continues indefinitely. It isn't surprising to find that in science there is no attempt to define things with any precision but rather to explain how they behave under certain conditions according to certain laws. We don't have to know what something is to know how it works or how we can use it. More significantly, the futile attempt to rigidly define concepts like truth and justice, encourages deceptive definitions. The difficulty experienced while making these attempts may also lead to frustration and despair, which is often attributed to the reasoning process itself. This serves to encourage a lack of faith in the proper use of reason in favour of mystical solutions. The difficulty of defining things accurately is a commonly-used debating strategy(you may justifiably call this sophistry), and being lured into making a definition or merely accepting someone else's definition should be resisted.2

39 Plato 1

Refer to sections 47 and 50 for intuition or innate truths that are independent of sensory experience. 2 Refer to the tricks and traps of language in appendix E. © 1997 Allan Sztab

151

Plato, a disciple of Socrates, was born in 428BC into an aristocratic family. Most of his life was lived during periods of war and political instability, as a direct result of the social change from a tribal to a civilised society, a society where different ideas and cultures mixed. It was this experience that perhaps led Plato to conclude that change was evil. He accepted the view of Heraclitus that everything was in a constant process of change. Plato then developed his famous allegory of the cave, which he used to denounce the accuracy of the world as it appears to us. The allegory goes like this: if a group of people were confined to a cave and all they could see were the shadows cast by a fire, they would conclude that this world of shadows was the real world. Even if somebody managed to escape from the cave and for the first time saw the sun, plants, trees and animals, and then returned to the cave to tell everyone, they wouldn't believe him. This is in fact the first reaction of people to something that is considered revelatory. However, what Plato was trying to demonstrate was that the world we see isn't all there is, and that there is actually more to it than meets the eye. This is no doubt true, but as Parmenides had pointed out, it would be impossible to obtain a precise and unchanging knowledge of a constantly changing world of appearances. This wasn't good enough for Plato, who desired a knowledge that was certain, so he claimed that this world of appearances was in reality based on another perfect and unchanging world!1 The person returning to the cave where the rest of humanity was housed, was none other than the philosopher Plato, who now held a special knowledge. According to him the Ideas we have in our minds of right, wrong, justice, of perfect triangles, circles and other objects, were in actual fact the real world. The ever-changing world, as reported to us by our senses, could only produce opinions and not truth. The real world of Ideas existed in the mind of god or the universal reason or the One, before they became part of the objects and people they represented. The real world, the Ideas and the One, are uncreated. Material bodies were only imperfect reflections of the Ideas, and as they changed they moved further and further from the original Idea from which they were moulded. Plato concluded that change is therefore evil.2 1 2

Refer to section 58 for the error of imaginary causes.

Note the influence of Heraclitus (section 33) © 1997 Allan Sztab 152

According to Plato the human soul had a full knowledge of the Ideas before it became part of the human body, and people could recall what the soul once knew by intuition, commencing with an examination of the contradictions that occur in the world of appearances. The human soul had fallen to earth because of conflicts between its reasoning ability, the various drives to action and the appetites or passions. Like Socrates, Plato claimed that ignorance was the source of error. In Plato's scenario it was ignorance that enabled the appetites to outwit reason. This led to unhappiness as the soul would seek pleasure in doing the wrong things. It is the irrationality of the passions that pulls the soul towards earth. Desire creates lust which disturbs the harmony of the soul. The concept of reincarnation or the transmigration of souls was well known in Greece, and Plato was familiar with the Orphic concept of the soul being trapped in the human body until it could be freed from its cycle of rebirth by paying for a prior transgression.1 Plato now extended his theory of Ideas into the political arena. Just as things around us are copies of Ideas, so too is there an Idea of a perfect state. The closest a state could be to this ideal state had already existed - the aristocratic rule of the wisest and most godlike such as that of Sparta and Crete. According to Plato it is the pursuit of self-interest and material possessions that creates conflicts between different classes in society, conflicts which lead to decay and the change to inferior forms of government.2 A similar historical interpretation would be reached by Karl Marx some 2,500 years later. According to Plato it is the breakdown of unity within the ruling class that brings about political change, a breakdown caused by a clash of economic interests. Thus, aristocracy or the rule by nobles degenerates into a timocracy where some aristocrats place the pursuit of honour and personal fame before the common good. Competition amongst them eventually leads to greater disunity 1

This attempt to furnish a reason for human suffering is widely believed in. Refer to section 30 for the influence of this concept on the Christian doctrine of Paul. Refer to Appendix B1 and B2 where almost the same theme finds expression in the Hindu religion. This theme is also found in the Old Testament notion of original sin, for which Gods' chosen people are condemned to suffer forever. It is also to be found in the influential psychological theory of Freud in the form of the inherent depravity of the id. 2 Individual actions pose a threat to authoritarian rulers so Plato cunningly equated them as being selfish. This is another of his not so noble lies as it is clear that selfishness is opposed to altruism and individual actions are opposed to group actions - selfishness and altruism have nothing to do with individual or group actions. © 1997 Allan Sztab

153

until timocracy degenerates into oligarchy, where the aristocrats pursue personal wealth and disobey the laws. Now the society becomes divided into the rich and the poor. Conflict between them eventually leads to civil war and degeneration into democracy, where the poor rule. However, even the poor want to be rich and they eventually begin to steal from the rich who seek out a strongman to defend them. Democracy then decays into despotism. Instead of opting for a classless society, Plato's ideal state is based on a tribal authoritarian aristocracy that once existed in Sparta. It would be constructed so as to make any conflicts that might lead to change or decay impossible. It would be divided into three classes and he proposed to tell the people what he called a noble lie, the Myth of Blood and Soil - a lie that would in time, through the idolisation of Plato, provide an intellectual inspiration for racial bias and prejudice - a lie that god mixed gold into the ruling class of philosophers, silver into the guardians or military and brass into the farmers and craftsmen! Children were not to be raised in the traditional way but would be bred according to strict marriage rules to ensure the quality of the future rulers and guardians. Variation brought about by the mixture of classes would introduce impurities which would create disunity in the ruling class. This myth of racial purity still persists among many radical movements, and, as one of the first to advocate breeding humans for racial purity, Plato can rightfully claim to be one of the first eugenicists.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

154

The uncritical acceptance of such doctrines reached its most perverse form of expression in the Nazi extermination camps.1 In Plato's schools children would be taught only what was in the interests of the ruling class, and a strict censorship would be applied to prevent the minds of the people from being corrupted. Children would not be taught philosophy as this would be reserved until they reached the age of fifty, an age when their way of life had already been accepted. We also find a similar logic at work in Hinduism, where the Upanishads were modified by the Brahman priestly caste so that ascetic pursuits would be reserved towards the end of a mans' natural life, when it would undoubtedly be far easier and considerably more practical to achieve, as most of the passions of youth would then have waned.2 According to Plato it was out of these elderly pupils that new leaders would be selected. Today in France almost every politician and administrative official has passed through the Ecole Nationale d'Administration (ENA). Burdening education with objectives like selecting the best and allowing the state an excessive control over education has its roots in Plato's philosophy. 'It has been said, only too truly, that Plato was the inventor of both our secondary schools and our universities. I do not know a better argument for an optimistic view of mankind, no better proof of their indestructible love for truth and decency, of their originality, stubbornness and health, than the fact that this devastating system of education has not utterly ruined them.' (Popper) Today education is influenced by big business groups who are obsessed with producing skilled, as opposed to educated, graduates.3 Plato's ideal state is an authoritarian one - there is no freedom of association, choice or thought, and all laws would be made by the ruling class who would have absolute power. Plato accepted the principle of the absolute and unchecked power of a ruler. It thus seemed natural for Plato to ask who should rule absolutely without any regard for restrictions on the use of power. Not surprisingly, about nine of Plato's pupils and associates went on to become tyrants. 1 2 3

Refer to appendix F for the history of eugenics. Refer to appendix B2 for further information. Refer to section 67 for the vital role of education in a free and democratic society.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

155

'Plato's political programme was much more institutional than personalist; he hoped to arrest political change by institutional control of succession in leadership. The control was to be educational, based upon an authoritarian view of learning - upon the authority of the learned expert, and 'The man of proven probity!' This is what Plato made of Socrates' demand that a responsible politician should be a lover of truth and of wisdom rather than an expert, and that he was wise only if he knew his limitations.' (Popper) Morality and justice for Plato is that which serves the interest of the state, one's tribe or group. The natural enemy of such an idea is obviously the individual who holds a different moral point of view. The theory of the Inquisition has even been described by Karl Popper as 'purely Platonic' because in Plato's Laws Plato justifies the persecution and slaying of those whose conscience forbade them to follow the religious laws of society. To bring people over to accept his views, Plato propagated yet another subtle lie - that if you hold beliefs different from that of your tribe, group, state or leader, you are selfish or egoistic. However, the opposite of a group is an individual and the opposite of selfish is altruistic.1

40 Aristotle Aristotle was one of Plato's pupils and although he accepted much of Plato's teachings, he proposed many different solutions of his own. He introduced the word metaphysics to describe any speculation on things which are beyond our power to confirm or deny. To say that spirits, souls, atoms, electrons and gods exist are metaphysical claims. To say, as Plato did, that our world is merely one of appearance but the world of Ideas is the real world is likewise metaphysical speculation. Aristotle founded the study of logic, which to him was the study of reasoning or thoughts that are transformed into words, and with which we attempt to prove things. He claimed that the five senses combine their information to reflect the sensible world, and the mind focuses on the essential natures or the general ideas of things.2 These essences or ideas don't have an independent existence as Plato claimed but are properties they have in common and exist in the individual things themselves. 1

Refer to section 66 where self-interest is vital to happiness. Refer to section 50 for the view of Rousseau that reasoning is the processing of sensations. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

156

Plato was concerned with things as they existed now and viewed change as decay. Aristotle viewed change as progress whereby things become, or realise whatever their self-contained potential or natural end was. In a similar fashion to that of Plato, Aristotle believed we could obtain a knowledge of the essences of things by using intellectual intuition. He also agreed with Socrates and Plato that the essences of things could be precisely defined. These small changes to Plato's theory of Ideas would later give rise to the attempt to discover what the potential, natural end or fate of things were by examining how something had developed historically, a technique that Karl Marx would later apply to determine the end towards which society was developing. To Aristotle the problem of morality was caused by the conflict between our desires. The origin of morality was the choices we make and the habits we learn to achieve our end. The word ethics (ethike) is derived from the Greek word for habit (ethos). What this end was he never managed to say and the fact that we exist and must create our own end or essence, forms the basis of what is known as existentialism - the fact that our existence comes before our essence.1 For Aristotle the state was a creation of nature that functions to preserve life and ensure that humans behaved well. Unlike Plato he left no utopian model or blueprint for such a state. He also believed 'that some men are by nature free, and others slaves, and that for these slavery is both expedient and right'. To him democracy was based on the assumption that because people are equal in some respects they are equal in all respects. Similarly oligarchy, or the rule by few, is based on the assumption that because people are different in some respects they are different in all respects. It is 'the desire of equality, when men think they are equal to others who have more than themselves' that causes revolutionary feelings - an acute observation that would later be echoed by Karl Marx, whose impractical and failed communistic solution was to avoid class conflict by abolishing all classes in favour of one class of person: the working class.2

41 The Cynics and self-sufficiency Around 330BC the independent Greek city-states were absorbed into the powerful Macedonian empire, only to become mere elements of an imperial 1 2

Refer to existentialism in section 56. Refer to Marxism in section 53.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

157

order. There was no longer a stable society with fixed traditions but a mixture of people seeking profits, pleasure and power. It was a time when a persons fortune could change quickly according to chance, and this provided a fertile soil for the growth of ideas. In a world that seemed senseless and beyond control, many chose to withdraw from the chaos in an attempt to take control of their own lives. A contemporary of Plato and Aristotle, called Diogenes, advocated living a self-sufficient life according to nature. He was shameless and therefore said to be like a dog, which in Greek is the word kuvikos that is derived from the Latin word cynicus. The word Cynic was used to describe anyone who advocated living a self-sufficient life by freeing themselves from any conventions, influences, false values, ties or responsibilities that restricted their freedom.1 Today a modern dictionary defines it as an 'ostentatious contempt for ease and pleasure' or 'one who has little faith in human sincerity and goodness'. The Cynics chose to live a life free from customs and traditions, free from the distinction between barbarian and civilised, rich and poor, free and enslaved. They believed in a universal and natural society of humankind, distinct from historical society with its different customs and traditions which served to disguise their commonality. This idea is known as cosmopolitanism, and the Stoics held a similar view of humankind but believed there was a rational substance or divine law that permeates everything, orders nature and controls all events. The self-sufficient philosophy of the Cynics was not very different to that of Gautama the Buddha, and is summed up by Lucian in The Cynic 'I pray that I may have feet no different from horses hooves ... and that I myself may not need bedclothes any more than do the lions, nor expensive fare any more than do the dogs. But may I have for bed to meet my need the whole earth, may I consider the universe my house, and choose for food that which is easiest to procure. Gold and silver may I not need, neither I nor any of my friends. For from the desire for these grow up all men's ills civic strife, wars, conspiracies, and murder. All these have as their fountainhead the desire for more. But may this desire be far from us, and 1

Refer to the quest for freedom in section 66.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

158

never may I reach out for more than my share, but be able to put up with less than my share.' (Wiser)

42 The Sceptics Scepticism was a school founded by Pyrrho (361BC). The old Greek word from which it derived meant seekers or inquirers. Today it is used to refer to someone who doubts accepted opinions. Although many of their original works were lost, the Greek arguments for scepticism were recorded by Sextus Empiricus. According to Sextus scepticism arose due to the confusion caused by many contradictory and dogmatic claims to the truth. The sceptics were wrongly accused of denying the evidence of appearances. All they did was to question the interpretations that were given to them. They advocated the maintenance of a healthy mistrust of everything, and not to take anything for granted. They relied on their senses, as this was natures' way of guiding them. If something tasted bitter they didn't deny it but were wary of attempts to determine whether its true essence was really bitter1 . According to them the best chance of obtaining happiness and peace of mind was not to hold dogmatic views but to always remain open to doubt. The fact that it is possible for appearances to deceive us should make us particularly wary of believing in things that we cannot experience because we can never determine their truth. The fact that different moral views can be supported indicates that there is no indisputable knowledge about morals - only opinions. However, it was possible to act morally by choosing those actions which had the highest probability of achieving happiness - customs and laws were reliable guides, but should always be open to change.2

43 Epicurus Like the cynics and sceptics before him Epicurus was faced with many conflicting claims to the truth together with their prescriptions for moral behaviour. His philosophy was primarily guided by the practical value that it

1 2

Not even our taste buds were immune from slander! Refer to section 66 for the quest for happiness.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

159

had. Unlike many philosophers before him he lived according to his philosophy - he practised what he preached. He revived the atomistic and moral theories of Democritus, and is known mainly for his version of hedonism which today carries a somewhat derogatory implication. However, there is nothing whatever in his philosophy that even remotely matches the vision of feasts and orgies that the term 'hedonist' conjures up in the modern mind. The word 'hedonist' is defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary as the 'belief in pleasure as the highest good and mankind's proper aim'. Epicurus was merely acknowledging the fact that people are naturally driven to seek pleasure and avoid pain, and never required any beliefs in order to do so. According to Epicurus it was our senses that told us that pain is bad and pleasure good, and the maximum pleasure could be obtained in perfect health. Mental pleasure was more important than sensual pleasures, and to achieve this it was necessary to escape from useless fears such as those of god and death. According to Epicurus everything that can be said to exist was made up of atoms which had always existed and were created by some purposeless and random event. There was therefore no need for god or an afterlife. We needn't fear death, as in death there can be no sensation of pain. We needn't fear any gods as they had no influence over us - they had no troubles of their own and never caused any for people. They required no favours from anyone and never granted any because these were characteristics of the weak. They have nothing to do with human affairs and praying for help was therefore useless. If praying were effective the world would have already ended as people would always request bad tidings for others. Because humans had sensations and could think, they were capable of determining their own nature, and it was wisdom that helped us to avoid overindulgence and pain by controlling the desires. It was thus clear that the only way we could achieve happiness was to do so on our own. The only function of society was to prevent people from causing pain to others; laws and justice were merely conventions that should be obeyed to the extent they provided for public order and personal security. Epicurus advocated a simple and natural approach towards life. © 1997 Allan Sztab

160

Chapter Eight The Entrenchment Of Mysticism 44 The Power Of Belief We saw in section 25 how the psychologically powerful sentiment that people attached to their superstitious beliefs and practices led to a revolution when the attempt was made to change them. As the followings of certain superstitious groups grew, so too did the power of their leaders. The historical studies of the Sophist Thrasymachus in about 500BC led him to conclude that might is right and that it was the strong who imposed their will on others by force. However, superstitious leaders were now able to control and influence their followers by offering them belief and hope. The belief of people that their suffering was a punishment for not following a prescribed set of rules, together with the hope that it would be followed by a better life after death, was sufficient to obtain their obedience.1 The simplicity and power of this crude psychology to control and influence large amounts of people without force didn't go unnoticed. We will see in section 45 how, in the year 392AD, the psychological power of religious sentiment and the might of brute force would join hands together. It was an alliance that spread rapidly throughout the old world and conquered the new world of the Americas until it reigned universally. Superstitious thinkers have always been impressed by the logic and certainty of science and wherever possible they attempt to incorporate anything that might give their speculations the appearance of being scientific, rational, or logical. They were quick to make use of the mysticism of Plato but fiercely resisted anything scientific that cast any doubt on their doctrines, to such an extent that they effectively stifled scientific progress by at least 1,500 years. Today the attempt is being made to enlist the uncertainty that is the hallmark of quantum physics.

1

Refer to section 11 for the psychology of belief and distortions of reality. Refer to section 27 for historical examples and section 63 for manipulation as a result of holding certain beliefs. © 1997 Allan Sztab

161

In doing so they are following a tradition that goes back thousands of years in equating a fear of the unknown, the unfamiliar or the uncertain with imaginary things such as demons, spirits and gods.1 It may seem fairly obvious that if you start with an empty container you can only get out of it what you put into it, no more and no less. If all you have to put into it is words then all you will get out of it is the air that carried them. This is obvious, yet some of the most esteemed philosophers attempted to do precisely this - to manipulate words and thereby bring into existence imaginary things such as demons, spirits and gods. Their attempts stand as a monument to the power that a fear of the uncertain has, and the consummate ease with which it can distort the reasoning ability of even the greatest thinkers.2

45 The marriage of Religion and Politics By the year 130BC the trading village of Rome had grown, by conquest and the acquisition of territory over a period of 150 years, to become an empire spreading from Spain and Britain in the West, to Egypt and Mesopotamia in the East. The Romans ruled by disarming conquered peoples and collecting taxes from them. Wealth poured into Rome and promoted both corruption and luxurious living. By the year 27BC Rome had in effect become a monarchy. Augustus Caesar was said to be of divine lineage, if not a god himself. The Roman emperors Caligula and Nero who succeeded him, both considered themselves gods. The empire had no particular culture with which to replace those it conquered, and consisted of a diverse cultural mix of people. This led to the unique development of Roman law which was objective, based not on religion but on practical concerns such as the settling of disputes regarding ownership, property and contracts that were entered into between members of a diverse mix of people. After the death of Christ vigorous missionary activity led to the rapid expansion of Christianity throughout the Roman empire and beyond. Missionaries spread wide and far to convert civilised and uncivilised alike, setting up churches wherever they could. The Christian doctrine was open to all, and had a strong 1 2

Refer to section 58 for a belief in imaginary causes. Refer to section 46 for some of the rational proofs for the existence of God.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

162

appeal especially to the poor, sick and oppressed. Christianity offered them the hope of a better life after this one and accepted everyone as being equal. Many Germanic tribes were converted long before their eventual incursion into Roman territory. Having members from many different cultural backgrounds was something the Christian and Roman empires had in common and both sought to control and unify them. At first the Christians were persecuted by the Romans, as they refused to partake in the worship of other gods, but their numbers and influence continued to grow. The Roman Emperor Constantine claimed to have been converted to Christianity after seeing a vision of a cross in the sky shortly before a battle, with the words 'By this sign shall ye conquer'. Using a cross as a symbol he won the battle and shortly thereafter in 392AD Christianity became the official religion of the Roman empire. Those who preached alternative doctrines were now guilty of a crime against the state. Unifying the many churches within the empire became a priority and the name Catholic, which means universal in Greek, was given to the church. It was a marriage of convenience. From now on political power protected the church and enforced religious conformity, while powerful rulers were given the authority of god, an authority which provided credibility and stability to their rule. An accommodation between religious and political rulers would now become almost a necessity, and changes in political power merely brought about new alliances with the church.

The achievement of political objectives that might previously have seemed to revolve purely around the expansion of power for powers' sake, could now shelter under the wings of religion, and the rally cry 'for the greater glory of God' was soon heard. The attractiveness of such a marriage was evident even to pagan, barbarian kings, as it allowed them to acquire vastly more power than © 1997 Allan Sztab

163

their tribal and often democratic institutions and traditions permitted them. This had the effect of spreading Christianity even further.

46 Religious Faith and Philosophy The Christian philosophers were quick to reflect the accommodation between state and church, although, like most marriages, there would be some difficult times ahead. The most serious dispute centred around whether the authority of the state or the church was supreme. Saint Augustine (354AD), following Plato, concluded that humans were sinful and the state was necessary to control and prevent them from destroying each other. He insisted on loyalty to the state provided it never interfered with any of Gods commandments. Almost 1,000 years later, Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225AD) adopted an essentially Aristotelian approach: that the state wasn't grounded in human sinfulness but had evolved from nature. According to him people used to live in communities and enjoyed freedom, equality and independence. Laws aimed to achieve the harmonious living of people within society. Humans had an essence which was fixed by God. The state should be subordinate to the church because it had been granted authority from God. It was only the duty of the state to maintain law and order amongst the people whilst the church would provide for their spiritual concerns. This dispute would finally come to a head on the battlefield which divided Christianity into Catholics, who believe the authority of the church is supreme, and Protestants, who believe that the authority of the state is supreme. This all commenced when Martin Luther (1483AD) spoke out against the Holy Roman Empire that he felt had become a priestly, corrupt and privileged class. Like Saint Augustine and Plato before him he concluded that humans were sinful and required a strong ruler to prevent chaos. However, Luther went much further and insisted that unlike faith which was required for religion, blind obedience was required for politics. Rulers had obtained their authority from God and to resist them was to resist the will of God. He protested by posting ninety-five theses on the church door at Wittenburg in 1517 and thereby started the Protestant Reformation. For his troubles he was excommunicated from the Catholic © 1997 Allan Sztab

164

church by the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, but his resistance was against the Italian papacy, who were essentially a foreign power. His doctrine was based on the bible and had a popular appeal in Germany. The German princes saw the advantage that such religious power and authority meant for their rule. They were quick to seize church property and take its revenues for themselves. The Holy Roman Emperor Charles V was slow to act against the Protestants but in 1530 he managed to defeat some of the princes. In 1555 he was forced to compromise in the Peace of Augsburg, whereby each prince was entitled to choose their own religion. However, it would take the Thirty Years War between 1618 and 1648 to settle religious conflict in Germany. It was a war which spread internationally and cost the lives of half the German population. The Reformation spread to France and led to a long period of civil war, until the Edict of Nantes in 1598 allowed Protestants to worship in public. The Reformation also spread to Italy, Switzerland, Spain and England, where King Henry VIII declared the king, and not the pope, as head of the church in 1534. The Reformation gave rise to a Catholic counter-reformation, whereby all heretics or non-Catholics were strongly opposed. The Inquisition was the most infamous system of all; a court of the Catholic church set up specifically for the discovery and punishment of heretics or non-believers by some of the most cruel and barbaric methods of torture ever devised.1 Christianity proved to be remarkably flexible, and over time was developed and enhanced. It was quick to modify and incorporate any ideas that could support its doctrines, and here follows a short list of the attempts made by some of the most esteemed thinkers in human history to conjure up the existence of imaginary things. The source of the ideas that follow are shown in brackets and the three proofs that are most commonly cited are shown in bold: All change is an illusion. God is the only unchanging and true reality. (Parmenides and Plato). The closest thing to god is light or pure mind or universal intelligence and as we move away from god we get material things, darkness, and then the 1

Refer to Plato's justification of the persecuting and slaying of those whose conscience forbade them from following the religious laws of society. © 1997 Allan Sztab

165

boundary between nothing or non-being where there is disorder and evil. Light represents good and darkness evil. The sensual desires are the powers of darkness. Evil is the choice between loving god or loving other things. (Plato, Ancient Iranian, Zoroastrian and Mithraic concepts). Principles such as justice are implanted in things by god. These universals can be extracted from them. Universals have an independent existence. (Aristotle and Plato) The fact that we can have an idea of something that is so perfect that nothing can be more perfect is the idea of god, therefore god exists. (Plato) There is motion. There must be a Mover which is able to move things without itself being moved. This First Mover is god. (Aristotle) Everything is caused by something. It isn't possible to go back to infinity so there must be a First Cause - god. (Aristotle) All things achieve their potential or ends which are well-ordered and intelligently designed. This intelligence is god. (Aristotle) The most basic substance is a force or energy which has a built-in purpose and is capable of action. In nature they all act in harmony and this points to a god. (Gottfried Leibniz) Things have a beginning and end in time and cannot come from nothing. There must always have been something - god. (John Locke) 'To be is to be perceived'. Nothing can exist without a mind to perceive it and if they do there must be some other mind - god. (George Berkeley) If humans were limited to this life they wouldn't be able to 'endlessly progress' towards the experience that the supreme good is virtue and therefore happiness. In order to do so the soul must be immortal. There are no grounds in nature or humanity for the universal connection between virtue and happiness but we believe this to be true so it is morally necessary for there to be a god. (Immanual Kant) Everything is a product of our minds. Since we never created our minds there must be some other mind responsible for it - an Absolute Mind - god. (Hegel) © 1997 Allan Sztab

166

The knowledge a person has of their own mortality causes anxiety which can only be overcome by their relationship to something everlasting - god. (Soren Kierkegaard)

© 1997 Allan Sztab

167

Chapter Nine Science And Reason 47 The myth of impartial observation The steady progress of science and the growing understanding of nature that it provided seemed to confirm what many philosophers had long suspected - that nature had no concern with morality at all. Once again there were those philosophers who realised the errors that occur when trust is placed on things or explanations which couldn't be sensed. One of these was Michel De Montaigne (1533) who lived during the Protestant Reformation amidst religious persecution. Despite the existence of many religious doctrines, none could provide any solutions to the miseries of his time. This led him to doubt their truth. To him scepticism was a mood of inquiry that never held any dogmatic doctrines or denied what was common sense - it was simply an attempt to lead a fulfilling life. It was clear to him that it was only when people go beyond sensory experience to capture the truth that fanaticism and dogmatism arose. The attempt to create idealised or utopian images of humanity as opposed to confronting the reality of human nature created not angels but beasts.1 It was a steady resistance to mystic solutions that provided a growing impetus towards some criteria by which rival claims to the truth might be judged. The truth or falsity of scientific theories could at least be demonstrated, and there were some philosophers who thought that the application of scientific method to philosophy would enable it to make similar progress. Francis Bacon attempted to reform philosophy and science which to him had now been mixed up with superstition, mysticism and theology. He believed that peoples' minds had been corrupted by traditional education which was full of ancient prejudices and imaginary things. To him the solution was to observe things without allowing one's prejudices to distort them. This commenced by getting rid of all unproven claims so that everyone stood an equal chance of finding the truth. In this process no Platonic claims to unique insight or intuition should be entertained. According to Bacon nature was matter set into motion and because of its indifference could offer no guidance for human behaviour. He believed that it 1

Refer to section 67 for political systems that are based on utopian ideals of humanity.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

168

was the misuse of language that created misunderstandings and while a word such as purpose might describe human intentions, it was out of context when applied to nature. Furthermore, because nature was indifferent the word good only demonstrated the value or preference that people had towards certain actions.1 Bacons' attempt to eradicate some of the bias and prejudice that was inherent in the way we observe things, would go on to have a marked influence on the development of philosophical thought and the problems concerning observation would take philosophers a long time to unravel. The view that we acquire our knowledge of facts based on our experiences and observations of what goes on around us, is known as empiricism. However, observation is fraught with problems. To begin with, there is no absolute guarantee that our senses are correct. If we look at a stick immersed in a bucket of water it appears to be bent, although we know that this isn't so. Some might cite this as an instance where the senses deceive us but we must also take into account that our senses work in collaboration with each other, so the deception of sight is easily exposed by the sense of touch. In addition, examples like this should always be treated with caution, because it would be equally correct to say that what our eyes are reporting is the fact that light is refracted or bent by water. It is only a lack of knowledge of refraction that gives rise to the incorrect conclusion that it is our eyes that deceive us. In the process of interpretation an observer is influenced by their existing knowledge and experience, cultural upbringing, prejudices and expectations. All these are brought into play, and form the basis upon which the interpretations of the observer are made. We saw in section 9 how the mind takes short-cuts and employs various rules while processing information. Whatever we don't know or recognise might be harmful. To this extent the unfamiliar is feared and we saw in section 11 how the ability to recognise what is known to us is the cornerstone of learning. Thus the very first thing we do when we observe something is to see whether we recognise it. In this process all the past associations and meanings that are associated with our present observations are recalled and applied to 1

Refer to section 58 and the error of imaginary and false causes.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

169

them. This is how our past experiences and interpretations, prejudices and expectations colour our world. This same process applies even if the observations only remind us of certain past events or experiences. The vast amount of information that must be processed for recognition, combined with the speed at which this is performed, can only be done subconsciously. What we get is the end result of this complex and little-understood process, an end result which might be a feeling of apprehension, fear, mistrust, or any other emotion. This is what we refer to as a feeling of intuition. When our survival is at stake we have to make speedy judgements - we aren't geared for the luxury of contemplation. Hasty judgements with all their prejudice and irrationality give us speed which is often vital. In mathematics the fact that 1 + 1 = 2 or 2 x 2 = 4 might seems natural or self-evident. 1 However, we have forgotten the length of time we spent habituating or learning our addition and times tables. These feelings of intuition or self-evident truths are merely the end result of the process of recognition. The natural or intuitive feeling we have as to what constitutes the right and wrong behaviour is fashioned in exactly the same way when we learn and conform to the behaviour and commands of our parents and society. By constant repetition these rights and wrongs, do's and don'ts are habituated and appear at some later time to be natural, self-evident, or intuitive. Intuition assists us to determine whether a stranger can be trusted, a determination that is often based purely on the fact that they possess certain features or characteristics that we have come to associate with other people who have proved to be trustworthy in the past. Merely by looking at someone we prejudge them as being dishonest or cruel or even depraved. The prejudice and bias that is a daily part of our lives is well-researched, and it is known that people who are tall tend to be better paid and rise to the top of the corporate world more easily than shorter people. People who are good looking also find it easier to get jobs - as one employer admitted candidly, 'why employ ugly people when you can employ good-looking people for the same money?'2 Prejudices, strong desires and our beliefs colour or distort our reality. We might interpret a glance from a member of the opposite sex as an indication that 1 2

Refer to section 50 for the criticism by Locke of intuition. Refer to section 11 for the prejudice inherent in the recognition process.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

170

they are attracted to us. Politeness and a caring attitude could be interpreted as an indication of a willingness to befriend us. Being reprimanded might be interpreted as an indication that the person reprimanding us dislikes us or holds a grudge towards us, especially if we are feeling unloved. To alleviate a fear of death we might hold a belief in an afterlife or reincarnation.1 A scientist might inadvertently design an experiment and interpret the results in such a way that it lends support to a conclusion which is fuelled by a desire to earn praise from the scientific community, enhance their career prospects or even the possibility of earning a Nobel prize. No matter how careful we are we can only conclude that there is no such thing as an impartial observer. This fact underscores the essential requirement of feedback, testing and the independent replication of claims that is the hallmark of scientific method. On a personal level we can achieve an air of critical awareness by deferring our judgements and treating every new person and situation as what they are: unique. We can go even further towards breaking from the past by not expecting people and situations to stay the same or to last forever.2

48 Science and faith 'We cannot foresee which parts of our scientific knowledge may come to grief one day. Thus the belief in scientific certainty and in the authority of science is just wishful thinking: science is fallible, because science is human.' (Popper) Science may be defined as a discipline that expands and systematises knowledge. Aristotle realised that generalisations or universal claims about nature and things were based purely on repeated observations. Obviously these observations were subject to the interpretation of the person who made them, but even if we had the consensus of an entire society he realised that there would still be a problem. A scientist might observe that whenever object 1 is raised and released it falls, when object 2 is raised and released it falls, when object 3 is 1

Refer to section 14 for the fear of uncertainty and superstitious belief. Refer to section 64 for the harbouring of unrealistic expectations and section 66 for deferring judgement as a means of combating prejudice. Some of the pitfalls of leaping to conclusions is clearly illustrated in appendices F and G. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

171

raised and released it falls and so on. Based on numerous of these observations, the scientist would then generalise and make the universal claim that every object that was lifted and released would fall, something that could only be absolutely true if every object fell every conceivable time it was lifted and released. Of course this would be impossible to perform so the generalisation could never be said to represent the absolute truth. This process of arriving at generalisations Aristotle called induction, a process that is the cornerstone of science. What this means is that scientific belief also requires a faith in the truth of its generalisations. There is simply no way of making all future observations so the possibility always exists that a future observation will be contrary to those already made. The example just cited would be considered a very strong induction as there is much evidence to support the generalisation that when objects are lifted and then released they fall. When this is clearly not the case we would speak of a weak induction. Science commences with these induction's or generalisations, and based on them scientists formulate laws, hypotheses or suggested explanations of how things work. The attempt is then made to test these hypotheses, which are often modified or even abandoned as a result. What is explained by a particular model today might be abandoned in favour of a better explanation tomorrow, and this process of trial and error is essentially how science progresses. A word of caution is required here. The fact that science also requires a faith in the truth of its generalisations doesn't mean that any other faith is of equal merit in the same way that the relativity of morality doesn't mean that all moral systems are of equal merit. Historically, the ability of science to predict has often been seen as a challenge to the power of others, especially that of the Church, and when scientific explanations conflict with the views and interests of others they are often resisted. For example, Aristotle believed that the earth was stationary while the sun, moon and planets moved in circular orbits around it. It thus appeared that the earth was the centre of the universe. Ptolemy formed this idea into a complete cosmological model in the second century. This view persisted until the sixteenth century, when Copernicus theorised that the sun was stationary and © 1997 Allan Sztab

172

the earth and planets moved in circular orbits around it. The Church had adopted the Ptolemaic theory because it placed the creation of earth and human beings at the centre of the universe. As a result, Copernicus had to circulate his model anonymously for fear of being branded an heretic. It took almost another century before his ideas were taken seriously and confirmed in part by the observations of Galileo. During the early part of this century the physics of Newton dominated science. Newton's laws were based on observations and verified by numerous experiments which anyone could reproduce. His laws of motion and gravity unified vast tracts of experience, and gave us the ability to mathematically predict the motions of bodies. They also portrayed the universe as being determined in a mechanistic sense. In 1803 Thomas Young conducted a simple experiment that revealed the wave-like property of light. This became the accepted view of the nature of light but was problematic because light could travel through the vacuum of space. Some scientists even proposed the existence of an invisible ether which conveyed the light waves until Einstein demonstrated that light was particle-like and is composed of photons. It was for this achievement that he was awarded the Nobel prize for physics. Today the dual nature of light still remains a mystery. There was another peculiar property of light that puzzled scientists - its speed was always the same whenever it was measured, irrespective of the circumstances of its measurement. This perplexed scientists because the laws of transformation did not apply to it. These laws were already entrenched in peoples' minds and were accordingly considered natural, instinctive, or common sense. They are best illustrated as follows: if we were on a huge platform moving at 500 k.p.h. and whilst on the platform accelerated to 80 k.p.h. in the same direction our speed would be 500+80=580 k.p.h. If we accelerated to 80 k.p.h. in the opposite direction to that of the platform our speed would be 500-80=420 k.p.h. However, these laws didn't apply to light. Einstein's genius was to accept the fact that light always travels at a constant speed even if he couldn't explain it. He dared to accept that the orthodox views of his time were wrong. He turned the problem of the speed of light into a principle - the © 1997 Allan Sztab

173

principle of the constancy of the velocity of light, which is the cornerstone of his theories of relativity. Another assumption that scientists made concerned a concept of motion or lack of motion known as absolute rest. Einstein could find no reason why anything should be taken to be at absolute rest in preference to anything else, and proposed to do away with this concept altogether. Nothing on earth is at rest. In fact there is no such thing as absolute rest. The earth with us on it is spinning on its axis and at the same time orbiting around the sun. We only feel that we are stationary in the same way we feel stationary whilst as a passenger on an aircraft or train. However, the measurements we obtain of other moving bodies are only relative to our own movement at the time we take the measurement, and don't represent the situation of the bodies as they actually are. The implications of this are startling and difficult to comprehend even today. The velocity of an object is the distance it covers divided by the time it takes to do so. This is normally expressed in units such as kilometres per minute. There are only three variables to consider - the velocity, distance and time. If we know two of them the third is easy to calculate. Now if the velocity of light is constant throughout the universe, then the difference between what we measure concerning an object and the factual situation of the object can only be accounted for by changes in time and distance. Once we know its velocity and its distance from us then time is the only variable left. The result is that if we are travelling much faster than someone else our clocks will appear to them to be moving slower and vice versa even though everyone's clocks will appear to them to be working perfectly. Similarly, if we measured the length of an object travelling at great speed we would find it was shorter than it was at a slower speed.1 To verify the differences in time that Einstein's theories predicted, four highly accurate clocks were put on board a plane and flown around the world. When the plane landed the clocks were found to be slightly slower than similar earth-bound clocks with which they had been synchronised before leaving. The rate at which time flows is therefore dependent on the velocity at which an object moves and varies throughout the universe. 1

Refer to Zeno's paradoxes of motion in section 34.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

174

Just as Newton's theories made predictions that could be verified, so too did Einstein's. The remarkable thing about Einstein's theories is that they not only confirmed and incorporated the many explanations of Newton's theories but went on to explain many problems and difficulties that were unaccountable on the Newtonian model. Today a revolution is taking place in an area of science known as quantum physics. Quantum physics deals with very small sub-atomic particles such as protons and electrons. The reason quantum physics is so revolutionary is that on this small scale the laws of physics as we know them break down, and, to make things even more difficult to comprehend, particles on such a small scale behave in ways that are counter intuitive.1 Quantum theory does not deal in certainty but only in probabilities. For example, if we fired a single photon of light at a wall and we wanted to know where on the wall it would land, quantum theory will only give us the probability that it will land in a given area but whether it does so or not is considered pure chance. This pure chance aspect of quantum theory led Einstein to remark that '... god does not play dice'. Scientists are now confronting philosophical issues in the laboratory. They are divided as to whether a quantum object (a sub-atomic particle) has any properties prior to its being observed or measured. It isn't possible for the human eye to see sub-atomic particles and complex equipment is required to detect them. Let's say we couldn't physically see an obstacle but wanted to confirm its presence. We could throw a ball at it and if it bounced back we would accept that it was there. However, in the process of detecting the obstacle something about it would have changed due to the impact of the ball - perhaps its position or velocity. The same thing occurs when observing or measuring quantum objects and this is the reason some scientists believe that quantum objects only acquire their properties during the measurement process itself i.e. that observers create quantum reality.2 It was for this reason that Einstein considered quantum theory incomplete. He believed there were some hidden variables which, if known, would account for the unobserved or unmeasured properties of quantum objects.3 This battle, in 1

Refer to section 11 for uncertainty, fear, belief and distortions of reality. Refer to section 54 for the difficulty of conceiving matter as consisting of matterless energy. 2 Refer to section 51 for the claims of innate knowledge made by Kant and the mystical philosophy of Hegel who believed that everything we experience is a product of our minds. 3 Refer to section 58 for the belief that everything has something that caused it. © 1997 Allan Sztab

175

which Einstein pitted his well-tested theories of relativity against quantum theory, continued for almost 30 years until 1964, when Bells Theorem showed that any hidden variable theory that attempted to account for the quantum object having unobserved or unmeasured properties, must allow for faster-than-light communication. The results of Bells Theorem are independent of the truth or falsity of quantum theory. And this is very much where modern science stands today - poised for yet another revolution on possibly an even greater scale than that of either Newton or Einstein. Science gives us a greater understanding of why things work the way they do but it cannot explain everything, and is therefore incomplete. It makes no claim to absolute truth and scientific progress of necessity implies that something that is considered true today might be considered an error tomorrow. 'A particularly impressive example of this is the discovery of heavy water, and of heavy hydrogen (deuterium, first separated by Harold C. Urey in 1931). Prior to this discovery, nothing more certain and settled could be imagined in the field of chemistry than our knowledge of water (H2O) and of the chemical elements of which it is composed. Water was even used for the 'operational' definition of the gram, the unit standard of mass of the 'absolute' metric system; it thus formed one of the basic units of experimental physical measurement... but after the discovery of heavy water, it was realised that what had been believed to be a chemically pure compound was actually a mixture of chemically indistinguishable but physically very different compounds, with very different densities, boiling points, and freezing points - though for the definitions of all these points, 'water' had been used as a standard base.' (Popper) However, the methods of science renders it capable of a steady progress towards an ever more comprehensive understanding of the natural world. Science has a method of peer review whereby all scientific claims are subjected to independent verification, demonstration and criticism. This process crosses the boundaries of different cultures and language groups. Rival scientists are free to criticise and conduct their own experiments to confirm, refute or modify any claim. © 1997 Allan Sztab

176

The critical methodology of science, particularly its ability to demonstrate and predict by achieving the same results repeatedly by whoever chooses to do so, is the single most important means of distinguishing scientific claims from mystical and superstitious claims such as those of religion, astrology, aura diagnosis, astral travelling, biorhythms, clairvoyance, extra-sensory perception, ufology, graphology, numerology, parapsychology, precognition, psychic surgery, faith healing, pyramidology, spiritualism, reincarnation, regression, satanism, scientology, telepathy, I Ching and witchcraft.

49 The bridge between what is and what ought to be There is nothing a scientist or any other person can do to compel nature to work in any way other than the way it does. The philosopher David Hume first drew attention to the fact that, armed only with an interpretation or generalisation about what something is, it wasn't possible to determine how it ought to be. A moral judgement that an object or action was good or bad referred not to the bare facts of the object or action, but was something else that was produced in the mind. This principle became known as Hume's Law. (How this law may be applied to the process of logical deduction is covered in the next section). This gap or bridge between what is the case and what ought to be the case is not even considered in science. However, some philosophers believed that they could cross this bridge by commencing with the truth and not with generalisations. They attempted to define what good meant based on the properties or essence of good actions, and in doing so they were led down the same blind alley that Socrates had taken before them. In many cases they hoped their basic assumptions about human nature would enable them to determine how humans ought to behave and govern themselves. They made many attempts to define what was considered good or bad and many of their arguments sound convincing. However, the philosopher G.E. Moore formulated what came to be known as the open question argument, which applied Hume's Law to moral judgements and made it easy to expose the error that is implicit in them. If we defined good as meaning 'feeding hungry people' then we could always reasonably and meaningfully ask, 'If I feed hungry people is this good?' Having © 1997 Allan Sztab

177

defined that good is 'feeding hungry people' and substituting it for the word good in our question we would get 'If I feed hungry people is this feeding hungry people?' which is a mere repetition of words and the sentence loses its meaning. The same would apply to any definition of good we chose to use because good is only an abstract name given to an action that we or society value or approve of. The temptation to bridge the gap between what is and what ought to be the case, is so irresistible that even today some philosophers continue to spend their time carefully trying to define good as that which satisfies a human desire or want. However, such a definition of good still amounts to the same thing, because the only reason we would choose one action over that of another would be its value to us in satisfying the desire or want. What is clear is that there is nothing scientific in their definitions. Science doesn't require precise definitions or make the claim that its generalisations are true. Scientists don't need to know what something is to understand how it works. For example, it isn't necessary to define with any degree of accuracy what a sand dune is unless a sand dune with specific characteristics, such as those of its height and width, are required. Science relies on demonstration and makes progress by a process of trial and error. Some philosophers based their observations on events that surrounded them, and looked to history for evidence that would serve either to refute or confirm their generalisations about human behaviour. Modern scientific research reveals how accurate many of their observations were. The problems they faced in their times were similar to those we face today - government corruption, escalating violence and social disorder. It was probably with this in mind that Machiavelli and Hobbes set about making generalisations based on their observations of human nature. They laid the foundations upon which politics could progress scientifically by a process of trial and error. However, politics is characterised by a process of repetitive errors with hardly any trials. This is glaringly obvious because, despite the fact that certain assumptions about human nature have proved themselves to be wrong countless numbers of times, their lessons have failed to lead to suitable political modifications in an attempt to weed them out. © 1997 Allan Sztab

178

Thus we find that every form of government continues to give wide ranging powers to individuals on the erroneous assumption that there is a mystical being, such as a politician, who won't abuse them. Corruption by government employees continues without proper safeguards, on the erroneous assumption that if they are well paid they will not steal.1 Today we still have various kinds of dictatorships ranging from the purely military to a combination of military and religious. There are also a wide range of pseudo- democracies which serve interests ranging from those of one party or tribe, to that of America, which serves the special interests of upwards of 4,000 lobbyists who represent bigbusiness and perhaps even more clandestine groups. Nicollo Machiavelli (1469) claimed that historically it was good laws combined with the will and capability of enforcing them that had enabled societies to endure. What Is the case. According to him people desired more than they could get and would therefore always be dissatisfied. A virtuous leader was one who created order and stability out of chaos. What Ought to be done. Order should be imposed by force. In order to achieve this a leader was justified in using any means possible because humans were unscrupulous, egotistical, and only understood force. Once order was achieved the leader could then step aside and let the people rule. He advocated a republic similar to the Roman empire where the interests of all are represented and check each other. He recognised that force alone doesn't make a leaders rule legitimate. Suggested ordering of Religion. According to Machiavelli, having religious support for political objectives was useful for a leader as religion could unify people. The church must serve the state. Religion turned attention away from the practical concerns of life towards the beyond, and the failure of the Holy Roman Empire to achieve political order and stability were proof of this. Thomas Hobbes (1588) sought to instil certainty into politics and morality. According to him what was missing was a method such as that of science, which 1

Refer to section 67 and political systems that continue to perpetrate the errors of the past. © 1997 Allan Sztab

179

would enable certain knowledge to be found. He attempted to provide some basic principles which to him were obvious. He began with human nature. What Is the case. According to Hobbes humans are motivated by their appetites - satisfying them yields pleasure. They seek personal safety, economic gain, glory and fame. They are more interested in what is useful to them than what is good and aren't motivated by social concerns. They want to be esteemed by others and strive to establish their superiority. There is no limit to their passions. Knowledge provides the information, and power the ability to satisfy the appetites. This knowledge is based on previously memorised, sensory experiences. Knowledge is therefore limited to appearances and serves the desires. Signs and the names given to things and events are represented by words. Reasoning is the manipulation of words and the events or things they represent. The word 'good' is used to describe useful or pleasurable things while the word 'evil' is used to describe harmful or painful things. Because people have different pleasures morality is relative. There are no principles in nature to determine right or wrong, justice or injustice - in reality, the virtues of force and fear rule. All humans are equal before nature, and because they compete for limited materials, struggle will often be the result. Humans can lie and take offence for no reason and the only solution for peace is to construct an artificial convention (such as a constitution). The conditions for peace clash with the quest for power.1 What Ought to be done. Hobbes proposed two 'laws of nature': every person ought to be committed to peace and be prepared to mutually limit their liberty over others.2 Based on his conception of human nature he proposed an absolute sovereign to enforce the law, whether this was one person or many - an authority that was to be above the law. It is for this reason that he has been wrongly accused of being the father of totalitarianism. His decision was based on the belief that there were only two things that could influence people: force, and the fear of death.

1 2

Refer to section 65 for domineering desires and section 67 for the required safeguards. Refer to section 61 for the determination of limitations to freedom.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

180

According to him life without order had always been 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short'. Suggested ordering of Religion. To Hobbes religion was based on the human desire to understand things. Ignorance caused anxiety and then fear which led to the worship of invisible powers. According to him all the pagan gods could be explained in this fashion. Similarly, religious leaders like Abraham and Moses, who wanted to obtain the obedience of people, used words within the context and beliefs of their time. To introduce other philosophical ideas to them was a misuse of biblical terms. History confirmed the use of fear in the development of religion, specifically to obtain control over people. A contextual reading of the bible would reveal that the kingdom of god was on earth and there is no such thing as heaven, hell and an immortal soul. Accordingly, the church had no power to grant eternal damnation or the reward of immortality. Until the second coming of Christ the political sovereign was in effect the chief pastor of the church.

50 Logic, reason and rationalism In the previous section we saw how two renowned philosophers arrived at certain conclusions based on the strength of their generalisations. Making deductions, or reaching conclusions based on certain facts or generalisations, is known as reasoning. When this reasoning is performed by complying with certain rules of logic it is known as logical reasoning. Aristotle founded the study of logic, which for him was the study of thoughts that are transformed into words with which we then attempt to prove things. He formulated the three fundamental rules upon which logic is based. 1. Non-contradiction: Nothing can be both A and Not A. A person cannot be both single and married as this is a contradiction. 2. Identity: A is A. When we refer to any object like a cup for example, we are assuming the cup is a cup and not something else. 3. The Excluded Middle: Everything is either A or Not A. © 1997 Allan Sztab

181

A cup is either a cup or it is not a cup; a person is either married or not married. Aristotle also identified the logical principle of implication which states that if A = B and B = C, then A = C. These rules are accepted and used by all of us whenever we think and speak. Once they are accepted the ground is prepared for what is known as deductive reasoning, where we move from a statement or a premise to a conclusion. For example, if we accept a statement or premise such as 'If it rains then the garden will get wet', and it rains, we may arrive at the conclusion that the garden will get wet. This is known as a logically valid deduction. However, if we noticed that the garden was wet we couldn't validly deduce that it had rained, because the gardener might have watered it. This would be an example of a logically invalid deduction, because the premise only says 'If it rains then the garden will get wet', and not 'If the garden is wet then it rained'. We know that induction requires a faith in the truth of its generalisations. Similarly, logic also requires faith - a faith in the truth of the rules upon which it is based. These rules are not proved, but are assumptions that seem to work for the purposes we have created them for: to serve our needs. There is nothing of necessity in them. Let's take the principle of implication that if A = B and B = C, then A = C. This principle relies on the notion that there are identical things, something that is only an assumption, because if A was in all respects equal to B it would in fact be B and not A. That nothing can be both A and not A might only be a lack of ability and not a truth. It is useful to make this assumption but what is useful is no criterion of truth. Logic is nonetheless a powerful tool with which we can differentiate between logically valid and logically invalid deductions. It is seen at work in the heart of every computer processor. The fact that logic also requires faith wasn't recognised by many philosophers for a long time. The basic rules of logic and mathematics seemed to them natural, intuitive and common sense.1 However, these tools were designed primarily because a logical world or a calculable world is useful to us, and not because of any claims to the absolute truth. For 1

Refer to section 47 for rapid interpretations and feelings of intuition.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

182

example, Euclidean geometry informs us that two parallel lines never intersect, yet on any world globe we see lines of longitude which, while parallel at the equator, converge at the poles. The conclusions of philosophers like Bacon and Hobbes were based first and foremost on their observations of the world. They were followed by other philosophers whose faith in reason was so great that they believed the mind itself could generate a system of absolute truths about the world. The first one to attempt this was Rene Descartes (1596). He attempted to put aside all his personal knowledge, prior experience and prejudices in an attempt to become an impartial observer. Saint Augustine had claimed that doubting is an act of certainty because the person who is doubting knows that they are doubting, and because of this they must exist. Descartes may have modified this into his famous Cogito ergo sum - 'I think therefore I am' - which he believed was an absolute truth that couldn't be doubted. He believed that this truth would provide him with the starting point of a system of certain knowledge, and this assumption illustrates clearly how easily a strong desire can lead to belief in a false truth. False, because amongst other criticisms the word I, like any other word, can only be established as a word by social consent, so the mere use of the word itself implies that at least two or more people agreed on its usage prior to its use.1 What Descartes believed he had done was to prove that a mind that thinks, exists. However, this still didn't account for a persons material body and in doing so he established the notion that the I, ego, or mind that thinks, has a separate existence from the body. In other words, that there are two separate entities, a spiritual and a material. There are insurmountable problems with such a view, especially if we consider how such completely different entities could possibly interact with each other, and over the next 250 years much of philosophy would be occupied with this apparent problem which we shall deal with later in section 54. Gottfried Leibniz (1646) was a mathematician who published his discovery of calculus three years before Newton. He refined logic even further by introducing the concept of verification, and the placing of a limitation on what could or 1

Refer to section 3 for the social consent necessary for language and section 32 for social consent and its role in truth. © 1997 Allan Sztab

183

couldn't be validly deduced. He distinguished between truths of fact and truths of reason. According to him all truths of fact must first be verified or tested to determine their truth. There must be a reason that makes them true or else they could equally be false. Before this reason is found or the fact verified, truths of fact are only contingent or potentially true. Furthermore, truths of fact can yield no more information than is already contained in them. In other words, if you have facts A and B then the information you can get from them is limited to the information that is already contained in them. At first glance this seemed obvious but was nevertheless necessary, because it was a mistake that many highly respected philosophers had made in the past, and would continue to make in the future. Consider the fallacious reasoning of Plato that we are already familiar with: I have an Idea of something, therefore it exists. The fact that we have an idea of something that we are able to paint and describe in minute detail doesn't confer existence on it. In other words, existence isn't a property of an idea and cannot be logically inferred from it. 'I have an idea' only entitles one to claim 'I have an idea'. Nothing else can be deduced from it. This limitation might at first glance lead one to doubt whether new information can be deduced from known facts. However, a simple example will illustrate how this is possible. At election time Mr Smith goes to the local school to cast his vote; when he gets there he approaches Mr Official to find out which room he must go to. Mr Official knows that all people whose names start with S vote in room 4 so this forms the first premise or statement of fact. Mr Smith tells Mr Official that his name starts with an S, and this forms the second premise. Based on these two premises Mr Smith and Mr Official are able to derive some further information by concluding that Mr Smith votes in room 4. The process of arriving at a deduction may be summarised as follows: Premise 1

: Those whose names start with S vote in room 4.

Premise 2

: Mr Smith's name starts with an S.

Deduction : Therefore Mr Smith votes in room 4. Hume's Law that you cannot derive how one ought to behave from what is, as we saw in section 49, can now be stated in logical terminology - the information © 1997 Allan Sztab

184

that we deduce must be included in the premises of our argument. As we can see from the above example, no new information is acquired in the deduction that wasn't already included in the premises. We can never derive a moral conclusion, something that we ought to do, based on matters of fact, or what is the case, because moral information is not contained in matters of fact. According to Leibniz, truths of reason are known purely by logic, and are tested by the law of contradiction which could be done independently of any experience. For example, if we denied that Miss G is single because she isn't married this would be contradictory because single means someone who isn't married. Similarly, if we deny that a triangle has three sides this leads to a contradiction. To claim that a triangle has three sides is a tautology, a truth of reason, because to deny its socially-agreed meaning would be contradictory. Leibniz also held the view that all matter was formed of active forces or energy which he called monads. These monads were constantly active because all life requires movement. He anticipated what particle physicists are now discovering in the laboratory: that what appears to us as matter is ultimately formed out of matterless forces or energy.1 Leibniz and Descartes were rationalists. They believed that truths of reason could be obtained by moving from one idea to another without any experience at all. These ideas were deemed to be true provided they satisfied the law of non-contradiction. However, if rationalism is accepted then people are free to introduce any non-contradictory systems they can intuit without a shred of evidence. This is precisely what Plato did as well as many mystic philosophers after him. In fact, people often make rationalisations to justify their behaviour, and we saw in section 46 how the desire for certainty led some of the most brilliant minds to rationalise imaginary things into existence.2

Rationalists often claim that the knowledge contained in

propositions, such as 'the shortest route between two points is a straight line', are innate and require no experience. However, upon closer scrutiny they all break down, and the example just cited is only an expression in language of how a 1 2

Refer to section 54 for more on the question of body versus mind. Refer to section 58 for the error of imaginary causes and things.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

185

person would attempt to get from point A to point B. This could only occur by keeping B in sight and walking towards it. The fact that our eyes see what is directly in front of them is what gives the expression its truth status. The concepts straight, shortest and line are human language constructs, based on experience and common consent, which have then been applied to describe the process of getting from A to B. It is our acceptance of these language constructs, through years of learning and using them, that makes the proposition 'the shortest route between two points is a straight line' seem innate, self-evident and natural, without any requirement of experience. Mathematics was developed out of necessity to make things calculable and to assist us in describing them. There is nothing in nature that either requires or is bound to any rule of mathematics. Language was also developed out of the necessity for rapid communication and co-operation between people. John Locke (1632) rejected the concept of innate truths. Plato claimed that knowledge was accessible by intellectual intuition, but according to Locke this type of thinking only encouraged prejudice, opinions and beliefs, not knowledge. According to him the fact that 1 + 1 = 2 may seem self-evident and intuitive is to ignore the fact that we are born with a mind that is initially blank and is then filled with our own unique experiences. For this reason the statement 1 + 1 = 2 made no sense to anyone who hadn't already been taught arithmetic. The lure of self-evident truths arises purely from the habituation to mathematical rules and language concepts. Our knowledge is limited to whatever sensory information we can obtain and truths of reason are deduced by us from our interpretations of sensory experience. While he rejected innate truths he nevertheless managed to arrive at many of the same conclusions as his predecessors: god existed because things we experience always have a beginning and an end and cannot come from nothing. For Locke, a complete understanding of reality wasn't necessary, for moral actions could rationally be determined by their relation to the sensations of pleasure (good) and pain (bad), a conclusion shared by Epicurus. The law of opinion is a community's judgement of what they consider good or bad behaviour, and varies from culture to culture. It is conformity to this law that is © 1997 Allan Sztab

186

called virtue. He believed that people were creatures of god and were all equal. Even in their natural state the ability of humans to make use of reason allowed them to recognise this equality, which would lead them to adopt the moral law not to do any harm to each other. It was only by consent that people formed a society and gave up their natural rights to those of the majority, whose decision they agreed to obey. It was a lack of laws in society that led to conflicts between people. According to Locke people were entitled to the products of their labour which they then had a claim over. They were free to accumulate as much as they could provided they never deprived anyone else of land to work. Religion was useful in providing a code of moral conduct that would enable illiterate people to obtain salvation. It could exist separately from civil law, which was based on the natural and equal rights of everyone to 'life, health, liberty and possessions'.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

187

The philosophy of Locke is reflected in that of Rousseau and his notions of equality and natural rights had a strong influence on the framers of the American constitution. He believed that the legislature should be separate from the administrators of the law to prevent unfair lawmaking. Furthermore, the people were justified in rebelling if their trust was betrayed and this is something we see more and more people electing to do in response to biased, ineffective and hypocritical legislation despite an independent legislature.1 David Hume (1711) was particularly interested in the way the mind processes impressions. According to him, if our impression of an object appeared to be the same now as it was 5 minutes earlier we would conclude that the object had remained constant in-between the two impressions. The idea that one event causes another is based purely on the association of two or more events and their sequence, but there is nothing of necessity linking them.2 It is only our memory that gives us the impression that we are the same person from one moment to the next. Nobody could validly make assertions about the causality of the universe, because not only was the question of what caused it speculation, but it was unobservable as well. According to Hume there was no way the mind could know anything beyond what existed and had made impressions upon it. While mathematics concerned abstract reasoning with numbers, any reasoning that didn't concern matters of fact or things that exist were illusions. All scientific knowledge was based on generalisations and impressions which left little room for certainty. Reason could only make judgements concerning matters of fact and their relationships. Reason couldn't judge moral propositions, because these involved something other than matters of fact and their relationships. For example, we can describe a circle and the relationships between its radius and diameter, but if we applied the word beautiful to it this judgement cannot be found anywhere in its lines - it is only an effect that is produced in the mind. The same thing applied to judgements such as what constitutes a good or a bad action, and Hume would ask someone to show him 1 2

Refer to section 67 for the role of the legislature in political change. Refer to section 58 for the errors of imaginary and false causes.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

188

where a thing like vice was. According to Hume it was never possible to derive what ought to be from what is. The only principle to base ethics on was that of human sympathy, whereby certain actions such as caution and consideration were generally approved and called good. These actions were useful and contributed to the happiness of society. Morality was only convention and no such thing as human rights existed. The sole foundation of justice was that it served the public interest of everyone by its utility or usefulness in protecting their person and property.1 The Philosophes were a group of French intellectuals devoted to the methods of experimentation and reason. The most famous amongst them were Voltaire and Diderot. After 20 years of research they published the Encyclopedia which attempted to arrange knowledge from a strictly scientific and non-religious point of view. It was banned twice, once in 1752 and again in 1759. The Enlightenment is the term used to describe this new-found faith, that morals and politics could progress by reason, in the same manner that science had done. This faith contributed to the rise of Utilitarianism, which we shall cover in section 52. The Baron d'Holbach was a member of the Philosophes and his words are indicative of this spirit and are equally applicable today: 'To discover the true principles of morality, men have no need of theology, of revelation, or of Gods; they need only common sense. They have only to commune with themselves, to reflect upon their own nature, to consult their visible interests, to consider the objects of society and the individuals who compose it, and they will easily perceive that virtue is advantageous, and vice disadvantageous, to such beings as themselves. Let us persuade men to be just, beneficent, moderate, sociable, not because such conduct is demanded by the gods, but because it is a pleasure to men. Let us advise them to abstain from vice and crime, not because they will be punished in the other world, but because they will suffer for it in this...' The greatest critic of the Enlightenment was a man who had little formal education, but whose far-reaching insights into human nature, the role of language and the manner in which societies were originally formed, became an 1

Refer to section 60 for the notion of equality.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

189

influential source of inspiration for many. According to Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712) reason could never be separated from the senses because reason was merely the processing of sensations. All animals processed sensations and ideas and humans only differed in the degree to which they did so. Language was the instrument that accounted for this.1 What was unique about humans was the range of choice they had, and their quest for self-perfection. Science only looked after their material interests. Hobbes and Locke both assumed that humans were capable of reasoning before they formed a society. According to Rousseau humans in their natural state never had language and were therefore not capable of reasoning and forming a society. To him humans were naturally good and compassionate. It was society and progress that had made them wicked and depraved. He thus advocated a return to as natural a state as possible. This view of human nature was called romantic, because a return to nature was regarded by some philosophers, such as Hume, as life that was 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short'. In addition, spoken language isn't necessary for social behaviour or co-operation, which is clearly evidenced by many other species of animal and even insects such as bees and ants. According to Rousseau humans in their original state lived in political and moral equality and were almost totally self-sufficient. Nobody had consented to give privileges to anyone else or were obliged to serve others - they were free and equal and not born slaves, as Aristotle had claimed. It was the production of material goods and agriculture that led to people depending on each other. Material goods required an agreement between producers to respect each other's rights to their goods. It was private property that led to the development of a rich and a poor class, which the poor were obviously unhappy with. However, the rich created a political society to enforce it. As more and more people moved away from their natural conditions and grew to depend on others, their natural compassion waned and was replaced with vanity, while morals took second place to commercial gain and the rewards that society provided. Even the practitioners of the arts and science were influenced by what could sell in the marketplace, and this had the effect of lowering the standard of 1

Refer to section 65 for language and reason originating in social consent.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

190

their work. For Rousseau education was the solution, and he acknowledged the important role that women could play in it. His words are echoed in the oftheard statement: 'If you want to educate one person educate a man but if you want to educate a family educate a woman.' According to Rousseau, to regain freedom and equality a social contract was required. His book 'The Social Contract' commenced with the now famous words: 'Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains'. Power had no legitimate claim to moral authority and the only legitimate moral authority was one based on the consent of everyone. This general consent he called the peoples' will or the common will which, in relation to other people or nations, would be regarded as an individual. According to Rousseau the common will could only be achieved by direct participation in a democratic government, and the delegation of law-making to representatives, even if they were popularly elected, was to sacrifice self-rule for the sake of convenience and efficiency. Rousseau realised that the establishment of such a society would require the overcoming of special interest groups, and believed the only way this could happen was through skilful legislation.1

51 A mediator between mysticism and science Immanual Kant (1724) agreed with Hume that scientific knowledge based on generalisations made from repeated observation was never absolutely certain. On the other hand the rationalists couldn't arrive at any consensus at all because when they ventured beyond what they could sense, they obtained equally rational yet contradictory conclusions. He thus dismissed concepts such as god, soul and immortality. Even though he knew there was no certainty beyond what we could sense he was equally convinced that we did have access to a knowledge that was absolutely certain but that never required any experience. This knowledge consisted of those rules of judgement that the mind used, judgements that united our experience to produce an internal representation of the external world. He classified these judgements into categories of space, time, quantity, quality (a 1

Refer to section 67 for the state of democracy today and the problem of domination by special interest groups. © 1997 Allan Sztab

191

positive or negative judgement), relation (cause and effect) and modality (something is either possible or impossible). According to Kant the mind imposes these judgements onto things and in this way colours our reality. That the mind does have internal rules by which it translates sensory impressions is now a scientific fact, although not many of these rules have been discovered.1 Kant wanted to discover what these rules of judgement were in order to obtain a certain knowledge that science couldn't provide, and that would be free of the contradictions that arose when thinkers ventured beyond the senses. According to Kant judgements such as 'the shortest distance between two points is a straight line' is the same as the scientific judgement that 'every change has a cause'. Mathematics was to him a prime example of judgements that were universal and independent of experience. What the rules involved in these judgements were, how they could be independent of experience, and how we could tell the difference between a valid judgement and an invalid one he never satisfactorily demonstrated. As we saw in sections 47 and 50 these intuitive, natural and self-evident feelings we have about things is the end result of a complex subconscious test for recognition. We recognise the familiar features of friends or enemies, mathematical formulae and times tables, and the right and wrong behaviour that we have learnt so often that they have long since become habituated. Kant made a few of these judgements himself and arrived at the existence of god and immortality, which were the very mystical concepts he set out to get rid of in the first place. According to Kant the test of a moral action was whether it could be applied consistently and universally, a rule that became known as the categorical imperative: 'act as if the maxim of thy action were to become a universal law of nature'. He also believed that people should not be treated as the means to an end and that in order for there to be morality it must be assumed that humans are responsible for their actions.2 Kant believed he had discovered a secret knowledge that was innate and independent of any experience. He claimed it was the human mind that colours or prescribes what nature is by 1

Refer to section 9 for the short cuts taken by the brain in order to speed up the processing of information. 2 Refer to section 58 and the error of freedom of will. © 1997 Allan Sztab

192

imposing its rules upon it. However, he inadvertently gave mystics the respectability of a pseudo-science within which they could dabble to their hearts' content, and he didn't have long to wait. Hegel (1770) has been called 'the father of modern totalitarianism' and is without doubt the undisputed master of mystical thought and oracular philosophy. Anyone who attempts to read a few pages of his writing would easily be convinced of this. His most vociferous critic at the time was Schopenhauer who had this advice for a dishonest guardian: 'Should you ever intend to dull the wits of a young man and to incapacitate his brains for any kind of thought whatever, then you cannot do better than give him Hegel to read.' (Popper) Hegel is still taken seriously by some philosophers and a study of his works still forms part of the philosophy curriculum at some universities. His influence is evident in the works of philosophers such as Marx, Heidegger and Jaspers. Whereas Kant said that our minds make judgements about our experiences, Hegel said that everything we experience is a product of our minds and there is nothing that is unknowable. An object is a relationship between all of the universals or essences we know about it.1 The objects we experience and our consciousness of them are identical as they are both thoughts. The judgements or rules of mind have an independent existence in an Absolute Mind, which in theological terms is God. The State is the collective spirit of the people. He agreed with Plato that the state must be worshipped. He combined elements of Kant, Heraclitus, and Aristotle to produce a universal formula for change which he called dialectics. Here's how he did it: Kant showed that when we leave the field of experience any opinion we have can be countered by an opposite opinion. Heraclitus claimed that all change is strife, a tension between opposites. Hegel now claimed that these contradictions were in fact the way in which reason develops. He borrowed from Aristotle the idea that change is progress towards the realisation of a things potential or end, and concluded that in order to obtain knowledge of this potential it is necessary to examine how it had developed in history. He had good examples to follow. 1

Refer to Socrates and Plato's concept of essences or universals in sections 38 and 39.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

193

The authors of the Old Testament had reinterpreted world history and the destiny of the Jewish people in terms of the divine revelations of their god Yahweh.1 Plato interpreted political revolutions as being due to a clash of class interests. Now Hegel had his turn. According to Hegel, if there were no laws people would harm each other. This would be irrational. Laws that prevent this are rational and it is only by following the law that a person can be free. The state is therefore the expression of the collective spirit and freedom of the people. The potential or end of history is freedom. History will judge the national spirit by the success of its actions to succeed in its struggle with other national spirits for world domination. It is united by a common enemy and by the comradeship formed through the wars it has fought. (Most political movements are united by having a common enemy based on some trumped-up distinction such as class or race.) According to Hegel, conflict is creative evolution, a so-called dialectic process, whereby a thesis merges with its antithesis to form a new thesis. This evolution, or three-step dialectic process, is progress towards what he called the Absolute Idea and final cause of itself, which is expressed in nature and the way our minds work. In short, the history of the world is a rational dialectic process and what exists in the present is therefore the highest rational development to date. Hegel's method was utilised to demonstrate that the existence of the Prussian monarchy, for whom he worked, was the highest development of freedom. To protect science from mere opinions, the state would determine what objective truth was. Of course his dialectic process or devious play with words could be used to demonstrate almost anything, and in page after page of gibberish and senseless jargon he attempts to explain things like the position and movement of the planets, magnetism and sound. According to Hegel the dialectic process moves from the abstract to the concrete. The most purely abstract universal idea we can have of anything is its Being. As soon as anything is added to this pure Being it becomes something. Therefore before it is something, Being is in some sense Not-Being.

1

Refer to the Old Testament reinterpretation of history in section 27.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

194

As Hegel himself says: 'the proposition that Being and Nothing are the same is so paradoxical to the imagination or understanding, that it is perhaps taken for a joke.. [but it] ... is one of the hardest things thought expects itself to do'. The movement of the mind from Being to Nothing gives rise to a third category - Becoming - 'the unity of Being and Nothing!' By following this process it could be shown that any opposites are identical. (Popper) Schopenhauer (1788) summed up the philosophy of Hegel when he said that out of every page of Hume's there was more to be learnt than out of the entire philosophy of Hegel. His view of humanity and life has almost always been considered pessimistic but in it you will recognise much that is already familiar. According to Schopenhauer people are driven by motives which are already determined and the overall objective is the will to live. There is nothing more to life than what we experience. Humans are essentially not much different to animals. Human reason is dictated to by the will to live and we only think we are leading when in actual fact we are being driven. Nature is indifferent to the individual and only places value on the species. Our actions aren't free because in a situation we could never do other than what we do. There is no aim or end to life and happiness is the temporary cessation of pain that is caused by desires which cannot be fulfilled. '... the life of every individual... is really always a tragedy, but gone through in detail, it has the character of a comedy.' According to Schopenhauer there were only two ways to escape from the will and these were ascetic practices, or saying no to our passions and desires, and the appreciation of artistic beauty which he believed was unrelated to passion and desire.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

195

Chapter Ten Utopian Ideals 52 The Utilitarians Newtonian physics explained and unified vast amounts of information and the extent to which it did so revealed clearly the mechanistic nature of the universe. Scientific laws gave rise to the belief that human progress and behaviour could also be explained in a material and mechanistic fashion. The first who attempted to do this was Jacques Turgot (1727) who saw human history in terms of the development of the mind. However, the word progress in a human context implies that there is some objective or end towards which human behaviour is directed. The problem was to determine what this end or objective was. Claude Adrien Helvetius (1715) agreed with Locke that the human mind was blank at birth and that everything we learn is based on sensory experience. According to him it was pleasure and pain that were the greatest teachers and motivators of human behaviour. People sought knowledge and power, not for themselves, but for the pleasures they could provide. He concluded that human behaviour could be engineered to reward people for socially beneficial actions, and to punish them for harmful ones. By pursuing their own self-interest people could benefit the community at large and this could be achieved by means of education and proper legislation.1 The ethical concept of David Hume that moral actions be judged on their usefulness, or utility to society, formed the basis of the Utilitarian philosophy of Jeremy Bentham (1748), James Mill (1773) and his son John Stuart Mill (1806). According to Bentham pleasure and pain was understood by everyone, so the value or utility of our actions could be judged by reference to them only. Actions had consequences and pleasure or pain were sufficient to guide the moral behaviour of society without having to take into account any spiritual or emotional considerations. The goal of society should be to achieve the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Because politicians would abuse their power the people should rule. It was the role of 1

Refer to the Laissez Faire doctrine of Adam Smith in section 67.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

196

government to ensure the protection of people and their possessions and to moderate extremes of wealth and poverty. No rights or duties existed in nature and people only obeyed when threatened with pain. If there was no threat of pain there would be no duty to obey and as a result there would be no rights. Offences are those actions which are harmful to the happiness of the community. Punishment should prevent further pain to society and outweigh the benefit of the crime. To be effective punishment should be cheap, serve as an effective deterrent, not be administered if compensation was possible, and alternative punishments should be considered. According to James Mill happiness increases to the extent that people have the freedom to acquire as much wealth and pleasure as they wanted. To overcome the abuse of politicians he advocated a representative government with frequently-held elections so officials who didn't perform would lose their positions. John Stuart Mill followed the Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, by ranking some pleasures as superior to others. He therefore based his model of government on ideals as opposed to others like Machiavelli and Hobbes, who based theirs on an analysis of human behaviour. According to Mill the government should protect the freedom of individuals to criticise and challenge public opinion. The only limits on individual freedom should be with respect to those actions that effected others. Society had no interest in those actions that only effected the individual even if it was for their own good. The government shouldn't do things that individuals could do better or things that would give it too much influence or power. He was concerned that demands for equality would suppress the development of the individual genius who was responsible for progress.1 True democracy didn't require that the people govern as long as they could control those who did. He advocated proportional representation in an elected assembly that would oversee an elite of experts who would actually govern free from uninformed opinion. Charles Peirce (1839) coined the word pragmatism from the Greek word pragma, which means act or deed. According to Peirce people acted from beliefs 1

Refer to sections 60 and 67 for the modern notion that equality means a fair share for all. © 1997 Allan Sztab

197

which were rooted in society. These beliefs may be held dogmatically, even though they were contradicted by others that were equally valid. Beliefs could also be adopted uncritically, or by accepting the authority of someone else. The problem with all these ways of arriving at beliefs is that they precluded argument and weren't related in a meaningful way to our experiences and behaviour. To William James (1842) rival philosophical theories should be determined according to their cash value, which was the practical difference they made to our lives. It is the successful practical experience of a theory that establishes its truth and verifies it. Ideas are only made true by experience. If we don't put our ideas to the test we will never discover the truth. John Dewey (1859) was the most influential pragmatist. According to him there was no reliable knowledge besides that of collective experience. The problem with Utilitarianism is that pleasure and pain are subjective and one persons pleasure might be anothers pain. What would be good for society as a whole might be bad for a minority, and this would be unfair. Pragmatism makes the false assumption that what is useful or effective is true, although it does have the merit of being a theory that places reliance on action and positive results as opposed to pursuing consistently ineffective policies.1

53 Socialism and Marxism Socialism arose under the influence of the Industrial and French Revolutions, and was based on the acceptance of human equality. This influential idea can be found in the philosophy of Locke and Rousseau. Socialism was a humanistic movement dedicated to eradicate the poverty and suffering of the poor and to achieve this it was perhaps inevitable that the early founders of socialism would entertain the notion of ideal or utopian societies. These ideas had a great influence on Karl Marx (1818) whose intentions were also sincere. The lack of labour legislation in his day, coupled with an unregulated capitalism, led to the most horrific suffering and exploitation of labourers, especially women and children. Millions of workers all over the world who enjoy lunch and tea 1

Refer to section 48 for the trial and error of scientific progress and section 67 for the lack of trial and error in the policies of government. © 1997 Allan Sztab

198

breaks, sick leave, paid vacations and many other benefits, are indirectly indebted to him for these improvements in their working conditions. Marx was influenced by the philosophy of Saint Simon, Fourier, Owen and Feuerbach whose philosophies are briefly outlined below. Henri de Saint-Simon (1760) declared Catholicism and Protestantism heretical versions of Christianity which was dedicated to 'loving thy neighbour'. He identified three classes in society - workers, industrialists and scientists. According to him poverty could be overcome by a centrally-planned economy and the abolition of inheritance, so that only productive people could enjoy the privileges of ownership. It was possible to understand the laws of social existence and people could be governed according to scientific facts and not moral and mystical speculation. This would enable politicians to become administrators and not governors.1 Such a development would herald the end of history which was marked by alternating periods of order and chaos. Charles Fourier (1772) believed that humans were essentially good. According to him morality must accept human passions and desires and find appropriate ways of satisfying them instead of correcting or suppressing them.2 His utopia consisted of small independent communes where women would be free and their children raised communally. There would be free education for all and no restrictions placed on sexual conduct. Robert Owen (1771) worked his way up from poverty to become the owner of a spinning mill. He experimented by reducing the working hours and maintaining the same wages while improving the working conditions of his employees. To his surprise productivity and profits increased, which proved to him that people could be moulded by their social and working environment. Despite using this as an example to promote reform, it was a lesson that was unfortunately overlooked by both capitalists and the more idealistic utopian thinkers that followed him. It was the failure to win reforms that led him to turn to organised labour as a solution.

1

Refer to section 67 for the suggestion of changing the role of politicians from legislators to watchdogs. 2 Refer to section 66 for the importance to freedom of controlling the desires. © 1997 Allan Sztab

199

Ludwig Feuerbach (1804) was a follower of Hegel who exerted the most influence on Marxist socialism. He believed that religion was based on emotion and that the illusion of God led people to accept poverty and injustice in this life. Marx would later refer to religion as the 'opium for the masses'. According to Feuerbach it was by projecting their ideas of perfect goodness, justice and love onto an imaginary god that people alienated or distanced themselves from these very properties which now seemed imperfect by contrast. The solution was to remove God so that humans could concentrate on achieving these properties themselves. He disagreed with Hegel that everything was a product of mind and believed that material things could be experienced while our ideas of them could never represent them perfectly. As a result there would always be a difference between ideas and reality. To Feuerbach history portrayed the struggle of humanity to overcome its alienation. Marx believed, like Hegel, that history developed by a three-step dialectic process of thesis, antithesis and synthesis.1 Scientists had discovered laws of nature with which they could explain how things worked, and this led Marx to believe he could do the same with social history. The certainty of science led him, and even some distinguished scientists of his day to conclude that all events were strictly determined. This assumption is one that quantum theory specifically proves isn't correct.2 However, Marx was satisfied that all things were determined, and in addition, that the progress of history was similarly determined. With this belief he attempted to discover the conditions and the laws that governed this historical process.3 Such a discovery would enable him to explain the past and predict the future which was no doubt the secret wish of every historical interpreter before and after him. According to him it was the conflict between different classes that was responsible for the development of history, and this would end when there was only one class left. According to Marx this would be the working class and his utopia was dedicated towards achieving this objective.

1

Refer to Hegels three-step dialectic in section 51. Refer to quantum theory in section 48 and the error of imaginary and false causes in section 58. 2

3

The issue of determinism vs inderminism is taken up later in section 58. © 1997 Allan Sztab 200

Communism

represented

the

culmination

of

an

adaptation

and

modification of ideas that commenced with Plato and gives added credibility to the claim that 'the pen is mightier than the sword'. According to Plato, change was created by a clash of class interests that led to the decay of government. Marx agreed with him but, together with Aristotle and Hegel, believed that change represented development and not decay. Unlike Hegel, who saw progress as the development of spirit towards freedom, Marx agreed with Feuerbach that spirit was only the representation of the material world in the human mind. He rejected Plato's notion that there was another world and turned Hegels philosophy 'the right way up' - from its head (ideas) onto its feet (solid ground or material). Marx concluded that it was not our minds or consciousness that determined the way we live but the material conditions that we lived in which determined our consciousness.1 Historical change was caused by conflicts in the material world and hence the name dialectical materialism. According to Marx it was the private ownership of the means of production that was the material cause of class conflicts. Those who now owned the means of production, such as land and machinery, represented the capitalist class while those who could only sell their labour made up the working class. The workers were alienated from the means of production and even the products they produced. Class conflict was inevitable because the labourers got less than the true value of their labour - the difference or surplus was kept by the capitalist. This conflict would create the next dialectic movement or change of history towards socialism and finally, communism. By abolishing private ownership he hoped to remove the cause of class conflict and bring about this final change immediately. Marx believed this development was inevitable and nothing could stop it - all one could do was to lessen the birth pangs. Marx was wrong on a number of key assumptions in his theories. He assumed that science and history were determined in a mechanistic sense and that social history had developed due to a struggle between different classes. What he failed to see was that class struggle isn't always between different classes but is often 1

Refer to section 10 for the role of the environment on the formation of a persons character. © 1997 Allan Sztab

201

between members of the same class - capitalists and even workers compete with each other. He also assumed that when the workers revolted there would be a classless society. However, in any society, even a society of workers, there will always be some workers who have special privileges and who therefore form a class of their own. He also assumed that the value of a product was determined by the number of labour hours necessary for its production, when it is in fact determined by the supply and demand for the product.1 Predicting the future based on the past is fraught with difficulties. In their prophesy the communists failed to take into account the many concessions and improvements that the capitalists made when faced with the demands of organised labour. These concessions led to such an improvement in the conditions of workers that many of them were no longer interested in revolutionary activities. Marx foresaw a transitional stage between capitalism and socialism, during which private property would be abolished and a workers dictatorship installed. In mature communism workers would choose their occupation and work according to their ability, for which they would receive all they required in return. Society would be centrally planned and the government wouldn't dominate. Besides these broad predictions he left no guidance for how such large-scale changes to society could be achieved. Communism as it existed in the Soviet Union or as it exists in China today bears only a superficial resemblance to what Marx had in mind.

1

Refer to section 67 for the interference by governments in the supply and demand mechanism. © 1997 Allan Sztab

202

54 Analytical philosophy 'Let us beware of saying that there are laws in nature. There are only necessities: there is nobody who commands, nobody who obeys, nobody who trespasses. Once you know that there are no purposes, you also know that there is no accident; for it is only beside a world of purposes that the word "accident" has meaning. Let us beware of saying that death is opposed to life. The living is merely a type of what is dead, and a very rare type... There are no eternally enduring substances; matter is as much of an error as God.' (Nietzsche) Analytical philosophy arose due to the recognition that many philosophical problems were created by the imprecise use of language. By carefully analysing concepts or ideas it was hoped to logically clarify them and therefore prevent their misuse. David Hume concluded that there is no way the mind could know anything beyond what existed and could make impressions upon it - any reasoning that didn't concern matters of fact or things that existed were illusions. The attempt was now made by a group of analytical philosophers, who called themselves the Vienna Circle, to apply these principles to the logic of language. Their guiding principle is known as logical positivism. According to this principle only those statements that could be verified or translated into statements that could be verified had any meaning. Verification could only be performed by observation or in other words, by sensual experience. Those statements that couldn't be physically verified were simply emotive. Into this category fell metaphysics or those things that are beyond the senses such as, spirits, souls, god and heaven. However, logical positivism was problematic because even if a statement could be verified the people doing the verification could still interpret the results differently. In addition, it wasn't possible to verify certain statements such as those that concerned future events or even a statement such as the principle of verification itself. For these and other reasons logical positivism was later toned down to include statements that could, in principle, be verified by some degree of observation.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

203

The philosophy of Gilbert Ryle is a good example of what can be gained by the philosophical analysis of language. Some philosophers had been aware that many philosophical problems were created simply by the misleading use of language. According to Francis Bacon nature had no purpose so it was out of context to apply the word purpose to it. Hobbes claimed that the words of ancient texts were used within the context and beliefs of their time and to apply these same words to the context and beliefs of the present was to misinterpret them.1 Ryle focused on what is known as the body-mind problem - the belief that a person has both a body and a mind which exist independently of each other. Because the activities of the mind cannot be seen, while those of the body can, it is said that the mind exists inside the body - a ghost within a machine. Exactly how the mind and body interact isn't known nor can it be seen. Nobody has ever managed to answer the question how the mind influences the body or how the body influences the mind, but that they do is beyond dispute. As Mark Twain once asked, 'If the mind is spiritual and cannot be affected by physical influences then does the mind remain sober when the body is drunk?' According to Ryle this entire mystery is the result of what he called a category mistake.2 This mistake arises because the word mind is used to express the many different activities of a persons emotions and thinking - activities which cannot be described in terms of physical processes. The mistake is to treat the word 'mind' as if it really existed as an entity separate from all these processes, and then to compound the mistake by applying characteristics like cause, effect, state and substance to it. The error would be the same as that made by a person who, after a tour of the laboratories, sports-fields, libraries and lecture theatres of a university then asks 'so where is the university?' In other words, they have failed to recognise that the word 'university' is a collective word that represents all the facilities just visited and doesn't exist separately. They would further compound this error if they now began to attribute characteristics such as emotions or substance to the word 'university'. Similarly, when we talk of a game of pool we might describe a ball that strikes another ball as causing it to 1 2

Refer to the philosophies of Bacon and Hobbes in sections 47 and 49. Refer to section 50 for the dualistic views of Descartes.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

204

move, and if asked why we might say that one ball forces the other to move or compels the other ball to move. Because we are making the assumption that every action has something that caused it we are now prone to making contextual errors. The words force or compel are words that only have a meaning in a human context, such as one person being able to force or compel another person to do, or not to do, something. When we talk of one ball forcing another to move or compelling another ball to move we are therefore making a category mistake. The I that we talk of is merely the sum total of our hereditary character and our individual experiences. An idea is the first step in response to an emotion or desire. When we reflect or think about an action we are weighing up the alternative desires and actions that are available to us. The emotions or desires are produced by glandular secretions: '... without adrenals we could not be angry; without proper thyroids we become idiots... The mind in all its functions is a part of the body; it grows with its growth and dies with its decay; it is no more outside of corporeal (physical) nature than digestion, respiration, and excretion. It is merely the highest function of the flesh.' (Durant) The length of time that a society has come to accept a particular pattern of thought or way of thinking is instrumental in the making of such errors. In other words, a mind-set that has developed over a long period of time often makes it difficult for even the greatest of thinkers to see through. The greater the frequency and length of time a mind-set has existed the more ingrained the habits of thought become.1 The desire to reduce fear and anxiety is the incentive we have to accept beliefs that could easily distort our reality. When it came to thinking about the body-mind problem a particular mind-set or belief concerning material things had already existed for thousands of years. Many of the preSocratic philosophers were materialists who believed that whatever exists is composed of matter whether this was water, fire or air. The view of Democritus that everything was composed of 'atoms and the void' still exerted an influence on Newton some 2,000 years after him. When people began to speak of non1

Refer to appendix E for habits of thought.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

205

material entities it seemed common sense, intuitive, or self-evident to many philosophers that there was no place for things which couldn't be sensed or demonstrated.1 We are so accustomed to thinking like this that we find it difficult if not impossible to conceive of something in a non-material form. The difficulty that many people, even some scientists, experience concerning quantum theory is precisely the fact that it is counter-intuitive. In other words, it goes against everything that a person has come to expect.2 Scientists have now concluded that the ultimate constituent of sub-atomic particles is not matter but energy. What this means is that up until now whatever we have considered as being lifeless, be it a rock, stone, or a piece of metal is actually alive in the sense that it has been given form by matterless energy which operates either according to its own devices or in accordance with quantum laws which we don't yet know or fully understand. Life and matter are actually indistinguishable from one another and it is no longer impossible to see how life as we know it began. Some people still doubt whether inorganic (unorganised) compounds can be turned into organic (organised) ones, despite the fact that this is accomplished every time a plant converts the sun and chemicals in the soil into life-sustaining sap. Metals are sensitive and react to extremely tiny variations in light and temperature. Sensitivity to the environment such as that displayed along the perimeter of single-celled organisms is the clue as to how nature breached the gap between matter and life.3 If we speak of thought we should do so as a function of the body which isn't matter but life which permeates every cell and atom. The word 'mind' is merely a name we give to describe the process of thought; it doesn't exist as an entity on its own in the same way that the word 'sight' describes the process by which an organism sees things. When we say that there is an interaction between body and mind we are not saying that two independent entities are interacting but only that the nerve centre or brain interacts with the other organs of the body.

1 2 3

Refer to section 58 for the errors of imaginary and false causes. Refer to section 47 for feelings of intuition and section 48 for quantum theory. Refer to section 2 and the role of the senses.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

206

55 Nietzsche 'Truth is the kind of error without which a certain species of life could not live. The value for life is ultimately decisive.' (Nietzsche) Nietzsche (1844) never produced any formal system of his own but his works continue to influence modern thinkers up to the present time. His books are now experiencing a surge in popularity. This isn't surprising because they are easy to read, something which distinguishes his writing from practically every philosopher before or after him. He was especially critical of religion and of Christianity in particular. He regarded Christianity as a false doctrine that manipulated people and favoured values that were opposed to life instead of those which affirmed life. He is most well known for his statement that 'God is dead'. Many of the existentialist philosophers were influenced by him, and his deeply penetrating and keen observations about the workings of the human mind, consciousness, sub-consciousness and repression of memories influenced Sigmund Freud. It was Freud who said that Nietzsche 'had a more penetrating knowledge of himself than any other man who ever lived or was ever likely to live'. His insights are a guiding light for anyone who wishes to obtain a greater understanding of themselves and people in general. Nietzsche feared his work would be misunderstood, and this proved prophetic. His sisters husband was a German nationalist and together they interpreted his work to support nationalism and later Nazism. The truth is that Nietzsche was not anti-Semitic. It is very easy to misquote and misrepresent him because he wrote in short paragraphs or aphorisms. Nietzsche realised that many of the traditional problems of philosophy could be answered by enquiring first and foremost into the psychology of the human mind. For him beliefs had their root in the primitive human desires which were at one time essential for survival. Civilisation led to these desires being tamed and channelled into socially acceptable outlets. The best one could do was to give them form and style and by suppressing them unduly one was suppressing life itself.1 His advice to a woman who found it difficult to be chaste was 1

Refer to section 66 for the importance of controlling the desires to a persons quest for freedom and happiness. © 1997 Allan Sztab

207

'don't'. According to Nietzsche the desire for certainty led the superstitious to believe in God and the scientist to believe in truth. 'Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies'. Whatever proved useful was believed in, but usefulness was no criterion of truth and this applied to religion, mathematics and logic. Reason was a tool of the desires and emotions.1 For Nietzsche the dominant human drive was power, and happiness was the feeling a person had when their power was increasing. Victory was a recipe to restore or confirm one's power, and if defeated there was a tendency to find someone to blame or condemn in order to exercise what power one had left. According to him moral actions had their origin in the rules that were imposed by the strong over the weak. Resentment was a feeling that originated in the powerlessness of the weak and led to the development of the religious articles of faith, love and hope.2 Those who couldn't exercise their power over others often turned on themselves and tyrannised over their appetites by pursuing ascetic practices. He saw power as the underlying drive behind many other actions - having pity for others gave one a slight feeling of superiority, while on the other hand being able to evoke pity was an exercise of the power to hurt; teasing others was a subtle display of power; an expression of gratitude was a mild form of revenge as it was an acknowledgement of a persons power to get someone to do something for them; acquiring knowledge was to conquer the unknown and gave one a feeling of strength and superiority; praising someone was to assume the power to judge and dispense honours.

1 2

Refer to section 50 and the faith in reason. Refer to section 63 for the role of faith, hope and love in manipulation.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

208

56 Existentialism 'We are all May flies, or more poetically, day flies, those dainty insects with lacy wings and slender trailing tail, who live but for a day. The adult May fly lives for only a few hours, just long enough to mate. He has neither mouth nor stomach, but needs neither since he does not live long enough to need to eat. The eggs the May fly leaves hatch after the parent has died. What is it all about? What's the point? There is no point. That's just the way it is. It is neither good nor bad. Life is mainly, simply, inevitable.' (Kopp) Philosophy had tended to concentrate on the technical problems and difficulties of ethics, politics and religion, while ignoring the individual whose concerns were made even more urgent by the ever-increasing impersonal nature of work, the disregard for human life in wars, the failure of human efforts to prevent them, the doubt cast on religious faith by science, and the revelations of evolution and rational thought. Religion provided moral guidance and some sense of worth and meaning to an individuals life - something philosophy didn't appear to do. Religious doubt now led many people to conclude that life was worthless and meaningless. Philosophers now began to ask what contribution they could make to the individuals life. According to Albert Camus the only philosophical decision one must make is whether to live or commit suicide. To choose to live means to live a life full of absurdities. However, the fact that life is full of absurdities doesn't mean that life is meaningless. What sometimes leads to such a depressing conclusion is the confusion of objective meaning with subjective meaning. It is only the subjective meaning that we give to our own lives that can determine whether life is meaningless or not and this is borne out by the fact that many people have created meaningful lives for themselves. If we look at the world and the universe around us and ask the question, 'does it have any meaning?' we are asking for an objective meaning which implies that there is something out there that can have meaning independent of our minds and, more importantly, independent of all those lives before and after us. Not surprisingly, there is no answer to such a question, and it is the absence of any objective © 1997 Allan Sztab

209

meaning that leads some of us to despair. However, the question should rather be one of a subjective nature - 'what does it all mean to me?' - because this is a question each one of us can answer. The cornerstone of existentialism is that people exist first and are then responsible for finding or creating a meaning or essence for their lives i.e. existence precedes essence. In finding meaning the individual is faced with many different systems of belief and almost the only common feature of the socalled existentialist philosophers is their strong individualism and rejection of these systems of belief as inadequate and superficial, primarily because they had so little relevance to everyday life. Some existentialist philosophers turned to atheism while others turned to religion. The following philosophers are generally considered as exemplars of existentialist philosophy: Soren Kierkegaard (1813) was influenced by the philosophy of Hegel. According to him the knowledge a person has of their own mortality causes anxiety which alienates them from their essential being. Their attempts to overcome this anxiety only results in guilt and despair. It is only by their relation to an infinite or everlasting God that their anxiety about their own mortality can be overcome - a personal relationship that is unique to them and direct in the sense that it isn't allied to other groups such as a church or state. According to him there is a three-step dialectic process by which this can be achieved - the last stage being the religious stage which requires 'a leap of faith'. Although not an existentialist himself the methods of Edmund Husserl (1859) were utilised by some existentialists. Husserl based his philosophy of phenomenology on the fact that all the data from our surroundings are interpreted in the mind; our consciousness is a unique representation of the reality each one of us finds around ourselves - there is no objective reality. Our interpretation is based on assumptions and prejudices that are derived from our personal experiences, social and scientific backgrounds. Science gave the impression that only what is physical has any importance and this precluded the individual from developing a spiritual side to their being. By removing all these prejudices from our thinking and withholding hasty judgements, a process he

© 1997 Allan Sztab

210

called bracketing, people would be able to examine and interpret the world from their own unique point of view.1 According to Karl Jaspers (1883) it was the role of philosophy to distinguish itself from the other sciences by concentrating on the unique inner experiences of the individual because the truth is what the individual perceives it to be. Each person has a unique Being and like Kierkegaard's three-step dialectic movement, Jaspers believed that the individual moves through three stages on the way to finally realising the uniqueness of their Being in the merging of all aspects of their life - an awareness which he calls the Transcendent, and what theology might call God. According to Heidegger (1889) what distinguishes humans from other things is the awareness of their own being; it is only humans who experience anxiety about their own death and question the meaning of their existence. The essence of humans is how they exist in a world to which they give a unique meaning and interpretation. Humans are not separate from this world but form an integral part of it. The way in which people approach life is how they experience it: if they are sad their experiences will be sad - if they are joyful their experiences will be joyful. Because of a fear of death - of nothing in particular - the dominant human mood is one of anxiety which is aggravated by the knowledge that people are personally responsible for their actions. As a result humans lose their authentic selves and tend to become merely average people. In order to recover their authentic selves people must acknowledge their limitations and overcome the attempt to hide their fear of death. According to Jean-Paul Sartre (1905) we are the sum of our actions and plans. Being consciously aware of a world that exists apart from us differentiates us from other animals. Because there is no God we are abandoned and must create values for ourselves. The ability or freedom to do so makes us responsible for our actions. This responsibility creates anxiety and the attempt to escape from it by sheltering behind the idea of fate or the existence of mysterious forces leads to self-deception.2 1 2

Refer to section 66 for the role of deferring judgement in eliminating prejudices. Refer to section 11 for fear, belief and distortions of reality.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

211

© 1997 Allan Sztab

212

PART FOUR FOUNDATIONS FOR FREEDOM

'Might is right' is the sole refrain of nature. In a world without free will or certainty it is only the consensus that underpins the achievements of language, logic, mathematics and science that affords us the opportunity to rise above nature. The survival of any life form is based upon a faith in the senses as the bearer of truth and in this faith lies our future.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

213

© 1997 Allan Sztab

214

Chapter Eleven Freedom And Morality 57 The Origin of Morality How and to what end is one to act? The easy wants can be satisfied but it is precisely these questions to which we require clarity that the moral authorities become uncertain. Their fear is that if we acted according to the light, bright or dim of our own reason their right to be the only one's to exercise their own arbitrariness and folly would be diminished. (Nietzsche) To survive every organism has to be able to overcome any obstacles it faces. The human emotions and desires are the agents with which we do so and the reward of pleasure and the pain of failure are our guides. Every action we take is geared towards the avoidance of pain or discomfort or the seeking of pleasure and to this extent they are all innocent. When an eagle swoops down and picks up a lamb it isn't evil on this account and the same applies to our actions. The power that we have to influence or control the flow of events around us determines our ability to survive and flourish and this principle applies to every living organism be it a simple bacterium or the complexity of a human being. Morality doesn't exist in nature at all - morality is a uniquely human creation. Our ability to influence and control things and events around us is limited only by the forces that oppose us, such as those of the environment, other animals, or other people. This simple principle of nature is nothing other than the principle that 'might is right'. Whoever has sufficient power can enforce their will over others.1 At some time in the distant past human conflict might have been easy to avoid but as population density increased and competition for resources began this was in many cases not possible. Through these conflicts, struggles and wars, a victorious society was able to survive and freely determine for themselves those actions that they believed were good or bad. Wars are fought only because two

1

Refer to the Sophist Thrasymachus in section 37 and the political suggestions of Machiavelli in section 49. © 1997 Allan Sztab

215

or more parties believe that they are right.1 From birth onwards we are moulded by the principle that might is right; our parents and society are the first to enforce their will on us by presenting us with a system of rewards and punishments that encourage us to perform certain actions and to refrain from performing others. Thus we are taught which behaviours are permissible and those that aren't, those that are considered good and those that are considered bad. We learn who to identify with, who it is acceptable for us to mix with and those who are considered superior or inferior to us. Boys learn to behave like boys and girls to behave like girls. Even our sexual preferences are guided by the values of society, and in marked contrast with the heterosexual preferences of modern society, in ancient Greece homosexuality was regarded as normal.2 As we grow up these commands or laws are given to us largely without reasons as is the case with most laws. Once they have become habituated they form the basis of our set of beliefs and expectations, and thereby our moral conscience with which we later identify actions as being either good or bad. To learn those behaviours that are perhaps vital to our survival we conform to those around us. We are constantly absorbing repetitive information from the media that we learn subconsciously. The result is that over time we become habituated to obey in accordance with the opinions and beliefs of others - our first opinion is seldom our own despite the strong attachment that we may feel towards them. The behaviours we undertake have become habituated through many years of force and psychological manipulation. We have been taught by our parents and society how to think and how to perpetuate both the social truths and errors of the past. As Rousseau stated so eloquently: we are 'born free but are everywhere in chains'.3 History bears adequate testimony that from the earliest of times those who had the power to enforce their will over others determined those actions which could be undertaken and those that couldn't. Nothing has changed today except the guise that it appears in. We see nature at work in any game park. The lion roars 1

Refer to section 32 for belief and truth and section 33 for the view of Heraclitus that the outcome of war is always just. 2 Refer to section 10 for the formation of character and section 13 for the practical considerations behind the beliefs of any particular society. 3 Refer to section 62 for the habit of obeying as an obstacle to freedom, and appendix A6 for the learning theory of Albert Bandura. © 1997 Allan Sztab

216

to appear frightening, a display of its power that is intended to subjugate the weaker without a fight. The right of a dominant lion to impose its will is the same as that of a government. Under certain conditions a person might desire '... through his actions to count as being more powerful than he is: when the fear he engenders increases, his power increases. He soon notices that what bears him up or throws him down is not that which he is but that which he counts as being: here is the origin of vanity. The powerful man tries by every means to augment belief in his power... And the degree of vanity will, moreover, be the greater the more prudent and intelligent the individual is: because it is easier to augment belief in power than to augment power itself, but is so only for him who possesses spirit - or, as must be the case in these primeval conditions, for him who is cunning and deceitful.' (Nietzsche) It is only when two or more parties of equal power voluntarily agree to do or not to do something and the terms of their agreement are deemed to be fair and equitable between them that the notions of justice and morality first make their appearance. The existence of unfair laws and social obligations is prima facie evidence of a formal or informal agreement made by parties of unequal power. Even in the most modern democracies citizens have had their power usurped from under their noses with the result that unbiased legislation is the exception.1 There is much to be gained by co-operating with others and numerous examples of such co-operation exist. At a primitive level people might agree to share their food so that a person who never managed to find any wouldn't go hungry. These agreements were based on reciprocity.2 The same applies today. Being able to give effect to the obligations one has voluntarily undertaken is a display of personal power, confidence and the extent to which we can be trusted to honour our words. Those who dishonour their obligations seek an unfair advantage and display a lack of respect and fear towards those they have promised. Revenge seeks to remove any advantage that might have been unfairly gained and to restore honour and respect. 1 2

Refer to section 67 and the state of western democracy where minority interests rule. Refer to section 60 for the power relationship in giving and receiving gifts.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

217

For many people morality is based not on the principle that might is right, but on a belief in the truth of concepts such as intuition and divine revelation. Most of these beliefs breach one or more of what the philosopher Nietzsche referred to as errors of reason.

58 Errors of Reason The errors of causality It seems obvious from our own experience and observations of nature that every event is caused by something. Although we don't think much about it all the actions we take are based upon this assumption. When we hear a loud noise we look up immediately to see what caused it and we would never accept that it just happened on its own accord. If we believed that things could happen without having a cause then we would give up looking for them. If things could happen without a cause then nothing, including ourselves, could ever claim to be responsible for causing them. The belief that every event has a cause is so strongly held that even if we don't know what caused something we would rather attribute this fact to our lack of information of the circumstances surrounding the event than to accept that there was no cause for it. We require certainty to alleviate fear and a consistent environment to survive.1 The memory recalls earlier states of a similar kind with our interpretation as to what caused them. This tendency has become a habit and may even postpone an investigation of the real cause. 'To trace something unknown back to something known is alleviating, soothing, gratifying and gives a feeling of power. Danger, disquiet and anxiety attend the unknown - the first instinct is to eliminate these distressing states. First principle: any explanation is better than none... The new, the unexperienced, the strange is excluded from being cause... The banker thinks at once of business, the Christian of 'sin', the girl of her love... The entire realm of morality and religion falls under this concept of imaginary causes. [Unpleasant feelings] ....arise from beings hostile to us (evil spirits: most celebrated case - hysterics misunderstood as witches). They arise from actions we can't approve of (the feeling of 'sin', of 'culpability'...) as punishments, as payment for something we shouldn't have done...' (Nietzsche) What cannot be known or understood is unpredictable and might carry with it the potential for harm. If the desire to alleviate fear or anxiety is strong enough 1

Refer to section 7 for the consistency incentive and section 14 for fear of the uncertain as the origin of superstitious belief. © 1997 Allan Sztab

218

our reason may be motivated to distort reality by making guesses and generalisations to reduce the fear or anxiety.1 Not surprisingly, these guesses have often led to the assigning of false causes to events and to a confusion between whether something is the cause or consequence of a particular event or set of circumstances. For example, at one time it was believed that thunder causes lightning when today we know that it is exactly the opposite. Similarly, we might consider whether violent crime, drug abuse and corruption are the cause or symptoms of a society that is sick. That every event appears to have something that caused it is known as the principle of universal causality or determinism. The belief that not everything has a cause is known as indeterminism. It isn't possible to verify that every event has a cause but by the same token there are no events that are known to have had no cause. The fact that unknown factors have been discovered so often in the past lends added support to the assigning of unknown factors to anything that seems to have no cause. This makes it almost impossible to refute the principle of universal causality. There are some scientists who refuse to accept the uncertainty inherent in quantum physics by preferring to attribute this to unknown factors although the majority of scientists acknowledge that there is no certainty but only probability. When confronted with the pure chance aspect of quantum physics Einstein made his now famous remark that '.. God does not play dice'. The concept that there are imaginary causes responsible for otherwise inexplicable things like where, when and how the universe originated are strongly associated with uncertainty and the unknown because the desire to give at least some explanation provides comfort and the illusion of certainty. Science explains events, processes and actions in terms of natural laws which can only describe or explain actions - it cannot cause things to happen. Scientific laws are based on limited observations. The belief that there is a cause or a reason for everything that happens is borne out of the belief that the I or ego we think of as a separate entity can will things to happen with recourse only to our conscious minds, and independent of any underlying 1

Refer to section 11 for fear, belief and distortions of reality.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

219

subconscious motives. This ability we then project onto the outside world where we look for agents or causes for everything. According to the philosopher David Hume if our impressions of an object appeared the same now, and then again 5 minutes later, we would conclude that the object had remained constant in-between the two impressions despite the fact that we have no evidence to suggest that this has in fact been the case. Furthermore, the idea that one event causes another is based purely on the association of two or more events and their sequence, but there is nothing of necessity linking them - it is only our memory that gives us the impression that we are the same person from one moment to the next despite the fact that we are constantly changing. Our cells continually die and are replenished, new memories or experiences are added and new associations formed. Similarly, if a person places their hands above the inflamed joint of another and the next day the joint is healed it doesn't mean that the two events are in any way causally related. Scientists often make this error in interpreting the results of their experiments.1 Any conclusions that are based on limited observations can never provide us with absolute truth because there is always the possibility that our future observations might not be in accordance with them.2 Therefore there will always be the possibility that an event without a cause could be found and this is the reason that the debate between determinists and indeterminists has no solution. Some arguments, especially from the determinist camp might at first glance appear convincing but don't bear up to closer scrutiny. Lets assume that the principle of universal causality is true and all events are determined according to scientific laws that were known. In such a case if we were given the state of the universe at a particular time it should be possible to predict the rest of history because events would unfold in a mechanistic cycle of cause and effect with one effect being the cause of another effect and so on. Similarly, we should be able to determine the conditions or causes that immediately preceded it and so on. If we concluded that the universe is infinitely old then nothing could have caused it as it would always have been there and this is nothing other than the principle 1 2

Refer to appendix F for eugenics as one example of jumping to conclusions. Refer to section 48 for the generalisations or inductions that go to the heart of science.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

220

of indeterminism. If we concluded that there was a beginning of the universe we would also require a first cause - something that itself wasn't caused - which would bring us back to indeterminism once more. From a scientific point of view all we have is probability and our experience seems to conform equally well to the notion that we can never be sure that most things we take for granted in our daily lives will happen with absolute certainty. We often hear it said that 'the best laid plans of mice and men are often thwarted' and this is in accordance with our own experiences. That things only have a certain probability of happening is by no means an extreme point of view all it admits is uncertainty and chance. Fatalism is the belief that we cannot alter the course of events which is preordained, a view which is contrary to almost everything we do. We drive carefully to avoid accidents, go to schools to learn skills and exercise to maintain good health. These are things we wouldn't do if we seriously held the belief that we couldn't influence future events. People who say things like 'what will be, will be' are really only looking for an excuse not to do something such as giving up smoking or wearing a seat-belt in a motor vehicle. Sometimes it appears as if circumstances leading up to an event are in some way pre-ordained and the probability with which accidents and illnesses occur are so accurate that the success of insurance companies are even based on it. However, the fact that accidents, illnesses and deaths will occur with such predictability in no way implies that the way in which they will occur is pre-ordained or that the series of cause and effect carries on indefinitely. Probabilities are based on repeated observations while pure chance accompanies the intricate details of the majority of these events. When things happen to us without specifically planning them then we may rightfully talk of chance. Meeting someone in the street without planning to do so would be chance and it is never possible to determine it. Philosophers began to cast doubt over whether the world of appearances that our senses portray is in accordance with how the real world actually is. They based their arguments on optical illusions that we are all familiar with. For example, to get an indication of the distance between ourselves and other objects they appear © 1997 Allan Sztab

221

smaller when seen at a distance which we know isn't so. We also know that if we place a stick into a bowl of water it looks like it is bent. However, it is only our lack of knowledge about the inner workings of the human eye and the refraction of light that leads us to denounce our faculty of sight. Despite this lack of knowledge these optical illusions don't fool the senses because they work together - it is easy to feel that a stick immersed in water isn't actually bent and equally easy to realise that objects when seen at a distance aren't actually smaller. The philosopher Zeno developed some paradoxes about two-and-a-half thousand years ago which gave added strength to the illusory nature of motion while conveniently ignoring the fact that he had no trouble in moving around. 1 Over the years many other highly esteemed philosophers followed him in denouncing appearances as illusions. The minds of philosophers have always been occupied with understanding how the senses work and in particular, how we acquire our knowledge of the world. These are intriguing and important questions but the outright dismissal of the senses led to all sorts of mystical explanations and soon other entities and worlds seemed possible.2 Soon morality was based not on the reality of appearances but on mystical and superstitious concepts such as that of divine revelation, immortality, reincarnation, astral travelling and witchcraft. Then, as now, what is desired will be believed and reasons found to support them. It is belief that creates reasons and not reasons that create belief.3 The mere fact that something isn't known or cannot be explained can never be used as evidence either for or against the existence of imaginary entities that cannot be sensed. When we go against our senses we lose the only standard by which we can objectively measure reality. We know that without language complex reasoning would be impossible. Language simplifies and helps us to manipulate sensory information into a stable and ordered reality that we can recognise. Because it was developed for quick communication between people it is biased towards the collective survival of society. Language is an 1

Refer to the paradoxes of Zeno in section 34. Refer to the real and unchanging world of Ideas believed in by Plato. 3 Refer to section 11 for reason as a tool of the emotions and our beliefs. Refer to section 66 for changing our beliefs and behaviour and appendix E for changing habits of thought. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

222

agent of the desires and it is always about or for something external to us - there is no language to describe something internal and private like pain. Because language presupposes that external objects exist in some relation to the I we call ourselves we are easily led to believe that what has a word for it actually exists. However, existence is lacking in almost every mystical and superstitious concept such as heaven, hell and a day of judgement. Not surprisingly it isn't possible to determine the truth of a proposition that makes reference to imaginary things. Language, science, mathematics and logic are merely tools that furnish us not with the truth but with a calculable environment.1 It is useful to speak of identical things, familiar things, related things, space, time and motion; concepts which are as problematical today as they have always been. The process of selecting, ordering, simplifying and interpreting information is an act of creation - it provides something intelligible out of a chaotic mass of information. However, thinking in terms of opposites without giving due consideration to the various shades in-between, has instilled the idea that there are opposites for everything.2 If there is a complex world then there is a simple world. If the world is full of contradictions then there is a world of no contradictions. If there is a world of suffering then there is a world of no suffering. If the world is full of changes where things change or become other things then there is a world of no change where things are pure being and don't change - concepts which found their way into the philosophy of Plato, Hegel and some existentialist philosophers. Our set of beliefs and expectations is the source of our moral conscience. Some people are prepared to base their beliefs on the alleged experiences of others while some base their beliefs on those of their own. However, if we interpret a personal experience as being caused by something which has no evidence to support it then it may be an imaginary cause, and if there is one imaginary cause there is no limit to how many other imaginary causes there might be. Therefore, our interpretation of the experience stands an excellent chance of being an error. 1

Refer to section 50 for the rationalist belief in obtaining knowledge independently of experience. 2 Refer to appendix E for the error of thought in thinking in terms of opposites. © 1997 Allan Sztab

223

Assumption is the mother of disaster and without evidence there is simply no way we can ever know to what extent our assumptions are correct. We compound our error even further if we are prepared to base our moral conscience or behaviour on an imaginary or false cause, and open ourselves to self-delusion and / or being manipulated by others.1 The error of Freedom of Will 'We feel most aggrieved at acts because of the mistaken belief that those who have perpetrated them are capable of choosing to do otherwise - of exercising free-will. It is this belief in choice that engenders hatred, revengefulness, deceitfulness, all the degrading our imagination undergoes, while we are far more forgiving towards an animal because we regard it as unaccountable. To do injury not from the drive to preservation but as requital is the consequence of a mistaken judgement and therefore likewise innocent. Before the state we could act cruelly to frighten other creatures. Now the state does. Morality is preceded by compulsion which one suppresses in order to avoid the unpleasant consequences of our actions. Later it becomes custom, then voluntary obedience, finally almost instinct; then, like all that has for a long time been habitual and natural, it is associated with pleasure and is now called virtue.' (Nietzsche) We are a complex combination of needs and desires. Freedom is often taken to mean a lack of constraint in the sense that there is nothing physically preventing us from doing something. Of course we may not be capable of doing something and some people are more capable than others. Accordingly, freedom varies from person to person. Some people can control their desires through sheer selfdiscipline and will-power, but some cannot. Once again language bewitches us and abbreviates the entire complexity of our being to a single word - I - which provides us with a permanent identity and a will of our own. Despite the fact that we change from one moment to the next language misleads us to believe that the I we call ourselves remains self-identical. No action, even those that we perform, can be separated or isolated from the series of events and 1

Refer to section 14 for the development of superstition; to section 47 for the difficulties in the process of interpretation; to section 48 for distinguishing between scientific and pseudo-scientific claims; and to section 63 for the manipulation of behaviour according to the morality of imaginary causes. © 1997 Allan Sztab

224

circumstances that preceded it. There is no gap or space between events that isolates them from one another and everything is in a constant process of change. There are never any two identical situations or events. The assumption that there are units of measurement and intervals of time might be useful for mathematics but when we give them the status of truth then paradoxes and confusion are bound to occur.1 The fact that we feel free to do things doesn't mean that our actions are freely determined by us. It only feels as if we are responsible for it. And feeling that something is true is no indication of its truth. If we want a drink of water its seems that all we have to do is to will ourselves to perform those actions necessary to acquire it. However, an idea is merely the first step in response to an emotion or desire and we seldom consider that behind the thought there is something else prompting us to think of drinking without our conscious knowledge of it.2 When we feel hungry and crave for a pickled cucumber or something salty we are happy to say we are hungry. Language once again simplifies the entire process of obtaining nourishment and abbreviates it into a single word - hunger. However, all the foods we have eaten have been silently and subconsciously analysed in terms of the minerals, proteins and vitamins that they contain, and an association formed between their content and appearance. It is no coincidence that a pregnant woman craves precisely those foods containing the nourishment that she requires. It is no coincidence that a specific image of a particular food is conjured up by the mind together with the memory of how it smells and tastes. Similarly, when we feel amorous we are content in the belief that all we want is the pleasure that accompanies sexual release. Once again language reduces this complex process to one word - sex. Seldom are we aware of the stimuli that turned us on and that the pleasure we look forward to is only the lure or reward that encourages us to seek sexual contact. Consider what would happen if we were administered a drug without our knowledge. The drug could influence our behaviour and yet we would interpret all our actions as being normal or freely determined by ourselves. On the other 1 2

Refer to the paradoxes of Zeno in section 34. Refer to section 54 and the dualism of body and mind.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

225

hand, criminals are permitted to claim lack of responsibility due to the consumption of alcohol or some other drug, when many more potent and less understood drugs and hormones are active in our bodies at any specific moment. It is now commonly accepted that as we age the production of certain hormones varies and leads to changes in behaviour that are now referred to as the change of life or menopause. Hormone replacement therapies are now common, and from the reports of recipients, have a marked effect on their mood, vitality and attitude towards life. Their experiences are testimony to the silent, subconscious, yet powerful force these hormones have on our lives. The latest research indicates that the role of hormones in creating an increased sensitivity towards specific stimuli such as sexual stimuli during puberty and even sexual desire at various stages of a woman's fertility cycle is far greater than previously believed. There are lots of circumstances beyond our control. We had no say in choosing our sex and men and women each have certain unique characteristics. We have, as yet, no say in the workings of our genetic development program. Some powerful chemicals, enzymes and proteins still remain unknown and even when known their precise functions often remain elusive. Many of the drugs that play a role in the body's chemical reward systems are related to drugs such as the opiates which give us a high or a feeling of euphoria that helps remove pain. Without adequate knowledge it isn't possible to deny that kleptomaniacs may be acting under the influence of certain factors over which they have no control. The same may be said of alcoholics who cannot stop drinking once they have started. We know that our behaviour is guided by subconscious interpretations based on a lifetime of experiences and the meanings we have given them, meanings which in certain circumstances were made while we were still in diapers.1 Every decision we make is both consciously and subconsciously determined. The conscious mind is a tool of the emotions and we never know the extent to which our decisions are influenced by our subconscious preferences. It is a lack of knowledge about the mysterious workings of the many hormones and drugs within our bodies, and of the influence of the 1

Refer to section 9 for the role of defence mechanisms in tying us to the past.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

226

subconscious mind, that lures us into accepting the belief that we exercise our will freely. We are clearly not masters in our own homes and if we analyse any action of ours that on the face of it seems to be the product of our own free will we get to a point where our conscious self can no longer be held responsible for it. Those who believe we have freedom of will do not accept this. A belief in freedom of will has three major consequences. Firstly, if we believe we are completely in control of our actions and are therefore fully responsible for them we would be far more likely to suffer from feelings of guilt and remorse over certain of our actions. These feelings tie us to the events of the past which gave rise to them and make us vulnerable to being manipulated.1 Feelings of guilt and remorse favour the development of a low sense of self-esteem which makes it far more difficult to obtain a realistic understanding of our own capabilities and limitations. We are sometimes surprised at the way in which we react to certain unique situations that confront us and this should make us aware that there are powerful desires within us that we are not always capable of controlling. By acknowledging this fact we are taking the first step towards discovering what these desires are and how we may channel them into actions that will bring us the happiness or success that we might be seeking. Secondly, the belief that other people are always responsible for their actions leads to the belief that they could have done other than they did and this nurtures the desire for punishment and revenge. 2 Accepting that people are not always responsible for their actions opens the door to greater understanding, empathising, forgiving and loving.3 Thirdly, if we believe that people in positions of public trust are responsible for their actions then proper steps won't be taken to ensure that they place the interests of those they serve above those of their own. This permits them to make unfair inroads into our freedom.4 1

Refer to section 63 and the role of guilt in manipulation. Refer to section 59 for the role of freedom of will in the concepts of punishment, guilt, revenge and deserving of punishment. 3 Refer to section 66 and the role of deferring judgement and empathy. 4 Refer to section 67 and the corruption that is rife in governments that treat officials as if they had freedom of will. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

227

59 Moral Relativity, guilt, justice and punishment It is only by voluntary agreement that moral obligations are incurred. Such agreements may be between individuals or between individuals and society or government. It is these morals that determine our moral conscience which is the source of our guilt and our sense of justice and fair play in relation to others. According to Rousseau it was by means of a contractual agreement that the first social obligations were established and although correct in principle there is no evidence to support such a contract. The obligations and benefits of citizenship are reflected in the system of laws and regulations of society. The Sophists concluded that morality was relative based on their experience with people of different cultural backgrounds - actions that were considered immoral by one tribe were often morally acceptable to another tribe. They concluded that no human behaviour is right or wrong but has consequences that are perceived to be good or bad. If you were to take all the moral actions of a particular society and deduct from it those actions that were prohibited by other societies you would soon have nothing left.1 The fact that the moral consciousness of societies and individuals varies is entirely consistent with what we find. The fact that morality is relative isn't obvious because for most of our lives we tend to associate with people who share the same views as ourselves. We go to the same schools, stay in the same neighbourhoods and work in the same firms. We are often encouraged and coerced into associating with people of a particular group depending on our religious and cultural upbringing. Sometimes the maintenance of separate groups is even encouraged by government - under the legislative system of Apartheid in South Africa people from different races were prevented from mixing with each other. The division of people into groups who believe dogmatically in the truth of their opinions is the single greatest obstacle in the prevention of inter-group conflict, irrespective of whether the groupings are based on religious, cultural, racial, geographical or other grounds.

1

Refer to the views of Locke on the role of pleasure, and Hume on the role of useful actions in the determination of morals in society. © 1997 Allan Sztab

228

Some people believe that if one accepts the fact that morality is relative then anything goes. However, there is much to be gained by co-operating with others and many different moral systems can be designed to reap such benefits. It is clear that not all of these moral systems will be of equal merit. It is mostly with punishment that we have come to associate justice. A person who breaks a law is asked to plead guilty or not guilty. Finding someone guilty is merely another way of saying that they are responsible or accountable for their actions. This being the case it is assumed that they therefore deserve to be punished - that justice be done. Thus most legal systems are based on the erroneous belief that we have an unrestricted freedom of will. 'We kill things like insects intentionally if they cause us displeasure. The state intentionally punishes and does harm to criminals. Any moral system permits people to intentionally do harm to others in self-defence or selfpreservation. Yet almost all evil actions performed by one person against another can be explained in terms of self-preservation or the avoidance of displeasure. "Socrates and Plato are right; whatever man does he always does the good, that is to say, that which seems to him good (useful) according to the relative degree of his intellect, the measure of his rationality."' (Nietzsche)

© 1997 Allan Sztab

229

The application of a one-word label such as responsible, accountable, or guilty to a person is a punishment in itself.1 These labels are powerful psychological weapons which often carry punishments to unreasonable extremes. Guilt is simply an emotion, something that we feel, not something that we are. Punishment is the intentional commitment of harm and suffering for the breaking of a law, not something that we deserve. Laws and punishments are necessary for the maintenance of order in society but any law that is made by an illegitimate authority or that is unfair cannot reasonably confer a moral obligation on people to obey it.2 It is generally held that a punishment should be fair and in line with past punishments and customs and in proportion to the crime. The severity of a penal code is generally an indication of the strength or weakness of a society because a strong society can afford to be merciful towards criminals whereas a weak society cannot. There is always the danger that a penal code is out of step with social conditions and violent criminals are often afforded more protection than their victims with the result that some people live in continual fear of violence. The severity of penal codes has varied considerably in the past and while the merits of capital punishment are still debated it has been estimated that in as many as 80% of primitive societies murderers were often punished by the imposition of fines. In some cases the fine was paid by the murderer providing the family of the deceased with children or slaves in an effort to compensate them. At one time punishments were so disproportional that they justified the claim that the Old Testament 'law of talio, the law of eye for eye, tooth for tooth... belongs with the great and decisive advances of humanity..' (Paul Reiwald) There certainly was no sense of proportion when it came to the Christian notion of eternal damnation and the most horrific punishments were meted out to save peoples souls. The history of the Inquisition bears adequate testimony to the extent of this religious fervour. 1

Refer to section 11 for the habituation to following orders and the dehumanising of enemies to allay guilt feelings. Refer to section 63 for the use of guilt feelings in manipulation. 2 Refer to the philosophy of Locke in section 50. © 1997 Allan Sztab

230

Leaving aside the psychological punishment that accompanies feelings of guilt and responsibility the calculation of a just and proportional punishment is fraught with problems. The facts and circumstances surrounding each case are different and it would be unfair to punish people without the full facts relating to a crime because any extenuating circumstances could be overlooked. However, the full facts are often impossible to determine and in many cases the possibility of a person discovering them is in many societies largely dependent on the quality of the legal defence experts they can afford to pay. On the one hand the more evidence one is allowed to bring from the past the less the responsibility for the crime, while on the other hand it might be unfair to take into account any past offences of a similar nature as this would in effect be punishing a persons past. We can take as an example the general hostility displayed by society towards child molesters. Consider the case of young firsttime offenders who have been continually molested by their own family to such an extent that they have come to accept adult-child sex as normal. How does one determine a just or deserved punishment in such a case, especially if no intentional violence or physical damage accompanies the crime? The answer is simple - we cannot. Punishments cannot be proportional either. How is punishment to be apportioned when a person is convicted of killing one other person whilst another is convicted of killing a family of four? The answer is simple - we cannot.1

60 Equality, reciprocity, prestige and redistribution The benefits and obligations of citizenship are reflected in the laws of a society. Any law that is made by an illegitimate authority or that is unfair cannot reasonably confer an obligation on people to obey it. Fairness in this context implies equal treatment before the law so that each person bears the same burden of citizenship with no preferential treatment being given to anyone. This concept of fairness includes that of equal opportunity in that each person is free to pursue their own interests and utilise their abilities to reap the rewards of their labour. 'To each according to his needs, from each according to his ability' was a humanitarian ideal that Karl Marx strove for. It was only in the twentieth century 1

Refer to section 67 for an alternative to basing punishment on responsibility.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

231

that this ideal was replaced with the notion that equality means a 'fair share for all' - that every citizen should have an equal share of the productive efforts of society irrespective of their contribution towards earning it. From the earliest of times the obligations that a person voluntarily accepted were based on the notion of reciprocity. All parties to an agreement stood to benefit provided they honoured their obligations. Reciprocity is based on the notion of a fair and equal exchange. To receive more than your fair share carried the danger that you might not be able to reciprocate and therefore feel indebted to the giver. This would shift the balance of power in favour of the giver until such time as you could reciprocate. A person who has many people indebted to them would be able to grow in power and might even rise to a position where they could exercise control over a community. Such a person might begin to feel in some way superior to those who were indebted to them and it is largely for this reason that status seeking is frowned upon in egalitarian societies such as that of the Bushmen and Eskimos. The Eskimos even have a proverb that 'gifts make slaves just as whips make dogs'. Status-seeking and greed does have the potential to raise productivity by stimulating competition amongst people to work harder, but some societies simply don't want to work harder despite the efforts of Westerners to tempt them to do so. Like most of natures' creatures they place far more importance on their leisure time and for this they are sometimes called stupid.1 Many of these primitive societies also realise that unrestrained competition between their members might place a strain on the resources that are available to them whilst most Western societies are seemingly oblivious to this danger.2 The resources that are available to production represent a key factor in the determination of the productivity of a society. Wherever resources were available a society could benefit by increasing its productivity which in many cases enabled it to feed rapidly-growing populations. Some people were naturally better or harder workers than others and stood to accumulate a greater 1

The story is told about a primitive fisherman who goes out to fish and when he catches two fish he doesn't come to work the next day. Some would call him lazy or stupid but others might consider him wise. 2 Refer to section 67 for the failure of political systems to address real problems and appendix H for the possible results. © 1997 Allan Sztab

232

surplus. It was possibly in an effort to distribute this wealth amongst society that some primitive societies encouraged the voluntary distribution or the giving of gifts to society at large in exchange for admiration and approval. The greater their gifts to the community the greater was their prestige. This was the practice of some primitive American Indian tribes such as those of the Kwakiutl who were aboriginal inhabitants of Vancouver island. Those who gave were known as 'big men'. Today, in contrast, a persons prestige is measured by their ability to accumulate and hold onto their fortunes, which is sometimes accompanied by conspicuous consumption amongst themselves to see who has the finest homes, art and other prestigious collections. Governments now attempt to redistribute their income involuntarily by means of taxation and this, if anything, only serves to reinforce the desire of people to hold onto their possessions. However, when it comes to the involuntary redistribution of income by taxation we encounter the same problems as with punishment - how to make a just and proportional distribution. Not surprisingly we come to the same conclusion - we cannot.1 In order to calculate such a distribution one would have to take into account things like a persons sex, ethnic group and citizenship; what they have by way of wealth, family and abilities; what they need for themselves and their dependants; how they choose to spend or invest their income; and what they have committed themselves to. This would be an impossible task especially since all this information is constantly changing. There are simply no objective criteria to determine who has too much and who has too little and even if this could be calculated then by taking from those who have too much and giving it to those who have too little the incentive for anyone to exploit the full potential of their abilities would fall away. People would have to be forced to perform skilled work. Aristotle was correct when he claimed that it is 'the desire of equality, when men think they are equal to others who have more than themselves' that causes revolutionary feelings. The misplaced attempt by humanitarians to perpetuate this notion of 'a fair share for all' by supporting the involuntary distribution of societies' income by means of taxation might be 1

Refer to section 59 for the impossibility of a just and proportional punishment.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

233

well intentioned but it carries within it the seeds of revolution. There is naturally nothing to stop any humanitarian from calculating what a fair share is so that they can donate the excess of their earnings to a charity of their choice.

61 Three Laws for The new millennium The moral obligations that we accept require us to do or not to do something and this imposes a limitation on our freedom. There are nevertheless certain obligations that are beneficial to us and are thus worthy of pursuing purely on this account. Freedom is a paradox - if we have the absolute freedom to do whatever we wanted then this would include the freedom to kill or harm others. At the same time we could be killed or harmed by them. The value we place on our freedom will ultimately determine the extent to which we are prepared to sacrifice it on the altar of morality. Our actions can be broken up into three distinct types. The first is to act on impulse. In this case the rational and thinking part of the brain is bypassed and we rely on the inner workings of the subconscious mind which interprets a suitable response based on our past experiences. Whenever we are required to act quickly this mode of action will be the preferred one and afterwards we may often be surprised at the specific responses we made - it isn't uncommon for the unlikeliest of people to become heroes in moments of danger.1 In some cases hesitation means death. In such situations we are likely to perform those habitual actions which proved beneficial to us in the past. Actions which proved so useful would naturally be valued as good or moral actions and because they work there is the temptation to believe that the assumptions on which they are based are true. This is how certain actions and the beliefs that accompanied them were passed down from generation to generation. Yet the irony is that many of these beliefs and assumptions are false despite their usefulness. 'Those, for example, who did not know how to find often enough what is 'equal' as regards both nourishment and hostile animals - those, in other words, who subsumed things too slowly and cautiously - were favoured with a lesser probability of survival than those who guessed immediately 1

Refer to section 8 and the ability of the emotions to bypass the conscious mind.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

234

upon encountering similar instances that they must be equal. The dominant tendency, however, to treat as equal what is merely similar - an illogical tendency, for nothing is really equal - is what first created any basis for logic... for a long time one did not see nor perceive the changes in things. The beings that did not see so precisely had an advantage over those that saw everything 'in flux'. At bottom, every high degree of caution in making inferences and every sceptical tendency constitute a great danger for life. No living beings would have survived if the opposite tendency - to affirm rather than suspend judgement, to err and make up things rather than wait, to assent rather than negate, to pass judgement rather than be just - had not been bred to the point where it became extraordinarily strong. The course of logical ideas and inferences in our brain today corresponds to a process and a struggle among impulses that are, taken singly, very illogical and unjust. We generally experience only the result of this struggle because this primeval mechanism now runs its course so quickly and is so well concealed.' (Nietzsche) In the second type of action, impulses or habitual actions can be controlled by conscious intervention and either the same or another response made according to our capacity for critical rational thought. In the third type of action we respond on impulse but this time in accordance with an action performed as a result of critical rational thinking which has now become habituated. It is only the second and third types of actions that may be regarded as moral provided they have been made in accordance with obligations that have been voluntarily accepted. Obligations constrain our actions and thereby limit our freedom so it seems obvious that our first duty is to develop a basic principle upon which to base them and this principle is a simple one: any restriction that we impose on our freedom should be beneficial to us. The following limitations are only guidelines which give effect to this principle, and each person is capable of developing their own. Unless we choose to live in a society where we are in constant fear of coming to harm at the hands of others it is in our own interests to voluntarily accept © 1997 Allan Sztab

235

some limitation on our personal freedom with regard to them. We could reasonably agree to limit our freedom to intentionally kill or harm others without their consent unless in self-defence. Without such a limitation the conditions that favour our protection and security would be forfeited and we would be placed on a path that leads towards conflict, anarchy and nihilism.1 Prior to living in settled communities there wasn't much to own. The ownership of private property developed when people commenced living in settled communities. It was based on the principle that if someone had cleared a piece of land, planted and tended its crops, then they were entitled to the fruits of their labour. There are still communities that share both land and its produce but in most societies today the ownership of private property is a fait accompli. Even if it were possible to redistribute private property fairly the accumulation into fewer and fewer hands would commence immediately thereafter. People would trade and speculate in land, debts would be incurred and inheritances received. The inheritance of wealth has always been resented but who is to say that a person should consume their money and not save it for their children? Without an interest in property there would be no incentive to work it and the failed communist experiment bears adequate testimony to this. Unless we choose to live in a society where we are in constant fear of being robbed of our possessions by others it is in our own interests to voluntarily agree to impose a limitation on our freedom to steal from them. One could reasonably agree to limit our freedom to intentionally steal from others. Even a thief must sooner or later come to realise that if ever they want to keep the things that they steal they too must abide by this principle. The above obligations limit or restrict our freedom to intentionally kill or do harm to others unless in self-defence or to steal their personal property. These are the first two laws. If we abide by the limitations that we have voluntarily accepted then any other actions we perform are non-moral. Our moral duty isn't to 'do unto others as we would like them to do unto us' but to do unto others as we have agreed to do to unto them. 2 This is the third law. Although the restraints we may accept are reasonable there will always be those who require absolute freedom because it represents a short cut to the 1

Refer to section 65 for the determination of obstacles to our freedom. Refer to sections 66 for non-moral actions and section 67 for its application towards punishment. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

236

unrestrained satisfaction of their desires for wealth, power and prestige. There are also those who have chosen not to accept any restraints simply because their reason dictates so. More troubling today is a fast-growing sector of many populations who reject these restraints and they come mainly from the poor who have no education and no prospects of finding suitable work to enable them to earn a living. The expression 'if you have nothing, you have nothing to lose' applies to them. In some cases they are motivated purely by greed but in certain instances they are up against economic, political and legal systems that hardly give them any choice because they are designed to favour and serve certain vested interests whose beneficiaries form what may be referred to as a ruling elite. The failure of penal codes in many parts of the world to prevent ever-increasing levels of violent crime and corruption provides evidence that the decision not to abide by these voluntary limitations has filtered down from the ruling elite to a rapidly-growing class of the poor. The legislation of the ruling elite often keeps people poor because it robs them of their economic and political freedoms without conferring any benefits on them. Rising levels of violent and nonviolent crime, corruption and the large discrepancies between rich and poor are symptoms of a society that is sick. Ironically, many of the crimes committed by the poor are against their fellow sufferers. Most governments attempt to treat these symptoms not by restoring economic and political freedoms but by redistributing the income or rewards of society at large. They do so because this gives them additional powers and access to a steady cash flow. They are supported by a humanitarian sentiment that in the modern welfare state removes the incentive for people to support themselves and the incentive for those who can.1

62 The Greatest Obstacles to Freedom 'The need for belief, for some unconditional Yes and No is a requirement of those who are weak and dependent. They require others who use them and selflessness and self-alienation is their morality. In order to exist the person of faith chooses not to see many things, not to be impartial in anything, and 1

Refer to section 67 for the dangers of humanitarianism to democracy.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

237

to view all values only from a strict and necessary perspective. They are the antagonist and antithesis of those who are truthful and their conviction in unconditionality makes them fanatics.' (Nietzsche) It has been said that humans are 'condemned to be free' yet many people are reluctant to exercise what freedom they have and it is easy to understand why. From the very outset our survival depends on our ability to conform in accordance with the dictates of our parents and society. As an infant a fear of death for disobedience is a very real one. Being totally dependent on our parents we have little option because without any knowledge or experience of our own conforming to the behaviours of those around us is the key to our survival. We are taught to obey our parents and certain figures of authority, and when we don't we may be punished or coerced into doing so. The pain or discomfort of punishment is feared. It isn't surprising that after a few years we become habituated to obeying.1 Choosing a course of action means the willingness to accept the risk of its success or failure. The fact that we make lots of small decisions often blinds us to the fact that we allow major decisions to be taken for us. Because we have become habituated to obeying others we have also become habituated to avoid taking risks. We do so by following the decisions of someone else whom we regard as an authority. This authority could be that of a religious group, husband, wife, political party, or a particular movement or organisation whose general point of view is agreed with. In some cases we might blindly follow a popular trend or lifestyle that is avidly portrayed by the media and desired by society at large. In other cases we might blindly follow the paid advice of a doctor, psychologist, lawyer, accountant, or mechanic. Following the advice or actions of others is often accomplished without knowing what assumptions they are making and then subjecting them to critical appraisal. This is how both the truths and errors of society are perpetuated and by taking the advice of so-called experts or authorities uncritically we take the risk of perpetuating these errors. The uncritical obedience to, and the acceptance of the beliefs of others, is thus an obstacle to our freedom. It is natural for us to fear the pain or 1

Refer to section 11 for the habit of uncritical obedience.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

238

discomfort that is sure to accompany the inability to satisfy our needs for food, warmth, love and shelter. The behaviours that we adopt from our parents and society are those that have proved beneficial in satisfying these needs in ways that are not harmful to society. Within the framework of these guidelines we have developed individual behavioural preferences that are based on our unique experiences and the meanings we have given to them. Underlying every one of our behaviours is a belief that it is in some way beneficial to us. Society expresses the collective beliefs of the many individuals in it. The customs of society have been passed down from generation to generation and were arrived at due to circumstances which are not always known and which may no longer prevail.1 The meanings that ancient societies attributed to their experiences could only be based on the knowledge that they had at that time. Some of these customs were held in such high regard that they became sacred and any changes to them were fiercely resisted. In a world where trial and error experience sometimes meant the difference between life and death it paid to keep to the same successful recipe. In a similar way the meanings we give to our personal experiences can only be based on our prior experiences and therefore on the knowledge we had at the time we made them. As children we don't have much knowledge yet this is when many of these meanings are determined. The defence mechanisms of the mind keep painful experiences out of our conscious mind and this makes it difficult to reinterpret the past in accordance with the constantly-expanding base of knowledge that we accumulate. This accounts for the many juvenile responses and behaviours of adults. In many cases our present and future actions are directed by the painful experiences of the past and when we avoid certain situations or relationships we do so out of fear. A reluctance to question traditional customs that are revered by society has the same effect. Individuals and society are in many ways habitually tied to the past and this prevents actions from being determined according to the requirements of the present. Projecting the fears of the past into the present and future is another obstacle to our freedom.2 1

Refer to section 13 for the practicalities behind customs. Refer to section 19 for an example of the ritual cycle of war of the Maring tribe and section 60 for the system of redistribution of some primitive societies. © 1997 Allan Sztab

239

What cannot be known or understood carries with it the potential for harm and to this extent it is feared. Reason is a tool of the emotions and when faced with fear it attempts to eradicate or avoid it. In doing so any explanation is better than none, and when the unfamiliar cannot be easily understood then reason can easily distort our reality by providing erroneous explanations which are believed to be true. Any actions that could possibly be linked to a favourable outcome form the foundation for most mystical and superstitious beliefs. To make the unknown familiar and thereby eliminate fear and anxiety, imaginary causes are given to whatever cannot be understood. Hence the belief in imaginary rewards and punishments. Once these ideas or beliefs are accepted new ideas that challenge them are resisted. What once might have proved useful was considered good but after a few generations the belief in them could became sacred. This is the ground on which all mysticism, superstition, custom and morality has grown.1 The strong desire to avoid fear and the errors of reason we are capable of making leave us open to manipulation and to indoctrinating our children into the acceptance of such manipulation.2 It is not only fear but discomfort or suffering in general that opens us to manipulation. We may suffer as a result of things such as ill health, drug addiction, personal misfortune, poverty and unemployment. The degree to which we suffer varies from person to person and with it the desire to overcome such suffering. A remedy which consists in the following of a prescribed set of rules and regulations is offered by mystic, superstitious, religious and political leaders as a cure for our fear and suffering. All people have to do is to believe they will be cured. Many of these rules and regulations are unfair or intrude into areas of non-moral concern.3

63 Mysticism, superstition and manipulation Many of the prescribed rules and regulations of society, mystical and superstitious preachers intrude into areas of non-moral concern. Even without the knowledge of physiology and human behaviour that we have today, thinkers have always been unanimous in recognising the major role played by our emotions and desires, for they define what we are, our relationships with other people and the world. 2

Refer to the physiological and behavioural mechanisms that tie us to the past. Refer to appendix C and section 66 for fear as obstacles to our freedom. 1 Refer to section 14 for a fear of the forces of nature and section 15 for the mythical explanations of the unknown. Refer to section 58 for imaginary and false causes. 2 Refer to section 63 for the use of fear to manipulate people. 3 Refer to section 61 for moral and non-moral obligations. © 1997 Allan Sztab

240

With the freedom to roam in the wild in competition with other animals for food and shelter, every emotion was useful for the preservation of the human species. When unrestrained aggression was required it was there. When the need to kill arose the will was there. In times of shortage greed was there. When someone had something you desired, jealousy and envy were there. Every emotion served a need. With the power of language humans became masters of their environment in a relatively short period of time, and these same primitive emotions were now unleashed onto the world with an ever increasing force. History bears adequate testimony to this and whether we look to the past or the present it is inescapable to avoid the same conclusion: it is the primitive emotions that define the relationships between individuals, societies and nations. Moreover, there are no built-in limitations to emotions such as fear, power and greed.1 It isn't surprising that many thinkers regarded the emotions as the cause of evil and from this idea it was a short step for them to conclude that morality was linked to the expression of the emotions. We saw how Plato gave recognition to the emotions by incorporating them into the other world of his Ideas. The concept of reincarnation or the transmigration of souls was well known in Greece, and he was familiar with the Orphic concept of the soul being trapped in the human body until it could be freed from its cycle of rebirth by paying for a prior transgression.2 According to Plato the human soul had fallen to earth because of conflicts between its reasoning ability, the various drives to action and the appetites or passions. Like Socrates, Plato claimed that ignorance was the source of error. In Plato's scenario it was ignorance that enabled the appetites to outwit reason. This led to unhappiness as the soul would seek pleasure in doing the wrong things. According to him the emotions and desires created lust which disturbed the harmony of the soul, and it was the irrationality of the passions that pulled the soul towards earth. In the forests of the Ganges Valley almost the same conclusions were drawn from an interpretation of the Vedas. God, or in Platonic language, another world, became the only reality - all else in the world was an illusion due to 1 2

Refer to section 8 for emotions that have no limits to their expression. Refer to the Christian doctrine of Paul in section 30.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

241

ignorance.1 The body was trapped in a continuous cycle of birth, death and reincarnation due to the inheritance of the sins of our previous lives. These sins or moral shortcomings prevented us from obtaining enlightenment or knowledge of the illusions of this world. To break out of this endless cycle the prescribed cure of preventing the body from satisfying one or more of its normal desires such as those for food, excitement, music, sex or human contact, makes it clear that the sins are the emotions, passions or desires.2 Manipulation almost always commences with the threat of certain punishments or the offer of certain rewards in return for uncritical obedience. This manipulation commences from our infancy and the rewards that are offered vary considerably. Plato was witness to the turmoil and suffering that accompanied the political change to democracy and this is probably why he concluded that the route to happiness lay in his authoritarian utopia. According to Plato, if people strictly adhered to their allotted roles then they would attain the moral virtue of temperance by moderating their appetites, courage by moderating their reactions, and wisdom by reason continuing to see the true ideals. Justice, the fourth moral virtue, would flow from the harmony of all three. Similar formulae are proposed by almost every government, society and mystical or superstitious preacher. Happiness and contentment are offered as rewards, as the consequences of following specific customs or laws. Faith in a day of judgement serves as a threat to those who disobey and offers the weak the hope of revenge on the strong and more fortunate which they don't have the power or strength to achieve here on earth. Immortality offers them the hope that they will fare better in another life. Heaven offers them an eternal life in a paradise of resentment where according to Saint Thomas Aquinas believers will witness the punishments of the damned. For damned we can read those who are more fortunate, stronger, talented and those who refuse to be manipulated or intimidated. Hope works by lifting a person out of their suffering into a state of anticipation. This movement from a state of suffering to a state of anticipation is the immediate cure, and the degree of movement away from 1 2

Refer to section 58 and the error of imaginary or false causes. Refer to Hinduism in appendices B1-3 and section 66 for the control of the emotions.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

242

suffering represents the degree to which a state of pleasure or happiness is achieved. The emotion of love is utilised for its ability to distort reality. When in love a person can see things in the object of their affection which aren't there whilst ignoring some of the perhaps less savoury things that are. People have even been known to sacrifice their lives for love. Love is so powerful that most people are oblivious to its effects when in its grasp and are seldom swayed by the objective advice of anybody else concerning the objects of their love. Love is most effective if the love object is another human and this is the primary reason that many imaginary causes such as deities are represented in human form and with human characteristics. When a person believes they are in love with a deity the emotions they feel might be the same as those felt when being in love with another person, especially if the desire to love something is strong. However, unlike being in love with someone, the unrequited love of an imaginary deity or idol never dies. We distinguish between love that is genuine and love that is manipulative by the fact that genuine love is unconditional - there are no strings attached to it. In contrast, the love that is offered by those who aim to manipulate is never unconditional but is tied to the performance of rules and regulations that are often of non-moral concern.1 Mystics and superstitious priests often wage war on the emotions by advocating the ascetic practices of denying the body satisfaction of its emotions which are referred to as sins. Some people are said to be 'born in sin' whilst others are said to have inherited it. Because it isn't possible for anyone to overcome their emotions or to strictly observe the rules that regulate them they will be kept forever in a state of sin. By placing prohibitions on non-moral activities such as masturbation, listening to certain music or sex before marriage, the committing of sins is assured. When these sins are broken they create feelings of guilt which then require the grace and redemption of a priest. These requirements enhance the hold of the priests

1

Refer to section 10 and the effect of conditional love on character formation.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

243

over the individual. Being 'born in sin' a person is made to feel guilty right from the outset. 'From a psychological point of view ''sins" are indispensable in any society organised [or influenced] by priests: they are the actual levers of power, the priest lives on sins, he needs "the commission of sins"... Supreme law: "God forgives him who repents" - in plain language: who subjects himself to the priest.' (Nietzsche) A fear of guilt is one of the most effective means of controlling, manipulating and punishing people. Eradicating guilt would deliver a serious blow to political, mystical, superstitious, parental and social coercion. Guilt is so powerful that we feel it even if we break self-imposed rules; we assume that we have an unrestricted freedom of will and are therefore responsible for our actions.1 Thus a student who breaks their own study schedule by spending too much time socialising might suffer from guilt feelings. Guilt may be suffered consciously or subconsciously and could even be related to imaginary actions of the past. Survivors of wars and atrocities who have lost family and friends may feel that they don't deserve to live. Some people even suffer guilt feelings by comparing their situation to those less fortunate than themselves and conclude that they don't deserve their standard of living. By being indecisive or failing to make our position on something absolutely clear we may also open ourselves to the manipulation of others who will attempt to instil guilt in us by exploiting our indecisiveness at some later date. Their opening lines are normally something like '... but you said x' or 'you gave the impression that..' or ' you shouldn't have said or done x'. This form of manipulation is often a key strategy of certain people and if we find ourselves surrounded by people like this then the best option is to avoid them. Guilt is a feeling concerning past actions or deeds which cannot be undone, and tie us to the past. Guilt feelings are often accompanied by a negative sense of self-worth or a low sense of self-esteem and are often instrumental in depression and neurotic behaviour. Provided a person can be made to believe there is some way out of their suffering the actual receipt of the promised rewards aren't even necessary. 1

Refer to section 58 and the error of freedom of will.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

244

In fact, this isn't desirable either because to last a lifetime the promises should never be capable of being fulfilled. Nothing better exists to ensure this than to prevent a person from satisfying their natural emotions and desires for food, warmth, love, comfort and shelter. It isn't surprising to find that believers in these mystical and superstitious cures have a vastly different approach to dealing with their emotions because their eyes are directed away from the daily concerns of their present life towards another life. The hope of a day of judgement and a life hereafter are hopes that one can never attain in this life and nobody has ever returned from their final journey to tell us what lies ahead.1 This hope in that which is unattainable is what led Marx to proclaim that religion is the 'opium of the masses'. Amongst the remedies that are suggested to alleviate suffering we find 'the blessing of work' to keep the mind off one's suffering, and other easily obtained pleasures such as that of helping others, because in doing so one feels the pleasure of a slight sense of superiority over them. To ward off the feeling of suffering alone the keeping together with other sufferers is promoted because this has the effect of shutting out different ideas. Religious control does have the merit of keeping the poor and oppressed from rising against the wealthy and it often happens that in increasing times of hardship and suffering there is a larger than normal increase in religious sentiment and membership. Many of the laws enforced by government are made in accordance with the morality of religious groups.2 These laws are often of non-moral concern, unfair, difficult to comply with and created so as to manipulate the population at large. Politicians, like all gurus and priests, have as their main objective a receptive audience to whom they can make false promises, particularly to those who are suffering. And almost without exception they offer faith, the illusion of equality and hope, and in some cases love. Politicians will work hand in hand with any influential group if doing so enables them to gain favour with their members, always heeding the advice of Pareto 'not to resist a sentiment but to use it to one's advantage'. Politicians, like any leaders, get their power from a large base 1 2

Refer to section 24 and the dawn of scepticism. Refer to section 45 and the marriage of religion and politics.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

245

of followers and to win elections they will manipulate electoral boundaries and even move people from one region to another. It is said that 'those who breed most win' and this perverse dictum could well be a consideration of those who oppose abortion and birth control. Manipulation isn't confined to authority figures such as priests, mystics and politicians; every day we are constantly being manipulated by advertising which is nothing other than the promise of rewards for the purchasing of a particular product. Through high quality and repetitive advertisements successful marketers manage to create an association between their product and one or more of the desires such as those for sexual prowess, masculinity, femininity, sophistication, a long and healthy life or prestige. These are the myths that are propagated in order to form an association between a desire and the means of satisfying it. The result is that a positive attitude or belief is formed in the ability of the product to satisfy the desire and in the case of commercial products the remedy or cure is achieved simply by purchasing the particular product. In the case of prestige products this might not be easy and the amount of effort required to do so could easily exceed the alleged benefits (if any) of the product. It often takes people an entire lifetime to pay for them. However, once purchased a person will tend to justify their purchase and this enhances their belief in the particular product even further while at the same time perpetuating the myth. The particular lifestyle a person chooses to live is justified in the same way. Unlike the choice of a particular lifestyle there is often a direct correlation between a particular product and its harmful effects. When the product is a drug such as that of nicotine, alcohol, or a tranquilliser, a person might begin to suffer withdrawal symptoms or some level of discomfort as its effects wear off. The relief, relaxation, or pleasure that the drug then provides tends to encourage the belief that these feelings are actually benefits of the drug itself. Thus a smoker will often go to any lengths to defend such mistaken beliefs despite the knowledge that smoking is harmful. The tobacco industry is a powerful special interest group that continually lobbies to combat legislation that would be detrimental to their profits in favour of legislation that would benefit them, with © 1997 Allan Sztab

246

the result that they are still able to actively promote their harmful products to an unwary public. However, manipulation by priests and politicians has no boundaries. It is not uncommon for them to scrutinise present or past grievances or wrong doings in order to find anybody or anything that could possibly be to blame for the suffering or misfortune of a person, group or nation. They do so despite the fact that it isn't possible to accurately describe or recollect past events or to do so impartially.1 However, dredging up past grievances and opening old wounds is so easy that they are the most common pretext for justifying or rationalising war and unlimited aggression against other people.2 A politician or priest might say it is the Jews or some other scapegoat who are to blame. In the case of the Jews this commenced with the Gospel of St. Mark and the same ploy was utilised by Hitler and led to his attempt to annihilate them.3 A priest might say that a persons suffering or misfortune is a punishment for their own sins and that it is they themselves who are to blame. The only difference is that in the one case anger, hatred and resentment is focused on somebody or something else, while in the other it is directed backwards onto the person themselves. Directing anger, hatred and resentment onto oneself is by far the most subtle of all punishments. Being told that a death, trauma, or misfortune is a punishment for disobeying a law or ritual is horrific and the guilt feelings that it engenders may sometimes be crippling.

1

Refer to the reinterpretation of history in section 26 and history as the clash between different classes in sections 39 and 53. 2 Refer to sections 32 and 47 for the role of interpretation in our system of beliefs. 3 Refer to the Gospel of Mark in section 30. © 1997 Allan Sztab

247

Chapter Twelve Towards Freedom With A Clear Concscience 'The only critique of a philosophy that is possible and that proves something is trying to see whether one can live in accordance with it.' (Nietzsche)

64 Pitfalls on the road to freedom Because we are habituated to obeying others, independent thought and action doesn't come naturally. In the distant past those who behaved differently to others may have constituted a threat to the safety and security of their society. The punishment for independent actions was isolation and in a hostile environment this could often mean death. Although independent actions today no longer constitute the same threat to society, they signal to others that we are different and throughout history those who have chosen to see things differently have almost always been shunned.1 A fear of isolation, alienation or rejection often compels people to resist change by remaining in their present situation and/or conforming to the restrictions of freedom that are imposed upon them.2 In order to change and begin making decisions for ourselves we have to critically examine all our beliefs and expectations.3 Our entire support system or frame of orientation might change as a result, and the effects could be very difficult to accept. Lets say that a person questions whether there is life after death. They might believe all their deceased relatives or loved one's are waiting for their arrival in heaven. Such a belief might have helped them to overcome some guilt feeling towards them for failing to make amends for an argument prior to their death or for failing to ask or give forgiveness for some wrongdoing. To give up a mystical or superstitious belief in things such as immortality or heaven would mean the acceptance that those who have already died will never be seen again and this might permit these guilt feelings to 1

In section 48 we saw how Copernicus had to circulate his model of the planetary system anonymously as the church often resisted new theories. 2 Refer to appendix G and the modifications that Freud made to his theories out of a fear of rejection. 3 Refer to section 65 for the determination of the obstacles to our freedom. © 1997 Allan Sztab

248

resurface once more. Similarly, if a person believes that there is a reason and hidden meaning behind everything, according to the Judaeo-Christian belief that 'God works in mysterious ways', they might have reconciled themselves to the death, illness, or misfortune of themselves, their children, relatives or friends. By rejecting imaginary causes and the notion of fate a person would now have to embrace the pure chance aspect of life and the uncertainty that accompanies it. And what is unknown might easily lead to fear and insecurity. However, to become something new we have to give up something old and this applies to any change. This is the reason why the transition from childhood to sexual maturity and that from single to married life are often accompanied by initiation rites that are intended to guide people through them. In each case something old has been lost and something new gained. To become who we want to be we have to give up the person we have been told to be and doing the things we have been told to do. Change has always been feared as change by its very nature implies the risk of upsetting the status quo. This fear was justified to a large extent in earlier times when our very survival and that of society depended on the conformity to tried and tested actions. However, there are limitations which we are willing to accept that would leave scope for both conformity and individuality.1 The greatest fear we face when we change is that we no longer conform to the expectations that others have of us and as a result they might reject or isolate us. Personal relationships are either informal or formal agreements between two or more parties whereby certain obligations and benefits are established. These agreements also reflect the power sharing relationship between the parties. As we change, these agreements might have to be modified in order to take these changes into account. Some people who see us change might resist it as they could perceive it as losing their control over us. Many people are quick to pass judgement and when we express any doubts or give support to anything which remotely challenges the norms of behaviour or opinions that they subscribe to, 1

Refer to section 61 for the voluntary acceptance of limitations to our freedom and section 67 for the problem we face when governments don't uphold their obligations. © 1997 Allan Sztab

249

we stand the risk of being given a one-word label which might not be easy to erase and could seriously effect our reputation and standing in our community or workplace.1 We might also begin to look at our present activities and relationships in a new light and conclude that some or even all of them fall short of our new-found selves. Given the constraints of time and the practicalities of our situation we have to choose our activities and relationships carefully. We might only be able to successfully pursue one career at a time so to pursue a new career will of necessity mean losing our old one. We might only be able to have one wife, partner or lover at a time so obtaining a new wife, partner or lover could lead to the loss of our present one. The risk of isolation and alienation isn't reserved solely for independent thinkers - making unreasonable demands on others also leads to alienation. For many people the risks of change are well worth taking because in many ways they are already suffering from isolation and alienation due to disappointment or disillusionment with society and its institutions. This may be due to suffering as a result of a failed marriage or relationship, violent crime, or the breakdown of a sense of community with fellow workers who are often regarded as competitors. In many cases disappointment or disillusionment is clearly linked to the building up by society of unrealistic expectations with regard to career and personal relationships, marriage, material comforts and high-tech living. These expectations are fuelled by a media that informs us as to what type of car we should be driving, the style of hair and clothes we should be wearing, the body shape we should have, the image we should project, the places where we should eat and be seen at, where we should go on vacation, who we should vote for in elections, what we should drink and the medicines we should use. The media have an inordinate influence over almost every aspect of our lives. Even the music we listen to conveys messages as to how we should feel and react to life's fortunes and misfortunes, and the messages they give are often far from 1

The following anecdotes illustrate the bias inherent in attaching labels to people and of passing quick judgements. Question: 'What is the definition of promiscuity?' Answer'Anyone who does it more than you do'. A European woman is visiting a grave at a cemetery and takes with her a bunch of flowers which she places on top of it. At the same time a Chinese man is visiting another grave nearby and he sprinkles rice over it. They both notice each other and the woman thinks to herself 'that's so silly, does he think the dead can eat?' while the man thinks to himself 'that's so silly, does she think the dead can smell?' © 1997 Allan Sztab

250

encouraging - lyrics such as 'I can't live without your love', 'I would rather die than lose your love' or 'Lie to me and I'll believe you but please don't go' all reinforce the belief that life ceases when a loved one walks out of our lives.1 The media also select various role models who are continually paraded in front of us to persuade us they are worthy of emulation. These role models are used mainly because of their popularity and skill in a particular sport or activity, sometimes even merely for their good looks and as admirable as these qualities might be they are certainly no yardstick by which other more serious choices should be measured. The failure to meet extravagant expectations is often the cause of a low sense of self-esteem which tends to encourage people not to take risks. However, it is only by taking risks that obstacles can be overcome and with this the enhancement of self-esteem. It is often disappointment and disillusion that prompts us to think of ourselves and our role in a society which now appears to be strange or alienated from us. It is this sense of alienation that is often responsible for the belief that things were much better in the past.

65 Determining the obstacles to our freedom Our emotions and desires play a major role in our lives for they define what we are, our relationships with other people, and the world. Our moral conscience and the reasons we have created to justify it are determined by the set of beliefs and expectations that we have.2 It is the way in which we behave that ultimately determines our happiness and success. If we are unhappy or dissatisfied with any aspect of our lives then by examining our set of beliefs and expectations and the obligations we have accepted we should be able to determine the specific obstacles that rob us of the freedom we require to rectify it.

1

Refer to the learning theory of Albert Bandura in appendix A6. Refer to section 57 for the moral view that might is right and section 58 for the reasons why many people adopt alternative views. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

251

We do so by adopting a rational approach. That is, to adopt an attitude which is only superior to an irrational approach if we are willing to learn from the criticism and arguments of others and to accept that we might be mistaken. Critical appraisal is in step with freedom because we don't have to bring any moral principles into discussion at all. We can always choose to be amoral and not to incur, accept, or honour any obligations or limitations to our freedom. There are some irrationalists who claim that humans are not rational because they base their decisions upon their emotions and desires. They are correct on two counts: firstly, reason is a tool of the emotions and secondly, any principle or value we adopt is irrational to some degree simply because there is no absolute truth upon which to base it. Thus the very decision to adopt a rational approach is itself irrational and requires a faith in the ability of reason. However, this is a faith that every one of us, including the irrationalist, already accepts and practices because without social consensus as to the meanings of each word and the rational rules for their use language, intelligent thought and argumentation wouldn't be possible at all.1 It is only rational thought that permits us to recognise the long-term benefits that arise from doing or not doing certain things even if this means the foregoing of pleasure, freedom, or the making of certain sacrifices.2 Critical rationality and social consensus are the only hope we have of living in a free, ordered, and moral society as opposed to the slavery, disorder and nihilism which flows from irrationalism.3 It is only socially consistent sensation that bears the objectivity upon which language, science, logic and mathematics grew. It is our senses that convey to us the truths that we require for our survival even if the quest for life itself is irrational.4 However, when we forego socially consistent sensation we lose the only standard by which we can objectively measure reality. Science is based upon observation but everyone can see and feel it work. Critical rationality draws us towards the objectivity of socially consistent sensation as opposed to 1

Refer to section 3 for the necessity of social consensus in language and section 50 for the views of Leibniz, Locke, Hume and Rousseau on language and reason. 2 Refer to section 66 where the attempt is made to give a shape or form to our desires. 3 Refer to the basing of morality on errors of reason in section 58, the acceptance of moral obligations in section 61 and unfair legislation in section 67. 4 Refer to the existentialist philosophy on meaning of life in section 56. © 1997 Allan Sztab

252

the subjectivity of intuition that is the bearer of mysticism, superstition and irrationality.1 It is our senses that tell us might is right - that there are mightier forces than us and that it is perhaps beneficial to us to come to some agreement with them, even at the expense of restricting our freedom. This is a rational and logical progress of thought that is in accordance with the lessons we first learn in confrontation with our parents, a lesson that is repeated on the school playground, and later in all the relationships we have with other people and organisations. This is a lesson that is in accordance with political and social history and one that we can see working around us every day. The entire realm of morality flows from the adoption of this one principle, for self-interest is the cog on which our survival turns. Those behaviours we undertake that do not fall within the scope of the moral obligations or moral duties we have accepted are non-moral. It also follows that if others don't honour the obligations they have with us then we have no moral duty to honour the obligations we have with them. 1. We can examine all the behaviours we have adopted that stem from legislative obligations we have accepted and free ourselves from those that are unfair, not reciprocated, or confer no benefit to us.2 We have become so habituated to behaving in conformity with such legislation that for the most part we are never consciously aware of its bias except when we are directly effected. We should examine legislation such as those which rob us of economic freedom by the imposition of taxation, customs, tariffs and levies which redistribute the financial rewards of our labour and confer unfair advantages to others, or legislation which distorts free-market prices such as those that impose false constraints on the prices of certain goods, commodities, or wages. The introduction of tariffs raises the prices of certain products and allows inefficient industries to prosper at the expense of consumers who are now unable to purchase products at the lowest price. We should examine legislation such as that which prevents us from terminating our own lives or that of a loved one. It is only if we have witnessed a loved one 1

Refer to the Ideal world conjured up by Plato in section 39. Refer to the views of De Montaigne in section 47 that this kind of speculation leads to fanaticism and dogmatism. 2 Refer to the moral obligations arrived at in section 61. © 1997 Allan Sztab

253

in the final stages of terminal cancer, which is often a slow, painful and lingering death, that a person realises the despicable nature of such legislation whose sole justification for having it is that 'life is sacred'. This is nothing but the imposition of a fallacious and manipulative morality that is based on a belief in imaginary causes. We should examine legislation such as that which prevents a person from terminating an unwanted pregnancy. It is only when we have witnessed the despair and anguish of women who stand to have their lives and that of their families irrevocably changed and limited by the constraints imposed by having to take care of an unwanted child, that we come to realise the despicable nature of such legislation. This feeling of repulsion grows even further when we examine the aftermath of desperate women who risk their lives by resorting to back-street abortionists and the devastating effects on children who are resented before they are even born. Here again the sole justification for such legislation is that 'life is sacred'. We should examine legislation such as that which prevents us from doing things that we feel could be beneficial to us such as laws which prevent us from consuming a variety of medicinal and potentially life-saving drugs that are in many cases less hazardous, addictive and costly to society than many freely available drugs such as nicotine, alcohol, sedatives and tranquillisers; or the costly yet ineffective legislation and its enforcement that compels many drugdependent people into a life of crime or prostitution. It is only when we have witnessed a loved one such as a family member or a child addicted to a drug, such as heroin or cocaine, having to prostitute themselves, or destroy their lives and family, or turn to a life of crime, that one first becomes repulsed by such legislation. Drug addiction is a symptom and not the cause of social problems. It is only when one witnesses the suffering of patients who are denied recourse to a drug which does more good for them than any potential harm it may cause, that we can feel repulsed at such legislation. Here the sole justification of legislation is often that of government taking over the role of protector, for which it requires additional taxation, in the hopeless quest of stamping out an entire industry that is now made so lucrative and so easy to enter that it is virtually irresistible to innocent youngsters and more organised criminals. We should examine legislation such as that which fails to effectively enforce the protection we require from those who fail to reciprocate the reasonable and © 1997 Allan Sztab

254

mutually beneficial moral obligations that we are prepared to accept. Governments have always attempted to justify their existence by protecting their citizens from coming to harm at the hands of any other people. We have seen that this justification originates from the benefits that conquerors gained by not destroying those who they had conquered, but by collecting taxation from them instead - a quid pro quo.1 Yet many governments cannot even do this any longer and many honest businessmen are forced into insolvency by white collar criminals who utilise the protection that is afforded to them by the limited liability of legal entities such as corporations and companies - not to mention the harm done to many hundreds and sometimes thousands of innocent consumers. Today many thousands of people have no choice but to hire private security firms in an attempt to protect themselves. Those who cannot afford such protection are often at the mercy of violent criminals and often live in continual fear. The power of the Mafia and other organised criminals is partly attributable to the fact that many people utilise their services in order to obtain a speedy settlement to moral and legal disputes, a method which is often vastly cheaper and more effective than using a legal system that has in many cases been designed by the same legal professionals who stand to benefit from its ineffective and time-consuming legislative procedures.2 2. We can examine all our social and cultural obligations that intrude into nonmoral areas of our lives such as those that dictate the rituals we should perform at birth, puberty, marriage and death; customs that dictate what the roles and rights of men and women are; what, when and how we should eat; when and with whom we can associate and the range and scope of these associations; when we should work and when we should rest; when, how and with whom we should satisfy our sexual desires; when, how and where we should congregate with our family and friends; the occasions we should commemorate; and the welfare groups, political parties and the causes we should finance. Many of these rules and regulations are designed without the moral improvement of the individual in mind but in order to control and manipulate us

1 2

Refer to the quid pro quo of taxation and protection in section 20. Refer to section 67 and the problem of unfair legislation.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

255

with guilt feelings that are felt whenever these rules are broken.1 Each time a prescribed ritual is performed it encourages and reinforces the habitual obedience of the participants towards the commands of the authorities who are in charge of the proceedings. This signals to all those in attendance that the participants consider this authority to be legitimate and that they are in agreement with the system of beliefs that underlie such a claim. Because all those who are in attendance at these gatherings don't object to the proceedings they silently signal their approval of this arrangement to everyone else who is present. If we don't attend Satanistic rituals it is primarily because we don't agree with the beliefs upon which it is based and the same applies to our attendance at any other ritual. 3. We can examine our behaviours to determine those desires that have come to dominate us and the beliefs and/or fears that underlie them. It is our beliefs and fears that are the single greatest obstacle to our success and happiness. While it may not be within our power to modify unfair legislation or legislation that intrudes into non-moral areas of our lives, it is well within our power to control and give form and shape to our desires. However, unlike other restraints to our freedom, dominant desires are often more difficult to discern even though they might rule our lives like a tyrant.2 Underlying any behaviour is a belief that it is beneficial to us, whether or not the belief is true. We will tend to believe that which we desire to be true and disbelieve that which we desire to be false.3 Many of our opinions are based on subconscious desires or fears, and in general those things that will enhance our wealth and thereby reduce our fear of poverty will be believed in while those that threaten to reduce it will be disbelieved. It is almost a universal law that those who have will want to maintain the existing order whilst those who don't have will be revolutionaries. A fear of pain or discomfort could give rise to emotional responses that are similar to paranoid actions in that they are a gross over-reaction to a stimulus or situation. It could be a fear of losing love, food, warmth, shelter or anything that 1

Refer to the system of rewards and punishment, hope, faith and love in section 63. Refer to section 10 and the formation of character concerns. 3 Refer to the question of truth in section 32 concerning fear, uncertaintly, belief and useful errors. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

256

is required to satisfy our basic requirements. Any desire that is fuelled by unrealistic expectations can easily become tyrannical.1 If a persons life is dominated by a desire such as that for sex they might place this before everything else and by devoting all their energy to this single-minded pursuit deny themselves the opportunity to channel their energy into other areas which might need attention, such as their family, career, or health. The same applies to any other desire. The single-minded pursuit of money or power can lead to the unfair treatment of others which might arouse their anger, jealousy or desire for revenge. The desire to impress others with achievements and prestige possessions can lead to being shunned and even to open displays of hostility. 2 It is fear or insecurity that leads us to covet the possessions of others, to lust for sex and power, to demand more than we need, and to become envious of others who seem to be more fortunate than us. It is a fear of deciding for ourselves that leads to an over-dependence on others for protection or guidance.3 Desires that dominate us often lead to irresponsible and reckless actions which may later create feelings of guilt, a loss of self-esteem, frustration and outbursts of anger which are bound to have an effect on those around us. When we demand too much love, protection, or attention from others they are sure to either isolate or shun us. The state of our relationships with other people is therefore a prime indicator of desires that have come to dominate us. A dominant desire is also evident when we are continually having to justify our actions or words to ourselves or to other people. Once we have managed to justify them the path is cleared for us to perform the same actions again. Suffering from guilt or the frustration of failure often leads to the apportionment of blame onto others so as to maintain a false sense of pride. Having done so once the tendency to continue apportioning blame will remain until it too becomes habituated. Continual justification of our actions or the apportionment of blame onto others prevents us from uncovering the tyrants within us.

1

Refer to appendix C on fears, phobias and paranoia and section 64 for the feeling of alienation caused by unrealistic expectations. 2 Refer to section 60 and the primitive means of redistributing income as well as the obligations created by giving gifts. 3 Refer to obeying others as an obstacle to freedom in section 62. © 1997 Allan Sztab

257

By critically appraising the legal and social obligations we have accepted we can identify those that are unfair or not reciprocated and those that attempt to regulate non-moral aspects of our behaviour. By critically appraising our behaviours we can identify any domineering desires. The critical appraisal of our set of beliefs and expectations would be pointless unless there was some objective or goal with which to do so. The word happiness would probably come to the lips of the majority of people if asked what they most desire and it was with this in mind that the pursuit of happiness is specifically mentioned in the American Constitution. There are many routes to take on the road towards happiness and not all of them may be suitable to us. Some of them are based on mystical and superstitious beliefs that open us to manipulation and exploitation at the expense of our personal freedom.1 However, there is plenty of scope for individual and natural solutions that flow from the morality we have created and we now turn our attention to them.

1

Refer to the offer of happiness and comfort in return for obedience in section 63.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

258

66 Freedom and the Individual 'I formulate a principle. All naturalism in morality, that is, all healthy morality, is dominated by an instinct of life - some commandment of life is fulfilled through a certain canon of 'shall' and 'shall not', some hindrance and hostile element on life's road is thereby removed. Anti-natural morality, that is, virtually every morality that has hitherto been taught, reverenced and preached, turns on the contrary precisely against the instincts of life - it is a now secret, now loud and impudent condemnation of these instincts.' (Nietzsche) It is only when two or more parties reach a voluntary agreement that is deemed to be fair and equitable between them that the notion of justice and morality first makes an appearance.1 Benefits and obligations flow from any moral agreement. Obligations impose a limitation on our freedom and the extent to which we value our freedom will ultimately determine the extent to which we are prepared to sacrifice it on the altar of morality. Any limitation to our freedom should confer some benefit to us and the safety and security of ourselves and our possessions are prerequisites in order to avoid conflicts with others.2 According to our senses pain is bad and pleasure good. Seeking pleasure is natural and nobody has to be encouraged or urged to do so.3 Seeking pleasure or minimising displeasure is often equated with the somewhat derogatory term hedonism which conjures up a vision of perpetual feasts and orgies. Seeking pleasure and minimising displeasure is merely the choice between a life that is dominated by pleasure or an absence of suffering as opposed to one that is dominated by suffering. Seeking pleasure and minimising displeasure is the natural path to happiness. What is clear is that the happiness that many search for today isn't the same happiness that Montesquieu and Voltaire spoke about or what Jefferson had in mind when he framed the American constitution. Happiness to them meant material sufficiency, freedom from despotic 1

Refer to the creation of moral obligations in section 57. Refer to section 61 and the voluntary acceptance of limitations to our freedom. 3 Refer to section 7 on the natural incentives and the chemical reward system of the body. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

259

control, and equal opportunity. By way of contrast we find today the widely held belief that the route to happiness and freedom is via the acquisition of personal wealth which has now become a faith that has taken on religious proportions. The single-minded quest for financial rewards permeates almost every aspect of modern life including that of art, music and sport. It is clear that a perpetual state of pleasure isn't possible. Our bodies are geared more towards states of continual hardship than of pleasure.1 Unlike pain which can persist indefinitely, pleasures are relatively short-lived and are followed by an absence of pleasure. Thus the greater the pleasure the greater the discomfort that may accompany its loss.2 This is perhaps the reason that Buddha referred to life as one of suffering. Pleasures may be derived from people and things and this leads to the desire to attach ourselves to them in order to repeat the pleasurable experiences. However, nothing is permanent and if we lose these attachments due to changes beyond our control we may suffer. The discomfort or suffering that follows the loss or withdrawal of pleasure or the loss of our attachments may be feared and for some the remedy is the avoidance of pleasurable activities or the attachment to those people or things that are the source of pleasure. If we are not attached to others we won't suffer should they die or abandon us; if we aren't attached to material things then we won't suffer at their loss; if we aren't attached to youth and health we won't suffer if we lose them.3 There are varying degrees to which the pleasures of life can be denied. At one extreme is the ascetic who is dominated by an uncontrollable desire for power which reigns over their other desires. Their inability to obtain power over external things leads them to play the tyrant over themselves in the hope of gaining fear and respect from others. The result is to achieve varying states of inaction or hibernation which is often referred to as liberation from illusion, knowledge, truth or enlightenment. 1

Refer to the ordeal of the Andes survivors in section 5 with special regard to the change in belief that was necessary for them to survive and the speed with which it occurred. 2 Refer to section 8 and the alternating states of pleasure and pain or discomfort and to section 63 for how hope and faith can alter these states. 3 Refer to appendix B3 for Buddhism. © 1997 Allan Sztab

260

By denying expression to our desires we give up the joys and pleasures that life has to offer, of all that makes life worth living. Self-denial isn't a demonstration of power but of weakness - an inability to control a desire. It is fear, domineering desires or unrealistic expectations that lead to excessive behaviours that often have a negative influence on the course of our lives. 1 Fear or suffering opens us to the manipulation of mystical and superstitious priests with remedies that are in many cases based on the unnatural suppression of the desires.2 The natural solution is based upon the acceptance of change and learning how to moderate, control, satisfy and harmonise our desires according to moral principles of our own.3 Such a state of harmony is an act of creation and a more deserving candidate for the title of Nirvana or heaven, a state that can be achieved within ourselves here on earth. Happiness is a subjective state that can only be determined by each one of us. The first obstacle that we must overcome is the commonly-held belief that altruism, or the performing of actions that are beneficial to others, is a virtue, while looking after one's own interests is selfish. 'A persons virtues are called good if they serve the interests of the community, notwithstanding the fact that they may be bad for themselves. A virtue that fails to listen to instinct and reason has its victim firmly in its grasp. We are praised for our virtues because they are good not for us but for the community. Reason is shocked and the instinct for self-preservation horrified. Yet we are taught that virtue and our own self-interest are related! ... If this education succeeds then every virtue of an individual is a public utility. Consider the virtues of obedience, chastity, filial piety and justice. Praise of the selfless, self-sacrificed and virtuous didn't arise out of selflessness. The neighbour praises selflessness because it brings him advantages. If he was selfless in his thinking he would repudiate this mutilation for his benefit and above all by not calling it good...' (Nietzsche) Individual actions have always been a threat to a state, group or sect of people whose leaders require the blind obedience of all their members. To achieve this the attempt is often made to identify individual actions as 1

Refer to the role of domineering desires as an obstacle to our freedom in section 65. Refer to section 63 for the assurance that sins will be committed if the satisfaction of natural desires are deemed to be sins. 3 Refer to section 61 for the creation of moral obligations based on self-interest and reason. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

261

selfish actions. However, this identification is fallacious and is merely a cunning play on words because it is selfish actions that are opposed to altruistic actions and individual actions that are opposed to group or collective actions. In other words, when people act as individuals all they are doing is acting contrary to the actions of a specific group of people and this has nothing whatsoever to do with selfishness or altruism1 . Contrary to what many profess to do, every human action is ultimately performed in the belief that there is something to be gained thereby and not surprisingly people have never stopped performing them - some do so by deceiving themselves that there is nothing in it for them, some do so hypocritically and some do so with a guilty conscience. Even martyrs who are prepared to sacrifice their lives do so in order to satisfy some desire of their own. We can certainly be manipulated into benefiting others at our expense in the belief that a reward or punishment awaits us in some imaginary place like heaven or hell. Selfishness is a virtue and not a vice. Moreover, there are certain selfish actions that can benefit others such as the voluntary distributions to society made by big men in return for approval and prestige2 . There is also a benefit that flows to others when people act selfishly in a system of free-enterprise. It is only the individual who can understand, control and master their own desires and thereby achieve happiness. It is only individuals who can determine for themselves the limitations to their freedom that are required for them to achieve happiness. The only moral obligations we should have are therefore those that originate out of necessity. It is only when we honour obligations that are beneficial to ourselves that we can achieve happiness. When we honour obligations that are not beneficial to us we achieve not our own happiness but that of others. By critically appraising the legal and social obligations we have accepted we can identify those that are unfair or not reciprocated and those that attempt to regulate non-moral aspects of our behaviour.3 When we dishonour them we should do so with a clear 1 2 3

Plato was the first to attempt such an identification - refer to section 39. Refer to the Kwakiutl Indians in section 60. Refer to section 65 for the determination of obstacles to our freedom.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

262

conscience because there is no moral duty to honour obligations with any other party who directly or indirectly dishonour their obligations with us. We should do so to preserve our freedom and to avoid the build-up of impotent resentment and anger that may harm us even further by adversely affecting our health and relationships with others. There are often considerable risks of punishment when laws are disobeyed. Wherever possible one should work within the framework of existing laws but in many cases this isn't possible. Under certain forms of government some people don't have many options available to them. When we fail to comply with religious or social customs the punishment usually takes the form of being shunned or isolated and this could lead to financial ruin due to the loss of a job or the termination of business relationships. In every case one has to weigh up the risks, costs and consequences involved and the worries that such actions might hold for us. The creation of worries is a penalty that often isn't worth the price for it prevents us from attaining peace of mind. In many cases where we have incurred obligations that prove too onerous we are always free to re-negotiate them particularly if they are unreasonable or incapable of being fulfilled. The right to re-negotiate any obligation should never be forfeited. We should resist making unrealistic promises such as the marriage vow 'to love and cherish each other, in sickness or in health, in good times and in bad' or of using words like forever that commit us to lifetime obligations that are often impossible to fulfil. We cannot make promises that are based on the future state of our emotions or desires because we cannot fake emotions - we either have them or we don't. Any obligation we have made in the past that we cannot comply with should be re-negotiated with a clear conscience. We don't have to tolerate unsatisfying relationships with other people, family and acquaintances that are based on unrealistic obligations which paralyse us with a fear of guilt. Many people accept onerous obligations to behave in a particular manner purely in order to maintain a false image of themselves. Thus they might find it difficult to avoid being financially generous to others so as to maintain the image of being wealthy even if this means depriving themselves or their families. Not all © 1997 Allan Sztab

263

obligations are equally onerous but we should be aware of the acquisition of any obligation irrespective of how trivial it may seem. For example, whenever we ask someone else for a favour we incur the obligation to return one in the future and this gives them a certain degree of power or influence over us. This loss of independence is often worth far more than the favour. Wisdom is the ability to determine through experience and self-knowledge those things that will reward us with pleasure and those that will bring us pain, discomfort, or suffering. On the one hand the physical pleasures obtained from the chemical rewards of the body are short-lived and cannot be sustained. This limitation to the endurance of pleasure applies to the use of all drugs including those of nicotine, alcohol and tranquillisers. The body quickly builds up a tolerance to the pleasure giving qualities of most drugs and sends pleasure seekers on a desperate but hopeless quest to experience that initial high or intense state of pleasure once more. Sensual pleasures like sex are also shortlived and not even all the sexual gadgets in the world can enhance them. On the other hand, certain pleasures might include some level of initial discomfort. To maintain our health we must have the self-discipline to control what we eat and the activities we perform. Learning how to play a musical instrument can be frustrating at first but extremely pleasurable later. Students must sacrifice their leisure time to study in order to obtain a qualification. Great achievements have often been preceded by great suffering. However, because there is usually something to be learnt from suffering doesn't imply that suffering is good in itself. The relationships we have with our friends often require the sacrifice of our time, resources and in some cases possibly even our lives. However, it is in our own self-interest to have friends because they can protect, help and comfort us if we should require it. We might need friends to look after our families or possessions or to administer our estates in the event of our death, or even to terminate our lives if we are suffering and cannot do so ourselves. Although friendship is in our self-interest it doesn't imply that it cannot develop into an unselfish love for its own sake. Because friendships are based on loyalty and trust, friends have the capacity to betray and cause us harm and for this reason friends should be chosen with the utmost care. © 1997 Allan Sztab

264

We can avoid most suffering or discomfort by obtaining the basic necessities of food, shelter and love. It is only in perfect health that we are free of pain and there is an art to eating and drinking as pleasure, health and ill-health can be derived from them. The more desires we have the more difficult it will be to satisfy and harmonise them. Unrealistic expectations and desires such as those for fame, glory, prestige and riches need to be controlled or else they could easily come to dominate us. The exercise of power may be pleasurable in itself but having power over others could lead to them fearing or resenting us and with it the danger that they might one day turn on us. This is a danger that accompanies many high-profile and powerful positions. However: We must take care not to establish our life on too narrow an area of desires: for if we renounce the joys that position, honours, companionship, sensual pleasure, comforts, and the arts afford, the day may come when we discover that through doing without these things we have acquired for a neighbour, not wisdom, but boredom with life. (Nietzsche) Freedom from fear is equally as important as satisfying our basic needs. The suffering that accompanies fears and worries can often be far greater than physical discomfort. The ideal pleasures are those that are distinguished by the absence of both physical and mental suffering and here again we must carefully weigh up the anticipated pleasure and pain that can be derived from any pleasurable activity. The greatest sources of fear and worry are those associated with physical pain or discomfort and death. Because there is no pain after death we have no need to fear it - we are no different to any other creature of nature in this respect. However, we might never overcome the fear of death while we continue to maintain a belief in imaginary concepts such as immortality and a day of judgement.1 Basing our beliefs upon imaginary things or future events such as a day of judgement open us to being manipulated with imaginary punishments and rewards that burden us with unnecessary fears and obligations in the only certain life we have - the one we are living today. The ill-fortune that sometimes accompanies chance events isn't a punishment that is being meted out by an imaginary cause. Moreover, we never deserve this punishment for failing to abide by the imaginary rules of an imaginary 1

Refer to the fear of death in section 4, superstitious belief in section 14, mystical and superstitious myth in section 15 and the afterlife myths in section 22. © 1997 Allan Sztab

265

cause. Events do not unfold according to ancient prophesies that can only be deciphered with hindsight, because imaginary causes can always be found for any chance event. History can always be reinterpreted so as to alleviate suffering while opening the door to manipulation.1 Basing the decisions of the present on a belief in imaginary events which may or may not occur shifts our eyes and ears away from the truth of the present that our senses convey to us. It isn't necessary for our minds and actions to be manipulated and paralysed by fear, guilt, remorse, jealousy, envy and hatred.2 Fear is the single biggest obstacle that we face on the path towards happiness. Fear paralyses us with inaction and avoidance, which is why ascetics are distinguished by their lack of action. Behind many of the actions we claim we cannot do is a fear of losing things that are important to us and not a lack of ability.3 Whenever we are in a state of indecision and are in effect paralysed into inaction, then fear is the most likely cause. This may apply to our reluctance to break off, terminate, or modify a bad relationship because of the fear of facing an uncertain future and of the possibility of doing so alone. We may notice that a string of disappointments or failures have come about because we have been ignoring our own inner feelings when negotiating with others, and making bad deals because we are scared to lose their companionship, business or some other reward we believe they have to offer us. We may be refusing to make important career moves because we fear losing the security or benefits of our present jobs. Throughout history we see that significant change tends to occur in response to events which are beyond control and often in response to much suffering. Thus, it was change in climatic conditions which forced people with different customs to converge alongside rivers where it was necessary to modify their customs in order to avoid conflict. Conquest by other tribes had the same effect. Change almost always followed great upheavals and suffering, and most of the worlds' major religions developed in reaction to the suffering that accompanied such changes. Change is possible but our task is to make the change towards happiness without waiting for uncontrollable events or suffering to befall us. The overriding tendency is that of inaction - to wait until events force us to 1 2 3

Refer to section 26 for the reinterpretation of history in the Old Testament. Refer to manipulation in section 63. Refer to fears, phobias and paranoia in appendix C.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

266

face up to our worst fears, and we do so simply because we are comfortable with the familiar and fear the unfamiliar. We have become habituated to obeying and acting in conformity with the expectations of others and are afraid of making our own decisions. A fear of being alone or of losing some perceived reward is often the reason that many people waste precious time and opportunities while they wait for their spouse, business partners, or employer to abandon them. Fear is a very powerful emotion and the actions of a society may also reflect the fears of an individual. Politicians fear taking positive steps to tackle problems such as over-population and violent crime because they might become unpopular with voters - a failure to win the forthcoming elections could lead to their loss of power and prestige. Hesitation can sometimes have disastrous consequences. It is possible that the fear of another defeat by Germany played a large role in the defeat of France in World War II, a defeat which allowed the war to continue for a further five years at a cost of upwards of 30 million lives. The construction by the French of a set of fortifications known as the Maginot line was an attempt to reduce the fear of a German attack. It proved to be a false sense of security yet what was even more alarming was the fact that the French generals repeatedly dismissed intelligence reports of an impending German attack through the Ardennes which wasn't fortified. (Norman Dixon) We don't have to wait until events force us to face up to our fears and the fact that we have survived and even prospered after being forced to face some of the worst fears we have harboured, along with all the other mishaps that might have befallen us, is evidence that it is within the power of every one of us to do so. Fear and suffering leads us to distort reality and to the commission of errors of reason. We are geared towards making speedy judgements as our lives often depend on them. However, in the majority of situations we can afford to take the time to defer our judgements of other people or things and this allows us to make rational, moral and just judgements.1 The uncontrollable urge to pass 1

The moral obligations we determined in section 61 were arrived at by critical rational thought which takes time. © 1997 Allan Sztab

267

judgement is often the mask of weak, stubborn, narrow-minded, suffering, or vengeful people who seek to blame somebody for some alleged wrongdoing in order to raise themselves up at someone else's expense and there is seldom any better victim than one who is more fortunate or happy than themselves. When we assume the right to judge others we are in effect claiming to be superior to them and to have earned the right to judge. Deferring our judgement is the ability to avoid making an immediate response to a particular stimulus by exercising control over our desires. Our judgement consists of a mixture of our personal likes, dislikes and prejudices, good and bad experiences, and the state of our desires or mood at a particular time. Until we can create our own moral conscience our sense of right and wrong is often that which we have accepted and been taught from others. Suspending our judgement enables us the time to overcome errors of reason such as a belief that there are identical things and situations. There are only similar situations and not taking the time and patience to comprehend all the particular facts of a case leads us to make hasty judgements that are both unfair and illogical, and reinforces prejudicial beliefs. Hasty judgements bear the irrational imprint of the emotions and unless our lives depend on it we should never make decisions when our emotions have clouded our eyes. Many a fortune, career and love-life have been torn apart by emotional responses. We should take into account that nobody, including ourselves, is entirely responsible for their actions. Dispensing with the notion of responsibility enables us to forgive ourselves for our actions and the guilt that we may be suffering from. Suspending judgement allows us the time to empathise with others and to realise that often the only thing that distinguishes their behaviours from ours might be weakness or merely a lack of opportunity; some people are good only because they cannot be bad or haven't had the opportunity to be bad. The implications of a natural solution is clear. If we are free from pain and have provided for the basic necessities of food, shelter and love, it is only our minds that can disturb our tranquillity - minds that may be occupied with satisfying domineering desires such as those for power, sex, fame, riches and glory; or minds that are occupied with fear, guilt, envy, worry, hatred, self-pity and greed. © 1997 Allan Sztab

268

Fear and guilt are emotions that commit us to the past. Undue worries about events that might or might not take place prevents us from enjoying the present. The pursuit and exercise of power may be pleasurable but it isn't necessary to dominate or rule others to boost our sense of self-importance. We can lead by example and not by displays of power. Tranquillity comes from the leading of a moral life with a clear conscience, one that is simple and easy to maintain, one that is free from undue worries. Our task is to determine for ourselves those activities that will bring us happiness in accordance with the system of beliefs and moral guidelines we have furnished ourselves with. These are the foundations upon which we can move towards freedom and happiness. Our experience and knowledge will provide us with the wisdom to distinguish between those activities which bring us pleasure and those that bring us pain. We are tied to the past by the physiological and psychological mechanisms that are inherent in us. Our set of beliefs and expectations and the behaviours they commit us to have been determined by our parents, society and the experiences of our past. Over many years our behaviours have become habituated and our success in finding happiness and maximising our freedom will often depend on our ability to modify or control them. Other people, society and social institutions are similarly tied to their past. It is difficult enough for us to willingly modify certain aspects of our own behaviour and immeasurably more difficult if not impossible to change other people or the institutions whose laws and regulations they adhere to. We are not responsible for the state of affairs of the world and should therefore resist feeling guilty or being manipulated into feeling guilty for them. Attempting to change things we cannot change is often the cause of much friction, frustration and suffering, and wherever possible we should resist making the attempt to do so. If people and institutions are unacceptable to us the way they happen to be now then it is far easier and less traumatic to avoid them in favour of others that are more acceptable to us. The best chance we have of making any meaningful change to our lives is to change ourselves. However, it is often difficult to change lifestyles and habitual behaviours or to face up to fears. The ability to do so alone will vary from person to person depending upon their emotional capabilities and the particular © 1997 Allan Sztab

269

aspect of behaviour that is to be modified. It helps to have somebody to confide in, preferably someone whom we trust and respect. Discussing our beliefs with others is fraught with danger and we should be very careful with whom we do so.1 In certain cases we might need professional help, especially where the actions leading to fear or guilt feelings have been suppressed.2 We should always subject anyone's opinions to critical appraisal and appendix G highlights the potential dangers that we face if we don't. Fortunately there are many organisations and support groups which might be available whose participants have made similar changes to their lives. Confiding in others reduces any feelings of isolation and loneliness since they might be able to identify and empathise with us. Others who are more experienced than ourselves will be able to recommend suitable reference books which are also a great help in reducing feelings of isolation - 'some people read to know they aren't alone'. Admitting that we desire to modify certain aspects of our behaviour leads us towards a greater acceptance of ourselves and the recognition that we have certain strengths, weaknesses and limitations concerning the things we have the power to control. In many support groups no specific advice is given; people merely discuss their own personal experiences and participants are free to accept or reject any information they believe is applicable or inapplicable to their specific case. Any actions a person might choose to take are thus left to themselves to determine. A brief overview of fears, phobias and paranoia can be found in Appendix C whilst Appendix D is a brief guide to modifying behaviours and controlling desires. The beliefs underlying our behaviours are also expressed by us whenever we think and communicate with others. In the same way that our behaviours are reinforced each time we repeat them, our beliefs are reinforced each time we think and speak them - we have developed habits of thought. Breaking these habits of thought and speech cannot be separated from the modification of our behaviours. The importance of modifying our habits of thought is also extremely rewarding because communication is the principle means of persuading others: what we hear or read often enough we 1 2

Refer to section 64 and the pitfalls that accompany individual actions. Refer to section 9 and appendix A1 and the defence mechanism of repression.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

270

will come to believe. By becoming aware of our habits of thought and speech we become less susceptible to the persuasion and suggestions of others and appendix E is a brief guide to some of the tricks and traps of language.

67 Freedom and Society 'Voltaire preferred monarchy to democracy, on the ground that in a monarchy it was only necessary to educate one man; in a democracy you must educate millions... We hardly realise what pranks the birth rate plays with our theories and arguments. The minority acquire education and have small families; the majority have no time for education, and have large families..' (Will Durant) There is no morality in nature and whoever has the power to enforce their will over others will determine what is right and what is wrong.1 Freedom from the coercion of others has to be fought for and once obtained protected. If continual conflict is to be avoided then it is in the interests of society to agree to accept certain obligations that place limits on the freedom of individuals in order to reap the security and peace that an absence of conflict brings. The obligations not to intentionally kill or do harm to others without their consent, unless in selfdefence, and not to steal the personal property of others, are basic limitations to our freedom that are essential for the security of our person and property.2 However, it is necessary for these obligations to be enforced in order to protect citizens from each other or from any external society and this is the primary role of government. To this extent governments are usually granted the power of operating and maintaining a military and police force. Democratic forms of government evolved independently in many primitive nomadic tribes based on an equal distribution of power which arose due to factors such as a plentiful supply of land and access to cheap weapons of similar capabilities. A unique combination of geographical and military factors led to the demand of the middle class for a say in government which finally led to democracy in ancient Greece.3 Democracy in ancient Greece provided a 1

Refer to the conclusion that might is right in section 57. Refer to section 61 and the creation of basic moral principles. 3 Refer to sections 20 and 21 for the consolidation of power and the development of democracy in Greece. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

271

forum whereby well-informed people of equal power could meet to discuss and make political decisions and these are the conditions required by any free society. However, these conditions no longer exist. Many favourable conditions led to democracy in America. Key amongst these was a heritage of British law which defended its citizens against the state, and Protestantism which offered religious freedom. America also had vast areas of land which were widely held. Initially this land was free and families played a large role in the determination of their children's education and other conditions under which they lived and worked. Then the supply of free land dried up and industrialisation arrived which replaced labour with machines. Producer, distributor and consumer then became dependent on each other.1 Inventions, inheritance and differences in abilities led inevitably to the concentration of wealth and power into fewer and fewer hands. Soon people began to rely on government to provide what they had formerly provided for themselves, and as these demands grew so too did the power of government. According to Plato it was conflicts between different classes of society which led to decay and the change to inferior forms of government, and in this he was correct. However, he incorrectly identified the pursuit of self-interest as its principal cause.2 Today in America there is a rapidly growing number of poor, a shrinking middle class and an ever-increasing disparity between rich and poor with the result that the top 20% own half of the country's wealth. America is rapidly being divided into a rich and a poor, those who have power and those who don't. In 'The Rise and Fall of Elites' the sociologist Vilfredo Pareto looked back on history and concluded that 'when an elite declines, we can generally observe two signs which manifest themselves simultaneously: 1. The declining elite becomes softer, milder, more humane and less apt to defend its own power. 2. On the other hand it doesn't lose its rapacity and greed for the goods of others, but rather tends as much as possible to increase its

1

Refer to sections 17, 18 and 19 for the change from a nomadic to a settled existence, the development of private ownership and the commencement of war and conquest. 2 Refer to the philosophy of Plato in section 39 and the error of imaginary causes in section 58. © 1997 Allan Sztab

272

unlawful appropriations and to indulge in major usurpation of the national inheritance.' According to Pareto the fulfilment of both these conditions causes an elite to perish but if one is missing it could prosper. In other words, an increase in their power would permit an increase in their appropriations. On the other hand if their appropriations decreased they could make do with less power. 'Thus the Romans and the English elites could, by yielding where this was called for, maintain their power. The French aristocracy on the other hand, eager to maintain its own privileges, and perhaps also to increase them, while its force to defend them was diminishing, provoked the violent revolution of the end of the eighteenth century. In short, there must be a certain equilibrium between the power a social class possesses and the force at its disposal to defend it. Domination without that force cannot last.' Western democracies are characterised by a ruling elite of politicians, government officials, influential lobbyists and professional advisers who prefer to use the system to their own advantage. Democracies no longer respond to the needs of the public. The competence of the ruling elite lies in manipulation and the system the public votes for rewards them for it. Many governments have failed in their primary duty to provide security and safety for its citizens and this is clear from the escalating rate of crime and the rapid growth of privately paid security firms. In fact, it is no longer certain that conventional military forces are capable of dealing with small guerrilla armies who have access to cheap and effective weapons. This issue is ignored by military bureaucrats who seldom have any genius, individual professionalism or flair, as these are qualities politicians fear. Occasional victories over much weaker opponents are glorified and provide a false sense of comfort. It is easy to forget what happened to America in Vietnam and Russia in Afghanistan. All around the world governments are increasingly giving in to gangs of armed thugs. To compound this problem even further is the failure of governments to properly address a world population explosion and the conflicts over ever increasingly scarce resources that are sure to follow. For example, China has 20% of the worlds' population but only 2% of its resources. Like many other © 1997 Allan Sztab

273

Asian countries it is now industrialising and its citizens are fast becoming voracious consumers in true western style.1 History makes it clear that without adequate safeguards the ruling elite reserve for themselves the right to lie, steal and kill, and to do so with a clear conscience. It is the handing over of vast amounts of power to individuals or groups of individuals within government wherein a dominant personality or leader can come to represent the desires and wishes of an entire nation that is the major obstacle towards peace and order and the attempt to raise ourselves above the morality of nature. People will follow orders and when vast amounts of power are vested in men such as Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Idi Amin and Pol Pot, then peace and order remain only dreams. Democratic governments aren't exempt from this form of abuse and America in the twentieth century alone has seen its power and influence recklessly abused by small groups of individuals in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Angola, Yugoslavia and East Timor to name only a few. President Nixon demonstrated clearly how corruption of power could infiltrate even this bastion of democracy. The most tragic thing about his impeachment was the fact that despite disgracing the American nation he never once apologised or openly recognised the fact that he had done anything wrong. He serves as a prime example of how an educated man of intelligence and drive can become the president of the most powerful nation on earth without the ability to understand and comply with the fundamental moral obligations that we have outlined above - a man who justified his behaviour on the fact that his predecessors might have done the same things; a man who hadn't learnt that 'two wrongs only make a greater wrong'.2 And when the rot and corruption starts at the top it seldom takes long for its example to percolate down to the lowest rank of civil servant. The idea that a government should be exempt from the obligations of society is ludicrous but it isn't easy in practice to ensure that a government doesn't abuse the powers of coercion that are given to it. The failure of the Constitution of the United States of America illustrates this well. It was intended to limit 1

Refer to appendix H for a case study of over-population. Refer to the formation of character concerns in section 10 especially the characteristics of people who have strong power concerns. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

274

government power by keeping it decentralised so that individuals would be free to make their own decisions and thereby control their own lives. Its Bill of Rights made this intention even clearer by specifically prohibiting the American Congress from establishing a state religion or preventing anyone from practising any religion they chose. Congress was also specifically prohibited from passing any laws that impinged on the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press and the right of every American to keep and bear arms. Those powers not specifically delegated to the United States were to be reserved for the individual states or their citizens. Questions relating to interpretations of the Bill of Rights are now settled in American courts which removes the responsibility for political change from the democratic process. The courts have in effect become a law unto themselves and must wait until questions reach them before changes can occur - a process that can take up to 10 years. Judges who are mere mortals have now become powerful policy-makers who struggle to compose fair and clear judgements. Not surprisingly laws have proliferated together with the number of loopholes that can be found to circumvent them. One of the greatest threats to freedom is the widely-held belief in majority rule because a majority could decide that a tyrant or non-democratic government should rule. It was one of the primary intentions of the framers of the American Constitution that the majority should never be able to impose its will on a minority. They were equally determined that the special interests of minorities shouldn't dominate yet uninformed voters will vote almost equally and this makes it possible for a small concentrated minority who vote on one side to win an election - 'a united minority acting against a divided majority'. It is majority decisions such as these that often lead to arbitrariness and a swing away from the clear intentions of a Constitution. It is always possible to make a good case for an exception which breaks solid principles upon which the moral obligations of a democratic and free society are based. As Nietzsche correctly pointed out: 'Exceptions are the greatest danger'. It might not be difficult to persuade a majority to legislate against outlawing the speech of Nazis or some other fascist group while forgetting that at some time or another we will also be in a minority. The opposite also applies and it isn't uncommon for rival minorities and groups © 1997 Allan Sztab

275

to dredge up some prior discrimination of the past in order to back their claim for affirmative action. Democracy as it stands today is really a contest between organised minorities who are further strengthened by the cunning manipulation of electoral districts. Election issues disguise the fundamental problems. 'Elections become a contest in fraud and noise; and as sound arguments make the least sound, truth is lost in the confusion.' (Will Durant) Today debate between people is largely confined to specific social groups or private clubs where everyone shares the same interests and prejudices. The participation of citizens in democracy is virtually limited to the election of government which is little more than a popularity contest between various party candidates that is repeated every four, five or seven years. At one time candidates were supposed to present their views so the public could decide whether to vote for them but today candidates tailor their views according to the preferences of their electorate. Not surprisingly, candidates are chosen for their ability to get themselves nominated, advertised and elected, qualities which are free from originality or genius. They need have no other professional qualifications, yet when in duty they are given almost unlimited powers. Not surprisingly they are out of their depth and can only vote according to the recommendations of advisors and committees. There is a marked lack of any public participation and the results are evidenced by ever-rising levels of corruption. It has even been suggested that democracy is offered to other countries so as to make them weak. Conflicts can only be avoided provided the moral obligations of society are strictly adhered to in accordance with clear and precise principles. This is possible provided we can break away from the errors of the past.1 Firstly, as long as systems of government are based on the belief that humans have freedom of will and are responsible for their actions the notions of justice and morality will remain illusions.2 It is vain, ludicrous and delusory to believe that any leader, or group of leaders, can step out of themselves and assume a lofty position from which they will somehow no longer be subject to the subconscious desires which course through the veins of us mere mortals; 1 2

Refer to the moral obligations created in section 61. Refer to the error of freedom of will in section 58.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

276

that once in power they will somehow be able to resist giving reign to the emotions of greed, jealousy, anger, cruelty and hatred; that once in power they will suddenly and mysteriously begin to place the interests of others before those of their own, and those whom they identify with. It should come as no surprise to anyone that they don't simply because they cannot. It is only possible to rise above nature by absorbing a dose of humility that beckons to us from every page of human history - that no human being is entirely responsible for their actions. It is only humility that will point the way towards systems of government that are not geared towards harbouring illusory beings but beings who will, given the opportunity, dishonour their moral obligations towards those they serve. Corruption can only be curtailed by severely limiting the range and scope of the powers that we permit any leader or government to have without impinging unfairly on the freedom of others. History has shown clearly that the best the average citizen can hope for in a revolution is that the ruling elite changes without wide-scale bloodshed and disruption. History proves more than adequately that the change of an elite leads not to a cessation of corruption but to the continued or intensified use of the very same methods that were deplored by the revolutionaries themselves. For example, the Russian revolution of 1917 which was supposed to liberate the worker led instead to the systematic murder of 30 million Russians of all walks of life over a period of 70 years. It is simply not possible to change overnight from the role of liberation fighters, who are trained in unacceptable social behaviour and succeed to the extent that they excel therein, to that of welldisciplined and socialised leaders. Secondly, it is the severity with which criminals are punished for acts of violence and crime against other members of society that is a direct expression of the values of society.1 However, the failure of government to adequately perform its moral duty of protection is due largely to the pressures of special interest groups whose erroneous and hypocritical morality gains expression in the form of a misguided humanitarianism. It is these humanitarians who direct the misery and violence of society back onto itself as they judge society to be 1

Refer to the views of Bentham in section 52.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

277

responsible for it. They then ask society to forgive the innocent perpetrators of crime, to turn the other cheek and to violate itself even further by burdening itself with the cost of housing, feeding, protecting, training, educating and rehabilitating criminals while their mangled victims, if still alive, are offered nothing.1 What humanitarians forget is that we are all innocent. Society must punish people not because they are guilty and deserve to be punished but because they have dishonoured their moral obligations with society.2 People must be punished effectively and efficiently in order to deter them from harming society again, as their ability to continue doing so undermines the efforts of society to raise itself above nature. By dishonouring their moral obligations people forfeit the benefits that those obligations entitle them to and accordingly the form and severity of punishment is free from any moral restraints and to this extent is natural. A failure to protect people leads only to impotent resentment, hatred and suffering which open people to manipulation. There is nonetheless plenty of scope for humane, efficient and cost effective punishments which could be combined with efforts to compensate victims. Many perpetrators of violence can be treated with hormones that either eliminate or reduce their violent urges. Failing that, preventive surgical procedures such as castration for sexual violations and the removal of limbs for other violent actions should be considered. The efficiency and cost effectiveness of some of these punishments have been demonstrated for ages in the Middle East and although there is no necessity to utilise the same delivery methods, a good case could be made for its deterrence. There have even been cases where convicted child molesters have requested that they be castrated prior to their release from prison so that they will not be tempted to kill their victims in order to avoid the identification that probably led to their arrest in the first instance. Humanitarians sow the seeds of revolution by encouraging the belief that equality means 'a fair share for all', a belief that harbours false hopes and unrealistic expectations. Biased legislation and corruption is the inevitable result as government only too willingly accepts and attempts to implement yet another 1 2

Refer to section 63 and the manipulation by promises that cannot be fulfilled. Refer to section 59 and the punishment of people based on the error of freedom of will.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

278

impossible task. The words peace and protection flow unhesitatingly from the lips of almost every person as soon as they are old enough to comprehend them. However, unless the obligations of society are enforced equitably between all citizens and between citizen and government, no citizen can be expected to honour and uphold them. Moreover, those who revolt against biased legislation can easily justify their actions on moral grounds.1 Protection means making our leaders accountable by limiting the scope of their activities and powers to those that are absolutely necessary to give effect to the moral obligations that have been accepted by society. Protection means making our leaders accountable for their decisions, and for the taxpayers money which they spend by subjecting them to independent and ongoing audits that rely on sound methods of verification which deny them the accomplice of secrecy. Protection can be achieved by setting up independent legal, economic and social institutions working according to clear and precise principles, so that long-term decisions can be made and executed publicly and fairly by suitably qualified people in their respective fields, with the power to ensure that ineffective and inefficient projects are modified or abandoned, and that real problems such as over-population in the face of diminishing resources and a declining job market are meaningfully addressed; that domestic and foreign policy are based on the present and future needs of society and not in misguided attempts to undo the inequities of the past; that all unfair, ineffective, inefficient and non-moral legislation is eliminated, such as that which unnecessarily restricts the freedom of the markets, attempts to make people equal, gives legality to professional and industrial cartels, and ensures that only the wealthy get a fair trail. Protection means converting the role of politicians from that of policy making to being the eyes and ears of the public they serve.2 It is ironic that people who are fortunate to live in democratic nations today give away the very freedoms that were won for them on the battlefield by countless millions of people who fought and died after enduring long periods of unimaginable suffering, degradation and deprivation. Having freedom is being able to choose for ourselves what is in our own best interests, 1 2

Refer to the views of Locke in section 50 that rebellion is justified for a breach of trust. Refer to section 52 and 53 for views on the role of government.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

279

and to willingly accept the risks that these decisions entail. As soon as we allow others to determine what is in our own best interests we sacrifice the freedom to do so and enhance the range and scope of power that is exercised over us. The more that is asked of government the greater its powers, revenue requirements and the temptation for corruption. When a civil servant is given somebody else's money to give to somebody else, as happens in all welfare programs, they are given a god-like power over the recipients, whose self-esteem is eroded even further. By allowing the government to provide basic services such as housing, education and health care it shelters the consumer from the real cost of doing so which also removes the incentive for people to regulate the size of their families or to fend for themselves. In many cases civil servants are beneficiaries of the very programs they administer and are therefore tempted to manipulate regulations to favour themselves. This is often the reason that certain welfare programs tend to favour the middle and upper classes instead of the poor, who lack the skills to fend for themselves. With the vested interests of beneficiaries, and the anonymity of the taxpayer who foots the bill, the tendency is for government-sponsored programs to grow irrespective of their efficiency. People are capable of taking care of themselves by voluntary co-operation and the success of many privately run charities is a good example of this. The primary reason we turn continuously to the government to cure our ills is because we have become habituated to obeying others and to avoiding making our own decisions. Acting in our own self-interest is the cog on which our survival turns and nobody can cater to our interests or spend our money with the care and diligence that we can.1 Selfishness is a virtue and not a vice. Selfishness is compatible with the freedom and peace that most people seek. It was the genius of Adam Smith to recognise that a system of free trade or voluntary exchange could silently co-ordinate the activities of millions of people in a way that improved all their positions. He called this the power of 'the invisible hand' which communicates by means of the price of goods and services. Another example of the 'invisible hand' at work is that of language, mathematics, logic and science, which arose from the voluntary co-operation of 1

Refer to section 62 and the obstacle to freedom of relying on others to make decisions for us. © 1997 Allan Sztab

280

people all pursuing their own self-interests to the benefit of everyone. All of this was achieved without government intervention. One of the most important functions of freely-determined prices is that they make it possible to distribute the income of society fairly and equitably.1 It is only a free market that can efficiently determine what should be produced, where and when it should be produced and the quantity, quality and wages of the people required to produce it. Prices are determined by supply and demand which guides investors and entrepreneurs to utilise the resources available to them in the most efficient way possible. Their success leads to the creation and distribution of wealth amongst themselves, the people they employ and their suppliers. Governments distort the price mechanism and with it the equitable distribution of income by imposing tariffs, duties, customs, quotas and wage restrictions that are biased in favour of special interest groups. Wage restrictions provide a good example of how this is accomplished. The easiest way to ensure a high wage rate is to get the government to do it by enforcing minimum wage laws which discriminate against the unskilled who are precluded from obtaining low paid but on-the-job training. Governments also enforce the licensing requirements that are necessary in order for people to practice specific professions or skills such as those in the fields of medicine, law, engineering, accounting, plumbing etc. These methods vary from lengthy training or apprenticeships to unwarranted academic standards and in many cases the licensing boards that determine them consist of the practitioners themselves. The wider the definition of a specific occupation in the legislation the greater the demand for its services.2 Any first-year economics student knows that the price of any resource such as that for labour is determined by supply and demand. With over-population in the face of a declining job market real wages are set to decline for all but the most highly skilled workers. In the factory of the future, which is already in smallscale operation today, parts are designed and developed by a single skilled computer operator. These parts are then produced by machines that are in fact printers, except that they don't melt tiny ink particles but tiny metal particles. By 1 2

Refer to the simple means of redistributing income by primitive societies in section 60. Refer to the obstacle to freedom of biased legislation.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

281

a process of continual re-printing a part can be built up layer by layer to standards of complexity and accuracy which are in many cases not even possible by traditional methods of manufacture. Reducing the population is the surest means of increasing wages, decreasing poverty, maintaining a high quality of life and preserving global resources for everyone's benefit - the alternative of growth at all costs can easily be contemplated if we turn to history.1 The same economic principle of supply and demand lies behind the failure of prohibition to eradicate the demand for a wide range of products and services. Prohibition by government serves to increase the requirements and powers of government even further, and upsets the pricing mechanism so that prices soar. This encourages black market entrepreneurs, and in the case of drugs forces many users into a life of crime and/or prostitution. The only difference between these victims of prohibition and the millions of legal nicotine, alcohol, caffeine, tranquilliser and other drug addicts is the price of their drug. Drug enforcement and prosecution clogs up the legal system with innocent and harmless drug users whose only crime is that they decided to choose an illegal substance to become addicted to. Imprisoning people who don't harm or steal from others turns them into hardened criminals by the time they leave. Most prostitutes or drug addicts are morally upstanding people who have been turned into criminals by nonmoral legislation.2 In his book 'Free to Choose' the economist Milton Friedman provides a good example of how a commitment to a principle such as that of free trade could be enshrined in the American constitution so as to prevent its abuse: '... the Constitution could be reworded from: "No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any imposts or duties on imports or exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection laws" to "Congress shall not lay any imports or duties on imports or exports..." For wages and price controls a counterpart of the First Amendment is required such as "Congress shall make no laws abridging the freedom of sellers of goods or labour to price their products or services..." These amendments could be replaced by a single amendment patterned after the 1 2

Refer to appendix H on over-population. Refer to section 61 for non-moral obligations.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

282

Second Amendment to our Constitution... "The right of the people to buy and sell legitimate goods and services at mutually acceptable terms shall not be infringed by Congress or any of the States."' Education has the power to open the eyes and ears of the public so that they can demand and work towards reversing the erosion of our freedoms, but parents have little choice as to what their children are taught because they have handed over this function to an army of professionals and administrators who have a vested interest in keeping themselves employed. As soon as somebody else determines what should be taught many of the benefits of education are forfeited.1 Children are as clever or as stupid as they are taught to be and an excellent case can be made that children are actually taught to be stupid, first by their parents and then at school. A child has to be taught not to trust its senses. A child has to be taught the morality of mysticism and superstition, racialism and prejudice, instead of being taught the benefits that voluntary moral obligations can provide for them in a free and democratic society. So all-encompassing are the prejudices of society that even without the spoken word children learn quickly from gestures, the tone of voices and other clues. Thus an AfricanAmerican child defends her choice of a white doll because she has already learnt that 'blacks are bad'. A child has to be taught and tricked into believing in imaginary entities such as Santa Claus who brings them gifts, tooth fairies who bring them money and Easter bunnies who bring them chocolate. A child has to be taught to pray to an imaginary being who will grant them personal favours. Children are naturally inquisitive and intelligent. They ask questions such as: 'Dear god, are you really invisible or is that just a trick?', God, Its O.K that you made different religions but don't you get mixed up some times?', 'Dear God, What does it mean you are a jealous God. I thought you had everything?' 'Dear God, How come you did all those miracles in the old days and don't do any now?' 'Dear God, I wish that there was no such thing of sin. I wish that there was no such thing of war.' (Hample and Marshall) Questions such as these show clearly the natural intelligence and critical faculties of children and the dubious quality of the education they are receiving. 1

Refer to the education policy advocated by Plato in section 39.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

283

A child has to be taught to obey its parents and other figures of authority such as priests, teachers and policemen unconditionally. Children are seldom taught that their bodies are their own personal property and that nobody may touch them without their consent, especially their parents, immediate family and other figures of authority. A child has to be taught that pre-marital sex is bad and that celibacy is their only option instead of being taught the role of sex in their lives, the dangers of sexually-transmitted diseases, the risks of single parenthood and the potential risks to their self-esteem. Children are seldom taught about the advantages and disadvantages of all drugs such as those of nicotine, alcohol, cannabis, caffeine and tranquillisers, together with the scientific evidence, lack of scientific evidence and prejudice that is instrumental in the determination of their legal status. Children seldom have a suitably qualified person whom they can confide in without any fear of recrimination if they need to talk about any personal violation, their home life, sex, drugs, or peer pressure. Children should be taught the skills required for argumentation but these have been kept out of education together with a study of the arts and humanities. Most schools only produce graduates who have obtained skills that will assist in satisfying the demands of business and industry who have an inordinate influence on education. Compounding this problem is the fact that a liberal education is so expensive it is limited to a minority who can afford the high tuition fees of glamorous schools; however, a free society requires the education of the majority. Any education that isn't specialised is shunned and has come about largely as a direct result of the division of labour required by today's highly complex and dependent society. However, a growth in specialisation leads to a decrease in general knowledge and a loss of total perspective. The greater a persons expertise the more they are relied upon by other professionals and vice versa. Eventually they become confined to their area of expertise. Specialisation thus serves to undermine the individual who now has no influence on the workings of the whole. Because experts are trapped in their areas of expertise they don't criticise each other and are often expressly prohibited from doing so in codes of professional conduct. In fact, those experts who are employed by others are forbidden to work or discuss work outside of working © 1997 Allan Sztab

284

hours. Those who don't conform might be regarded as irresponsible and unprofessional and would soon find it difficult to gain alternative employment. This fear serves to eliminate public debate even amongst intelligent, educated and skilled citizens.1 The quality of information people have at their disposal is crucial to decisionmaking. However, the reality that is channelled to us by the media is based on pockets of expertise wielded by the ruling elite who control the information we need to make responsible decisions. This information consists largely of political and corporate public relations announcements. The balance of our daily news consists of sensational murders, rapes, kidnappings, hijackings, freak weather and a never-ending flow of information regarding celebrities. The press has become a glorified transmitter of junk-mail. The over-riding tendency of both government and corporations is to withhold important information from the public on the grounds that their failure to understand it will lead to panic. In this way important information such as that regarding nuclear accidents, radioactive contamination and industrial pollution are routinely withheld from the public. Most of the investigations that are brought about by public pressure, due to the chance leak of information, are held in secret under the guise that secrecy is in the public interest, while it is only required to protect the careers and reputations of those involved. In fact, almost everything is regarded as a secret, and because governments have access to teams of advisors and researchers they can always produce large quantities of information to back their claims and drown any opposition in a sea of facts. Critical and well-informed debate amongst educated people is an essential requirement of a free democratic society and words are therefore the enemy of authorities who use obscure language to serve their ends. Technical jargon is used not only by authorities and experts but has infiltrated most academic subjects. Even commentaries on older texts that were written in clear and precise language are difficult to understand. In this way authorities, experts, professionals and academics turn what is simple into something that can only be understood by themselves. They all have a vested interest in protecting their 1

Refer to the pressure on Freud to conform in appendix G.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

285

own information and dressing up the simplicity of their expertise to make it seem more worthy of their attention.1

1

Refer to the tricks and traps of language in appendix E.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

286

In A Nutshell

If our patterns of behaviour aren't producing the results we desire then we can change them by modifying our beliefs or overcoming the underlying fear or uncertainty upon which they are based.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

287

© 1997 Allan Sztab

288

APPENDIX A A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO POPULAR THEORIES OF PSYCHOLOGY A1 Sigmund Freud Philosophers in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries had theorised about the influence of subconscious processes on human behaviour, and Sigmund Freud developed a complete theory that described the innermost workings of the human mind which were not only performed on a subconscious level but intentionally kept out of consciousness by specific defence mechanisms. According to Freud human behaviour is determined subconsciously by inner drives, which he called instincts. These instincts ensured that the physiological needs of a person were met by creating a tension which was only released after being satisfied by an appropriate action. He grouped these instincts into two basic groups called the life and death instincts. The life instincts were dedicated to maintaining life and propagating the species and the sex instincts were the most influential determinants of personality development. Eating was an activity that was necessary for maintaining life, but also involved acts of biting and chewing which in effect destroyed the food. It was the role of the death instincts to maintain this harmony, and they were responsible for all acts of aggression and destruction. In his explanations Freud made use of three now-famous but imaginary constructs - the id, ego and super-ego. The id was the home of the instincts and obeyed no rules whatsoever in satisfying them. The ego ensured that the demands of the id were met in safety by considering the advantages and disadvantages of certain behaviours. This it did by referring to the super-ego which drew distinctions between those behaviours that were socially acceptable and those that were not. To satisfy the instincts some object was required to do so and this object could either be part of an individuals body or some external object. If the original object couldn't be obtained then the instinct could be displaced and focused on another object. Throughout a persons life the sex and aggression instincts are satisfied by choosing socially-acceptable objects with which to do so and a © 1997 Allan Sztab

289

persons personality was determined by their early childhood experiences as they moved through four stages of psycho-sexual development. These stages are the oral, anal, phallic and genital, and are based on those parts of the body whose stimulation will release sexual and aggressive tension. For Freud pleasure and sexuality are closely knit and the way a persons personality develops will briefly be discussed below. In the first year of its life the first object with which an infant attempts to satisfy its sexual and aggressive instincts is the mouth, and sexual pleasure is derived from sucking and playing with it. If something unpleasant is introduced into the mouth the infant will spit it out and close its mouth. According to Freud the mouth can either take in, hold on, bite, spit out and close, and these means of dealing with its early experiences become models for the way in which a person will deal with similar situations in later life. If taking things into its mouth is pleasurable, as it is when hungry, then a person might enjoy a hunger for knowledge, love, or power in later life. Thus, taking in becomes a model for acquisitiveness; holding on to things a model for determination; biting for destruction; spitting for rejection and closing for refusal. How they develop depends on the infants experience and if an infant is deprived of food or love it might become greedy and acquisitive in later life. A mother can withhold food for disobedience and provide food for obedience. In this way oral gratification might become associated with approval and oral deprivation with disapproval. If an infant suffers anxiety due to pain or discomfort and its mother attempts to provide comfort by giving it food, the infant can form an association between anxiety and its satisfaction by the intake of food, and hence to an eating disorder in adult life. Traces of oral behaviour can be seen in the biting of nails, chewing of gum, smoking and kissing. Anxiety suffered due to hunger could also lead to a person becoming dependent on its mother or on other people. If a person is ashamed of their dependency they might react by becoming strongly independent or in seeking ways of helping others. When the infant acquires teeth during the second half of its first year, biting and chewing become the means for expressing frustration due to delayed gratification, and fixation at this stage is seen in adults who are argumentative or sarcastic. Oral aggressiveness serves as © 1997 Allan Sztab

290

a model for many different kinds of displaced and disguised aggressions. A person could react to aggressive urges by only saying good things about other people, and in order to defend their aggression a person might project their aggressive desires onto others who will then be regarded as the aggressors. During the second and third years of life the focus of sexual gratification shifts from the mouth to the anus. The digestive process finally results in the elimination of faeces, and an infant experiences this as a build-up and release of tension. The retention and elimination of waste is pleasurable and the infant learns how to control this as it wishes. However, when toilet training commences the infant must learn self-discipline by delaying the pleasure of immediate defecation and conforming to the constrains imposed by the external authority of its parents. If training is too strict the infant could retaliate by intentionally soiling itself, and this could manifest itself in later life in attempts to frustrate authority by being messy, irresponsible and extravagant. The child may also withhold its faeces and this tendency to hold back could lead to the development of a personality characterised by stinginess, obstinacy, punctuality and extreme cleanliness. If mother pleads with the child and praises it for correct bowel performances, then the child might develop a personality characterised by creating things to please others, and generosity. If the child believes its faeces is highly valued then it could develop a personality characterised by being thrifty, economical and a collector of objects. A reaction formation to this could manifest itself in the tendency to give things away, gambling, or making reckless investments. During the fourth and fifth years of life the focus of sexual gratification shifts from the anus to the genitals - the phallic stage. Children will examine and play with their sexual organs, masturbate and express interest in sexual matters. Freud identified what he called the Oedipus complex, which he named after a Greek tragedy based on the theme of incest. According to Freud a male child develops subconscious desires to possess his mother but is scared his father will punish him by castrating him; this fear he called castration anxiety. Between the ages of 5 and 7 the male child represses his desires as he begins to identify

© 1997 Allan Sztab

291

with his father.1 The Oedipus complex for girls takes the form of penis envy and girls blame their mothers for depriving them of a penis while desiring their fathers who have one. Girls look to penis substitutes for sexual pleasure which is then focused on the clitoris. Later the resentment towards the mother and the desire for the father are modified as the girl begins to identify more with her mother. Fixation at this stage of development may result in men who are vain, boastful and strive for success, and in women who are seductive, promiscuous and assertive. Between the phallic and the genital stage of development the six to seven year old child sublimates or channels their sexual energy into other activities such as sports and school work. The genital stage commences with the physiological changes that accompany puberty. According to Freud all children go through a homosexual phase where they prefer the company of their own sex, but their sexual attention then changes towards the opposite sex. Freud believed that sex allowed the discharge of the instinctual energies that was necessary for the development of a healthy social attitude. A failure to accomplish this at any stage of a persons development led to what he called anxiety neuroses. A persons inability to control both their internal and external stimuli and especially their external environment creates a sense of imminent danger which he called anxiety. He identified three types of anxiety - realistic anxiety which was a response to external threats and dangers; neurotic anxiety which was a fear of being unable to control one's impulses; and moral anxiety which was caused by guilt feelings or shame at the entertainment of immoral thoughts. According to Freud the purpose of anxiety was to control the instinctual urges and in order to do so the mind had certain defence mechanisms that operated subconsciously and could therefore distort a persons perception of reality. He identified seven mechanisms sublimation whereby impulses are channelled into socially-acceptable ways of expression; 1

The Royal Swedish Air Force have a Defence Mechanism test which is given to aspiring pilots that is designed to detect subconscious castration anxiety. This subconscious fear is believed to manifest itself in the reaction speed of pilots when faced with a dangerous or fearful situation, resulting in accidents and the loss of valuable aircraft. Since its implementation during recruitment their safety record has improved considerably. © 1997 Allan Sztab

292

repression whereby any terrifying past experiences and unacceptable sexual or aggressive impulses are prevented from entering the conscious mind; projection whereby a persons unacceptable impulses are attributed to others; displacement whereby a persons impulses are directed towards a less harmful object; rationalisation whereby a persons activities are justified by wishful thinking and self-deception; reaction formation whereby forbidden impulses are repressed and the opposite behaviour is then adopted and taken to extremes; and regression whereby anxiety is reduced by reverting to an earlier stage of development where things were more secure, and is evidenced by childlike behaviour such as temper tantrums, rebelling against authority and reckless driving.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

293

A2 Alfred Adler According to Adler infants are entirely dependent on others and thus develop inferiority complexes based on the weaknesses they perceive themselves to have. They then attempt to overcome these weaknesses by an innate striving for superiority and perfection according to goals that each person has the freedom to determine. These goals or life-styles are formed between the ages of four and five and are difficult to change thereafter. A persons goals are based on fictions or assumptions that might be true or false but are believed to be true. A belief that hard work leads to prosperity could lead people to become hard workers. However, for many people hard work doesn't bring them prosperity so the belief isn't always true. A persons lifestyle constitutes the framework upon which all their behaviour is based and the early formative years thus play a crucial role. Although a person developed a lifestyle at such an early stage of life they nevertheless had a creative capacity to give a unique expression to it. Adler believed it was possible to classify a persons lifestyle by their attitude to career, friendship and marriage which all reveal a persons social interest. To Adler social interest was the yardstick by which to measure a persons mental health, and healthy people have an interest in improving humankind. He claimed that there are four basic types of lifestyle attitudes but because each person is unique it isn't possible to fit them into any one. The ruling type are assertive, aggressive and have little social interest; the getting type are more concerned with what they can get from others; the avoiding type fear failure and shy away from problems, while the socially useful type who is socially oriented and willing to co-operate with others is the most healthy. A persons earliest memories, pleasant or unpleasant, were clues to their psychological type as were their reactions when under pressure. Adler considered humans as social animals by nature, and a persons mother played a large role in the development of social interest, co-operation and comradeship in the child who looks to her as a role model in social situations. It is the mother who shows the child that caring for her husband and other people © 1997 Allan Sztab

294

doesn't mean being neglected. The father was next in importance and if he was authoritarian this would stifle the development of the child's social interest in favour of personal power. As a family grew the family social environment changed and would be different for the first-born and each child thereafter. According to Adler this would have an important influence on the social development of the children. The first-born would receive the undivided attention of its parents until the arrival of a second child, whereupon the firstborn is 'dethroned' and forced to learn how to be independent. The second-born has an older sibling and is therefore challenged to 'catch up' with the older child, and as a result might learn to speak or walk earlier than the first-born. The second-born might therefore become competitive and ambitious. The last-born was in a unique position as it would be showered with affection by everyone and would never be 'dethroned'. In addition, the last-born had to strive harder to keep up with its siblings. The only child would tend to be spoilt and without competition from other children, and might compete with the father for affection. The only child could come to expect attention and become dependent and self-centred.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

295

A3 Erik Ericson According to Ericson humans evolve through a series of stages that are part of a persons genetic development program. At each stage a person faces a crisis and in the process of resolving it their personality is formed. He identified eight stages in a persons development. In the first year or infancy stage which corresponds to Freud's oral stage, the infant must learn what and who to trust or mistrust, and resolving this conflict will depend to a large extent on the maternal care that it receives. If such care is inadequate the infant might develop a general attitude of apprehension or fear towards the world. In the second and third years the child enters the second stage, which corresponds to Freud's anal stage. Here the child develops a basic sense of autonomy and self-control versus shame or doubt. During this stage children learn how to control their bowel movements and begin to explore the world. The freedom or restrictions, encouragement or disapproval which parents give will determine the infants sense of self-esteem and will also add to the infants sense of trust or mistrust. The third stage, called the initiative versus guilt stage, corresponds to Freud's phallic stage, and here the child begins to initiate new activities. Parents who encourage these activities will tend to reinforce their initiative, while parents who ridicule or prohibit them will reinforce guilt or feelings of unworthiness. During the fourth stage of industry, between ages 6 to 11, the child develops a sense of competence or incompetence in relation to cultural activities such as reading, writing and partaking in social activities according to rules. Here the child learns what societies criteria for success is. The fifth stage of development, from the age of 12 to about 20, was particularly important to Erikson as it was during this stage that a person develops a personal identity, a sense of who they are, by integrating what they have learnt in the past, including their sexual orientation and social grouping, in order to gain a vision of where they are going in the future. Erikson interprets delinquent behaviour as the result of an 'identity crisis' where a negative identity opposite to © 1997 Allan Sztab

296

that of their parents is adopted. It might also be indicated in an inability to choose a career. During this stage a person also develops a sense of fidelity or loyalty to the rules and values of their society. It is at this stage that people could choose to identify with certain ideologies that challenge the established norms of society. During the sixth stage of development, from about age 20 to 24, a person develops a sense of intimacy or isolation as they become involved in intimate relationships with others. According to Erikson it is only when a person doesn't fear losing their identity by merging it with that of another, that a meaningful relationship can be established. It is during this stage that a person might choose to avoid interpersonal relationships that require an intimacy which may be regarded as a threat to their identity. The seventh stage, between the ages of 25 to 65, a person develops either a sense of concern or stagnation regarding their fellow humans. Humans need to be taught everything and this stage determines whether a person concerns themselves with the needs of society or that of their own. Children must be taught almost everything from their parents and society, and if life can be said to have any purpose then this could be it. According to Erikson, without developing concern a person becomes impoverished and life might appear to be meaningless. In the eighth and final stage of development a person looks back on their life and evaluates the seven stages of their development in terms of satisfaction or despair. Satisfaction is felt by a person who has integrated all seven stages and can say 'I am satisfied'. Such people no longer fear death as they see their own existence continuing in that of their children or in their accomplishments. Those who haven't integrated all seven stages might have regrets and despair that it is no longer possible to change their lives. This could be evidenced by attempts to change old memories and the display of bitterness, spite and paranoia.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

297

A4 Henry Murray According to Murray peoples emotions, memories, beliefs and fears are located within their brains and together constitute their personalities. A person is motivated by physiological or primary needs such as those for food, water and urination, and other secondary needs such as those for achievement, affiliation and play. He identified twelve primary needs and twenty-eight secondary needs. It was possible for a secondary need to take precedence over a primary need and, for example, a businessman could ruin his health in order to achieve success. These needs were 'turned-on' either by internal processes or by environmental stimuli - the 'turn-on' for sex could be due to deprivation or at the sight of a sexy-looking man or woman. Certain needs could be expressed freely in society while others had to be suppressed and were only evidenced in fantasies and dreams. There was a constant interaction and conflict of needs and if a need wasn't satisfied it would gradually come to dominate other needs. An action or activity could also satisfy two or more needs simultaneously - a specific job might satisfy needs for security and for affiliation. The actions required to satisfy a particular need depended on the subjective interpretation people make of their environment and delusions due to paranoiac thinking are possible. The environment may also be conducive or counter productive to the satisfaction of a persons needs. For example, if one was surrounded by hostile or overly-critical people then this could hamper the need to achieve. There was thus a constant and highly-complex interaction between the satisfaction of peoples needs and the environmental conditions surrounding them. It was possible to determine the ways in which people could be expected to behave in a specific situation based on previous observations of them. It was also possible to determine what peoples basic needs or dominant concerns were as these were formed during their early childhood. According to Murray people were products of their past and, following Freud, theorised that they went through five developmental stages which shaped their personalities in the form of complexes. These complexes were determined © 1997 Allan Sztab

298

according to the individuals unique experiences and the associations they attached to them. Cultural influences played a large role in their determination. These five stages or complexes were the claustral which was determined in the womb, the others being determined according to the pleasures relating to the activities of sucking (oral), defecation (anal), urination (urethral), and playing with the genitals (castration). Murray and a colleague developed The Thematic Apperception Test or TAT which is still widely used today as a method of exploring a persons subconscious mind. The test consists of a series of individual pictures which are non-related and intentionally ambiguous and a person is required to provide each one with a story having a past, present and future. The theory is that people project their subconscious desires into their stories from which it is possible to determine whether they are active or passive and how they react to obstacles in their environment.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

299

A5 B.F. Skinner According to Skinner human behaviour was determined by environmental circumstances that could be measured objectively. He regarded humans as nothing other than complex machines whose behaviours were fully determined and could therefore be understood and controlled without looking into their minds or genetic makeup. Human behaviour was learnt and specific behaviours became habituated or extinguished depending on their frequency and whether they were met with rewards or punishment. Each time a behaviour was performed in response to a stimulus the greater the chance of it becoming habituated and vice versa. To prevent the extinction of a specific behaviour it was only necessary to provide encouragement at infrequent intervals. Thus to encourage a child to study it was only necessary to praise the child at random in order for it to continue doing so. Skinner also observed that certain behaviours, like chanting when gambling, were linked to the favourable outcome of chance events even though there was no causal link between them. He called such behaviour superstition and noted that it wasn't necessary for an individual to learn superstition from their own experiences, as much of it is passed down from one generation to the next in the form of myth, custom and magic. Skinner developed a technique called shaping whereby a desired response could be obtained by first rewarding a seemingly unrelated response and then modifying the reward in a step-by-step fashion according to responses that were progressively closer to the desired response. Praising and encouraging a child's first utterances is a similar process which assists in shaping their language until it is perfected. Skinner distinguished between primary and secondary reinforcers. A primary reinforcer was something like food which was directly related to hunger, while a secondary reinforcer could be almost anything provided that an association has been formed between it and a primary reinforcer. In his famous experiment Ivan Pavlov made a dog to salivate at the sound of a bell and in this instance the bell was a secondary reinforcer that was associated with the primary reinforcer of © 1997 Allan Sztab

300

food. It is in this way that money achieves its motivating powers because it is associated with the satisfaction of many other drives. There are many 'social reinforcers' which people actively seek from others such as attention, approval and submission. Once a behaviour has become habituated it will also become generalised and its performance will tend to occur in similar situations. In this way learning to tip waiters in your home town in order to get good service is likely to be applied in out-of-town restaurants too, when it isn't likely they will ever be frequented again. Pain or discomfort are negative reinforcers and people will tend to avoid the actions or objects associated with them. 1 Avoidance actions will also be generalised and applied to other situations that are similar in nature. According to Skinner a once-off punishment will not modify socially unacceptable behaviour permanently. To achieve permanence, acceptable behaviours need to be continually reinforced by a system of rewards or positive reinforcements in order for them to become habituated.

1

Refer to appendix C for fear, phobias and paranoia.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

301

A6 Albert Bandura According to Bandura it was from observing behaviours, such as those of aggression and achievement, that led theorists to conclude that they were the result of a drive or motive. It was clear that there were other forces at work, such as the environment, and this was exploited by behaviourists but they never considered the capability of the human mind to determine behaviour. Behaviour for Bandura is an interaction between drives, environment and the reasoning mind. Whereas Skinner would say that a response was reinforced or extinguished by its reward or punishment, Bandura recognised that certain actions were also conditioned by their anticipated results. Humans had the capacity to imagine and plan new responses as well as being able to learn from the experiences of others. In addition, humans were able to regulate and control their environment. Because people learnt by observation it was natural that they would learn from those whose company they kept and from role models considered worthy of emulation. The media exploit this idea to its fullest potential by using various celebrities to endorse their products. A person learns by memorising visual representations and/or verbal descriptions of skills or behaviours which are then practised until they are perfected. To gain the freedom to travel around at will, a teenager could learn how to drive a motor vehicle by observing the driving skills and techniques of experienced drivers. Although learning was enhanced if there was an incentive or reward for doing so this wasn't necessary, and learning occurs without a person even being consciously aware of it. The mere observation of the consequences of other peoples behaviours in terms of the rewards or punishments that accompanied them had a great influence on conditioning the likely response of the observer if ever placed in a similar situation. People regulated and evaluated their behaviour in terms of self-imposed standards and it was common for people to reward or punish themselves for behaviours that exceeded or fell short of their expectations. People tended to refrain from rewarding themselves undeservedly as this might result in self© 1997 Allan Sztab

302

inflicted guilt feelings. According to Bandura people punish themselves to put an end to their own 'thought-created anguish' concerning past actions but there was always the danger that these punishments could be taken to extremes which could lead to a state of depression and a loss of self-esteem.1 This was evident in people who refused to adjust their standards to account for things like the effects of ageing on their reaction speed and agility. Conversely, people can have a high sense of self-esteem only because their standards are low. The more people evaluate themselves positively the greater their chances of continuing to do so and the converse applies as well. By observing one's own behaviour in detail it is possible to determine the stimuli or situations that give rise to a particular response or behaviour. Once these are known an effort can be made either to modify the environment or to avoid certain situations so as to reinforce or extinguish a particular response. This approach is used successfully by people who wish to give up smoking, reduce their weight, or even to study or work more efficiently. A system of self-imposed rewards and punishments can also be employed. Changes to the environment can be as simple as re-decorating a room in order to make it more pleasant to work or study in. Dieters claim that eating off a smaller plate helps because smaller portions look bigger on a small plate. (There has always been much controversy about the effects on viewers of violence in television and movie shows, and there is no doubt that people are affected by what they observe. However, there is a large gap between having learnt how to do something and actually doing it.)

1

Refer to guilt as a punishment in itself in section 59.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

303

A7 Gordon Allport According to Allport people possess definite traits or dispositions to behave in a specific way. They may have a specific action in response to a variety of different stimuli. These traits or dispositions are interrelated and together form a persons personality. If a trait is so marked that it characterises almost all of a persons behaviour it is referred to as a cardinal trait. For example a hermit might have the cardinal trait of reclusiveness. Most people could be characterised by a small number of specific traits or attributes which is particularly evident if one was asked to describe a person in terms of their over-riding traits or characteristics. However, unless a person was known quiet well their specific traits would be less noticeable and other less dominant or secondary traits used to describe them. Members of a specific cultural group would tend to share many of the same traits. All of a persons traits were unified to form a unique and consistent whole which could be described as their soul. A persons soul was formed over seven stages during which a child develops a sense of : self-awareness of its body; a sense of self-identity or 'I' that is known by the name 'Jack' or 'Brian'; a sense of self-esteem or self-worth during which it attempts to do everything for itself; a sense of jealous possessiveness of things that are external to itself; a sense of self-image depending on how other people view them (good, bad, naughty); a sense of rationality that they can think for themselves; and the striving for a goal in life. The cornerstone of Allports theory is that people develop continually and their past wasn't as important when compared to their present conditions. Furthermore, the complexity of motivation could best be understood from a persons long range goals which revealed their present motivations and not their past one's. However, he never explained how a childhood motive could change or evolve from childhood through to adulthood or what the relationship between © 1997 Allan Sztab

304

childhood experiences and their motivations as adults was. He found that there was no definition or grounds upon which to decide whether a person was healthy or not and the fact that a person never consulted a therapist might only indicate that they were not overly neurotic or couldn't afford one. He set about providing some guidelines as to what constituted 'positive mental health'. According to Allport there were some definite characteristics of mental health. A person should be able to see beyond their own needs so as to be able to care about others. With some family and close friends a person should be able to love on a level that was free from jealousy or possessiveness. A person should have a positive sense of self-esteem and self-control sufficient to distinguish between the alternative views and values of others and real threats. On maturing a person should obtain a sense of realism concerning their needs and abilities. A healthy adult was one who managed to develop a consistent world-view that would provide the foundations for both their values and meaning in life.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

305

A8 George Kelly According to Kelly human behaviour is relative and depends on how people interpret things. There is thus no such thing as absolute objectivity or truth and it is always possible for people to modify their perceptions. People are like scientists in that they attempt to understand the world around them and continually develop hypotheses or theories in an attempt to anticipate and understand it. This desire is so strong that it is normal for people to judge and form opinions of others within minutes of meeting them. This might be done by stereotyping people in terms of one's own prejudices. People test their assumptions and if they prove successful, regard this as proof of their original assumption. There is a tendency in people to view things in terms of black and white so that other people might appear to be good or bad with nothing inbetween.1 It is also sometimes the case that a person chooses to see things only in terms of black or white by concluding that there is no such thing as a good person. While it might seem better to keep an open mind and not make snap judgements there is very often simply not enough time in which to do so, and both snap judgements and being open to change were important. In Kelly's experience it makes no difference in practice whether a person has a motive for their actions or not and he claimed that people were active simply because they are alive. They behave in a particular fashion because of the way they anticipate the future. If risk-taking proved beneficial in the past for a person then the chances were good that it would form part of their future behaviour. Confidence lends itself to the acceptance and willingness to embrace change while insecurity leads to attempts to define things rigidly.2 A persons unique experiences provide the basis for their judgements and they will be reluctant to change opinions that would call for a radical re-assessment of their beliefs. People tend to maintain a hierarchical system of beliefs which are ranked in order of importance as much of their behaviour is based on them. Minor beliefs could be changed without much resistance but changes to major parts of their 1

Refer to the influence of Zarathustra on opposite forces of light and dark in section 31

and the language trap of thinking in terms of black and white in appendix E. 2

Refer to the attempt by Socrates to define concepts such as right in section 38.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

306

belief system are difficult and alternate views which would necessitate such a change could be viewed as a threat. People therefore tended to acquire new beliefs which fit in with or clarify their existing system of beliefs. A relationship with others is normally based on a mutual understanding of each others views and expectations. According to Kelly if a persons system of beliefs are unable to deal with a particular situation then they will become anxious. If they deviated from their system they would suffer guilt, and if they were reluctant to accept a belief as being incorrect they could display hostility in order to get others to respond to their beliefs. A healthy person is one who is open to change and actually encourages it while being able to interact with people who hold different views. An unhealthy person is one who persists with their beliefs despite their practical failure.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

307

A9 Abraham Maslow According to Maslow the most distinguishing feature of humans was their creative ability. While other psychologists focused on the neurotic or sick human he decided to concentrate on the healthy person. He believed that human desires were structured in a hierarchy with the lower needs at the bottom and the higher needs at the top. Once a person had satisfied the lower needs they would then desire to fulfil their higher order needs. A person could also at any time fall back to satisfy needs that were lower on the scale due to changes in their personal circumstances. On the lowest level are those basic needs a person must fulfil in order to live, which included food, water, air, sex, sleep and shelter. We have seen in section 5 how strong these needs can be. Once these needs have been met a person will move onto the next higher level of desire being that for safety or security which is obtained in a stable, predictable environment. This desire is the driving force behind many religious and philosophical systems of belief.1 The next level of desires is that for love or belongingness. Maslow saw the urgency of this need in the high degree of alienation faced by many Americans due to their everincreasing mobility which tended to make them insensitive to community needs and to form shallow and meaningless relationships.2 For Maslow love and affection was more than mere sex and involved trust and mutual respect. The next higher desire was that for self-esteem and recognition. Self-esteem stemmed from confidence and ability whilst recognition originated from the acknowledgement or appreciation of others. Deficiencies could lead to feelings of inferiority and worthlessness. There was also the danger that false praise from others could easily set a person up for an unpleasant fall when reality intruded. The next higher desire was that for self-actualisation which meant the realisation of a persons full potential. To Maslow this drive towards selfactualisation was inborn but not everyone could achieve it because there were many obstacles in their path. The most serious obstacle was never knowing what this potential was because they had been raised and educated according to social 1

Refer to the philosophy of Plato in section 39. Refer to the concept of alienation in section 64 and the lack of community spirit in section 67. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

308

stereotypes such as that relating to one's gender. There was also the tendency to avoid the risk that change necessitates by opting for the safety and security of the familiar or what is already known. According to Maslow those who had achieved self-realisation tended to take an objective view of reality and were more accepting of uncertainty, their own strengths and weaknesses, and those of humanity in general. They were not concerned with trivia and while being more open to change could nevertheless tolerate and respect social customs and laws while at the same time living according to their own moral standards. They tended to be more autonomous, creative and appreciative of the smaller pleasures in life. Although they formed deeper relationships with friends they also attracted admirers or disciples. Despite all these positive traits Maslow never regarded actualisers as a super race because they were first and foremost human and also had their fair share of depression, bursts of anger, irrationality, guilt and prejudices.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

309

A10 Carl Rogers According to Rogers human behaviour was determined according to the unique experiences and the meanings given to them by each individual. From many years of experience in dealing with people he came to believe that humans were essentially good and could live peacefully with each other. He was aware of the human capability for destruction but attributed these actions to be defensive or borne of fear. His view was therefore fundamentally opposed to the Christian view that humans were evil and born in sin. He saw the same interpretation in the theory of Freud who claimed that without social control human actions would be destructive and harmful. For Rogers the guiding force behind all forms of life was that towards selfactualisation and all the other needs of the organism were regarded as forming part of this force.1 Thus the satisfaction of physiological requirements, such as those for food and water, were necessary to maintain the organism in order for it to achieve self-actualisation. Human behaviour was determined according to the values placed on them. Those behaviours that were satisfying would be positively valued whilst those that were unpleasant would be negatively valued. Research has shown that value preferences for a specific food or foods are based on a subconscious assessment of nutritional requirements.2 Because all individuals interpreted their unique experiences differently their concept of reality would also be unique. For this reason it was only possible to understand people by getting to know their internal frame of orientation of life and the experiences that lay behind them. Once this was known it would be possible to explain their behaviour. Where Rogers departed from theorists such as Freud was his insistence that it wasn't necessary to trace a persons childhood history because it was the way that they perceived and interpreted things today and how they saw their future that was of major importance. To him the stages of a childs development were less significant than the way they were evaluated by others, as this was instrumental in the formation of their self-image or selfworth. People developed value preferences based on their own experiences and 1 2

Refer to Maslow's hierarchy of needs in appendix A9. Refer to the error of freedom of will in section 58.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

310

the evaluations of others. People needed to be admired, loved and well-regarded by people who played an important part in their lives but there was the danger that these needs would only be satisfied conditionally. 1 For example, parents might offer rewards to children in order to encourage behaviour that would please them. Thus a persons self-esteem may become dependent on complying with the demands of others while ignoring the discovery and fulfillment of their own needs and ultimately their self-actualisation. For this reason Rogers stressed the importance of giving and receiving unconditional love, respect and admiration in order that people could develop their own valuation preferences. At the same time he made it clear that it was also possible to combine discipline and control by avoiding the use of admonishments such as 'bad girl' or 'bad boy', which are negative personal evaluations in favour of providing sound reasons why particular behaviours shouldn't be performed and why punishments would be administered if they were. According to Rogers people develop a self-concept based on their experiences and perceptions, and behave in accordance with it. Behaviours which conflicted with it would be resisted. However, if conflicting behaviours were undertaken people would experience anxiety and confusion which they might not even be consciously aware of. There were two methods of defence - to rationalise their behaviour if they were aware of it, or by purposefully ignoring or denying what they were doing. There were varying degrees in which people could infringe their self-concept and serious infringements could lead to high level of anxiety and confusion sufficient to seek out professional help. In severe cases a persons self-concept might be shattered and their defences could become inoperable. In such cases they might become psychotic and behave irrationally, and even engage in activities which they denied were part of their self-concept. For example, if a persons self-concept forbade sex with prostitutes and their self-concept was shattered they might visit a brothel.

1

Refer to the role of conditional love in the formation of character concerns in section 10, its role in manipulation in section 63 and obeying as an obstacle to freedom in section 65. © 1997 Allan Sztab

311

According to Rogers people who were 'fully functioning' and achieving selfactualisation would be able to accept their feelings and control their impulses; be able to enjoy each moment by realising its uniqueness; behave according to their own valuations; have the power and confidence to accept responsibility for their actions; and be able to live creatively and constructively amidst change.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

312

APPENDIX B THE RISE OF THE GREAT RELIGIONS B1 Hinduism At roughly the same time as the Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilisations developed, the Indus civilisation arose alongside the Indus river of North West India. These civilisations used to trade with each other from as early as 2,500BC. The Indus civilisation had the skills to write and used bronze and copper, but scholars are still unable to read their script so not much is known about their history or religious development. From the little that is known it appears that they were more concerned with material comforts than religion. Their capital cities of Harappa and Mohenjo-daro were well planned and uniformly constructed, suggesting the existence of a centralised and unified administration. There is evidence that the cities were rebuilt many times, possibly as a result of recurrent flood damage. That they were rebuilt to inferior standards suggests that a steady decline in social standards had set in, probably due to political upheavals. Unlike the Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilisations that managed to survive invasions, the Indus civilisation was eventually destroyed by Aryan invaders from the hill country to their North and West. These Aryan invaders shared a common ancestry with those Aryans who migrated down into Iran. The Aryans were pastoralists or wandering nomads whose chieftains were called 'rajahs'. They worshipped many nature gods, and being nomads used to worship and make sacrifices in the open. In other respects the civilisation that now took root in the fertile valleys of the Indus and later the Ganges rivers would experience the same adaptations that the older Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilisations had experienced before them. There was the change from nomadic pastoralists to settled agriculturists, the struggle for power and wealth between rival tribes leading to the establishment of powerful kingdoms, the mixing of cultures with diverse customs, and the worship of different gods - changes that would have a marked affect on their religious development. © 1997 Allan Sztab

313

The religious beliefs, traditions and mythology of the Aryans were called Veda or 'knowledge' and was transmitted from generation to generation by the spoken word. This accounts for the fact that hardly any of their history exists. Over time it is also likely that much of the original Veda was lost. To facilitate the memorising of the Veda they devised ways of combining words to form verses or 'mantras' and collections of verses into hymns. The composition of these mantras continued throughout the period of their settlement and through numerous contacts with the varied traditions of the original inhabitants of these valleys. These contacts and the influence they exerted placed considerable strain on the old Vedic religion. It was only after settling in the Indus and later the Ganges valleys that the oral traditions, mythology and history of the Veda, were first collected and edited to form a collection or samhita of over 1,000 hymns to the gods, known as the Rig-Veda. The Rig-Veda was composed over many centuries by many different priests, poets and philosophers, and reflects much that was certainly derived from non-Aryan or pre-Aryan cultures. Priests came from the priestly Brahman class while the poets and philosophers were mainly from the Kshatriyas or warrior class. As such, the Rig-Veda was mostly a reflection of their aristocratic views. In addition to the Rig-Veda there are three other Vedic commentaries that contain much of the same material. These are the Yajur-Veda or 'knowledge of ritual', the Sama-Veda or 'knowledge of chants', and the Atharva-Veda or 'knowledge given by the sage Atharva'. The oldest parts of each book are the Mantras or hymns to the gods. Indra, the god of the thunderbolt who takes the wealth of those who don't perform sacrifice and gives it to those who do, has over 250 hymns dedicated to him. Agni, the god of fire who brings burnt sacrifices to the gods is mentioned in over 200 hymns. Other gods of particular interest are Varuna, the god of the universe who forgives sins, Shiva, the god of destruction, death, rebirth and fertility, and Vishnu, the god who comes to earth at various times and in various forms to assist humans in their struggles. The Brahmans were a select class of priests who, because the Vedas were communicated orally, were active in their interpretation. Their interpretation therefore reflected the views of a privileged class and encouraged much © 1997 Allan Sztab

314

speculation. The Vedas were originally suited to the unsettled life of wandering nomads and a settled life now provided the opportunity for fresh interpretation and commentary which formed the second oldest part of the Vedas known as the 'Brahmanas' or 'instructions for ritual and sacrifice'. The Brahmanas divided society into four castes. Not surprisingly, the first were the priests or Brahmans. They were followed by the chieftains and warriors or Kshatriyas, the merchants and commoners or Vaisyas, and lastly, the dark skinned non-Aryans or Sudras who were looked down on and became their slaves and servants. The Brahmanas also claimed that by the correct performance of rituals a person might obtain reincarnation. The Brahmans claimed special privileges for themselves, such as exemption from the common law and taxation, and expected gifts and fees for their services in performing rituals. The power and feeling of superiority that a class system gives has always proved attractive throughout the ages and has the effect of keeping old cultural groupings together, especially during periods when people of different cultures began to mix and form permanent settlements. The Sudras or non-Aryans included the native Dravidians, who were possibly early settlers from the Caspian Sea area. Membership of castes was hereditary but over the years new castes were formed while some were split into two. Today there are many castes with some of them merely representing occupational groupings. Allegiance to one's caste would make allegiance to a government or state in later years far more difficult than was the case elsewhere. Ultimately it would be religion that provided the common ground that binds Indian society.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

315

B2 Rival interpretations of the Veda The interpretation of the Vedas by the Brahman priests didn't go unchallenged and rival schools sprung up in the forests where pupils hoped to achieve religious enlightenment by ascetic practices which prevent the body from satisfying one or more of its normal desires such as those for food, excitement, sex or human contact. The warm climate of the Ganges Valley made such practices possible. Another device used was the attempt to alter or escape from self-consciousness by means of meditation. In meditation the attempt is made to suspend all thinking, or the linking of meanings by way of language. If this could be achieved the person would reduce the extent of their consciousness. It is likely that the establishment of kingdoms with bureaucratic administrations led to social upheavals. The loss of one's status, power and prestige were prime motivating factors for the philosophising that now took place. Another factor could have been the strain of adapting to an urban life. Many of the pupils were from noble families and many were intellectuals. The forests provided a secure retreat for all of them, where they could philosophise about the mysteries of life. These schools sought to give a fresh and philosophical interpretation to the Vedas and are known as the Upanishads, which form the third part of the Vedas. While the rest of the Vedas were intended for the worship of many gods, the Upanishads now proposed the existence of only one reality - the god Brahman. Brahman is sexless, eternal, infinite and timeless. Other beings were merely expressions of Brahman and all else in this world was an illusion due to ignorance. They also prescribed meditation, ascetic practices and self discipline as a means of worship. The aim is to achieve knowledge of the illusions of this world. Such knowledge leads to 'enlightenment' and the unity of Atman, the human soul or breath, with Brahman, the spiritual reality behind all sensory experiences. Once unified again the endless cycle of birth, death and re-birth would cease. The obstacle for Atman to overcome is Karma, or our moral shortcomings, acts or sins. Karma is inherited from our previous lives due to reincarnation and therefore confines us to a material body. Once again we find © 1997 Allan Sztab

316

the notion of being trapped in a body due to some sin or action which requires enlightenment to escape, without any explanation as to the sin or action.1 The Upanishads were absorbed by the Brahmans who modified it so that the ascetic pursuit would take place towards the end of a mans natural life, when it would undoubtedly be far easier and considerably more practical, as most of the passions of youth would now have waned. It was this ongoing process of religious development that gave rise to the varied and complex practices that make up what is today known as Hinduism. Later, for possibly the same motivations that led to the creation of the Upanishads, two men who were already practising ascetics would make rival interpretations of the Upanishads, which in turn would be modified to form the religions of Buddhism and Jainism, elements of which would also be absorbed into the Hindu religious system. The doctrine of the Vedas has always intrigued scholars for ages due to the emergence of a pessimistic outlook on life, which seemed to grow more marked as Hinduism developed, despite the fact that the Aryan conquerors were fierce warriors who had an essentially optimistic outlook. In the oldest part of the RigVeda (the hymns that describe the early beliefs of the Aryan invaders) no reference can be found concerning ascetic practices at all, so it is possible that this was an influence derived from the original inhabitants of the land. The doctrine that now emerged from the Upanishads was intended as an explanation for the fact that some humans were better off than others whether this was due to the class they were born into or their position and wealth in society. These inequalities were probably fresh in the minds of their philosopher creators who had escaped to their forest retreats. Human suffering was now seen as justified due to the inheritance of bad Karma, as was the inferior position of certain members of the caste system and that of women. It wasn't totally pessimistic in that salvation or enlightenment was possible. In the Code of Manu, the caste divisions are seen as being the word of god. The first three classes, the Brahman, Kshatriyas and Vaishvas are said to be 'second born' while the fourth class, the Sudras, are said to be 'first 1

Refer to the Christian doctrine of Paul in section 30.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

317

born'. The duty of the Sudras are to serve and obey the 'second born' and thus move from life to life up the caste hierarchy until they come to the rank of Brahman. The 'Mahabharata', a poem that evolved over a long period and consists of over 220,000 lines, relates the stories of great Indian heroes, myths and gods. It tells the story of two prominent Indian families which culminates in the battle of Kurukshetra some time between 850BC and 650BC. Before this battle the warrior Arjuna speaks to his charioteer Krishna about the problems of life and the folly of war. This dialogue forms the most famous section, known as the 'Bhagavad-Gita'. Krishna claims to be the reincarnation of Vishnu and has come to help him. The dialogue is said to be a reflection of the philosophy of the Upanishads and the basic teaching is to do the duties of one's caste religiously to avoid Karma. The Gita also specifies a number of ways to achieve salvation asceticism, meditation, performing the duties of one's caste, or the devotion and worship of the gods. Another way to achieve enlightenment is 'the way of knowledge' which refers to one of the six systems of philosophy, all based on different interpretations of the Vedas but all accepting the concept of rebirth and salvation, liberation or enlightenment as a means of escaping therefrom - Samkhya, Yoga, Mimamsa, Vedanta, Vaisheshika and Nyana. The Samkhya system was influenced by the development of Buddhism and Jainism, and is essentially atheistic as it doesn't recognise any personal gods. The Yoga (to yoke or join) system, with its many variations, basically follows the same views but stresses mental and spiritual development, especially meditation, to purge the mind of desires such as lust, anger and greed. The Vedanta system believes there is only one god and true essence that exists Brahman. Everything else is an illusion due to ignorance with liberation coming through knowledge. Hinduism thus offers many ways to achieve salvation, and although there are thousands of gods to worship, two of the most popular gods are Shiva and Vishnu. Shiva, the god of destruction, death and disease, is also the god of fertility as death comes before rebirth. The consort of Shiva is the goddess Kali who is considered even more terrifying. A cult known as the thugs used to © 1997 Allan Sztab

318

strangle victims while calling out for Kali to witness the struggle. Vishnu, the god of love and forgiveness is supposed to have already appeared nine times on earth to help humankind. His tenth appearance is supposed to herald the end of the world.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

319

B3 Buddhism and Jainism Buddhism and Jainism were stricter, purist interpretations of the Upanishads. One of the followers of Buddhism was the emperor of India, Asoka. He was convinced that Buddhism was for the masses and attempted to spread it to other countries in similar fashion to Christian missionaries. It was lucky for Buddhism that he did because it was eventually absorbed into Hinduism on the pretext that Buddha was a reincarnation of Vishnu. Buddhism then ceased to exist in India. Buddhism was founded by a man called Siddhartha Gautama who was born about 560BC, while Jainism was founded by Mahavira who was born about 599BC. What is known about 'the enlightened one' or Buddha, is constructed from the legends and stories of his disciples. Because their lives were so similar it is possible that the details of Mahavira were taken from Buddhism. Both were born to parents of the Kshatriya or warrior caste and came from wealthy homes. Both were dissatisfied with their lives and turned to extreme ascetic practices in the hope of finding personal salvation. Both rejected all present forms of religion with their many gods and developed faiths that had much in common. Salvation was now open to all castes without the necessity of priests or sacrifices. The doctrine of reincarnation was adopted and escape from the circle of birth, death and rebirth was possible through correct knowledge and conduct. In all other respects they differ markedly. Jainism divides the world into soul, which is life, and matter which is uncreated, evil and eternal. It is the flesh as matter that corrupts the soul and can only be released by ascetic practices undertaken by the individual. As such no god, if any exists at all, can help. It is activities or change of any sort that build up Karma, and the ideal would be to do nothing at all. Monks take five vows while householders or more liberal followers attempt to follow the first three of them only. These are: 1. the non-injury of all forms of life; 2. to speak the truth; 3. not to steal; 4. not to have sex and 5. not to have any attachments to or love for anything. The objective is to free the soul from matter. It isn't clear what happens to the soul once it is free from the endless cycle of birth, death and rebirth. © 1997 Allan Sztab

320

By contrast, Buddha practised an extreme form of asceticism for five years but failed to find personal salvation through it. Finally, after a long period of meditation he found salvation and went on to derive a unique conception of human nature. Buddha rejected the existence of a soul or Atman. According to Buddha it is our sensations of the world, together with our memory and instincts, that produced our consciousness. Because our instincts were ignorant of the true nature of the world they caused us to desire things which led to suffering.1 Accordingly, salvation lay in freeing ourselves from our instincts and thereby from our desires. His doctrine is summarised as 'The Four Noble Truths' - 1) existence means suffering; 2) the cause of suffering is our desire or craving for things; 3) suffering can be stopped by eliminating desires and 4); this can be achieved by following the eight-fold path of truth by avoiding extremes of indulgence and ascetic practices. This eight-fold path is that of right conduct, speech, aspirations, livelihood, view, effort, mindfulness and meditation. The objective of meditation is to achieve an altered state of consciousness. It is up to the individual to pursue a path that leads to their personal salvation or Nirvana, and thereby freedom from the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. Having achieved Nirvana they would be called arahat which means a worthy or respectable person. As Buddha rejected the idea of a soul or Atman it isn't clear precisely what is meant by Nirvana. Nirvana may be a state that exists only while still alive. Some have interpreted it as meaning annihilation at death, while others have claimed that Nirvana is the same as Atman. In fact, indecision as to the true teaching of Buddha has been the hallmark of the disciples of Buddha ever since his death. It was clear that not everyone could leave society and detach themselves completely, so the idea arose that achieving merit in this life would ensure a better lot in the next life.

1

Refer to the similar role of ignorance in Plato's philosophy in section 39 and in Hinduism in appendix B1. © 1997 Allan Sztab

321

Interpretations have been made concerning literally 'every conceivable aspect of existence'. For example, 'coming into existence' has been explained 'in a way curiously reminiscent of the Christian theory of the transmission of Original Sin, that the passage from one existence to another was actually effected in conception and not by physical birth - through the union of mother and father at the seasonal concourse, the seed of consciousness, fettered by enjoyment and arising here or there, produces in the mother's womb the germ of mind and body.' (Brandon) Today there are hundreds of different Buddhist sects but most of them fall into one of two major camps - Theravada Buddhism, 'the tradition of the elders', or as it is known to the opposing camp, 'the smaller vehicle', and Mahayana Buddhism or 'the larger vehicle'. Theravada Buddhism is the more conservative of the Buddhist sects and is supposed to follow closely the original teachings of the Buddha. Accordingly, each person is free to find their own salvation, and teachings, scriptures or other gods are of little importance in this quest. This simplicity has never had a wide appeal and it has only a small following. In contrast, Mahayana Buddhism opened the way for the introduction of many new principles, based on the assumption that these had been taught by Buddha to some of his followers in secret. In addition, Buddha is believed to be one of many saviours that have come and will continue to come to earth to assist humanity in their quest for salvation. Around these saviours temples could now be built and ritual systems of worship and sacrifice developed. The gods of other religions could now be absorbed into Buddhism on the pretext that they were also saviours. This widened its appeal and was a major factor in its spread into China, Korea, Japan, Mongolia and Tibet, amongst others. Probably one of the most well-known sects of Buddhism in the western world is that of the meditation or intuitive sect which takes its name from the Japanese word for meditation - Zen. According to Zen Buddhism enlightenment is achieved by the individual through meditation or by accident. No scriptures, temples or anything else is required to do so. Rational thought or reason is to be distrusted and their riddles are specially designed to be non-sensical. Riddles such as 'You have heard the sound of the clapping of two hands, but what is the sound of one hand © 1997 Allan Sztab

322

clapping?' are designed so as to confuse reason in order that one can by meditation go beyond reason where enlightenment will be found. Art that is created by accident and not by design or reason is also valued more highly. What is meant by enlightenment and beyond reason are not clearly explained. By contrast, the Tendai sect recommend the pursuit of rational thought and the study of scriptures in addition to meditation. Tibetan Buddhism or Tantric Buddhism makes uses of words, phrases and hymns which are supposed to achieve something similar to that of religious incantations. The phrase 'Om mani padmi hum', for example, is supposed to 'ward off evil and bring good fortune'. Its monastic followers are known as lamas or 'the superior one's'. It has two main orders, the Red Hat school which is the smaller of the two, and the Yellow Hat school whose leader is known as the Dalai Lama. On the death of the Dalai a search is made for his reincarnation in a child who appears to have his characteristics.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

323

B4 Islam The Arabian religion known as Islam was founded by Muhammed who was born in Mecca about 570AD and belonged to the Hashim clan of the Quraysh tribe. In Arabia at the time of his birth many different gods and spirits were worshipped and blood sacrifices made in the ancient hope of gaining practical advantages in this lifetime - benefits such as the fertility of the soil, women and animals, protection from disease and good fortune in war. Archaeological evidence indicates that their dead were carefully buried with artefacts such as cups and jewellery, which suggests a primitive belief in an afterlife that was available to everyone. This afterlife was probably in the tomb and could be influenced by the mortuary rituals and offerings made by relatives. The Meccans used to worship a meteoric stone that, according to legend, fell to earth during the time of Adam and Eve. The temple built around it was called the Kaaba and the legend claims it was built by Abraham, the first Jewish family head, and his son Ishmael. Pilgrims used to travel to Mecca to worship at this shrine and a truce was made between rival tribes for a few months each year so they could do so in safety. It was Muhammeds tribe that used to control the Kaaba. Muhammed was illiterate and when young became a caravan worker. Later he became a camel driver for his wealthy wife Khadijah. Wealth and travel gave him the opportunity of meeting Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians, and the time to delve into religious questions. Many desert tribes were Jews who had probably fled from Jerusalem during the revolution that led to their defeat at the hands of the Romans in 70AD. What impressed him in particular was that the Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians all had one god who promised prosperity in this life and immortality hereafter in return for obedience, and a day of judgement when evil disbelievers would be punished. Zarathustra also encouraged his followers to fight if necessary against the Lie and the evil practices of other religions. Muhammed feared for the fate of his people on the final day of judgement. He used to take his family to a mountain cave in the hills not far from Mecca during the hottest month of Ramadan where he used to meditate. It was here while in a © 1997 Allan Sztab

324

trance-like state that he first claimed to have heard the voice of the Judaic angel Gabriel bringing him a message from Allah, the god of his people. He was now about forty years old and over a period of time the words he heard while in these trances were memorised and then dictated by him to his secretary, Zayd, who committed them to writing. These Islamic scriptures are called the Quran which is organised into chapters called surahs. His own words and interpretations spoken when not in a trance are known as the Hadith or tradition of the prophet Muhammed. There was only one god and Muhammed claimed that although other religions knew him by other names they were actually referring to the same god - Allah. He was a prophet of Allah as was Abraham, Moses and Jesus before him, but unlike them his inspiration was a complete and final one. His duty was to spread the word of the supreme god Allah, but he encountered much resistance as he forbade the worship of other gods and idols such as those at the Kaaba, around which a lucrative trade had grown. The people he was preaching to had also adopted a fatalistic attitude to life and displayed a healthy scepticism not unlike that expressed by the Egyptians over 2,500 years ago. According to Muhammed they believed it was time that destroyed people, and in response to his preaching requested that he produce their deceased fathers to prove that there was life after death. Those who refused to be persuaded by Muhammed led him to conclude that Allah had created both those who would follow and were therefore good, and those who wouldn't and were therefore evil. The plight of each person, including the term of their lives, was predestined by Allah. This scheme of predestination presents a logical conflict with his promises of forgiveness and salvation offered to people if they became followers by their own choice. In addition, by levying punishments for not following his laws he implied that people were responsible for their actions. It is a question that is still debated today. What is clear is his belief in the inferiority of women who must be obedient to men. In this he seems to have accepted the traditional Semitic evaluation of women. His preaching created many enemies but they fell short of killing him for fear of retribution from his tribe. His followers were mainly from

© 1997 Allan Sztab

325

the young and poorer classes and some of them sought exile in Abyssinia and were known as Muslims or submitters. In 622AD he and his followers travelled to Medina to settle a dispute between feuding Arab farmers. This journey was known as the Hegira or migration. There were many Jewish people in Medina but his expectation that they would recognise him as a messenger of their god were soon dashed. However, they were accepted as one clan amongst others. Here he continued to preach and make rules for his followers who soon grew in number. These rules or the way of Islam, which all good Muslims must obey, are known as 'the five pillars of Islam'. 1) Repetition as often as possible of the creed of Islam known as the Shahadah - 'There is no God but Allah; Muhammed is the messenger of Allah'. 2) Prayers five times daily: at dawn, midday, mid-afternoon, sunset, and at nightfall. 3) Fasting during the daylight for the month of Ramadan. 4) Almsgiving or the sharing of their possessions with the poor. 5) The pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in a persons life. To be a follower of Allah was to serve without question and this meant obedience to his messenger Muhammed. Medina was an oasis and his followers had no means of supporting themselves. Despite almsgiving there wasn't enough to go around so Muhammed sent his followers to raid caravans passing on their way to and from Mecca. The Meccans were divided and they failed to prevent the Muslims from harassing them; but these raids led to even larger battles. The religious conviction of the Muslims and their hostility towards non-believers made them a force to be reckoned with; and the Jewish non-believing farmers of Medina were evicted and their land given to Muslims whose following now began to grow, a growth which soon required territorial expansion beyond Medina. Soon another Jewish oasis was conquered but this time only a tribute was levied and distributed amongst the followers, a practice that would serve as a model for future expansion. With every new conquest the Muslim following grew. Their © 1997 Allan Sztab

326

victories in battle led followers to believe that god really was on their side. The intolerance of other religions that required their conquest attracted those who were more interested in the rewards of conquest; this militancy would prove to be a decisive factor in the rapid spread of Islam, especially amongst the Nomadic tribes. In addition, Islam was attractive as it was a universal religion open to anyone and it was simple to follow 'the five pillars of Islam'. Raiding and plundering caravans had the blessing of Muhammed. Muslim soldiers who fought and were killed in a religious holy war against nonbelievers, a war that is known as a Jihad, were promised an immediate entrance to paradise. This call to war was heard often during the expansion of Islam. A special reward for dead soldiers in paradise accords with Muhammeds vision of an afterlife that requires a physical body, as did his description of hell. His conception of a soul was that of a force which lived with the body. For those who never died in a holy war there would be a long unconscious sleep until the day of Judgement when their body would be resurrected and the faithful rewarded. This simple belief wasn't good enough for some later believers who enhanced it to include the idea that a person remained conscious in their graves, where they were visited by two angels who interrogated them about their religious faith. After numerous successes Muhammed entered Mecca with 10,000 armed men in 630AD, and was unopposed. He destroyed all the idols at the Kaaba with the exception of the black stone. Territorial expansion continued and before Muhammeds death in 632AD much of the Arabian peninsula was conquered and united. After his death a friend of his, Abu Bakr, was recognised as his first deputy or caliph, but spiritual guidance was left to the Quran. Not everyone accepted this and it was necessary for Muhammeds followers from Medina to fight against rebel tribes to achieve unity once more. After Abu Bakr's death in 634AD his successor was Omar, under whose command the first Moslem conquests outside of Arabia occurred; Syria fell in 636, Iraq in 637, Mesopotamia in 641, Egypt in 642 and Iran in 651. In time the whole Middle East was conquered and Islam moved into India, China and Spain. The spread into North Africa was slower since the Muslims never had any prohibition © 1997 Allan Sztab

327

against slavery, and the conversion to Islam of potential slaves wasn't good for the slave trade. Since the slave trade ended towards the end of the nineteenth century Islamic missionaries proved to be very successful. (Their spread as a warring religion didn't go unopposed and the Christian Crusades were organised to recover Holy Land. They commenced in 1096 and drew to a close in 1291 having failed to achieve this objective.) Eighty five percent of Muslims belong to the orthodox Sunnis who follow many different schools of thought that vary according to the weight placed on the Quran and the traditions and interpretations of Muslims known as the Hadith. The Shiites are the second largest sect and are mainly found in Iran and Iraq. They are followers of Ali, the fourth caliph, whose descendants or Imams are recognised as their leaders. The last descendant never left an heir and is expected to return once more as a messiah known as the Mahdi. Within the Shiites there are many sects; the most notorious were known as the Assassins whose members would smoke hashish and murder selected victims for promises of paradise. Today Islam is one of the largest and fastest-growing religions in the world.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

328

B5 Confucianism And Taoism The ancient Chinese worshipped many gods and spirits who were believed to control the universe. They held a belief in some form of existence beyond the grave, which is indicated by the discovery of tombs containing the bodies of servants or slaves. The aged were sometimes buried within their homes and their planting seeds were stored in the same location. The fertility of the earth in bringing forth new life probably led to the idea that the newly-born were reincarnations of these dead ancestors. The ancient Chinese were always impressed by the balance of forces in the universe and the unity of heaven and earth. They referred to these forces as the yin and yang. The yin represented the feminine force of the earth, darkness, coolness, fertility, irrationality and the material soul or kwei. The yang represented the male force of the heavens, light, warmth, brightness, rationality and the heavenly breath or soul, the shen. Neither of these two forces was better than the other and harmony existed when they were in balance. The Chinese never felt the need for spiritual salvation or a divine saviour, and their concerns for future survival were seen in terms of that of their families and not of individuals. All humans were a unity of these two forces and differed from other animals because they were capable of creating a perfect balance or equilibrium between the forces of the heaven and earth. This was the conception of Chinese religion up until the feudal period of the Chou dynasty in the eleventh century BC. The Chou had overthrown the Shang but never had the power to rule that the Sheng had. To gain support for their rule they claimed that it was the immoral behaviour of the Shang that had led to their overthrow. Furthermore, they claimed that the Chou had been appointed by the supreme god Shang Ti, and it was their duty to rule according to moral and virtuous principles. Political power was divided amongst a number of Chinese states ruled by princes. However, during the sixth century BC this balance of power was disrupted due to the territorial expansion of the frontier states who managed to conquer and absorb barbarian tribes around them. Four of these

© 1997 Allan Sztab

329

frontier states now vied for power and some of the smaller states were repeatedly invaded. During this period of political upheaval and turmoil the ancestors were no longer respected - traditional morality and aristocratic rule had broken down. This chaos provided fertile ground for fresh ideas and it was out of this turmoil that the philosophy of Lao-tzu and Confucius arose. It was particularly a nostalgia for the past - an imperial past where the rulers were appointed by the Heavens that inspired the philosopher Confucius: 'I for my part am not one of those who have innate knowledge. I am simply one who loves the past and who is diligent in investigating it'. In contrast the Taoists wanted as small a government as possible. The teachings of both Confucius and Lao-tzu were philosophical as opposed to religious and it is only because their teachings were later modified by their followers to include religious concepts that their philosophies have been considered here.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

330

B6 Confucianism Confucius was born in 551BC to an aristocratic family who had lost their wealth and status due to the political upheavals of this time. He was brought up in humble circumstances by his widowed mother. During his twenties he began teaching and his main interest was in good and equitable government. His teachings were compiled after his death over a long period of time by different authors so it is hard to tell precisely what his teachings were. They are known as The Analects of Confucius which means 'The classics of the Way and its power and virtue'. He often used the word Tao which means a road, path or way of doing something, particularly in the spheres of morality, conduct and truth. To him the Way was that of the ancients who had respect for their parents and elders. The word Li refers to the correct rituals that people were to perform in society, especially to those above and below one's social standing. In the times of kingship the Li or rituals of the king were especially significant as their correct performance was believed to have a direct bearing on the welfare of the state, the fertility of its women, crops and animals. A good government for Confucius was that of a feudal monarchy. It was the duty of the ruler to bring out the good which was inherent in everyone by setting an example. He never deemed it necessary to offer rewards or punishments. In this he departed from the Christian belief that people are born in sin. He rejected violence or force in favour of ruling by the observance of rituals and 'giving way to others' in accordance with traditional values. It was bad government that caused people to behave badly. Nobility was acquired from education and proper conduct, not by birth. A true gentleman practised what he preached, kept his word, was unbiased, genuine, courteous, well-versed in ritual and took the time to discover what was right as opposed to what paid. Being good brought happiness. He placed more emphasis on the concerns of this life as opposed to spiritual matters and the ultimate destiny of the individual. Confucius never managed to get appointed to a ministerial position where he could put his principles into practice. Confucians were eventually appointed as administers of the civil service during the Han dynasty (202BC) and their © 1997 Allan Sztab

331

influence permeated government well into the twentieth century AD. In 136BC they were entrusted with the education of the young, and the teachings of Confucius continued up until 1905AD. His followers modified his doctrine over the years, and the most famous of his disciples was Mencius, whose teachings reinforced those of Confucius and are found in the Book of Mencius. The disciple Hsun Tsu held a different view - humans were evil and hated each other by nature but could be trained to be good. He believed strongly in ritual practice as a device to teach people. The Han rulers revered Confucius and built shrines for him and offered sacrifices. By 600AD some considered him a god, but no popular religion arose around him and today he is considered as the ancestor of the Chinese scholar.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

332

B7 Taoism Not much is known about Lao-tzu and according to legend he was born about fifty years earlier than Confucius. His teachings are contained in his book the Tao Te Ching which is only second in terms of influence to that of the Confucian Analects. It was reputedly written in the sixth century BC but developed into its present form around the third century BC, possibly as a criticism directed against the Confucians. The Taoists held the belief in an impersonal force or First Cause of the universe, which united everything in it. Humans were therefore a part of nature and it was civilisation that had led them astray and was the cause of all their problems. Accordingly, all the trappings of civilisation were to be shunned in favour of a simple and humble life. This meant the rejection of fame, glory and the attempt to raise oneself above others. Life itself was deemed to be the most precious possession of all and there was a great concern for the quality of life. Death was seen as a natural part of nature. It was only later that the quest for extending life took root amongst a group of Taoists. Initially they attempted to achieve longevity through diet and fasting, but this desire soon led to the quest for immortality by mystical or magical practices, then by sacrifices to the gods and the establishment of temples. Taoism became a very popular religion and in time borrowed much from Buddhism. It was still practised in China as late as the twentieth century.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

333

APPENDIX C A GUIDE TO FEARS, PHOBIA AND PARANOIA Fear is a response to a perceived threat that is associated with pain. Fear, like most emotions, prepares the body for action. The natural response to fear is to fight or flee. Conscious physical manifestations of fear range from a simple dryness in the mouth and a sinking feeling in the stomach to crying and the urge to urinate or defecate. Subconscious manifestations include fatigue, depression, loss of appetite, insomnia and nightmares. Pain provides us with a powerful motivation for learning how to avoid it. Driving carefully is rewarded by avoiding potentially painful accidents. Similarly, studying diligently serves as a reward by reducing the fear of failing an examination. Fear is learnt by avoiding any stimulus that is associated with discomfort or pain whether or not the stimulus is the actual cause of it, as long as it is believed or perceived to be. Fear is believed to arise in three ways - by being innate, dependent on physical maturity and by learning. Because humans are primarily learning animals we have very few innate fears. There seems to be incentives to avoid unfamiliar objects, depths, startling sounds or rapid movements - a fear of snakes is believed to develop because of their movement. Our learning experiences modify the specific reactions to these incentives and certain phobias are related to our age. Fear of loud noises is common in infants, followed by a fear of strangers in older infants, animals at pre-school age and open spaces and social situations between adolescence and middle age. In many cases phobias are the result of new social situations encountered as the person develops. Such a change might be a move from a primary school to a secondary school, while others are related to mechanisms which become prominent after puberty. Phobias are common in children but subside as quickly as they arise and most may be considered normal. Common fears are those of darkness, storms and of school which could be related to separation anxiety. The most common phobia in adults is agoraphobia which refers to a class of fears such as that of crowds, open spaces, going out alone or various combinations of these. Interestingly, phobias occur twice as often in women as they do in men. © 1997 Allan Sztab

334

Fear can be learnt from the experiences of others and while this is advantageous it also carries with it the ever-present danger of being deceived. Language makes possible complex thoughts or ideas which are represented or symbolised by words. The mere use of some words such as 'fire' or 'police' are enough to create fear.1 Humans are also unique in their use of symbols and the sight of a Nazi Swastika painted on a wall could easily create fear within a community. Cultural factors also play a role and fears vary from age to age - in the 16th century fears of demons and witches were common while today we have fears of cancer and nuclear war. A phobia is an uncontrollable, illogical fear created by an over-reaction to a specific situation or thing. Some external things or objects, such as a mouse, can be avoided. However, when the phobia relates to something internal such as disease and death they cannot be avoided and this places the body under stress. Obsessive phobias are not directed towards any object or situation but towards the imagined consequences arising from them. These obsessions may concern fears of killing people, swallowing pins or being contaminated by animals; but the fears are seldom warranted. Obsessive avoidance rituals, such as the repeated washing of hands, are often undertaken. Avoidance will obviously be successful but the underlying fear will always remain. However, avoidance might be inconvenient and could interfere with the normal activities of a persons life. What has really happened in all these types of fear is that a person has become over-sensitised to a particular stimulus, whether this is external or internal. Any action that appears to reduce the discomfort will be repeated whether or not the action actually reduces it, as long as it is believed or perceived to do so. A feeling of helplessness intensifies the fear while eating, anger, sexual arousal, the presence of a friend or familiar surroundings helps to alleviate it. Sudden traumas or accidents can lead to a phobia of the object involved such as a fear of dogs after a dog attack and a fear of motor vehicles after a motor accident. Sometimes a phobia can develop as a result of one trauma or event whilst others require a number of events. The avoidance actions are not easy to 1

Refer to the tricks and traps of language in appendix E.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

335

extinguish even when the stimulus isn't present. For example, if a person avoids cinemas because of a fear of crowds they will tend to do so even when they are empty. Sometimes the cause of a fear or phobia is more subtle and relates to certain actions that create feelings of guilt. Guilt feelings arise after an action because it conflicts with a personal belief.1 While it isn't necessary to know how a belief arose in order to extinguish it a phobia might be related to a past action or trauma that has been repressed and is no longer capable of being recalled.2 Paranoiac actions are those actions prompted by an unwarranted fear and worry about what is perceived to be an imminent threat, persecution, or vulnerability. These fears are generally directed towards something that we care about or fear losing. This could be a job, lover, an image we have of ourselves, or some aspect of our frame of orientation, expectations, or system of beliefs.3 The motivation could be related to what we perceive to be our requirements for power, prestige, self-esteem or popularity and to satisfy them we are easily tempted to entertain superstitious fears, and taboos which open us to manipulation.4 In some cases fears, phobias and paranoia are extremely difficult to eradicate. By a process known as desensitisation a person can expose themselves to fearcreating stimuli in graduated measures while exposing themselves to another pleasurable stimulus in the hope of creating an association between the pleasurable and fear-creating stimuli.5 Avoidance actions are much easier to extinguish if they can become associated with pleasure. If a person is able to relax properly then they can attempt to imagine or visualise fear-producing stimuli in graduations from the least to the most feared and in this manner build up the courage to face the phobic situation in reality. The use of drugs to relax isn't effective as this sometimes lessens the desensitisation process. Closely allied to this is a technique called logotherapy where people are urged to create anxious states and anxious situations, imaginary or real, until they cease to have any effect. In other cases people are asked to tolerate and accept anxiety until 1

Refer to section 59 with respect to guilt and punishment. Refer to section 9 and appendix A1 for the defence mechanism of repression. 3 Refer to the consistency incentive in section 7. 4 Refer to section 63 for the role of the desires in manipulation and to section 66 for the desires as an obstacle to our freedom. 5 Refer to the role of learning and association in section 6. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

336

they resign themselves to their fear of losing someone or something etc. It also helps phobics to watch other people in phobic situations in order to gain the courage to attempt the real situation themselves. Prevention is always better than cure and where possible any potential phobia or fear should be treated before it has time to develop. After a motor vehicle accident a person should attempt to drive again as soon as possible before the fear can be enhanced by the person repeating the drama in their minds and then reinforcing it by avoiding similar situations. The same would apply to any situation where anxiety arises even where the reason for it isn't known.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

337

APPENDIX D A GUIDE TO MODIFYING BEHAVIOURS AND CONTROLLING DESIRES The philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche was one of the pioneers into the inner workings of the human mind and in one aphorism he captured the essential methods of modifying behaviours and controlling desires. Aphorism 109 from his book 'Daybreak - Thoughts on the prejudices of morality' is quoted here in full. For the word drive we could equally insert the words desire, habit, or addiction. 'I find no more than six essentially different methods of combating the vehemence of a drive. First, one can avoid opportunities for gratification of the drive, and through long and ever longer periods of non-gratification weaken it and make it wither away. Then, one can impose upon oneself strict regularity in its gratification: by thus imposing a rule upon the drive itself and enclosing its ebb and flood within firm time-boundaries, one has then gained intervals during which one is no longer troubled by it - and from there one can perhaps go over to the first method. Thirdly, one can deliberately give oneself over to the wild and unrestrained gratification of a drive in order to generate disgust with it and with disgust to acquire a power over the drive: always supposing one does not do like the rider who rode his horse to death and broke his own neck in the process - which, unfortunately, is the rule when this method is attempted. Fourthly, there is the intellectual artifice of associating its gratification in general so firmly with some very painful thought that, after a little practise, the thought of its gratification is itself at once felt as very painful (as, for example, when the Christian accustoms himself to associating the proximity and mockery of the Devil with sexual enjoyment or everlasting punishment in Hell with a murder for revenge, or even when he thinks merely of the contempt which those he most respects would feel for him if he, for example, stole money; or, as many have done a hundred times, a person sets against a violent desire to commit suicide a vision of the grief and self-reproach of his friends and relations and therewith keeps himself suspended in life:henceforth these ideas within him succeed one another as cause and effect). © 1997 Allan Sztab

338

The same method is also being employed when a man's pride, as for example in the case of Lord Byron or Napoleon, rises up and feels the domination of his whole bearing and the ordering of his reason by a single affect as an affront: from where there then arises the habit and desire to tyrannise over the drive and make it as it were gnash its teeth. ('I refuse to be the slave of any appetite', Byron wrote in his diary.) Fifthly, one brings about a dislocation of one's quanta of strength by imposing on oneself a particularly difficult and strenuous labour, or by deliberately subjecting oneself to a new stimulus and pleasure and thus directing one's thoughts and plays of physical forces into other channels. It comes to the same thing if one for the time being favours another drive, gives it ample opportunity for gratification and thus makes it squander that energy otherwise available to the drive which through its vehemence has grown burdensome. Some few will no doubt also understand how to keep in check the individual drive that wanted to play the master by giving all the other drives he knows of a temporary encouragement and festival and letting them eat up all the food the tyrant wants to have for himself alone. Finally, sixth: he who can endure it and finds it reasonable to weaken and depress his entire bodily and physical organisation will naturally thereby also attain the goal of weakening an individual violent drive: as he does, for example, who, like the ascetic, starves his sensuality and thereby also starves and ruins his vigour and not seldom his reason as well. Thus: avoiding opportunities, implanting regularity into the drive, engendering satiety and disgust with it and associating it with a painful idea (such as that of disgrace, evil consequences or offended pride), then dislocation of forces and finally a general weakening and exhaustion - these are the six methods: that one desires to combat the vehemence of a drive at all, however, does not stand within our own power; nor does the choice of any particular method; nor does the success or failure of this method. What is clearly the case is that in this entire procedure our intellect is only the blind instrument of another drive which is a rival of the drive whose vehemence is tormenting us: whether it be the drive to restfulness, or the fear of disgrace and other evil © 1997 Allan Sztab

339

consequences, or love. While 'we' believe we are complaining about the vehemence of a drive, at bottom it is one drive which is complaining about another; that is to say: for us to become aware that we are suffering from the vehemence of a drive presupposes the existence of another equally vehement or even more vehement drive, and that a struggle is in prospect in which our intellect is going to have to take sides.' We can only control our desires or modify our behaviours provided we have the opposing desire to do so. We need to consider those actions or behaviours which are now available to us in terms of the new set of beliefs and obligations we have forged for ourselves.1 To create a new future with a clear conscience we should attempt to put the past to rest. We need to heal any emotional wounds which could still be affecting us both on a conscious and subconscious level. We may still be suffering from guilt feelings and we can now review the past based on those moral obligations which we have now accepted. If we still have any guilt feelings towards other people for dishonouring any moral obligations that we had towards them then we can ask them for forgiveness. More importantly, once we have accepted that we too don't have an unrestricted freedom of will we can forgive ourselves. The same applies to other people, and if we harbour any anger or resentment towards others for their actions towards us then we can forgive them as well. While there is no possibility of changing the past it may nevertheless be possible to make certain amends such as the repayment of any outstanding debts. In some cases bringing up the past could do further harm and it might be inadvisable to do so e.g. the admission of previously unknown discretion's to a former spouse, present spouse or employer. We are habituated to our old or customary ways of behaving and we tend to perform them subconsciously so it is important to try and maintain a constant awareness of them. All the specific stimuli, situations and associations that trigger them should be identified. In the case of those behaviours that are repeated frequently there will be many activities or situations that have become associated with them and it is effective to plan ahead for any stimuli or associations that we might encounter in future situations such as 1

Refer to section 65 and the determination of obstacles to our freedom.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

340

seasonal activities or vacations. We have to overcome the habitual response to each stimulus in order to break the association between them. The more stimuli there are the longer it will take and the longer we will have to maintain a conscious awareness of them. Thus in the case of habits like smoking and drinking, which have extremely high numbers of associations, ex-smokers and drinkers must remain on their guard for years after breaking the habit. However, what this implies is that we shouldn't attempt to modify our behavioural responses simultaneously unless we are prepared to devote the majority of our conscious awareness towards doing so. This is simply not possible and the lack of success that will follow is sure to lead to despondency. It helps considerably if we develop new behavioural responses that in effect take the place of our old one's so that over time we will become habituated to them and thereby reduce the level of conscious awareness that is required. We must find alternative actions or behaviours that will allow us to satisfy our desires in a manner that is more acceptable to ourselves and that won't result in further guilt feelings or in the acceptance of unnecessary obligations. Bottling up our desires doesn't remove them and in many cases only makes them more persistent. We must find new outlets for them. To ward off an urge to perform a particular action a suitable distraction or non-related action could be substituted which might range from the taking of a slow, deep breath to the playing of sport or any other form of physical activity such as going for a walk or having a swim. In many cases we can make major improvements simply by doing nothing. Resisting the urge to do something can often demonstrate the unworthiness of a fear, belief or expectation, and this leads to the development of selfconfidence and self-reliance. This demonstration is made more effective by looking back on the futility of our past actions. Doing nothing means not projecting a false image of ourselves or we are likely to develop an obligation to support it; not harbouring unrealistic expectations concerning other people or things as this can easily lead to disappointment; not asking for reassurance from others regarding our appearance or sexual prowess or we will intensify our personal fears; not seeking reasons for chance events which are beyond our © 1997 Allan Sztab

341

control; not making hasty accusations, judgements or impulsive actions without thinking critically of their repercussions both now and in the future. We should adopt a positive attitude to criticism and whether we perceive it as an attack or not the urge to counter attack should be resisted. We should welcome feedback from others as we could be making changes that have an impact on relationships that we value. It is particularly positive feedback that serves to encourage our efforts even more. We should listen to constructive criticism carefully as we cannot always see things objectively when our emotions are involved. We have become so used to rationalising our actions that the objective criticism of others is invaluable in pointing this out. The moment we respond to criticism with anger or counter-criticism we lose all sense of objectivity and fair play. Sometimes all it takes to lose a confidant or destroy a relationship is one unfair judgement. On the other hand some people will be determined to resist our efforts to change and might even attempt to induce us to continue with our old habits out of spite. People who put us down or who try to saddle us with guilt should be avoided whenever possible. They might see our new-found independence as a change to the status quo or even as a direct threat to their authority over us. We should strive to keep the company of energetic and positive people whom we feel comfortable with. Every time we manage to successfully control a desire or channel an impulse into a more acceptable response we reinforce the belief that underlies it and take one step closer towards habituating ourselves to it. Change takes time and if we suffer a minor setback we should avoid self-recrimination. Any failings along the way should rather serve to strengthen our resolve to do better in future. As we learn more about our emotions and desires and the beliefs or fears that underlie them, it will become easier for us to identify the same behaviours in others and to empathise with and understand them. Seeing others behaving or speaking in the same way that we used to can also help reinforce our commitment to change, while the visual picture of someone behaving unreasonably makes it far easier to abhor the same habits in ourselves. We should achieve the changes we desire by breaking them down into small easily-achievable steps. The success we have with every small step we take will © 1997 Allan Sztab

342

give us a sense of accomplishment and a boost to our self-confidence. We should always reserve the right to change our minds at any time and this will make it easier to take well calculated risks. Many of the things we secretly desire mightn't bring us the pleasure we anticipated and vice versa, and only our experience of them will tell. However, if we don't try we will never know.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

343

APPENDIX E A BRIEF GUIDE TO SOME TRICKS AND TRAPS OF LANGUAGE Language is a tool of the emotions and is capable of conveying these emotions to others. The tone of voice, facial expressions and gestures that accompany words are all stimuli that need to be interpreted. Emotive words like good, bad, ugly, obstinate, foolhardy, stupid and bigot, convey the opinions, judgements, attitudes and beliefs of the speaker which may or may not be true. Besides expressing the attitudes and beliefs of the speaker the use of emotive words conveys little factual information so we should remove them from all arguments in order to enable us to concentrate purely on the facts. This is largely the reason that scientific language has been stripped of all emotive words. Emotive words complicate our language and might make it more difficult for others to understand us and for us to understand them. As with any repetitious behaviour the more we use emotive words the more we reinforce the belief that underlies them until they become an integral part of our thinking - they become habits of thought. By listening carefully to what we say and how we say it we can uncover many of our own beliefs and prejudices and learn how to detect them in the speech of others. The language we use conveys information about us. Often this information is available merely by our identification with a particular group or by the company we keep and is the primary reason why it makes sense to find out as much as possible about an audience or person before addressing them. If our beliefs are known we may be told things that we are sure to agree with. This has the tendency to lull us into a false sense of security and makes us vulnerable to accepting suggestions or conclusions without critically appraising them. When we reveal to others the things that we desire or fear, we have revealed our weaknesses and this makes it far easier for someone to manipulate, hurt or irritate us. This is the reason that the people closest to us are often the one's who hurt us most. If our desires are known they make us vulnerable to accepting the first suggestion that might satisfy them. This can be used dishonestly by someone who will suggest a course of action that might not be the best alternative available to us. © 1997 Allan Sztab

344

Because emotive words are able to evoke emotions in others they are commonly used by politicians and marketers whose prime objective is to persuade. They succeed by offering us specific rewards that are geared towards satisfying our desires. When it comes to elections politicians will promise different rewards to different interest groups based on whatever they believe will be most desired by them. If a politician addresses businessmen they might offer them tax incentives or import protection, but when addressing the needy will offer them increased welfare - two promises which are very likely contradictory. What makes it particularly easy to detect contradictions in the speech of politicians is that they always attempt to do everything for everyone. Sometimes they might even attempt to make such contradictory statements in the same sentence or speech. Not surprisingly their actions are often contradictory and they seldom admit to their errors or inconsistencies. Of course what politicians are gambling on is the poor memories of voters and when their promises are not carried out it is of course too late. By the time the next elections arrive they will find other desires with which to fade old memories and raise false hopes of future rewards once again.1 Like all marketing one of the most effective means of persuasion is repetition, and politicians often repeat statements in a confident and insistent manner. Repetition is usually accompanied by slight variation. For example, 'We will fight for our country. We will fight for our homes. We will fight for our loved one's. We will fight for what we have worked for'. What is actually being said is 'We will fight for the things we value' yet virtually the same words are repeated four times and could easily be extended. Naturally this is something politicians are highly proficient at doing and they can sometimes ramble on for hours without saying much at all. By learning some of the tricks and traps of language we can prevent being persuaded by faulty arguments which are presented to us either innocently or with ill intent. Any argument is only as good as the reasons we have to support it and this in turn depends on the information and theories we have available at any given time. For any argument to be sound the statements or premises that support it must provide good grounds for the conclusion, be logically acceptable and 1

Refer to the promise of rewards and manipulation in section 63.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

345

include all the relevant information. Because the rational mind is a tool of the emotions we can easily be led to distort reality and accept fallacious reasoning if we have a strong desire to believe that something is true. This is nothing other than wishful thinking. We may also accept fallacious reasoning if our knowledge on a particular subject is exceeded, presented in a complex fashion, or confused with a valid reasoning process. Sometimes we might accept a false principle, such as a roulette player who believes that if a number comes up more than once in a row the probability of it coming up again is diminished - the fact is that the probability never changes irrespective of how many times it has come up before. Generally speaking, most of the errors made in arguments breach one or more of these requirements, so it is useful to keep them in mind when confronted with an argument as the following simple examples illustrate: 1. 'If you see a falling star you will have good luck. Mr A saw a falling star. Therefore Mr A will have good luck'. There is no evidence that seeing a falling star will bring anyone luck so the first premise or statement is unacceptable - it is based purely on wishful thinking or speculation. 2. 'If it rains then the garden will get wet. The garden is wet. Therefore it rained'. From the premises alone we cannot validly deduce that it rained, because the gardener might have watered it. This is therefore a logically invalid deduction because the premise only says 'If it rains then the garden will get wet' and not 'If the garden is wet then it rained'. 3. 'Mr A prayed and was cured. Mr B, C, & D prayed and were cured. Therefore if anyone prays they will be cured'. The argument is false because it doesn't mention the fact that Mr F, G and H prayed and weren't cured. Wishful thinking is nothing other than imagination or speculation driven by a desire. Whenever strong desires are combined with our ability to imagine, we can easily be persuaded or convinced we are facing non-existent or imaginary things, threats, or situations.1 Example 1 above is typical of wishful thinking albeit of the harmless variety. All the fallacies, tricks and traps that are mentioned here apply equally well to ourselves as they do to others. Whenever 1

Refer to the error of imaginary and false causes in section 58 and manipulation in section 63. © 1997 Allan Sztab

346

we are in an emotional state we are most vulnerable and under these conditions it pays to avoid making any hasty decisions or judgements. The most important requirement for convincing language is that of consistency which is a natural incentive that is part of our genetic inheritance program. Anything that is inconsistent or contradicts what we have come to expect represents a potential threat to our survival. We feel comfortable with the old and familiar and the desire for consistency is so strong that in order to make things familiar many people submit to the temptation of holding mystical and superstitious beliefs. On a personal level, the more people think they know us, the more familiar we seem to them to be. From the information we have provided them they determine whether they can trust us or not and develop an expectation of how we are to behave, especially if we have promised them something or made any particular claims.1 Any statements or actions we make that are inconsistent or contradict any other statements or actions we have made could make people nervous and distrustful and in the majority of cases this mistrust is justified. It is terribly difficult to defend inconsistent statements and/or actions. When we deal with other people our reputation for being a person of integrity is of deep concern to us. Being known as someone who is inconsistent is tantamount to being known as someone who cannot be trusted, someone who lacks integrity. It is therefore highly beneficial to us to be as consistent and non-contradictory as possible. As with any behaviour the more we practice it the more we enforce it until it becomes habituated. It is common for many people to continue giving tips for service in areas, cities, or countries they are unlikely ever to frequent again. They do so not because they have given it any thought but out of habit, and this has the benefit of ensuring consistent behaviour. It is important to note that as with obligations, we reserve the right to change our minds but if we do so we should inform or make it clear to all those concerned that we have done so, even if this means admitting that we were mistaken over a particular issue or action. When we do so we avoid being accused of inconsistency. Being aware of inconsistencies in our speech and/or

1

Refer to the consistency incentive in section 7 and the re-negotiation of obligations we have accepted that are too onerous. © 1997 Allan Sztab

347

actions makes us more likely to spot the inconsistencies and contradictions in the language and actions of others. One of the most common fallacies in argumentation is that of generalisations. We saw earlier that scientific observations lead to a special class of generalisations called inductions. However, they have the social consensus of the scientific community and their results may be detected by the senses.1 A common fallacy in language is to make generalisations based on limited observations and these usually take the form 'All x's are liars' or 'All x's are murderers' where x usually represents a nation, race, religious or other group of people. Without valid scientific research such statements are meaningless and impossible to prove.2 What they do is to give us a distorted sense of reality which is reinforced when we repeat them in our speech. What is usually meant is 'Some x's are liars' or 'Some x's are murderers' which is far closer to the truth. Whenever we hear an argument with the word 'all' we should replace it with the word 'some'. Sometimes the word 'All' is missing from the statement but is implied in it - for example, 'Men are x', 'Women are x', where x represents some alleged characteristic. In these cases we should add the word 'some'. Defending a generalisation is difficult and should be avoided because all it takes to disprove it is one instance or counter example where it doesn't apply. Some people try to get around a counter example by claiming that it is 'the exception which proves the rule'. However, any exception proves the generalisation is false and not true. Reasoning with generalisations often appears to be logically correct but the conclusions drawn from them are false. They usually take the form: All A's are B, C is a B, therefore, C is an A. For example, All cats are four-legged animals, A dog is a four-legged animal, 1

Refer to socially consistent sensation and the truth in section 32 and the methods of science in section 48. 2 Refer to appendix F for researchers jumping to unfounded conclusions. © 1997 Allan Sztab

348

therefore, a dog is a cat. The fact that two members of a class or group are equal in some respects doesn't allow us to conclude that they are equal in all respects. This applies equally to human beings.1 It is also a fallacy to claim that because each member of a class share something in common that this applies to the entire class or group as a whole eg 'each part of this machine is light, therefore the machine is light'. It is also incorrect to claim that because a class or group of things has a certain property that this property is shared by its individual members eg 'this is a large car so the engine is large'. The temptation to make this error is made even more acute when people use analogies to explain things. Despite the usefulness of analogies in helping people to visualise things in terms they can understand, they can be used to arrive at faulty conclusions. When broken down analogies usually take the form: B is like C. B has properties x and y. C has properties x, y, and z. Therefore B has property z as well. Sometimes analogies are expressed in the form of a metaphor such as 'he is as cold as ice'. If other conclusions are drawn based on this metaphor, such as 'if things get too hot he melts' then it becomes an argument from analogy. The best way to refute an inappropriate analogy is to introduce an instance where it breaks down, or to replace it with another analogy with which it may become easily apparent that it is inappropriate. Words can be used ambiguously in order for us to intentionally draw faulty conclusions based on them. An advertisement making the claim that 'sugar is an essential material for the body' should actually be using the word 'glucose'. It would be false to conclude that table sugar was essential to a persons diet. Words can also be used with two different meanings in the same argument. For example, the name of a country like 'South Africa' could be used to blur the distinction between a government that is in power today and one that was in power during the era of racial discrimination - two very different governments. 1

Refer to Aristotles views on equality in section 40.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

349

We should ask precisely who is meant when somebody says 'in the interests of X' or 'X did this'. We should ask for clarification when people refer to things like 'high temperatures' or 'whiter than white'. Definitions are useful specifically when people choose to see things in absolute or extreme terms such as something that is either black or white and make the assumption that there are no shades in-between. In section 32 we saw this assumption being made in the religious development of the idea of forces of light and dark, good and evil. This assumption is still very common and a person is often regarded as being against something if they aren't for it. By thinking in absolute terms or of opposites such as 'either you are sane or insane' the odds are weighted so heavily in one direction that it seems there is no choice left when in reality there are many states in-between the two extremes. For example, countries of the world cannot be divided into communist or non-communist, pro-west or anti-west, as there may be some that are neutral. We must always consider that there are more possibilities than those presented. Often complicated issues are reduced to slogans that are simple and easy to use but the danger is that the beliefs underlying them are easily accepted by an uncritical audience. During times of war it might be necessary to portray the enemy as 'totally evil' to motivate soldiers on the battlefield. However, in everyday life slogans lead people to making faulty judgements and encourage prejudicial thinking. While it is always possible to define things more accurately we should avoid the temptation to make or be lured into making precise definitions because sometimes this is very difficult.1 It isn't possible to determine how many hairs constitutes a beard. In some cases it is even alleged that because there is no precise dividing line there is no difference. However, because it isn't known how many hairs constitute a beard doesn't mean there is no difference between a beard and a face with 40 hairs on it. We should use words as they are used with their normal everyday meanings and be on the alert for words that are used out of their context.2 Statements such as 'intelligence is a state of mind' are out of context as 'intelligence' is a quality of mind and not a 'state' of mind. An entire statement can be meaningless until it is placed in the correct context. For 1 2

Refer to the failure of Socrates to make any definition of right or wrong. Refer to section 54 for errors of context.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

350

example the question 'what town is closest?' is meaningless without being placed in the context of running out of gasoline while on a trip. Whenever we fail to ask for clarification, definitions, or explanations we allow speakers to gain an unfair advantage over us and in many cases this is their sole objective. When arguing it is important to remain emotionally detached or else we could be tempted by our opponent to react to anger with anger, or to make concessions by appealing to our sense of pity or sympathy. A common trick is to deny the falsity of a statement by changing the meaning of a word. For example, Mr A argues that all Christians are wellbehaved and Mr B then points out a number of people who are Christian but maltreat their spouse and children. Mr A might then attempt to avoid the refutation be claiming that they aren't 'really Christians'. Another common trick is that of circular reasoning which is also known as begging the question. Here the attempt is made to assume something that is being disputed in order to prove it. For example, 'God exists because it says so in the Bible' is circular reasoning because a 'Bible' is by definition a religious scripture that is in turn inspired by God. In a debate over abortion someone who argues that abortion is wrong because a baby shouldn't be made to suffer from the actions of its mother, is using circular reasoning because the word baby assumes that a foetus is already a human being and this is often an important issue in an abortion dispute. A person might attempt to extend or modify our argument in order to make it more difficult to defend. For example an opponent might say 'you ought logically to say that all x's are y if you claim that some x's are y'. They might even attempt to modify their position in order to make it easier to defend and in both cases such tricks should be averted simply by repeating our original position or their original position as the case might be. A person can ask for a 'Yes/No' reply to a question that follows an assertion with the result that either reply confirms the assertion. For example, 'Lowering interest rates will reduce inflation - is this good?' makes a 'Yes' or 'No' reply confirm or deny the assertion that 'Lowering interest rates will reduce inflation'. If the assertion isn't correct then the only remedy is to deny the accuracy of the © 1997 Allan Sztab

351

assertion. Similarly, two or more questions can be asked in one statement and the remedy is to reply to each question individually. A person might attempt to present their position as being a compromise between two extremes in order to take advantage of the tendency people have to accept compromise. However, any point of view can be made to appear as a compromise and the best way to avoid it is to show that our position can also be regarded as a compromise. An opponent might try to weaken an argument by pointing out that some greater evil is more worthy of attention than what is being discussed. However, all this means is that the greater evil should also be addressed. Similar to this is the false reasoning that two wrongs make a right and often opponents will attempt to justify their position or actions based on what other people have done before them. President Nixon attempted to justify illegal phone tapping based on the activities of prior administrations. Wartime atrocities are often justified on this basis but with every case the fact remains that two wrongs only make a greater wrong. A person might attempt to create a diversion in order to evade answering a question. A company spokesman might reply to the allegation that his factory is responsible for polluting a particular river by replying that 'this isn't so because we have the most modern state of the art anti-pollution equipment'. The reply might be true but is irrelevant to the particular accusation. A person could also fasten onto some irrelevant detail in an argument such as the date of a particular event and attempt to give the impression of victory by refuting or correcting it. Another common diversion is known as 'playing the man and not the ball'. Here an opponent might attempt to reduce the argument to one concerning the credentials or qualifications of the debater. This might however be valid if it is of relevance to the argument, as credentials can be faked. A similar diversion is known as the straw man and here a person concentrates their attack on their weakest opponent or on their opponents weakest arguments in order to make their case look good. The straw man diversion often goes hand in hand with the suppression of evidence and an opponent will almost always suppress information that might be harmful to their argument or cause. It is thus always useful to know where their interest lies so that one can read between the lines. © 1997 Allan Sztab

352

Figures are often given to support claims but when they are added up don't make any sense. A disk drive manufacturer might claim that the mean time to failure of their products is 150,000 hours. Dividing this by an average of eight hours in a working day and taking two hundred and twenty working days in a year would give an estimated life expectancy of eighty-five years, which is hardly likely, and not surprisingly the majority of them aren't prepared to guarantee their products for longer than one or two years. Figures like these clearly fail to mention a host of other conditions which have a bearing on the claim. Many manufacturers attempt to justify higher prices for their products by claiming that they are 'produced under hygienic conditions' or 'contain vital minerals and vitamins' when these claims apply equally well to their competitors products. A common trick is for a person to make an appeal to an authority and we might be tempted to accept a statement because of the reputation of such an authority. However, experts often disagree amongst themselves as the various psychological theories in appendix A illustrates. It is often assumed that because a person is an authority in one field their opinion in another unrelated field is equally authoritative while it is at best no more than an intelligent opinion. Sometimes the statements of a well-respected authority or politician are accepted purely out of a sense of loyalty and even in the face of evidence to the contrary. Supporters of president Nixon accepted his innocence in the Watergate affair despite mounting evidence against him. People are also tempted to accept a statement based purely on their identification with a particular group and this fallacy is known as provincialism. For example, many Americans refused to believe that American forces could commit atrocities in Vietnam because 'our boys would never do such things'. Relying on figures of authority for guidance is a means of avoiding personal responsibility and an obstacle to individual freedom. Statistics are figures which when quoted seem authoritative but can be manipulated to show almost anything1 . A common fallacy is that of making faulty comparisons. For example, 'more people have died of x disease today than at any other time in history' could probably be faulty because while the numbers 1

Refer to the eugenic research of Galton in appendix F.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

353

might indeed show an increase it ignores the fact that the population has increased substantially over that period - it would clearly be more appropriate to make use of percentages. Another faulty comparison is made by concluding that because a specific percentage of people using product x develop cancer or some other disease that this percentage applies to all people when no proper comparison with people who don't use the product have been made. Statistics can also be biased because of using population samples that are not indicative of the general population or are so small that they don't permit any conclusions to be made. Sometimes statistics are quoted which give the impression of accuracy. For example, the statement 'there have been 14,523 wars during the last 5,000 years' suggests that some historian has compiled an accurate list of every war over that period which is not true - at best many figures quoted are estimates which could vary substantially depending on who is making them. Sometimes statistics induce us to derive the incorrect conclusions. If a report claimed that the yen had depreciated from $1= 85¥ to $1=125¥ we might calculate the depreciation as (85-125)/85 = -40/85 = -47% and if we did so we would be incorrect. In order to calculate the depreciation we must first calculate how many dollars to a yen at both periods. This would be 1/85 = 0.0118 to 1/125 = 0.0080 and the depreciation (.0118 - .0080)/.0018 =0.0038/0.0018 = 2.11%! (This example courtesy of the Economist(19-26 April 98). When people quote statistics they are prone to drawing false conclusions such as that of attributing false causes1 .. Besides the many superstitions that have had a terrific impact on society there are others which lead to prejudicial thinking, as the following example illustrates: Based on IQ tests during World Wars I and II black servicemen scored lower than white servicemen and this was considered proof that whites are naturally more intelligent than blacks - in other words that there was a causal correlation between a persons race and their intelligence. However, IQ tests ignore many other factors such as environmental conditions which could easily account for the difference. At the same time other evidence of the tests was suppressed that could equally have led to the 1

Refer to the error of imaginary and false causes in section 58. © 1997 Allan Sztab 354

conclusion that both blacks and whites from northern states were more intelligent than whites from southern states. Today both Jewish and Asian people score higher than most Americans on average but no hasty conclusions are being drawn. Finally we come to simple hypocrisy or special pleading where someone will use an argument against an opponent in one set of circumstances but not in others. For example, pay rises for civil servants might be resisted by politicians on the basis that they are inflationary but not when their own pay rises are in question. The best way of getting around this is to get the person to agree to the general principle and then apply it to an instance they have ignored.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

355

Appendix F The Myths Of Racial Prejudice And The Eugenic Experiment The notion of equality and the cry for freedom probably commenced with the exploitation of conquered peoples at the hands of their conquerors. Might is right and laws were imposed and enforced by the strong over the weak. On a more basic level all morality is imposed by the strong over the weak whether the strong are called parents or conquerors, society or government. Since the earliest of times the notion or desire to be treated equally grew in almost direct proportion to the maltreatment suffered at the hands of conquerors. However, the desire for equal treatment fades in comparison with the desire to believe that one nation or class is superior to another. This belief imparts to an individual or nation an immediate boost to their self-esteem and it is only the weak and those with a lack of self-esteem who desire this most of all. Human competition for environmental resources is inevitable and the willingness and ability to kill is natural. People will always agree with experts in the same way that soldiers blindly accept orders to commit atrocities. A very important role that all animals must learn early on is to be able to identify who is friend and who is foe. Not being able to do so would make survival impossible. With many animals the identification mechanisms are fixed within their genetic inheritance program but humans have to learn how to do so from their parents and society. It is with identity that we find the source of most small and largescale conflicts because without being able to identify who the enemy is no large scale conflicts or wars could ever take place.1 It stands to reason that all attempts to promote or maintain group identities are perhaps unwittingly laying the foundations for conflict. Mystical, superstitious and political leaders are at the forefront of these attempts at fashioning and maintaining specific group identities based on things like religious belief, geographic location, language and race. However, it isn't possible to define with any degree of precision exactly who should be included or excluded from membership of any specific group because the definitions are for the most part arbitrary and the exceptions so great and diverse that they don't hold up to close scrutiny. 1

Refer to section 11 and the failure to identify with other humans that removes a fundamental natural barrier towards killing our own kind. © 1997 Allan Sztab

356

It is obvious that some people will be naturally stronger or swifter of foot than others and their natural abilities would be praised by their family or tribe especially if this talent was in some way beneficial to them. A strong man would be better able to protect and a fast runner better able to hunt. Today we can trace the desire to do things progressively better to the consistency incentive, and when combined with competition for natural resources it is easy to perceive how claims to superiority might first have arisen. From the evidence we have it is clear that some tribes or races always considered themselves superior to others and the Hindu Vedas and its interpretation, the Upanishads, were the precursors for the caste system in India which is by far the longest living and most institutionalised form of discrimination known1 . Possibly the greatest tragedy of human history commenced with Plato's interpretation of history as the struggle between different classes. This gave way to the conclusion that some people were superior to others. According to him it was the intellectual class of philosophers who were top of the heap and provided they received the correct education (indoctrination) they would be able to obtain by intuition a knowledge of the perfect 'Ideas'.2 The thought occurred to Plato that if one could breed superior strains of wheat and other crops by selecting and breeding those specimens which displayed sought-after qualities, then the same could be done with humans. He advocated the selective breeding of people according to strict marriage laws, and Plato could probably lay claim to being the first eugenicist. Combined with racial prejudice the popularity of his ideas had its climax in the concentration camps and gas ovens of Auschwitz and Buchenwald less than sixty years ago. Aristotle was the first intellectual supporter off the mark. He declared 'that some men are by nature free, and others slaves; and for the latter, slavery is fitting as well as just. The slave is totally devoid of any faculty of reasoning'. According to him democracy was based on the assumption that because people are equal in some respects they are equal in all respects. Similarly, oligarchy or the rule by few is based on the assumption that because people are different in 1

Unlike their zeal to dismantle Apartheid humanitarians are silent on this issue. Makes one think doesn't it? 2

Refer to Plato in section 39.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

357

some respects they are different in all respects. It is 'the desire of equality, when men think they are equal to others who have more than themselves' that causes revolutionary feelings - an acute and accurate observation that would later be echoed by Karl Marx whose impractical and failed communistic solution was to avoid class conflict by abolishing all classes in favour of one class - the working class. Democracy was resisted by both Plato and Aristotle because democracy permitted everyone's opinion to be considered, and they were of the opinion that some knew better than others. The attempt by supporters of democracy to equate democracy with 'a fair share for all' gives its enemies a stick to beat it with because the attempt to redistribute the income of society to make everyone equal is unfair and can only be done at the expense of anothers freedom. Equality is an enemy of personal freedom and is the prime reason that such attempts must be resisted. It was no doubt the misery of the conquered, or those who were poor, that motivated men like Rousseau to declare that before settled societies, wars and conquest, all people were free and equal before nature errors on both counts and the French Revolution made it abundantly clear that unlimited freedom leads not to freedom but to barbarism. The ongoing democratic attempt to make people equal is one of the greatest dangers facing democracy and is of particular concern to those who appreciate all the other freedoms that only a free society can provide. The idea that people do inherit characteristics from their parents is in principle correct but jumping from a principle to its practical implementation without proper scientific research and evidence is almost destined to a tragic ending. The practical side of eugenics is a lot more complex than even scientists today would care to admit. That it is correct in principle is clear because the susceptibility to certain diseases is without doubt hereditary and many medical tests are conducted in safety and with success in order to avoid them. However, when sound principles are mixed with social prejudices and wishful thinking, great harm can be done not only to valid and much needed genetic research, but to efforts to eliminate prejudice itself. Modern eugenics commenced with the publication in 1865 of a series of articles by Francis Galton which was an attempt to 'investigate the origins of 'natural © 1997 Allan Sztab

358

ability''. He was influenced by Darwin's theory of evolution but it was the heredity of mental characteristics that most interested him. He held the belief that success was hereditary and in a fashion similar to that of Plato he arrived at the conclusion that the professional classes were endowed with 'ability and civic virtue'. He believed it was possible to eliminate the barbarism in people and accelerate the growth in quality of the human race. He began research into the infant science of statistics and tried to deduce or arrive at conclusions based on the correlations (or relationships) between data. This method is widely used by scientists and researchers today but it has the unfortunate tendency of encouraging the reaching of false conclusions - especially if the conclusion is one that a researcher consciously or subconsciously desires.1 For example, because there is a positive correlation between the amount of food a person eats and their weight doesn't mean that people who eat a lot of food will be fat because there are lots of other factors involved such as a persons metabolic rate, the type of food consumed, and the amount and quality of exercise they perform. Positive correlations often lead scientists or those working with statistics, to make wide-sweeping generalisations and to reach unfounded conclusions based on them.2 It was largely through Galton's work that the idea that genius or talent was hereditary gained ground. Over the years this idea attracted many supporters and research sponsors who probably believed that they possessed these highly esteemed qualities. Many unsubstantiated stories abounded and were no doubt believed by many. There were myths that sex during pregnancy sowed the seeds of sensuality in the unborn; that divorcees were more prone to mental disease and sterility; and that 'the characteristics of offspring were shaped by the experiences of the pregnant mother' so that a beautiful child could be produced if a pregnant mother looked for a long time at the picture of a beautiful child! Social workers and other professionals who believed in the heredity of social deficiency soon came to believe that only government intervention could assist them. Eugenicists were particularly concerned with the marriage of the feebleminded, insane and especially those with venereal diseases. Since the 1 2

Refer to the error of imaginary and false causes in section 58. Refer to tricks and traps of language in appendix E.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

359

eighteen eighties officials at state institutions had been calling for a policy of sterilisation, and they found support in prominent politicians such as Theodore Roosevelt in America and Winston Churchill in Britain. Eugenics support came from all quarters of the political spectrum and this soon gave way to the Platonistic idea that certain couplings between people should be encouraged and others discouraged. 'Britain passed no sweeping law preventing the marriage of the mentally deficient, but in America, by 1914, some thirty states had enacted new marriage laws or amended old one's. Three-quarters of the statutes declared voidable the marriages of idiots and of the insane, and the rest restricted marriage among the unfit of various types, including the feebleminded and persons afflicted with venereal disease'. The grounds for most of them were supposedly based on the inability of these people to bind themselves contractually but in the state of Indiana a statute was passed in 1905 that 'forbade the marriage of the mentally deficient, persons having a 'transmissible disease', and habitual drunkards; required a health certificate of all persons released from institutions, and declared void all marriages contracted in another state in an effort to avoid the Indiana law... By the nineteen twenties, many states had enacted measures forcing a delay between licence application and the actual wedding, a policy that eugenicists advocated in the interest of discouraging hasty and illconsidered unions.' (Kevles) Criticism was also levelled against Capitalism on the grounds that it attracted cheap immigrant labourers who were below the standards of society, a view which fomented prejudice against immigrants. In 1924 the Immigration Act was passed to 'keep America for Americans' and the number of immigrants from European countries was limited according to their proportion in the 1890 census. Welfare spending came under the spotlight and the view gained ground that welfare given to the children of incapable adults bred only more 'unemployables, degenerates, and physical and mental weaklings'. It was even believed by many that the cause of prostitution was due to an 'innate eroticism' and not economic circumstances. It is possible that many people were confused © 1997 Allan Sztab

360

between the effects of sterilisation and castration and erroneously believed that a decline in the sex drive would follow from sterilisation. By 1917 sixteen states in America had sterilisation laws that enabled officials to sterilise 'habitual or confirmed criminals, or persons guilty of some particular offence like rape', while the scope of that of Iowa in 1911 was so wide that it included drug addicts and epileptics. In the late 1920's 'Fitter family' contests were held at fairs across America and Britain and contestants had to undergo medical examinations and intelligence tests. At one such fair a chart declared: 'Unfit human traits such as feeblemindedness, epilepsy, criminality, insanity, alcoholism, pauperism and many others run in families and are inherited in exactly the same way as color in guinea pigs'... [an] American Eugenics Society exhibit included a board which... revealed with flashing lights that every fifteen seconds a hundred dollars of your money went for the care of persons with bad heredity, that every forty-eight seconds a mentally deficient person was born in the United States, and that only every seven and a half minutes did the United States enjoy the birth of a 'high grade person.. who will have ability to do creative work and be fit for leadership'... An exhibit placard asked, 'How long are we Americans to be so careful for the pedigree of our pigs and chickens and cattle - and then leave the ancestry of our children to chance or to 'blind' sentiment?' (Kevles) It wasn't long before immoral behaviour, or behaviour that was different to that considered normal, was considered evidence of feeblemindedness and featured explicitly in the grounds for the sterilisation laws themselves. Soon the prophetic fear was expressed that any class of person could be targeted indiscriminately and it was no coincidence that most advocates of sterilisation were always keen to apply it to those of a different class to their own. A study concluded in 1933 even reached the conclusion that the poor were a defective biological class that was perpetuated by marriage. German legislators thanked their American counterparts for showing them the way, and their first sterilisation laws passed in 1933 made sterilisation compulsory for all people who had hereditary disabilities which included physical handicaps that were considered grossly offensive, feeblemindedness, © 1997 Allan Sztab

361

epilepsy, blindness and drug or alcohol addiction. With typical German enthusiasm and efficiency it took only three years for the German authorities to sterilise 'some two hundred and twenty-five thousand people, almost ten times the number so treated in the previous thirty years in America'. Against this background of Platonic ideas, hasty legislation based on dubious scientific research, political fervour, and a large dose of popular prejudice, it is perhaps easier to comprehend how German eugenic law finally came to merge with Nazi racial policy. In 1935 marriages between Germans and people of different race groups were prohibited and in 1939 euthanasia was advocated for all mentally diseased or disabled which included all Jewish people irrespective of their mental status. The horrors of the Nazi holocaust are always capable of being perpetrated as long as racial prejudice and hatred is bred. The classification of the world into four different geographical groups of people was first made by Carolus Linnaeus in 1758 and each group was described according to their colour, humour and posture but without any ranking of superiority. Being a European it was clear that Linnaeus considered Europeans superior, followed by Asians and Americans, and then Africans. It was Johann Friedrich Blumenbach in 1781 whose classifications were most influential. Although based on those of Linnaeus he changed the focus to one of superiority based on his idea of superior beauty. According to him the most beautiful were the light-skinned people found along the southern slopes of the Caucasian mountain range in Russia and hence the name Caucasian. Based on this personal assessment he decided the human species originated in this same area and then spread to other parts of the world. The other groups were seen as Platonic degeneration's or movements away from this idea of beauty, and were designated as Mongolian, Ethiopian, American and Malay. He stressed that racial differences were due to adaptations to differences in climate and habitat. The fact is that 94 percent of the genetic variation between people is random. In addition, the variation isn't necessarily based on racial divisions. This means that a patient who needed an organ transplant could find an even better tissue match with a person from a different racial group. More importantly, there is more © 1997 Allan Sztab

362

genetic variation between people of the same racial group than there is between different racial groups themselves. It is only because a persons colour is so visible that it has become identified with racial prejudice. However, humans possess a mechanism which regulates the amount of pigment that is produced so as to enable us to adapt should environmental conditions require it. It has even been suggested that we have changed colour many times during our evolutionary development. 'The Negritos of the islands of Luzon and Mindanao in the Philippines, for instance, superficially resemble other dark-skinned groups in Africa and Australia. Yet their overall genetic affinities turn out to be far stronger to the lighter-skinned Asian peoples who surround them. This suggests that the Negritos ancestors may once have been lighter and that they independently evolved features that are somewhat reminiscent of black Africans, or that the Asian peoples surrounding them were also once much darker and evolved toward lighter skin - or possibly both.' (Discover - The Science of Race - November 1994) There are many adaptations to environmental conditions which are known. 40 percent of Africans in malaria regions carry the sickle-cell gene which makes them more resistant to the disease. This gene is also common in certain areas of the Arabian Peninsula and southern India. If people were classified according to variations of this gene Swedes would be grouped with the South African Xhosa but not with Italians or Greeks. After the agricultural revolution people began to drink milk long after being weaned and the human body adapted by retaining the lactase enzyme necessary to digest it. If we classified humans by this gene Swedes would be paired with the West African Fulani, while most other African 'blacks' would be paired with the Japanese and American Indians. Due to the climate body shapes vary as well. Eskimos have compact bodies and relatively short arms and legs which reduces the surface area of skin and thereby minimises heat loss. In hot dry areas the problem is how to maximise heat loss and East Africa is host to some of the tallest and most long-limbed people in the

© 1997 Allan Sztab

363

world such as the Dinka's. Despite this there is still variation within any group of people. Body shape has also evolved due to sexual selection. 'Women with very large buttocks are a turn-on, or at least acceptable, to Khoisan (Bushmen) and Andaman men but look freakish to many men from other parts of the world. Bearded and hairy men readily find mates in Europe but fare worse in Southeast Asia. The geographic variation of these traits, however, is as arbitrary as the geographic variation in the colour of a lion's mane.' (Discover - The Science of Race - November 1994) Some genetic characteristics and body variations such as blood groups and fingerprints have no known function at all. Fingerprints vary geographically and the fingerprints of a European tend to have many loops while the aboriginal Australians have many whorls. If we classified people by fingerprints most Europeans and black Africans would form one race, Jews and some Indonesians another, and aboriginal Australians yet another. It used to be thought that skin, hair and eye-colour varied to protect against the sun but this theory doesn't stand up to scrutiny because some people who live in similar climates have different colour skins such as the African blacks and the Southeast Asians. Believers who cling to this theory have proposed about seven other functions of skin colour such as protection against rickets, frostbite, folic acid deficiency, beryllium poisoning, over-heating and over-cooling. It seems that skin, eye and hair colour are better accounted for in terms of the aesthetic role they play in the selection of sexual partners. Based on all the scientific evidence produced thus far it is clear that there is no scientific basis for racial classification. It is known that the chemical serotonin plays an important role in regulating sleep, sexual behaviour, appetite and impulsiveness. Although many factors can influence serotonin levels a persons race isn't one of them. The levels are 20-30 percent lower in men than they are in women. Low levels are thought to be related to violence but it isn't known exactly how. Research offers the prospect of identifying individuals who may be predisposed towards violent behaviour and the social conditions and stimuli that could trigger these responses. However, researchers are finding it very difficult to conduct investigations © 1997 Allan Sztab

364

because of a fear that such investigations will be racially biased. So sensitive are people to racial slurs that the tendency to be misunderstood is very high and has in fact permeated the entire effort to do so. Of course there are very good reasons why such research should be feared especially if one looks back on early eugenic research and legislation. However, the errors of the past should be utilised not to prevent further important research but towards the creation of sufficient safeguards to ensure that research continues without their repetition.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

365

Appendix G The Danger Of Surrendering to Popular Opinion A persons system of beliefs guides their interpretation or perception of events. As a result it isn't possible for anyone to be an impartial observer. We tend to see in things precisely what we want to see in them and the overriding tendency is to judge people and attribute characteristics to them which conforms to our system of beliefs. Accepting the opinions of anyone, be it a doctor, plumber, or street sweeper, without subjecting them to critical appraisal, is to surrender our freedom to them and we do so at our own risk. 1 This willingness to sacrifice our freedom is dangerous and because the role of change in our lives is so important we can learn a lot be taking an example from those professionals who are experts in the field of human behaviour - the psychiatrists, psychotherapists and the many different counsellors who offer guidance on things ranging from marriage and child rearing to that of sex and bereavement. (We may also draw numerous other examples from our own experiences, those of our family and friends, the countless number of law suits that are reported and the multitude of others that don't even get to court.) Every therapist has undertaken some training and many of them believe that they have the knowledge not only to identify what problem a person has but also how to cure it. Some therapists even believe it is possible to accurately identify the course of events that are responsible for their clients problems. These are very big assumptions that are based on the acceptance of one or more theories. In Appendix A we covered briefly the main thrust of some of these theories and in section six and seven we noted that because of the difficulty involved in scientifically measuring the human drives it isn't possible to test them against rival theories with the result that there isn't sufficient research to confirm any one of them. In many cases therapists deal with people who are classified as insane or mentally disturbed and some of them have even been committed to mental hospitals or rehabilitation centres against their will. It is in these institutions that patients are sometimes repeatedly beaten, subjected to shock therapy, emotionally manipulated and administered powerful mind-altering drugs. 1

Refer to section 62 for the obstacles to our freedom.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

366

However, there is no definition or standard by which to judge sanity or insanity and it is possible to be classified as mentally insane merely by behaving differently to others. One person who behaves irregularly might be called a lunatic while a group of people behaving in the same way would perhaps be accepted as belonging to a sane community or sect. This is one of the dangers of alienation we dealt with in section sixty four. We also saw in Appendix F how sterilisation legislation was passed based on prejudicial and grossly uninformed definitions of what it meant to be feebleminded, immoral, or socially deficient. Sadly we also know the horrors that this kind of thinking or rationalisation can lead to.1 However, the imposition onto others of the standards, prejudices and moral evaluations that have been adopted by another person, group of people, class of people, or political party, is also inherent in the very concept of advice itself. In most cases a person visits a therapist or councillor because they have a personal crisis or behavioural problem that they feel unable to deal with on their own. A person might have a phobia they wish to treat or be suffering from distress caused by a career dilemma, divorce, death, illness, unemployment, personal violation, rape, suicidal feelings, drug addiction, or a general unhappiness with a life that might appear to them to be without meaning, to mention only a few. In severe cases a person might be traumatised by events and realisations that threaten their entire system of beliefs or frame of orientation. Unable to cope on their own they feel isolated and are exceptionally vulnerable. It is in this state of mind that they surrender themselves to a therapist who is now in a position of great power and, like all forms of power, it can be either used or abused and here is only one example of the scope and scale with which it can happen irrespective of the good intentions of the therapist. It isn't widely known but Freud once subscribed to what is known as the seduction theory. According to him many of his patients were suffering as a result of having been sexually violated when they were young. The term seduction itself is misleading as it gives the false impression that the person 1

Refer to the danger and difficulty of making definitions in appendix E, the attempt to bridge the gap between what is and what ought to be in section 49 and the horrors that such faulty thinking are capable of in appendix F. © 1997 Allan Sztab

367

seduced is a willing partner when in the vast majority of cases this isn't so. The term rape is a far better description, because the sexual abuse and aggression was sometimes so violent that the children often died. According to Freud it was young girls who were most at risk from their fathers, brothers and other family members. Not only that, the results of this type of violent sexual abuse had been available in forensic reports since the early eighteen hundreds and Freud had even surmised that people had chosen not to see it. His suspicions were confirmed shortly after he delivered a ground-breaking paper to his colleagues at the 'Society for Psychiatry and Neurology in Vienna' in 1896 which dealt with the reality of child rape and abuse. His colleagues were faced with a truth that was so hard to bear and so contrary to their present frame of orientation that they felt threatened by it and for very good reason - research indicated that these violent abuses were common even amongst educated, prominent and puritanical families. To gain some idea of the horror that must have accompanied the mere entertainment of the idea of an otherwise distinguished father violently raping his own three year old daughter, we should remember that at that time people were still dealing with severe feelings of shame and guilt for masturbating. Not only that, it also went against the commonly-held belief of the time that mental illness was hereditary and not influenced by family, environmental or social conditions. So it isn't surprising that they rejected his paper and began to ostracise him. In section 48 we noted how Copernicus had to circulate his revolutionary model of the planetary system for fear of being branded a heretic by the Church. Such examples are common in history and alienation is often the price that is paid for independent thinking. Well it was no different for Freud. However, for someone who had chosen psychiatry as a career, largely because it was an area that was relatively new and one in which he was sure he could make a name for himself, the pressure was too much to bear: 'I felt as though I was despised and universally shunned'. So he rejected his theory and in its place these sexual abuses became nothing other than childhood 'fantasies'. According to Freuds new theory it was during the genital stage of their development that girls fantasised about possessing their fathers and boys fantasised about possessing their mothers and this he called the © 1997 Allan Sztab

368

Oedipus Complex.1 However, fantasising about something and actually doing it are worlds apart yet Freud now claimed that it made no difference to the psychological effects on a person whether they had fantasised or really experienced the trauma, something which even a person who has a rudimentary dose of common sense would find hard to believe. Yet this is the very heart of the psychoanalytic therapy that people might obtain if they should frequent someone who is practising it. Lets say that a woman or man who has been traumatised like this in their childhood and is now suffering. Perhaps they are being subjected to social pressures to get married and settle down but they cannot do so because they find they are unable to have sexual contact with other people. The memories of these repressed events might break to the surface of consciousness as a result of such pressures or could even be flushed out by a therapist. However, a psychoanalyst might tell them that they have fabricated the entire event. This carries with it the implication that not only are they totally divorced from reality but are solely responsible for their own suffering! This has distinctive parallels with the concept of sin and the guilt feelings that are sure to accompany it.2 In addition to the personal trauma and further damage such therapy imposes on those who receive it, psychoanalysis has delayed efforts to prevent child abuse by almost a century. The cost of this in terms of human suffering and misery is inestimable. Interestingly, it was a pupil and friend of Freuds by the name of Sandor Ferenczi who first broke with Freud and accepted that the sexual traumas of children were indeed real. He went further and explained that the adult aggressor doesn't accept any guilt or responsibility and should the child dare to say anything the parent would admonish them for dreaming or being crazy. In certain cases this denial was even encouraged by the other parent. Because the adult aggressor refuses to accept any guilt the child accepts it and comes to identify sex with violence which could later develop into severe depression or a perverted sexuality. Ferenczi also identified these childhood traumas with the well-noted phenomena of accelerated emotional and intellectual development of children in 1

Refer to Freuds theory in appendix A1. Refer to the Christian doctrine of Paul in section 30 and the role of guilt in manipulation in section 63. 2

© 1997 Allan Sztab

369

an effort to protect themselves. However, like Freuds original theory, the paper in which he outlined his theory received a hostile reception from his colleagues and his death shortly afterwards led to successful attempts by them to prevent the scope of its circulation. It is thus of vital importance when going to a therapist, or seeking advice from anyone, to critically appraise it because the advice or judgement that is given is made by someone who has been trained to see things from a particular perspective or point of view. Their opinion, irrespective of who they are and what they know, might be right but it also might be wrong. This applies to advice given by anybody and especially from people who are paid to give it. We have seen above the great harm that can be done with good intentions and without malice. We should also be aware that many therapists regard themselves as superior to their clients and adopt the role of teacher and moral legislator. Many of them cannot resist abusing this power they have over their clients who come to them in a most vulnerable state and who surrender themselves to their control. It isn't possible for anyone to be an impartial observer and any information we have must first be interpreted.1 We have likes and dislikes and are bound to find these in other people no matter how hard we might try not to. No therapist can develop an unrestrained emotion of genuine care, empathy and love towards their paying clientele who they see on a professional basis for perhaps only one hour a week. Therapists, like the large majority of people who express an interest in psychology, may do so to solve their own problems, and we may feel encouraged or more kindly disposed towards advice that comes from someone who has experienced similar problems. However, people learn different lessons from their experiences. Lets take the example of a therapist who has themselves suffered from emotional abuse at the hands of their parents. Such a person might easily learn to be abusive as this is what they have experienced during their formative years. On the other hand, another therapist with a similar background might have learnt to empathise with abusive people who have suffered like themselves. It is therefore possible for someone who is 1

Refer to the myth of impartial observation in section 47.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

370

experiencing abuse in a marriage or family situation to be given advice that might vary considerably from one therapist to another. We see a similar divergence of approach in many spheres of our lives. Many people have struggled to gain membership of professional associations that have managed to unfairly restrict the performance of certain activities such as those relating to auditing, medicine, law and engineering. The reason they do so is simple - the smaller the number of people who can practice these activities the greater their earnings potential. Limitations to the number of members is mostly achieved by the imposition of lengthy periods of apprenticeship, unnecessarily high academic admission and final examination requirements. Most people who have managed to obtain membership will sit back and reap the rewards. They might attempt to make membership requirements even more stringent or actively promote legislation that would bring them further rewards. There will be very few of these practitioners who would see the unfairness of the system they form part of and be prepared to promote reforms which might be to their financial disadvantage. The fact is that those who are diligent and hard working seldom require the unfair advantages of these associations. It is the same with political parties and freedom fighters who are quick to decry the harsh methods used by a government that is in power but continue to utilise the same methods when they form a government.1

1

Refer to the ruling elite in section 67.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

371

Appendix H The danger of over-population To forecast where we are now headed it isn't necessary to look into a crystal ball or even to have much talent as a science fiction writer. As we have already done so many times before we can turn to history. In the August 1995 edition of Discover magazine Professor Jared Diamond tells the interesting story of Easter Island. This isolated island of about 160 square kilometres posed a puzzle to early European explorers because they found the remains of gigantic statues that were carved out of various stones which were carried from other parts of the island. There were over 900 statues with some weighing up to 270 tons. They could only have been built with considerable manpower and materials, yet despite being extremely fertile the island was desolate and had only a small population. Scientists finally managed, after painstaking research, to piece together the Islands history. The inhabitants were Polynesian and first arrived on the island about 400AD. That they managed to cross the oceans was demonstrated by the primitive raft-sailing experiments of Thor Heyerdahl's 'Kon-Tiki' voyage. From archaeological sites it was estimated that the population density ranged from between 7,000 to 20,000 which is well within the restraints imposed by the fertility of the island and the living room available. Statue-building experiments with islanders led to the conclusion that only a few hundred people could have built, transported and erected a statue within a year provided they had sufficient timber for rollers and ropes. However, there were no suitable trees available in the quantities required. A column of sediment was bored out of a swamp by the scientists to reveal layer upon layer of material that had been deposited over the life of the island. Each layer was radiocarbon-dated and pollen analysts were able to identify the pollen grains in each layer with that from known species of plants. From the bones in ancient garbage heaps they were also able to determine the kinds of food the islanders ate in different periods. From these scientific studies a chilling picture emerged:

© 1997 Allan Sztab

372

Thirty thousand years before human settlers arrived the island was covered with a subtropical forest of trees, bushes, ferns and grasses. When the first settlers arrived from Polynesia with a few rats as stowaways they found a fertile island with plenty food, space and timber for building materials. There was the hauhau tree from which rope can be made and an abundance of large palm trees. In the next few centuries they prospered and multiplied. They then began to construct statues and, as with the pyramids in ancient Egypt, the homes of Hollywood moguls and the rush by businessmen to build the highest building, each new statue was an attempt to outdo the previous one in size and splendour. (A headline in a March 1996 edition of the Guardian read 'The giddy height of humiliation' and went on to explain that 'In an act of economic and cultural humiliation, Malaysia has ousted the US as home of the world's tallest skyscraper...') The palm trees on Easter Island were ideal for making canoes and rollers as they had no branches. From the garbage heaps of archaeological sites it was ascertained that one third of their diet during the period 900 - 1300 consisted of porpoises which could only be harpooned offshore from big canoes. The islanders also ate birds such as albatross, petrels and frigates. The lack of predators on the island suggested that it was a popular breeding site for a rich variety of sea birds. In addition, they also ate land birds such as parrots and barn-owls. According to the pollen records the forests were already being destroyed and replaced by grasses by the year 800 to supply the growing demand for fuel, houses, canoes and rollers for statues. The demand simply exceeded the rate at which the forests could regenerate. The forests slowly began to disappear and by the fifteenth century they were totally destroyed. The destruction was due not only to logging but to the rats which devoured seeds and prevented them from germinating. It is estimated that statue construction peaked during the period 1200 - 1500 and during this same period the porpoise bones disappeared from the garbage sites along with those of the islands animals. Deforestation was also accompanied by declining crop yields due to soil erosion. Without big canoes to

© 1997 Allan Sztab

373

catch porpoises they replaced their meat supply with chicken and then human remains appeared in garbage sites. 'The overall picture is among the most extreme examples of forest destruction anywhere in the world: the whole forest gone, and most of its tree species extinct... The colonies of more than half of the seabird species breeding on Easter or on its offshore islets were wiped out... Intensified chicken production and cannibalism replaced only part of all those lost foods. Preserved statuettes with sunken cheeks and visible ribs suggest that people were starving... Surviving islanders described to early European visitors how local chaos replaced central government and a warrior class took over from the hereditary chiefs... By around 1700 the population began to crash toward between one-quarter and one-tenth of its former number. People took to living in caves for protection against their enemies...' It is hard not to draw parallels between Easter Island and the global situation facing us now except that, with the potential for destruction that small and cheap armaments are capable of, the horrors that might unfold cannot even be imagined. And cannibalism isn't far removed from modern civilisation. In recent clashes between rival gangs in Liberia dead bodies were cut open and the hearts cooked in palm oil and eaten in the belief that the power of the deceased would be absorbed. In South Africa young children are murdered from time to time so specific body parts such as the genitals and eyes may be used to create magic potions or muti. These are the same kind of irrational beliefs that are driving many animals such as the rhinoceros to extinction. During the last 80 years the human population has grown from 1.6 to 8 billion and is set to double early in the next century, even if draconian population control measures were implemented today. On our present course most of the earths resources of fish, tropical rain forests and soil will be depleted - we too, have nowhere else to go. Big businessmen no longer have roots or loyalties to any particular neighbourhood or even country as they become increasingly mobile. Clashes between big business and environmental groups are now the norm with the all

© 1997 Allan Sztab

374

too familiar and repetitive rallying cry in support of destruction being the provision of jobs. 'Every day newspapers report details of famished countries - Afghanistan, Liberia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, Zaire where people have appropriated the wealth or where central government is yielding to local gangs of thugs. With the risk of nuclear war receding, the threat of ending with a bang no longer has a chance of galvanising us to halt our course.' Ever since Malthus drew the world's attention to over-population more than a century ago the mere ability to fill bellies was seen as a victory over his warnings. Today even this ability is becoming strained but the danger is for the most part still being ignored, despite the exponentially increasing population growth; the inability of governments world-wide to provide even basic housing, sanitation and health care for its people; the rapidly increasing levels of both violent crime and corruption amongst politicians and white collar criminals; the decline in quality of life for all but the wealthy; the increase of unemployment in the face of an internationally decreasing job market; the increasing inability of governments to resist local gangs of thugs; and the ever dwindling supply of natural resources. Economic growth, which is regarded as a cure for all ills, is doomed to failure simply because there are limits to resources. Cutting the population has the real potential to double or treble real incomes while simultaneously increasing the quality of life and preserving natures bounty.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

375

References to accompany the detailed bibliography Part One Chapter One In section 2 the statistics on the weight of the brain in different species is found on page 48 of 'The Pleasures of Philosophy' by Will Durant. Chapters one to eight of 'The Making Of Memory' by Stephen Rose contains loads of interesting information on the workings of memory without too many technical details. The quote concerning the typography of memory in section 2 may be found on page 202; the quote dealing with the brain and meaning on page 91; the process of habituation and sensitisation is discussed on pages 170173. The elegant quote in section 2 on the difference between brain and mind comes from 'The Myth of the Machine' by Lewis Mumford and can be found on page 27. The book also traces in considerable length the evolution of language depicted in section 3 and transports one back to the early days of human existence. The technical particulars relating to the evolution of the human brain may be found on page 119 of 'A Criminal History Of Mankind' by Collin Wilson. The theory of love as the merging of identities can be found on pages 84 to 87 of 'The Road Less Travelled' by M. Scott Peck.

Chapters Two and Three The story of the aircraft survivors comes from the book 'Alive' by Piers Paul Read and is also available on video. The source for the role of the natural incentives in human motivation comes from 'Human Motivation' by David McClelland. For a detailed discussion of the various incentives refer to chapter 5, and for the formation of character concerns refer to chapters 7 to 9. For the evidence that pleasure is often followed by pain and vice versa see page 113; for the limited amount of basic emotions see page 119; for the presence of hormones in anger-aggression and also the possibility of a link to pleasure see page 151; for the ability of the emotions to bypass the thinking part of the brain see page 155; for the Asch experiment see page 163; © 1997 Allan Sztab

376

for the interaction of incentives see page 165; for power oriented persons and their choice of occupation and friends see pages 282 to 285; for the quote regarding Nixon see page 318; for the test on justifying actions after shocking someone see page 487; and for the quote concerning the cultural influences on power concerns see page 597. The story relating to pilots attempting to please passengers can be found on pages 65-66 of 'Our Own Worst Enemy' by Norman F. Dixon. The concern for approval displayed by the ill-fated British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain is outlined on pages 98-101; the quote from Millgram may be found on page 112; the dangers of boredom and the story about the DC10 airliner can be found on page 217. The quote on the short cuts taken by the brain during visual processing comes from a special issue of the Discover magazine of June 1993 titled 'The Mystery of Sense'. The famous quote by N. Tinbergen can be found in his article 'On War and Peace in Animals and Man' in Science, Vol 160, page 1412. The quote on the artistic flair we have to stay with the familiar is from aphorism 192 of the book 'Beyond Good And Evil' by Friedrich Nietzsche and may be found on page 115. All of Nietzsche's books are essential reading. They are easy to read, highly enjoyable and as Nietzsche rightfully claimed, 'say in ten lines what others cannot even say in an entire book'.

Part Two Chapter Four and Five The story concerning the mummies in the Chinese museum comes from an article in the Schools Project section of the You Magazine of 9 June 1994. The quote concerning the dimorphism of apes and early man comes from an article in the Science and Technology section of The Economist of 23rd April 1994. The quote concerning the spreading of genetic material comes from an article in the Science and Technology section of The Economist of 13th April 1991. For a detailed discussion of the rise, fall and role of women in ancient society see the 'Goddess Mother of Living Nature' by Adele Getty. The quote © 1997 Allan Sztab

377

concerning goddesses may be found on page 12; for the quote concerning the role of men in conception see pages 15 to 16. The quote on cannibalism in Liberia is from an article by Philip van Niekerk in the Weekly Mail & Guardian of 25 April 1996. For a detailed discussion of various cultures, customs and taboos see 'Man in the Primitive World' by E.A Hoebel. For marriage and sexual relations see chapter 16; for the quote about Cleopatra see page 289; for the quote concerning the practice of marrying the wife or husband of a deceased brother or sister see page 295; for a detailed discussion of communal and private property see chapter 25; for the regulation of combat amongst certain Australian aborigines see pages 508-9. For the role of climatic changes in the transition from an existence as nomadic wanderers to that in settled communities see the book 'Cannibals and Kings' by Marvin Harris. For a detailed discussion of the transition and ancient methods of population control see chapters 1 to 3; for the possible advantages of matrilineal lineages for warfare and hunting see page 69; for the evidence of societies where the value of power and prestige exists in what a person could give away see pages 80-81; The ritual cycle of pig feast, war and peace of the Maring tribe may be found in 'Cows, Pigs, Wars and Witches', also by Marvin Harris. Further details may be found in the chapter 'Primitive War'. The author also explores myths such as those behind the 'sacred cow' of India and the taboo on pork. The quote concerning warfare and the environment may be found on page 67. The history of settled communities and the continuous cycle of incursions by nomadic warriors is well portrayed in 'The Rise Of The West' by William H. McNeill. The book provides a large scale picture of human development that includes the influence of weapons technology on the ability and effectiveness of waging warfare throughout the centuries. For the diffusion of human populations see page 5; for the role of geography in the formation and stability of central governments see page 41; for the development of ancient Greek civilisation, democracy, and the leading role of the phalanx see pages 188-205; and for the breakdown of the 'concert of princess' in ancient China see page 228. © 1997 Allan Sztab

378

Chapter Six For the history of ancient Egypt see 'The Dawn of Human Consciousness' by James Henry Breastred. For the code of Hammurapi which dispensed justice according to the social class of the litigants see page 13; for the development of the notion of a judgement after death see page 21; for the role of the sun god in human affairs see pages 23-28; for the notion of a persons resurrection after death and the reconstitution of their soul see pages 47-50; for the ancient yet unlearnt lesson that not even well-paid officials are guaranteed to be impartial see the story of the Eloquent Peasant which starts on page 183; for the Admonitions of Ipuwer see pages 195-196; for details of the industry that grew out of the belief in an afterlife see pages 235-241 of the chapter titled the 'Growth Of Magic'; for a detailed description of the judgement process see pages 255-257; for a list of actions considered sins see pages 257-258; for the priestly corruption of afterlife rituals see pages 263-266; the elegant quote 'Monotheism was but imperialism in religion' and details of the first religious revolution can be found on page 275; the Egyptian and Persian influences on the Old Testament is detailed in the chapter 'Sources of our Moral Heritage' and the quote concerning the Book of Proverbs may be found on page 371. For a detailed history and comparative discussion of religious belief see 'Man and his Destiny in the Great Religions' by S.G.F Brandon. Chapter Seven For a detailed criticism of Plato see 'The Open Society And Its Enemies' by K.R. Popper, Volume I. This book and its companion Volume II are highly recommended. The quote on the influence of Plato on education may be found on page 136 and the quote concerning his political program may be found on page 137. The description of the theory of the Inquisition as purely Platonic may be found on page 24 of Volume II. For a detailed examination of the history of philosophy see 'From Socrates To Sartre' by Samuel Enoch Stumpf. The integrity and ease of comprehension with which such highly complex subject matter is rendered is unrivalled. The quote attributed to Aristotle concerning slavery may be found on page 104 and that concerning the cause of revolutionary feelings on page 105. © 1997 Allan Sztab

379

The quote in section 42 from The Cynic commences on page 68 of 'Political Philosophy, a history of the search for order' by James L. Wiser. Part Three Chapter Eight, Nine and Ten The quote in section 50 from the Baron d'Holbach may be found on page 239 of 'Political Philosophy, a history of the search for order' by James L. Wiser. The quote from Rousseau may be found on page 263. For a detailed criticism of Hegel see 'The Open Society And Its Enemies' by K.R. Popper, Volume II. For Hegel as the father of modern totalitarianism see page 22; for the quote from Schopenhauer about a dishonest guardian see page 77; for the quote concerning the fallibility of science see pages 374 and 375. For the quote on Hegel concerning Being and Nothing see pages 331-332 of 'From Socrates To Sartre' by Samuel Enoch Stumpf. The quote from Schopenhauer about the tragedy of life can be found on page 350. The introductory quote for section 54 is from aphorism number 109 of 'The Gay Science' by Friedrich Nietzsche. For a full discussion on the body-mind problem see chapter three of 'The Pleasures of Philosophy' by Will Durant titled 'Matter, Life and Mind'. The quote from Mark Twain may be found on page 48 while the quote concerning the importance of glandular secretions can be found on page 49. The introductory quote for section 55 is aphorism number 492 of 'The Will to Power' by Friedrich Nietzsche. 'Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies' is aphorism number 483 of 'Human All Too Human' by Friedrich Nietzsche. The quote that introduces section 56 may be found on page 30 of the book 'If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him!' by Sheldon Kopp.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

380

Part Four Chapter eleven For the great influence on behaviour of hormones see page 602 of 'Human Motivation' by David McClelland. The opening quote to section 57 is from aphorism 107 of 'Daybreak' by Friedrich Nietzsche. The quote 'the best laid plans of mice and men are often thwarted and leave us nothing but grief and pain for promised joy' is by Robert Burns. The quote on the desire to augment a belief in one's power is from 'Human all too Human' in the section 'The Wanderer And His Shadow' aphorism 181 by Friedrich Nietzsche. The introductory paragraph from section 58 on the error of Freedom of Will is an interpretation, extract and rewording of aphorism 99. The quote concerning the killing of things that cause us displeasure is from aphorism 102. The quote regarding the law of talio as an advance for society may be found on page 44 of 'Society and its Criminals' by Paul Reiwald. The quote on tracing something unknown back to something that is familiar is from the section 'The Four Great Errors' from 'Twilight of the Idols / The AntiChrist', by Friedrich Nietzsche. The opening paragraph of section 62 is taken from section 54 of 'The Anti-Christ'. The quote in section 63 concerning the requirement for sins may be found in section 26. In section 60 the information relating to the forms of distributing income in primitive societies is from the chapter 'Potlatch' in the book 'Cows, Pigs, Wars and Witches' by Marvin Harris. Chapter Twelve The opening quote for chapter 12 may be found on page 187 of 'Untimely Meditations' by Friedrich Nietzsche. The opening quote from section 66 may be found on page 55 of 'Twilight of the Idols / The Anti-Christ', by Friedrich Nietzsche. The quote concerning the virtue of selfishness is from aphorism number 21 of 'The Gay Science' by Friedrich Nietzsche. © 1997 Allan Sztab

381

The fear of the French and their construction of the Maginot Line in World War II is recounted in chapter four and the quote may be found on page 45 of 'Our Own Worst Enemy' by Norman F. Dixon. The quotes from 'The Rise and Fall of Elites' by Vilfredo Pareto may be found on pages 59 and 60 respectively. The quote on Voltaire's preference for monarchy and on the noise that clouds election issues may be found on pages 293 and 295 of 'The Pleasures of Philosophy' by Will Durant. The quote from Nietzsche on not having too few desires is aphorism 337 titled 'Danger in renunciation' and may be found on page 290 of 'Human All Too Human'. The paraphrase from Milton and Rose Friedman about the suggested rewording of the Amercian Constitution can be found on pages 354-355 of 'Free to Choose'. Appendix B3 The quote concerning the many interpretations of Buddha is from 'Man and his Destiny in the Great Religions' by G.W.F. Brandon and may be found on page 352.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

382

Bibliography Alcoholics Anonymous. Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions. London: Alcoholics Anonymous Publishing Company. Aldred, Cyril. The Egyptians. London: Thames & Hudson, 1987. Ardrey, Robert. The Social Contract. Collins, 1972. Ayer, A.J. Language, Truth and Logic. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1983. Ball, Alan R. Modern Politics And Government. Hampshire: Macmillan Education Ltd., 1991. Barnett, S.A. Instinct & Intelligence. London: Macgibbon & Kee, 1967. Boas, George (Translator). The Hieroglyphics of Horapollo. New York: Pantheon Books, Inc., 1950. Boyd, William. Emile For Today. The Emile of Jean Jacques Rousseau. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., 1975. Brandon, S.G.F. Religion in Ancient History. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1973. Brandon, S.G.F. Man and his Destiny in the Great Religions. Manchester: The University Press, 1962. Breastred, James Henry. The Dawn of Conscience. London: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1934. Byles, Marie Beuzeville. Footprints of Gautama The Buddha. London: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1967. Camus, Albert. The Rebel. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1971. Camus, Albert. The Myth of Sisyphus. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1988. Camus, Albert. A Happy Death. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1988. Camus, Albert. The Outsider. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1988. Casti, John L. Paradigms Lost. London: Little, Brown and Company (UK) Ltd., 1993. Casti, John L. Searching For Certainty. London: Little, Brown and Company (UK) Ltd., 1993. Chalmers, A.F. What is this thing called Science? England: Open University Press, 1985. Coetzee, J.M. Life & Times of Michael K. England: Penguin Books Ltd., 1988. Crocker, Lester G. (Ed.). The Selected Essays of Montaigne. New York: Pocket Books, Inc., 1959. Davidson, James Dale & Rees-Mogg, William. The Great Reckoning. London: Pan Books Ltd., 1993. Descartes, Rene. Discourse On Method And The Meditations. England: Penguin Books Ltd., 1987. Dixon, Norman F. Our Own Worst Enemy. London: Futura Publications, 1988. Durant, Will and Ariel. The Lessons Of History. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1968. Durant, Will. The Pleasures of Philosophy. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1953. Eisenman, Robert & Wise, Michael. The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered. England: Penguin Books Ltd., 1992. © 1997 Allan Sztab

383

Eliade, Mircia (Ed.). The Encyclopaedia of Religion. New York: Macmillan and Free Press, 1987. Flew, Antony (Ed. Con.). A Dictionary of Philosophy. London: Pan Books Ltd., 1983. Frankena, William K. Ethics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1973. French, Marilyn. The War Against Women. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1993. Friedman, Milton. Free To Choose. Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd., 1980. Frijda, Nico H. The Laws of Emotion. American Psychologist, 1988, 43, 349358. Fromm, Erich. The Anatomy Of Human Destructiveness. Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd., 1982. Galbraith, J.K. The Affluent Society. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1967. Getty, Adel. Goddess Mother of Living Nature. London: Thames & Hudson, 1990. Golding, Martin P. Philosophy of Law. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975. Hall, Calvin S. A Primer of Freudian Psychology. New York: New American Library, 1982. Harris, Marvin. Cows, Pigs, Wars and Witches. New York: Vintage, 1978. Harris, Marvin. Cannibals and Kings. London: Collins, 1978. Hawking, Stephen W. A Brief History Of Time. London: Transworld Publishers Ltd., 1989. Hjelle, Larry A., & Ziegler, Daniel J. Personality Theories. Mc Graw-Hill, Inc., 1981. Hoebel, E.A. Man In the Primitive World. New York: McGraw Hill, 2nd ed., 1958. Hollingdale, R.J. Nietzsche. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1973. Hooke, S.H. Middle Eastern Mythology. London: Penguin, 1963. Hopfe, Lewis M. Religions of the world. Beverley Hills: Glencoe Press, 1976. Hospers, John. An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1987. Hudson, W.D. Modern Moral Philosophy. London: Macmillan Education Ltd., 1988. Jackson, John D. Justice in South Africa. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1980. Johnson, L. & Koopman, A. How to Escape your Comfort Zones. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1995. Jordaan, W.J., & J.J. Man in Context. Johannesburg: Lexicon, 1992. Kahane, Howard. Logic and Philosophy. California: Wadsworth Inc., 1986. Karnow, Stanley. Vietnam. A History. Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd., 1995. Kaufmann, Walter. Without Guilt and Justice. New York: Peter H. Wyden Inc., 1973. Kaufmann, Walter. Nietzsche. Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1978. Kaufmann, Walter. Discovering The Mind. Vol I -3. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1980. © 1997 Allan Sztab

384

Kaufmann, Walter. Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre. Cleveland World Publishing Co., 1956. Kellet, E A Short History Of Religions. London: Gollanz, 1933. Kevles, Daniel J. In the Name of Eugenics. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1986. Kopp, Sheldon. If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him! London: Sheldon Press, 1988. Kristal, Leonard (Gen. Ed.). The ABC of Psychology. England: Penguin Books Ltd., 1982. Lasch, Christopher. The Revolt Of The Elites And The Betrayal Of Democracy. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1995. Leeming, David Adams. The World of Myth - an anthology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government. London: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1990. Macnamara, Michael. Meaning In Life. Johannesburg: AD. Donker (Pty) Ltd., 1987. Macnamara, Michael (Ed.). World Views. Pretoria: J.L. van Schaik (Pty) Ltd., 1980. Marks, Isaac M. Fears And Phobias. London: William Heinemann Medical Books Ltd., 1969. Marx, Karl. Capital. Vols I & II. England: Penguin Books Ltd., 1979. Marx, Karl & Engels, Friedrich. The Communist Manifesto. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1986. Masson, Jeffrey. The Assault On Truth. London: Harper Collins Publishers, 1992. Masson, Jeffrey. Against Therapy. London: William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd., 1989. McClelland, David C. Human Motivation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. McGinn, Colin. Moral Literacy. London: Gerald Duckworth & Co. Ltd., 1992. McNeill, William H. The Rise Of The West. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970. Mumford, Lewis. The Myth of the Machine. London: Secker & Warburg, 1967. Nairn, Rob. Tranquil Mind. Cape Town: Dragon Publications., 1993. Nietzsche, Friedrich. Human All Too Human. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Nietzsche, Friedrich. Daybreak. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Gay Science. New York: Random House, Inc., 1974. Nietzsche, Friedrich. Beyond Good And Evil. England: Penguin Books Ltd., 1990. Nietzsche, Friedrich. On The Geneology of Morals / Ecco Homo. New York: Vintage Books, 1989. Nietzsche, Friedrich. Twilight of The Idols / The Anti-Christ. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1990. © 1997 Allan Sztab

385

Nietzsche, Friedrich. Untimely Meditations. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Nietzsche, Friedrich. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1969. Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Will To Power. New York: Random House, Inc., 1968. O'Rourke, P.J. Parliament Of Whores. London: Pan Books Ltd., 1991. Ornstein, The Psychology of Consciousness. Harcourt: Bruce Jovanovich, 1977. Pareto, Vilfredo. The Rise and Fall of Elites. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1991. Payne, Robert. The Corrupt So ciety. New York: Praeger Publishers Inc., 1975. Peck, M. Scott. The Road Less Travelled. London: Century Hutchinson Ltd., 1989. Plato. The Republic. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1988. Plato. The Last Days Of Socrates. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1982. Popper, K.R. The Open Society And Its Enemies. Vol II. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1971. Popper, K.R. The Open Society And Its Enemies. Vol I. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1986. Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. Structure And Function In Primitive Society. London: Cohen & West, 1953. Rand, Ayn. Atlas Shrugged. New York: New American Library, 1957. Rand, Ayn. The Virtue Of Selfishness. New York: New American Library, 1964. Raphael, D.D. Problems of Political Philosophy. London: Macmillan Education Ltd., 1989. Ray, Christopher. Time, Space and Philosophy. London: Routledge, 1991. Read, Piers Paul. Alive. London: Reed Consumer Books Ltd., 1993. Reiwald, Paul. Society and its Criminals. London: Heinemann, 1949. Rist, J.M. Epicurus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. Rose, Steven. The Making Of Memory. London: Transworld Publishers Ltd., 1993. Rousseau, Jean-Jaques. The Social Contract. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1968. Saul, John Ralston. Voltaire's Bastards. New York: Random House, Inc., 1993. Searle, John. Minds, Brains & Science. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1989. Sigal, Philip. Judaism - The Evolution of a faith. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1988. Solomon, Robert C. The Passions. New York: Anchor Press, 1976. Stumpf, Samuel Enoch. Socrates to Sartre. New York: McGraw Hill, Inc., 1988. Swain, John. The Pleasures Of The Torture Chamber. London: Noel Douglas Ltd, 1946. Taylor, Richard. Metaphysics. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963. Thouless, Robert H. Straight and Crooked Thinking. London: Pan Books Ltd., 1974. Tinbergen, N. The Study of Instinct. London: Oxford University Press, 1969. © 1997 Allan Sztab

386

Tinbergen, N. On War and Peace in Animals and Man. Science, Vol 160, 1968, 1411-1418. Tolstoy, Leo. The Death of Ivan Ilych And Other Stories. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1960. Urmson, J.O. (Ed.). The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers. South Africa: Century Hutchinson Group (SA) (Pty) Ltd., 1985. Waley, Arthur. The Analects Of Confucius. London: Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1988. Watts, Alan W. The Wisdom of Insecurity. London: Rider and Company, 1985. Weinberg, Dr George. Self Creation. London: Futura Publications Ltd., 1979. Wilson, Collin. A Criminal History Of Mankind. London: Granada Publishing Ltd., 1984. Wiser, James L. Political philosophy, a history of the search for order. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 1983. Worsley, Peter. Marx and Marxism. London: Tavistock Publication Ltd., 1982. Xenophon. Conversations of Socrates. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1990. Zukav, Gary. The Dancing Wu Li Masters. England: Collins Publishing Group, 1988.

© 1997 Allan Sztab

387

Index Aborigines conflict resolution, S19 Absolute truth - the Sophists, S37 truth – Socrates, S38 power, S39 truth – Science, S48 truth – Descartes, S50 Abstract concepts language, S3 Achievement variety incentive, S7 strong concerns, S10 Adam and Eve myth, snake, S14 punishment, S27 original sin, S30 Adler, Alfred dominant drive, S7 theory, A2 Adrenaline chemical rewards, S7 Affiliation sexual incentive, S7 Affirmative action special interests, S67 Aggression impact incentive, role of identity, S7 role of identity, S8 power concerns, S10 Agriculture history, S16 American Constitution influence of Locke, S50 Jefferson & happiness, S66 Anarchy limits to freedom, S61 Anaxagoras body & mind, S35 Ancient Texts Egyptian, Mesopotamian, S12 Old Testament, S26 Gathas, Avestas, S31 Upanishads, Vedas, RigVeda, B1,B2 Andes drives & power S5 Anxiety and Freuds theory, A1 fear & phobias, C Appearance and truth, S32 Zenos paradoxes, S34 © 1997 Allan Sztab

Appearance cont. illusion, desire, belief Plato's perfect world of Ideas, S39 and reason, S58 Aristotle metaphysics, essences, change as progress, potential or fate, S40 stationary earth, S48 logic, S50 Asceticism escaping desires, S51 and power, S55 and sin, S63 and pleasure, S66 and enlightenment, B2 and Buddhism, B3 controlling desires, D Associations language, S3 behaviour, S6 defence mechanisms, S9 recognition & interpretation, S47 and Freuds theory, A1 Assumptions vision, S9 customs, S11 Zeno's paradoxes, S34 equality & democracy, S40 absolute rest, S48 human nature & morality, politics S49 logical rules, S50 Authority fatal flaw, S11 authoritarianism - Plato, S39 religion & politics, S45 church vs state, Reformation, S46 above the law, S49 obstacle to freedom, S62 Avoidance of pain, S8 theory of Skinner, A5 and fear, C Bacon, Francis impartial observation, scientific verification, S47 Barbarians and civilisation, S17 invasions, S19 cycle of conquest, S20

388

Behaviour mechanism, S5 association, pain or discomfort, S6 dispositions, concerns, desires, S10 social interpretations, sin, taboo, S13 radical change, S17 modification, S66 Being and Non-Being, S51 Belief psychology, fear, reason, distortions of reality, S11 and superstition, S14 truth & opinion, S32 uncertainty & fear, S63 change & fear, S64 threat of change - theory of Kelly, A8 Maslows hierarchy of needs, A9 Beliefs critical appraisal of S65 Bells Theorem quantum theory, hidden variables, faster than light communication, S48 Bentham, Jeremy pleasure & pain, S52 Bhagavad-Gita Hindu poem, B2 Body modifications, superstitions, cannibalism, S14 and mind problem, Descartes, S50 and mind problem category mistake, S54 Book of Job origins, scepticism, S24 Old Testament, S27 Boredom variety incentive, S7 variety concerns, DC10 airliner, S10 Brain capabilities, S2 capacity, growth & language, S3 tripartite nature, S8 source of emotions, interpretation, recognition & bias, S11

Index Buddha similarity to Cynics, S41 Buddhism notion of trapped soul, S30 philosophy & religion, B3 Bushmen lifestyle, S12 equality, reciprocity & status seeking, S60 Camus, Albert meaning in life, S56 Cannibalism hunger drive, S5 superstition, reports S14 Caste Hinduism, B1 Catholic universal religion, S45 church as supreme authority, Protestant Reformation, S46 Catholics marriage regulations, S13 Cave allegory of Plato, S39 Censorship Platonic roots, S39 Certainty beliefs & expectations, S11 and religion, S14 Old Testament, S27 quest for truth, S32 relativity & insecurity, S37 Socratic definitions, S38 suffering, belief & hope, S44 science, quantum physics and probability, S48 politics & Hobbes, S49 Descartes & rationalism, Hume & uncertainty, S50 probability & chance, S58 Chamberlain, Neville concern for approval, S10 Chance determinism, fatalism, S58 Change environment & survival, S2 consistency, variety incentive, S7 pleasure & pain, degree, S8 Egypt, drought, S23 scepticism, questioning established beliefs, pessimism, new ideas, S24 Jewish experience, S26 © 1997 Allan Sztab

Change cont. Book of Job, influence of pessimism, S27 Heraclitus, S33 as evil - Plato, S39 as progress - Aristotle, S40 and development of major facing fear, suffering, happiness, S66 religions, B1 Character concerns formation & measure, S10 Children education, letters to God, sex & drugs, S67 Christianity rival doctrine of Paul, Gospel of Mark, S30 marriage with politics, missionaries, S45 church & state, S46 Churchill, Winston sterilisation laws, F Civilisation ancient Mesopotamian & Egyptian, S12 first agricultural settlements, S16 Indus, Aryan invaders, B1 Clan ancestry myth, S13 Classes administrators, artisans, soldiers and centralised control, S19 conflict - Plato, S39 Co-operation language, S3 Communication between cells, S2 Complexes defence mechanisms, S9 and Freuds theory, A1 Concerns character formation, S10 Conflict and creative evolution, S51 and private ownership, S53 groups as facilitator, S59 Conformity and obedience, a fatal human flaw, S11 Confucianism Confucius, forces of yin & yang, B5 389

Consciousness internal representation, S2 memory & recall, S6 Consistency incentive, expectations, superstition & belief in causation, S7 and language use, E Contact approval, fear of rejection, natural incentive, S10 Contradiction truths of reason, S50 dialectic formula for change, opposites, S51 Control emotions & stimuli, S7 regulating behaviour, gods will, S14 Copernicus scientific progress, S48 Corruption ancient roots, S22 politics, lack of trial & error, S49 Bentham - the people should rule, S52 Cosmopolitanism Cynics & self-sufficiency, freedom from tradition, S41 Cults Orphism, S30 Gnoticism, Mithraism, S31 Curiosity variety incentive, S7 Customs beliefs, identity, stability, reluctance to change, S11 Cynics self-sufficiency, freedom from tradition, S41 d'Holbach, Baron Philosophes, science & reason, S50 Dalai Lama Tantric Buddhism, B3 De Montaigne, Michel scepticism, fanaticism, dogmatism, S47 de Saint-Simon socialist, identification of social classes, centrallyplanned economy, S53

Index Death inactivity, S2 dreams, S4 necessity for, S9 property ownership, S18 Defence mechanisms and Freuds theory, A1 rationalisation & denial theory of Rogers, A10 Definitions Socrates, general ideas, debating strategy, S38 morality, science, language trap, S49 of mentally deficient, G Democracy origin, balance of power, spread of ideas, S21 assumption of equality, S40 religion & power,S45 conditions for, dangers, value of freedom, role of education, S67 Democritus atoms & space, materialism, idealism, S36 Descartes, Rene impartial observer, Cogito ergo sum, S50 Desires character formation, S10 fear, reason, distortion of reality, S11 domineering, obstacle to freedom, S65 happiness & pleasure, harmony, S66 Maslows hierarchy of needs & interactions, A4 needs, A9 Determinism and causality, S58 Dewey, John collective experience, S52 Dialectic argument, Socrates, S38 three-step formula for change, S51 Dictators Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, S67 Diderot Philosophes, science & reason, S50 Discomfort - see Pain © 1997 Allan Sztab

Disease identified with specific cultural groups, S13 domestication of animals, S17

Disorders anorexia, bulimia, S6 Division two schools of thought, S32 units, points, moments, Zeno's paradoxes, S34 Dreams as a tool, interpretation, revelations, S4 Drives their power, S5 acquisition by association, measurement, S6 Drugs chemical reward system, S7 use in war, S11 lack of knowledge & freedom of will, S58 non-moral concern, prejudice, S65 limit to pleasure giving properties, S66 evils of prohibition, nonmoral concerns, government ineptitude, children's education, S67 Education and influence of Plato, S39 as a solution to social ills Rousseau, S50 freedom & democracy, argumentation, debate, specialisation, S67 Egypt afterlife myths, vegetation god Osiris, sun god Re, S22 Einstein, Albert dual nature of light, theory of relativity, theory, S48 Elephant and memory, S9 Eloquent Peasant Egyptian story, S24 Emotions language, S3 incest taboo, S13 cunning of vanity, S14 as sinful, love & as cause of evil, manipulation, S63 fear & happiness, S66

390

Empiricism principle of verification, S47

Empiricus, Sextus scepticism, S42 Energy materialism, S54 Enlightenment faith in reason, S50 Environment information, S2 source of stimuli, interaction, S5 consistency incentive, S7 limit for emotions, S8 character formation, S10 regularities, S11 changes, S12 ritual warfare, S19 interaction & Murrays' theory, A4 Epic of Gilgamesh quest for immortality, S24 Epicurus pleasure seeking & pain avoidance, S42 Epistemology knowledge & materialism, Democritus, S36 Equality as an error, Aristotle S40 Locke & natural rights, S50 Error division into units of space & moments of time, Zeno's paradoxes, S34 due to ignorance, S38 going beyond senses, S47 of freedom of will & false causes, S58 Eskimos regulation of sex drive, S13 equality, reciprocity & status seeking, S60 Essences Heraclitus, S33 Socrates, S38 Euclidean geometry see Truth, S50 Eugenics myth of racial purity - Plato, S39 heredity, F Euphrates river first agricultural settlements, S16

Index Evidence and personality theories, S5 for natural incentives, S7 from ancient texts, archaeology, S12 and punishment, S59 Evil forces or spirits, S31 and darkness, S46 harm or pain, S49 non-followers of Islam, B4 Existentialism Aristotelian roots, S40 Expectations consistency, S7 beliefs, suffering & formation of, S10 change, S11 disillusionment, media, S64 Experience formation of character concerns, S10 Failure fear of, S10 Fair and equal treatment, obligations, S60 Faith a requirement for scientific belief, S48 logical rules, S50 in reason, S65 Fatalism determinism & chance, S58 Fate predestination, Islam, B4 realising ones potential, S40 Fear of the unknown, money & poverty, S11 recognition & interpretation, S47 Fear cont. memory of pain as an obstacle to freedom, uncertainty & erroneous belief, S62 change, individual actions and morality, S64 critical appraisal of behaviour, S65 of attachment, imaginary things & change, S66 Feedback and character formation, S10 © 1997 Allan Sztab

Ferenczi, Sandor and Freud, G Fertility immortality, re-birth, vegetation-god, S14 Feuerbach, Ludwig socialist, belief & poverty, alienation & history, S53 First Cause / First Mover proof of Gods existence, S46 Food surplus and population growth, S17 Forgetting defence mechanism, S9 Fourier, Charles socialist, communes, S53 Freedom and conquest, S20 Jewish rebellion, S28 Plato - censorship, authoritarian rule, control of education, S39 self-sufficiency, freedom from tradition, S41 as the aim of history, S51 and abilities, S58 paradox, limitations, sacrifice for morality, S61 uncritical obedience & acceptance of beliefs as obstacles, S62 reason and critical appraisal, S65 and the individual, S66 role & scope of government, won at great cost & given away, S67 Freedom of Will impartial observation, S47 and Schopenhauer, S51 responsibility, forgiving others & ourselves, S66 punishment & systems of government, S67 Freedom of will errors of reason and the over-simplification of concepts, S58 Freud, Sigmund dream interpretation, S4 learning & association, S6 sexual incentive, S7 defence mechanisms, S9 seduction theory, G 391

Galton, Francis pioneer of eugenics, F Generalisations and speech, E Genetic development program see Responses - fixed, S2 God agricultural revolution & attempt to control with sacrifices, S14 new deities, S17 rulers as appointed representatives, change of gender, S20 afterlife myth, day of judgement, resurrection, ritual assimilation, Osiris, Re, S22 universal god, good & evil spirits, S31 Heraclitus & universal substance, S33 no need for, S43 Roman emperors, S45 Indra, Agni, Varuna, Shiva, Vishnu, B1 Shang Ti, B5 Goddess Kali, B2 of creation, S14 Golden Rule categorical imperative, S51 Good parents & society as role models of, S10 useful behaviour, S11 ancient notions of, S22 suffering, scepticism, S24 forces or spirits, S31 as unified with evil, S33 as pleasure, S43, S50 identified with light, S46 as values or preference, S47 produced in the mind, pleasurable things, S49 humans naturally good Rousseau, S50 as a follower of Islam, B4 Government origin & protection, S20 Plato's authoritarian aristocracy, selection of leaders, theory of change, control of education, S39

Index Government cont. Rousseau & the social contract, S50 Mill & proportional representation, democracy, & control of rulers, role as protector, S52 socialism, centrally planned-economy, S53 redistribution of income by taxation, S60 biased legislation, failure to provide protection, S65 abuse of democracy, corruption, interference, S67 Guilt source of, S11 responsibility, punishment & justice, S59 and manipulation, freedom of will & responsibility, S63 Habituation and language, S3 learning, S6 and moral actions, S61 obedience & morality, S62 and theory of Skinner, A5 Happiness pleasure, American Constitution, S66 Heaven sun-god, S14 belief & manipulation, S66 Hedonism Epicurus, pleasure seeking & pain avoidance, S43 Hegel creative evolution, dialectic, mystical philosopher, S51 Heidegger existentialist, awareness, anxiety, S56 Helvetius, Claude Adrien social engineering, selfinterest, S52 Heraclitus constant change, S33 Hinduism notion of trapped soul, S30 History language, S23 first reinterpretation, S27 Plato - class conflicts & self interest, S39

© 1997 Allan Sztab

History cont. Marx - class conflict & alienation of means of production, S53 Hobbes, Thomas politics, scientific method, morality & religion, S49 Honour value, S6 Hope and manipulation, S63 Hoplites equality of power & democracy, S21 Hormones behavioural function, S5 and freedom of will, S58 Human Rights no such thing - Hume, Locke & natural rights, S50 Humanitarianism morality, vested interests and redistribution, S61 punishment, crime, harm to democracy, S67 Humanitarians misguided notion of a fair share for all, S60 Hume, David morality & facts - Humes Law, sympathy & morality,S49 false causes, S50 Husserl, Edmund interpretation, bracketing, S56 Idealism atoms & space, Democritus' theory, S36 creating reality, S37 Ideas Plato's theory, S39 Identical things Heraclitus, good & bad, S33 Identity and love, friend or foe, S8 aggression, war, dehumanisation, S11 and ideas of superiority, F Ignorance as source of error, S39 Illusion beliefs & expectations, S11 of controlling unknown forces, S14 of appearances, S34 392

Illusion cont. of precise definitions as a basis for truth, S38 and ignorance, S39 and abstract concepts, S50 God, poverty & injustice, S53 explanations, uncertainty, real & apparent world, S58 of equality & hope, world of appearance & ignorance, S63 Imagination memory, S2 imaginary threats & aggression, S11 Immortality origins, S14 Pyramids, scepticism, quest for, Epic of Gilgamesh, S24 Impact natural incentive, S7 Independence isolation, alienation, S64 Information collection, nerves, S2 processing speed, S9 Innate see Responses - fixed, S8 Innovations spread of ideas, similar solutions, S12 Inquisition counter-reformation, church vs. state, S46 punishment & religion, S59 Instincts see Drives & Desires, A1 Interpretation of stimuli, S8 social customs, individual experiences, S11 myth of the impartial observer, S47 Husserl, bracketing, S56 and human behaviour theory of Kelly, A8 Intimacy contact, sexual incentive, S7 Intuition knowledge of unchanging world - Plato, S39 recognition, interpretation and self-evident truths, S47 rules of judgement, S51 Irrationalism and critical appraisal, S65

Index Islam five pillars, history, Sunnis, Shiites, B4 Jainism notion of trapped soul, S30 philosophy & religion, B3 Jaspers, Karl existentialist, Being, S56 Jesus controversial history, trial, Gospels, death & Jewish disciples, S28, S29 Jews marriage regulations, S13 early history, Yahweh, Old Testament, Ten Commandments, S26 disciples of Jesus, belief in second coming, S29 Jihad holy war, B4 Judgement myth, S15 Egyptians & afterlife myth, morality, S22 and Zoroastrianism, S31 recognition & interpretation, intuition, S47 the various categories of Kant, S51 concept & manipulation, guilt, S63 deferring, overcoming prejudices, imaginary things, S66 Jung, Carl dream interpretation, S4 Justice greed & impartiality, S24 and punishment, S59 Kaaba meteoric stone, Islam, B4 Kant, Immanual uncertainty beyond senses, rules of judgement, categorical imperative, S51 Karma cycle of death & rebirth, B2 Kierkegaard, Soren existentialist, alienation, leap of faith, S56 Knowledge information, S2 memory, learning, S6 overridden by emotions, S8 infantile interpretations, S9 © 1997 Allan Sztab

Knowledge cont. Laws cont. early agriculture, S16 economic law of truth of expressions, diminishing marginal utility, evidence, senses, S22 S24 purification of soul, Gnostic of Hammurapi, S26 belief, S30 reinterpretation of history & epistemology, S36 Yahweh's laws, S27 Sophists, customs & interpretation & truth, S32 sensory limits, S37 governing change, universal Socratic definitions vs reason, S33 science, S38 and different cultures, might Plato & intuition, S39 is right, S37 senses & ignorance, myth of and science, S38 the impartial observer, S47 as guides that should be and the ascetic, S66 authoritarian, Plato's Krishna justification of persecution reincarnation of Vishnu, B2 & slaying for disobedience, Language stopping change & conflict, common consent, role of S39 imitation & habituation, divine law permeating communication, S3 everything, S41 and gestures, S8 open to change, S42 experience & prediction of as mere conventions, S43 useful behaviour, S11 Roman law & objectivity, rituals, S23 S45 truth & opinions, S32 to achieve harmony, duty of prejudicial words, S37 state, S46 context, good as a value or Humes Law & morality, preference, S47 Machiavelli & good laws, contextual reading of bible, Hobbes two laws of nature, defining good & evil, authority above law, S49 morality, S49 Locke's law of contradiction intuition, rationalism, as and ,justification for necessary for society & rebellion, Rousseau & the reason - Rousseau, S50 common will, S50 analytical philosophy, Kant - universal laws, Hegel contextuality, & errors of - law & freedom, S51 causality - imaginary, government by scientific identical, verification, facts, Marx & laws of social meaning & emotion, S54 history, S53 over-simplification of commands, given without complex concepts such as I, explanations, S57 sex & hunger, familiar & and moral obligation, S59 related things, S58 de Saint Simon and danger of one-word influence of religion, S63 labels, S59 democracy - bias & lack of and fear, C moral obligation, S67 tricks & traps, beliefs, E Learning Laws ability, memory, S2 taboo, rituals, S13 drive satisfaction, S5 made by conquerors, association, S6 protection & taxation, S20 recognition, S47 equality of power & subconscious influence of democracy, S21 media & music, S64 theory of Bandura, A6 and fear, C 393

Index Leibniz, Gottfried

Materialism atoms & space, Democritus' theory, S36 body-mind problem, matterless energy, S54 Meaning memory, brain, S2 and language, S3 emotional responses, S8 learning, life-time associations, S9 recognition, recall, prejudice, & prejudice, S11 interpretation & truth, S32 objectivity & idealism, S37 existentialism, objectivity, subjectivity, S56 Media and manipulation, S63 unrealistic expectations, S64 influence on public - theory of Bandura, A6 Meditation suspension of thinking, B2 Zen Buddhism, B3 Memories dreams, S4 Memory learning, meaning, neuronal connections, recall, forgetting, S2 and learning, S6 selective bias, S10 recognition, bias, S11 recognition, S47 errors of causality, personal identity, S58 Men protector of women, spreading of genes, S13 preference for male children, S19 Messiah origin of concept, S24 militaristic nature, S27 Metaphysics speculation, S40 speculation of what exists beyond experience, S54 Might is Right Sophistic origins, S37 Might is right origin of morality, S57

logic & limits to conclusions, verification, S50

Limitations emotions, S8 Locke, John property ownership, S19 equality & natural rights, habituation, empty minds, pleasure & pain, S50 Logic rules, reasoning, S50 conflict in Islam, B4 Logical Positivism verification & meaning, S54 Love emotion & reason, merging of identities, merging of identities, S8 conditional love, character formation, manipulation, S10

seven year itch, S13 conditional love, Old Testament, Yahweh, S27 and manipulation, S63 and friendship, S66 and mental health, A7 importance of unconditional love - Rogers theory, A10 Luther, Martin Protestant Reformation, state vs church, S46 Machiavelli politics, morality & religion, S49 Mahabharata Hindu poem, B2 Majority rule threat to democracy, S67 Manipulation fear, uncertainty & belief, S62 punishments & rewards, hope, faith & love, S63 and speech, E Maring tribe - ritual warfare, S19 Marriage regulation by society, practical solutions, S13 religion & politics, S45 Marx, Karl property ownership, S19 history determined, class conflict, humanist, influences, S53 religion & manipulation, S63 © 1997 Allan Sztab

394

Index Mill, James and John Stuart Utilitarian, freedom & selfinterest, representative government, Utilitarian, ranking of pleasures, utopian ideals, S52 Money incentive of fear, S7 Monotheism origin of concept, S24 Jewish God Yahweh, S26 Zoroastrianism, S31 and Islam, B4 Moore, G.E open question argument, S49 Moral conscience formation of, S10 (see Guilt) Morality influence of afterlife myths, earliest table of values, S22 as relative, convention, S37 obedience to the state Plato, S39 conflict of desires, habits, S40 definitions, Humes Law, as a basis for human behaviour, language definitions, rooted in human needs & wants, S49 as convention - Hume, humans naturally good Rousseau, pleasure & pain Locke, S50 categorical imperative, S51 satisfying & not suppressing desires, S53 origin in principle of might is right, innocence, seeking pleasure & avoiding pain, social agreement, S57 obligations & legitimacy, S59 impulsive, rational & beneficial actions, nonmoral actions, S61 obstacle of obedience, S62 uncritical obedience, emotions as evil & sinful, S63 examining obligations, S65 happiness & a clear conscience, obligations, S66 biased legislation, lack of education, S67 Maslow & the individual, A9 © 1997 Allan Sztab

Mormons regulation of sex drive, S13 Moses first Jewish leader, S26 Motion Zeno's paradoxes, S34 Muhammed prophet of Allah, Islam, B4 Muslim submitters, followers of Muhammed, B4 Myth ancient origins, day of judgement, rituals, explanations, S15 afterlife, resurrection, S22 Old Testament, S27 Blood & Soil - Plato's noble lie, racial purity, S39 of racial superiority, F Natural incentives facial expressions, behaviour, S7 Nazi Plato's & racial purity, S39 Neanderthal burying of dead, S14 Nerves communication, S2 New Testament and the influence of Zoroastrianism, S31 Newton, Sir Isaac explanatory power, S7 Democritus' theory, S36 scientific laws, S48 Nietzsche, Friedrich W. dominant drive, S7 anti-Christian, psychologist, civilisation & taming of primitive desires, power as primary drive, S55 controlling desires, D Nihilism limitations to freedom & morality, S61 Nile river first agricultural settlements, S16 Nirvana a state of inner-harmony, S66 Buddhism & personal salvation, B3

395

Objectivity greed & impartiality, S24 existentialism, meaning in life, S56 Obligation and moral duty, S59 fairness, reciprocity & indebtedness, S60 Obligations re-negotiating, S66 democratic governments, ruling elite, S67 Observation myth of impartial observation, S47 experience, S54 objectivity & reason, S65 Obsession phobias & rituals, C Obstacles impact incentive, S7 Old Testament myths, S15 origins, S26 first reinterpretation of history, S27 and Zoroastrianism, S31 Open Question argument, S49 Organism survival, S1 functions, S5 Owen, Robert socialist, environment & productivity, S53 Pain natural incentive, S7 before or after pleasure, S8 character concerns and, S10 Paranoia and fear, C Pareto, Vilfredo power of sentiment, S25 conditions for the decline of ruling elites, S67 Parmenides change as illusion, S34 Past mechanisms that trap us, S10 manipulation & war, S63 affirmative action, errors of democratic governments, S67

Index Paul and his use of ancient Egyptian concepts, S22 history, source of ideas, S30, S31 Peirce, Charles Pragmatism, S52 Pessimism immortality, afterlife, S24 Book of Job & change, S28 Phalanx equality of power & democracy, S21 Philosophy ideas adapted by Christianity, proofs of Gods existence, S46 applying scientific method to politics, S49 systems of rebirth & enlightenment, B2 Pilate, Pontius sentencing of Jesus, S28 Gospel of Mark, slander of Jews, S30 Plato hostility to democracy, S21 truth & intuition, S22 philosophy of, change as evil, allegory of the cave, unchanging world of Forms or Ideas, S39 and selfishness, S66 Pleasure natural incentives, chemical rewards, S7 degree, & pain, S8 character concerns and, S10 link to aggression & cruelty, influence on actions, S11 good behaviours, S13 as a worthy pursuit, S24 ignorance & unhappiness, S39 hedonism a natural state of being, the highest good, S43 as a motive for human behaviour - Hobbes, S49 as a determinant of moral actions - Locke, S50 and knowledge, order of rank, subjectivity & Utilitarian measure of value of an action, wealth & happiness, S52 as an increase in power, S55 nature & morality, S57 © 1997 Allan Sztab

Pleasure cont. and happiness, loss of pleasure & suffering, S66 Politicians fear of action, S66 threat to democracy, corruption, duty as watchdogs, S67 and persuasive language, offer of rewards, E Politics justification based on human behaviour, S49 Population global warming, primitive methods of control, S16 food surplus, steady increase, S17 pressures, emigration, colonisation, democracy, S21 density & conflict, S57 unrestrained competition, S60 moral obligations & the poor, S61 declining value of labour, ineffectiveness of ruling elite, S67 history of Easter Island, H Power language, S3 drives, S5 impact incentive, dominant drive, S7 career choice, formation of character concerns, presidents & war, S10 accumulation of wealth, maintaining control, messengers of god, S20 equilibrium, democracy, S21 religious sentiment, S25 Rousseau & social contract, S50 sought for pleasure - S52 and change, S64 abuse in democracy, President Nixon, inequality and the danger to democracy, S67 as the dominant drive Adler, A2 Pragmatism beliefs vs practical experience, S52 Praying ineffectiveness, S43 396

Prediction consistency incentive, S7 emotion responses, S8 Prejudice identity & manipulation, S11 recognition & interpretation, S47 deferring judgements, S66 hereditary superiority, F President Nixon power concerns &, S10 Prestige redistribution of wealth, S60 politicians & fear, S66 Priest role in agriculture, intermediaries of god, S17 early corruption, S22 ritual, S23 Probability causality & determinism, S58 Productivity limited by resources, equality, reciprocity & status seeking, S60 Proofs of Gods existence, S46 Property and marriage, S13 forms of ownership, S18 Marx & abolishment of private ownership, S53 morality, distribution, limitation of freedom to steal, S61 Protagoras Sophist, S37 Protestant state as supreme authority, Reformation, S46 Protestants marriage regulations, S13 Pseudo-sciences unpredictability vs. scientific method, S49 rules of judgement, Kant and Hegel, S51 Psychology theories of personality development, A1 Ptolemy scientific progress, S48 Punishment equation with ill-fortune, S14 disobedience to God, S27 and its objectives - S52

Index Punishment cont. responsibility, freedom of will, guilt, revenge & desert, S58 a non-moral concern, values of society, misplaced humanitarianism, revenge & resentment, alternative forms, S67 Punishment cont. association with justice, self-preservation & innocence, proportionality, compensation, evidence, S59 Pythagoras division, S34 Quantum physics probabilities, counter intuitive, scientific revolution, S48 Quran Islamic scriptures, B4 Rationalism obtaining truth independent of experience, S50 Reality atoms & space, Democritus' theory, S36 real unchanging world of Plato, S39 relativity of morality, S59 Reason the thinking of emotions, S8 guilt, rationalisation of aggression actions, fixed behaviour, irrationality, S11 Zeno's paradoxes, thinking vs. senses, S34 proofs of Gods existence, S46 and the Philosophes, logically valid deductions, rationalism, S50 appearance, illusion & belief, distortion of reality, errors of causality, determinism, S58 impulsive vs. rational actions, S61 manipulation & justification of war, S63 critical appraisal, faith, S65 Reciprocity fairness & equality, S60 Recognition sensory processing, S47 © 1997 Allan Sztab

Reincarnation and Plato, S39 Krishna, B2 ancient Chinese beliefs, B5 Religion and marriage regulations, origins, S13 justification of rule, S20 justification of war, good and evil, S31 order of church & state, Reformation, S46 groups & dogma as a politics - order of church and state, S49 source of conlict, S59 and manipulation, S63 Repression defence mechanism, S9 Resources competition, S19 Responses fixed, learned, S2 emotions & stimuli, S8 Responsibility error of reason, guilt feelings, S58 Revolution freedom, S21 religious sentiment, S25 justification, Locke, S50 change in ruling elite, futility, S67 Rewards impact incentive, S7 Ritual and language, first shamans and priests, S23 baptism, S30 exposure of body to vultures, S31 Rogers, Carl drives, theory, S7 Romans charge & execution of Jesus, Pontius Pilate, Zealots, S28 destruction of JewishChristians, S29 Pontius Pilate, antisemitism, S30 Christianity as state religion, Constantine, empire, law, S45 Roosevelt, Theodore sterilisation laws, F 397

Rousseau, Jean Jacques and education, language & reason, humans naturally good, naturally free & equal, social contract & the common will, S50 Ruling elite morality and vested interests, S61 politicians, threat to democracy, corruption, futility of revolution, S67 as aggressive - Adlers theory, A2 Ryle, Gilbert analytic philosophy, language & context, S54 Saint Augustine humans as sinful, S46 Saint Thomas Aquinas church above state, S46 Sartre, Jean-Paul existentialist, freedom & responsibility, anxiety, selfdeception, S56 Satisfaction of needs, S5 drives, emotions, S8 Scepticism origins, questioning established beliefs, new ideas, S24 doubt, relativity of truth, S42 Schopenhauer the will to live, S51 Science behaviour measurement, S7 consistency & definitions - Socrates, S38 methods, S47 generalisations & induction, trial & error, faith, resistance by Church, S48 predictability vs. pseudosciences, S49 Self-esteem development of, S10 guilt feelings, sin & manipulation, S63 development theory of Bandura, A6 notion of superiority, F Self-evident Truths Locke, S50 intuition & rules of judgement, S51

Index Self-interest as a benefit to society, S52 and happiness, S66 freedom & democracy, S67 Selfishness Plato's identification of selfishness and individual actions, S39 as a virtue, S66 Senses information collection, S2 stimuli, S7 De Montaigne - fanaticism beyond the senses, their denouncement, S47 reason & socially consistent sensation, S65 taught to disbelieve, S67 Sensitisation learning, S6 and theory of Skinner, A5 Sensitivity collecting information, S2 matter & life, S54 Sentiment power of superstition, S44 Sex natural incentive, angeraggression, S7 dimorphism, incest taboo, regulation by society, S13 preferences taught, S57 education & children, S67 Sin religious taboo, S13 Egyptian notion of day of judgement, S22 soul confined to human body, S30 the emotions & manipulation, S63 suffering & bad Karma, B2 Slavery as natural, S40 Smith, Adam self-interest, S67 Socialism humanism, origins, S53 Society values & character formation, S10 regulation of sex drive, S13 role of government, S20 Bentham & the role of government, S52 © 1997 Allan Sztab

Society cont. penal code as a reflection of social conditions, S59 morality, limitations to freedom, security, S61 customs & beliefs, S62 Socrates truth & intuition, S22 definitions, general ideas, universal essences, S38 Sophists relativity of truth and morals, S22 creating reality, sensory limits of the senses, S37 Soul Egyptian belief, S22 varying conceptions, confined to human body as punishment, S30 development theory of Allport, A7 Hindu Atman, B2 South Africa witch doctors, S14 Species new generation, S2 change, shark, S3 Spirit dream origin, S4 Stimuli behaviour, S5 natural incentives, S7 emotions & control, S8 Subconscious dreams, mind, S3 drive satisfaction, S5 learning, S6 defence mechanisms, S9 concerns, S10 Subjectivity existentialism, meaning in life, S56 Suffering punishment by God, S27 power of belief, psychology of manipulation, S44 loss of pleasure, Buddha, S66 as sin or bad Karma, B2 philosophy of Buddha, B3 Suicide a philosophical question, S56 Sun-tanning environmental interaction, S5 Superstition origins, S14 398

Taboo controlling behaviour, sexual regulation, S13 Tantric Buddhism incantations, different schools, B3 Taoism Lao-tzu, B5 Taxation distribution of wealth, S60 freedom & redistribution, S61 origin, protection, S20 Ten Commandments and Old Testament, S26 Thinking language, S3 Thrasymachus Sophist, might is right, S37 Tibetans regulation of sex drive, S13 Tigris river first agricultural settlements, S16 Time as destiny, Father Time, S31 division into units, S34 Tobacco manipulation, advertising, S63 Toilet training formation of character concerns, S10 Tools language, S3 reason & emotions, S8 logic, mathematics, S50 Tribe ritual, language & common consent, S3 varying customs, S11 clans, lineages, representative, S13 oral recitation of history, S15 Truth belief, conviction, subjectivity vs. objectivity, consistent sensation, S22 as gods word, as whatever works, certainty, change, appearance, S32 Euclidean geometry, faith in logical rules, S50 freedom of will, as successful experience, S52 errors of causality, S58 relative, S37 Plato's noble lie, S39

Index Truth cont. tools of language, mathematics & logic, S58 Turgot, Jacques determinism, S52 Tyrants democracy, S21 drives, S5 pupils of Plato, S40 Uncertainty see Certainty Universal and primitive emotions, S8 myths of floods, S16 god, S24 Socrates & general ideas, S38 objects & their essences, S51 Utilitarianism greatest happiness for the greatest number, usefulness as a criteria of human behaviour, S52 Utopian Ideals Plato & authoritarianism, S39 Utilitarianism, S52 Values behaviour, S6 association to fear, S7 and character formation, S10 Vanity influencing gods, S14 origin, S57 Variety natural incentive, S7 and strong concerns, S10 Veda Aryan mythology, B1 Vedas ancient religious texts, S63 Vested interests obstruction to morality, S61 Vienna Circle logical positivism, S54 Vision processing, short cuts, S9 truth, appearance, interpretation, S32 Voltaire science & reason, S50 War theory of identity, dehumanising the enemy, use of drugs, S11 advantage of matrilineal lineage, S13 © 1997 Allan Sztab

War cont. as an adaptation to the environment, modern vs. primitive, S19 early pattern, factors, S20 religious cause, S31 Heraclitus, natural struggle, war as a just outcome, S33 religious - Thirty Years War, Inquisition, S46 might is right, S57 and the necessity of group identities, S59 past grievances and manipulation, S63 decline in capability of conventional military forces, S67 Jihad against non-believers of Islam, B4 group identity, F Wisdom avoiding pain, controlling desires, S43 determining pleasure & pain, S66 Women Goddesses of creation, S14 population control, war, S19 domination by men, S20 as inferior to men, B4 Worry happiness and peace of mind, S66 Yellow river first agricultural settlements, S16 Yoga Samkhya system of Buddhism, B2 Young, Thomas the wave-like property of light, S48 Zealots rebel Jewish sect, freedom fighters, S29 Zen Buddhist sect, B3 Zeno paradoxes, appearance & illusion, S34 Zoroastrianism Zarathustra, history, S31

399