<>2-sº <>2-stº sº 2-stº2-s:-25 <>2-sº-25 <>2-stºl THUNMBNAIL ESSAYS SAMPLES OF UNUSUAL THINKING by an evolutionary psychologist THEODORE SCHROEDER NEXT CENTURY PAMPHLETS No. 8. INTELLECTUAL COWARDS dare not read, and immature minds will not understand, any NEW CLAIMS OF TRUTH PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR Tel. Stamford 3-2579 COSCOB, CONN. U.S.A. 1949 -* * ~ *-* - * * * * * * * * - - - - - - $ - - - - - - I shot a cartoon into the air, It fell to earth, I know not where. Where'er it is, I've no regret, Perhaps the idea's traveling yet. — Art Young. WANTED: PUBLISHERS & “ANGELS” to insure the production of one or numerous books written by myself. They cover many subjects and exhibit varying literary styles, depending upon the subject treated and upon the readers for whom each book is designed. All my books imply the unusual viewpoint of the accompanying sample essays. I also need a publisher for my Collected Works. By the way! I could quickly finish a few hundred Thumb- nail Essays. Perhaps you would like to publish or sponsor a volume of: Thumbnail Philosophy Of One Evolutionary Psy- chologist. For more information address: THEODORE SCHROEDER, COS COB, CONN., U.S.A. (Coyrighted by the Author 1949) (2) THEODORE SCHROEDER THE LITERARY output of Theodore Schroeder has appeared in one hundred seventy through six different languages. different periodicals scattered In later years he has specialized, with growing emphasis, on evolutionary psy- chology. His essays on psychology have appeared in the following periodicals: Albany Law Journal, Albany, N.Y. Alienist and Neurologist, St. Louis, Mo. American Journal of Eugenics, Chi- cago, Ill. American Journal of Psychology, Worcester, Mass American Journal of Religious Psy. chology, Worcester, Mass. American Journal of Urology and Sexology, New York, N.Y. American Medicine,New York, N.Y Anthropus New York, N.Y. Archives of Dermatology and Sy- philology, Chicago, Ill. Arena, Boston, Mass. Azoth, New York, N. Y. California Law Review, Berkeley, Calif. Central Law Journal, St. Louis, Mo. Critic and Guide (Medical), New York, N. Y. Current Psychology and Psycho- analysis, New York, N.Y. Everyman, Los Angeles, Calif. Forum, New York, N. Y. Freedom and Unity, Santa Barbara, Calif. Freethinker, London, Eng. Imago, Vienna and Leipzig. Indian Journal of Venereal Diseas- es and Dermatology, Bombay, India. International Journal of Pscho- analysis, London, Eng. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Boston (then Albany, N. Y. and Hanover, N. H.). Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, New York, N. Y. Journal of Religious Psychology and Anthropology, Worcester, Mass. Journal of Sexology and Psycho- analysis, New York, N. Y. Labor Age, New York, N.Y. Liberal Review, Chicago, Ill. Medical Journal and Record, New York, N. Y. Medical Council, Philadelphia, Pa. Medico-Legal Journal, New York, N. Y. Medical Review of Reviews, New York, N.Y. Michigan Law Review, Ann Arbor, Mich. Monist, Chicago, Ill. National Pictorial Monthly, New York, N. Y. New York Daily Call, New York, N. Y. New York Medical Journal, New York, N.Y. New Yorker Volkszeitung, New York, N.Y Open Court, Chicago, Ill. Open Road, Mays Landing, N. J. Pacific Medical Journal, San Fran- cisco, Calif. Pioneer Illustrierter Volks-Kalend- er, New York, N. Y. Proceedings: XV Congre Interna- tional de Medicine, Lisbonne, Portugal. Psyche, London, Eng. Psyche and Eros, New York, N.Y. Psychoanalytic Review, Washing- ton, D.C., & New York City. Seven Arts, New York, N.Y. Sexuelle Probleme, Frankfurt a.M., Germany. Social Science, Winfield, Kan. Scund View, Ollala, Wash. Sunshine and Health, Mays Land- ing, N.J. Truth Seeker, New York, N. Y. Unity, Chicago, Ill. Zeitschrift fur Religious-Psycholo- gie, Leipzig, Germany. Zentralblatt fur Psychoanalyse und Psychotherapie, Wiesbaden, Ger- many. Modern Thinker, New York, N.Y. (3) - - * * *** - *** * * ~ * **** * * > * * * * * *s - - • - * - - -- SUPERSPECIALIST ON LIBERTY * * “This is a day of specialties and specialism, and Theodore Schroeder is a specialist. It may be said, even, that he is a super- man liberty. He is a liberty specialist, a liberty expert, a liberty” " enthusiast. There may be many other liberty enthusiasts, and not a few liberty experts; but, so far as I know, Mr. Schroeder is the only liberty specialist. Applied liberty being something outside the sphere of our so- cial experience, Mr. Schroeder's consideration of the subject ne- cessarily is academic in character. Although he possesses no more liberty than do the rest of us, he knows much more about it than does any other of us. His lack of knowledge of its prac- tice does not lessen his knowledge of its theory. He is a philoso- phic libertarian, a scientific libertarian, a technical libertarian. He is the last word on the subject of social liberty. Mr. Schroeder has written more along these lines than any other person that ever lived; and the aggregate volume of his published writings in defense of unabridged freedom of speech exceeds that of the combined similar output of all other writers in the English language. His industry in this direction is nearly incredible. He is an accepted authority on the law of this sub- ject, being himself of the legal profession and profoundly versed in its various intricacies.”—WALTER HURT, in The Paladin, Jan. 12, 1918. A MAVERICK PSYCHOLOGIST “One hundred and sixty (175 before 1949) periodicals in six languages have published Theodore Schroeder's Psychological, Philosophical, Religious, Medical, Sociological and Legal Es- says; * * * At the very least, he is one of the most interesting figures alive in America today.”— Maynard Shipley, Pres., Science League of America, in: The New Humanist, v 6. 1933. WORLD'S LEADING AUTHORITY “A lawyer by profession (Theodore Schroeder) has long been the world's leading authority on the legal aspects of freedom,and he has become convinced that the psychologic approach to pro- blems is more important than the legal.”—PRYNS HOPKINS, in Freedom and Unity, Jan. 1942. WORLD'S MOST DIVERSIFIED ESSAYIST “Articles from Schroeder's pen have appeared in a wider range and variety of publications than, perhaps, any author that has ever lived. And he is still at it!”—C. G. PATTERSON, Editor, Free Mind in: Thomas Paine, p. 10; 1945. (4) BIBLIOGRAPHIES OF SCHROEDERLANA 1913 Partial bibliography of the writings of Theodore Schroeder dealing largely with problems of religion, of sex; and of free- dom of speech. Free Speech League. (New York) April 1913, 8 p., 84 titles. - 1919 Authorship of the book of Mormon. Psychologic tests of W. F. Prince, critically reviewed by Theodore Schroeder * * * to which is now added a bibliography of Schroeder on Mormon- ism. Reprint [except bibliography]. American Journal of Psy- chology. (Worcester, Mass.) XXX pp. 66-72. January, 1919. 18 p , 65 titles. Bibliography pp. 10-18. There is some duplication by revis- ion, repulication or translation. Sankey-Jones, Nancy Eleanor, 1862 — Theodore Schroeder on free speech, a bibliography by Nancy E. Sankey-Jones. (New York.) Free Speech League. 1919. 24 p., 149 titles. .*. Duplication by revision, replication or translation. 1920-2 Sankey-Jones, Nancy Eleanor, 1862– Theodore Schroeder's use of the psychologic approach to pro- blems of religion, law, criminology and philosophy. A biblio- graphy by Nancy E. Sankey-Jones. (Cos-Cob, Conn.) 1920. 16p. Revised ed., Jan. 1922. 18 p., 92 titles. –Some duplication by revision, republication or translation. 1922 Sankey-Jones, Nancy Eleanor, 1862– A unique heathen, to which is now added: Theodore Schroeder on the erotogenesis of religion, a bibliography “. * * republish- ing in combination two essays from: The Freethinker, London, Eng. Apr. 17, 1921; The Truth-Seeker, New York, N.Y. Jan. 7, 1922.Cos Cob, Conn. January 1922. 27 pp. Lists 50 titles, mostly selected from last list. 1934 Sankey-Jones, Nancy Eleanor, 1862– Bibliography of Theodore Schroeder on the psychology of re- ligion and the erotogenetic interpretation of mysticism. Pub- lished by the author, Coscob, Conn. Dec. 30, 1934. 1945 Bibliography of Theodore Schroeder's writings on: Mormonism, Free Speech, Church & State; also Psychoanalysis and Evolu- tionary Psychology, applied to Philosophy, Religiosity, Sex, Law, Criminology, Sociology, Wage-Arbitration, Split Person- ality, Mental Hygiene and the Amoral Attitude. In preparation. ANGEL NEEDED FOR FINISHING, PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTING THIS ITEM. (5) SOME PROSPECTIVE BOOKS By Theodore Schroeder Most of the material for the prospective books has been published in magazines. Most of that has been revised for book use. Some essays need rewriting. Other essays still need to be written for each volume. The following list of prospective books is incomplete and Over long, because many of the magazine essays can be fitted into several of the volumes listed. One published essay is entitled: Sexual Determinant In Mormon Theology. That could be used in a book on : Mormonism, on : Sex in Society, or: Sex in Religion. This means that some of the listed prospective books may never appear. 1. SEX WORSHIP TO SEX CENSORSHIP. A PSYCHIOLOGIST'S CHIALLENGE. 2. THE HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL INTELLECTUAL LIBERTY. . FROM PSYCHOANALYSIS TO EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY. BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THEODORE SCHROEDER'S WRITINGS. : THE PSYCHOLOGIC AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF A PSYCHOLOGIST. TOWARD A PSYCHOSOCIAL SCIENCE, AND THE FUTURE SOCIETY. SEX IN SOCIETY. “HOLY JOE’’ AND JESUS. THE GREAT MORMON FRAUD. 9. THE NEW AGNOSTICISM OF A PSYCHOLOGIST. 10. ONE RELIGIO-SEXUAL MANIAC. 11. SEX IN RELIGION. A PSYCHOLOGIC STUDY. (2 VOLS. 12. THUMBNAIL PHILOSOPHY OF ONE EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGIST. 13. LACONICS OF ONE EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGIST. 14. JUDICIAL OPINIONS CRITICIZED, BY A PSYCHOLOGIST. 15. ESSAYS ON WAR, . BY A PSYCHOLOGIST. 16. CONTROVERSIAL CORRESPONDENCE OF A PSYCHOLOGIST. 17. THE CHURCH_STATE CONTROVERSY. 18. THE COLLECTED WORKS OF THEODORE SCHROEDER. (This will contain some other volumes, already pub- lished.) . 5 6. . (6) INSTEAD OF AN INTRODUCTION #TN the year of our Lord 1432 there arose a grievous quarrel among the brethren over the number of teeth in the mouth of a horse. For thirteen days the disputation raged without ceasing. All the ancient books and chronicles were fetched out, and won- derful and ponderous erudition, such as was never before heard of in this region, was made manifest. At the beginning of the fourteenth day, a youthful friar of godly bearing asked his learned superiors for permission to add a word, and straight- way, to the wonderment of the disputants whose deep wisdom he Sore vexed, he beseeched them to unbend in a manner coarse and unheard of, and to look into the open mouth of a horse to find answer to their questionings. At this, their dignity being griev- ously hurt, they waxed exceeding wroth; and, joined in a mighty uproar, they flew upon him and smote him hip and thigh, and cast him out forthwith. For, said they, surely Satan hath tempt— ed this bold neophyte to declare unholy and unheard of ways of finding truth contrary to all the teachings of the fathers. After many days more of grievous strife the dove of peace sat on the assembly, and they as one man declared the problem to be an everlasting mystery because of a grievous dearth of historical and theological evidence thereof, and so ordered the same writ down.”— From an old Chronicle. P.S. — PLEASE try to eliminate all prejudice about precedents. —T. S. (7) MY READERS few persons like or dislike me personally, and so praise or blame my work in general — without reading it. Some achieve a sentimental interest in a little of my work, and imagine that they understand all of me. Some approve the con- clusicns of certain essays, who would hate me if they knew my negation of their own pet prejudices. Some see a little of my method, but without understanding its implications or its Con- flict with the intellectual methods of others working in the same general field, whom they like or dislike very much. A few dis- cover, and are attracted by, some apparent novelty in my method or conclusions, as revealed in a particular essay, but without suspecting its consequences, when the method is applied to very different data, or to their own psychology. Others give approval or disapproval to some application of my method, without any awareness that only the understanding and improvement of my method seems important to me. Those few, who really care to urºderstand me, must read much of my recent intellectual out- put. Their evaluation of my work would help if, after they read my output with empathic insight a n d understanding, they believe that they have more mature impulses and intellec- tual methods than those which I use. Their criticism then could be very useful to me and to scientific advance, and that would make me very happy. The emotional approval of me as a person is as nothing compared with the understanding of what I am trying to do, if such understanding leads to an improvement of my method or my theories. (8) INTELLECTUAL, HOSPITALITY To HAVE SCme intelligent appreciation of how little of the knowable is yet known, conduces to that humility which is the beginning of wisdom. To know something of the past struggles for progress conduces to an appreciation of how little is probably true of what we think we know. Thus to see our at- tainments in their true relation to past beliefs and their probable relation to future knowledge, conduces to a true measure of our great ignorance. To have such understanding is to be without censure, because without childish pride. To love truth more than our vain predispositions; to love harmlessness of life more than moral sentimentalism; to be free from phariseeism, because we know the diversity and uncertainty of standards; to be unafraid of new evidence, and unoppressive toward new claims of truth; to be controlled by a selfishness so mature that our greatest happiness comes from studying all problems by unemotional methods, and making all judgments by objectively derive; standards; to have the desire to know the truth always over" power the desire for approval; to seek always the corrective for our present beliefs; never to impose our opinion by invasive force; never to be impatient — except perhaps with intolerance —that is the essence of intellectual hospitality. In addition to this, if we show that rare disposition to make a substantial Sacrifice for defending the right of those to be heard whose opin- i. we disapprove, we shall have a virtue so rare as to be almost €IO1C. (9) ALL, IS HUMAN NATURE B.º. every social problem is a problem of human nature — of psychology — a problem of mental hygiene and psychologic immaturity. The solution of such problems requires a new kind of education. Pedagogical indoctrination must be sup- planted by a discipline to unify and mature the im- pulses and intellectual methods of learners. Thereby the next generation will outgrow the need for “in fallible, unchangeable and irreformable” ideologies or conflicting moral creeds, which are only the ra- tionalizations and intellectual symptoms of “split personalities.” A better social order comes, not by a change of social theory, but by a maturing of the im- pulses behind our theories. Our problems are not matters of pure intellect, but of immature urges and sick emotions. The chief defect in our education is not a lack of the “right” ideologies,but in the intens- ity of the conflicting emotions behind them. Moral discipline can be the main cause of mental illness. That creates our “split personalities,” who are the greater part of our juvenile delinquents, marital mis- fits, criminals, rioters, revolutionists, warmongers, sadistic exploiters and reformers, most of the in- mates of our mental hospitals, and most leaders in education, religion and politics. All these are “split personalities” developed, in some degree, by our educators. (10) A NEW METHOD IN DEBATE Jºº. a new kind of controversy. I am not inter- ested in debates over the relative importance of Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum. I am undisturbed by any social theory, but I wish to know whether its practice will help or hinder democratization. I am indifferent to this or that bunch of metaphysical words, but I wish to discover the psychologic how and why of their illusional importance to others. I care nothing for this or that doctrine of conservat- ism, liberalism and radicalism; and to theories of re- gional or national dictatorships, or even to the supernational dictatorship of the Prophet, Seer and Revelator of the Mormons, the Calif of the Moham- medans, or of the Pope of Rome. I have no choice be- tween this or that pedagogical indoctrination, but oppose the impositions of any artificial fears, de- luding hopes, and all of their wishful or fearful thinking. I will work with any group, whose prac- tices do most to mature the impulses and intellectual methods of the crowd. I am zealous for the better mental hygiene through an educational discipline which accelerates the natural processes of psycho- sexual maturing for the young, and psychosocial evolution for all. A part of every debate over social problems should be about the relative immaturity or morbidity of the impulses and intellectual methods of the debaters, and thus show who is nearest to the un- attainable absolute truth. (11) ALWAYS THREE VIEWPOINTS T here are always (at least) three very distinct approaches to every human problem. There is always your approach; your opponent’s approach, and the scientific approach of an evolutionary psy- ck blogist. Your approach and that of your opponent are almost certain to be controlled by the conflicting emotions of a “split personality.” The approach of the one with a scientific temperament, who special- izes in emotional and evolutionary psychology,should be nearly free from emotionalism, even toward the emotions of others. The first two may use much of cultural and experiential equipment to rationalize and justify their emotional predispositions, where others use all available facts to correct their primi- tive ones. The first two will use “good logic” to justify their ends. The third will substitute psycho- logic explanations and classifications. The former will justify some old superstitions, or substitute new superstitions for the old. The scientist, with a more unified personality, may prefer the amoral realistic attitude, and explain the psychology of superstition, and so reduce the fictive component in all our think- ing. The two former often lose their way by devotion to words that are meaningless in the objective realm, and symbolize only conflicting feelings within the antagonists. The scientific psychologist is more con- cerned with acquiring ever more of objectively and inductively derived opinions, thus outgrowing ever more of their feelingful prejudices. * (12) THREE KINDS OF ARGUMENT M. debates have shown me three kinds of argument. In one , the disputants use different words to symbolize the same states of mind. Un- aware of that fact, they quarrel only about the mean- ing of their words. Other disputants use the same words to symbolize very different ideas. So we only have another quarrel about meanings. The third class of disputants increase the evil, by using mainly words which symbolize nothing objec- tive, but symbolize only feelings and fantasies. Thus again the discussion ignores all comparison of conflicting mental contents. If the disputants are ‘‘educated” then other techniques may be added to befuddle the listeners. So they use emotionally lad- en, question-begging epithets, adjectives, figurative language and emotionally laden remote analogies. Thus they cause the listeners to transfer the feel- ings, in remote and unrelated situations, over to the present subjects of debate, or over to the debater. In the minds of listeners, this minimizes still further their capacity for objective thinking. I doubt if any university ever exposes the evils of such emotional- ism. Accordingly, few know how to do anything but fearful and wishful thinking, about personal or soc- ial problems. Even in international negotiations, no- one shows any awareness of knowing the difference between a fact and their feelings about that fact; nor of the desirability of using all the available facts of any problem, so as to correct and outgrow their own primitive predispositions. (13) A NEW WIFWPOINT I is as true in the psychological realm, as in the physical, that every status has its necessary ante- cedent conditioning factors, which we rationalize as “natural causes.” Since all our political, economic and social relationships involve our human nature, we will never adequately understand the former, ex- cept through the scientific study of the latter. This applies especially to the behavior of our emotional maturing Therefore, all human intercourse presents problems of emotional health, and of psychologic immaturity. Unfortunately our misleaders in relig- ion, morals, education, business and politics, have mot yet discovered that fact, and therefore cannot help others to live more wholesome or mature lives. because all human institutions, and most human ac- tions, are being dominated by these psycho-neurotic leaders of our moronic civilization, we have infam- tile parasitism instead of mature mutual aid; we we have control by artificial fear and deluding hopes, or by brute force, instead of the eager mutual adjustment to “natural law” in the psychosocial realm. Democracy is not and cannot be static; nor can it consist only of such forms and ceremonies as voting or office holding. A mature democracy must express the whole of well-unified personalities, de- voted to an acceleration of psychosocial evolution and its processes of democratization. (14) DEMOCRATIZATION Nº. Democracy has not failed. It has never been tried – never existed. Oh yes! Here in the United States we have probably the best democratic political machinery that has been devised. However, that democratic machinery has never been used by democratically minded voters, to hasten the natural process of democratization. On the contrary, demo- cratic forms and ceremonies have always been used as if they were ends in themselves; or as if they must prevent further democratization. We glorify so much of democracy as has been achieved, and then perpetuate or increase the existing und mocratic privileges and prerogatives. No one, in a place of power, has ever proposed to use the government to complete the democratization of education; or to ed- ucate for democratic mindedness; or to maximize co-operation as a means to outgrow infantile parasit- ism; nor to use the ballot as a means of accelerating the natural process of the democratization of wel- fare. Our “leaders” think of democratic forms and ceremonies as a final and static achievement, instead of as a means for the acceleration of democratiza- tion. The intensity of our devotion to the word “democracy,” or to democratic forms and cermo- nies, is apt to be an exact measure of our fear and aversion to more democratic-mindedness and its fruits. For the further democratization of education, of co-operation and of welfare, it is indispensable. (15) MAKING DEMOCRACY WORK ith its amendments, our Constitution is the best political machinery thus far devised. Never- theless, we have many undemocratic practices, both outside of and under claims of legal sanction. Ne- groes, Jews, the yellow races, foreigners, Catholics, atheists and radicals are often denied an equality of rights, and of opportunity for education or welfare. Also, here the undemocratic disparity of welfare be- tween the richest and the poorest is probably great- er than in any country in the world, at any time in history. When a Civil Rights Bill is before the U.S. Senate, the right of minority control by means of a filibuster is more sacred than the constitutional rights of the oppressed. Evidently, the best of con- stitutions is not self-enforcing. To make democracy work, we obviously need a big majority of more democratically minded voters. For education to that end, pedagogical indoctrination is pernicious, be- cause it promotes only fearful or wishful thinking, not objective factual thinking. We need a recondi- tioning of the emotions, so as to minimize the “split personalities,” and substitute well unified person- alities, with a high degree of psychologic maturity and intelligence. This means a new kind of educa- tion, in harmony with a fairly well understood theory of evolutionary psychology; an education to mature the impulses and intellectual methods of the learner, and so to accelerate the natural processes of democratization and psychosocial evolution. (16) PSYCHOLOGY OF ECONOMICS I deny that “money talks”, or holds any force. The seeming power of money resides only in the mor- bid greed and fear-psychology of crowds. Let us try to understand the oscillation between booms and starvation amid plenty, through a study of the os- cillations of the “split personalities” between fits of depression and exaltation; and of the conditioning of the reaction of such crowd emotionalisms. Let us study them through their hopes and exaltations into the production of inflationary booms and illusional prosperity; and, with a return of the emotional pen- dulum, working through an artificial fear-psychol- ogy, producing synchronized mob depressions, econ- omic panics and starvation amid plenty. From this point of view, the problem of economics is basically a problem of mental hygiene and of evolutionary psychology; a problem of maturing the impulses and the intellectual methods of the learners. This implies the general development of democratic mindedness and its cooperation; and of the democratization of work and welfare. For ‘‘the economic determination of history,” I would substitute a study of the psy- chologic determinant of our choice of economic theory and practice. For the investigation of “econ- omic laws”, I would substitute a psychogenetic study of the conditioning of the psychologic imperatives behind our choice of economic theories and practices, and a psycho-evolutionary classification of the im- pulses and intellectual methods of economists and financiers. (17) THE LOWE-HATE COMPLEX L. has meaning only by contrast with its in- separable hates, both being symptoms of the love-hate complex. The most passionate lover of to- day may be the equally passionate hater of tomor- row, if the love-object disappoints some emotionally important expectation. That same hate may go out to those who discredit the perfection of the love-ob- ject. It is the love-hate complex that makes court- ship a game of hide-and-go-seek; marriage an en- trancing gamble, and romantic love the most colossal deceiver. The victims of the more intense love-hate complex must envy and resent the greater healthy mindedness and poise of others, which enable those others to see their fellow humans almost as they really are; see them nearly free from the distortions of either love or hate. These persons with the lesser distortions of love will tend to be relatively calm and understanding; free from moral sentimentalism and its hateful moral judgments; free alike from con- demnation, or the need of offering forgiveness. The capacity for an extravagant romantic love is always a most terrible evil omen. While the “split person- ality” exhibits only its love side, psychomeurotic authors write poems, songs and novels in glorifica- tion of its romanticized symptoms. When the hatreds of the love-hate complex dominate, the historian sometimes writes the record in blood. (18) SEX EDUCATION I. the realm of sex, as everywhere, growing im- munity from realistic harm will come only by the general development and application of the scienti- fic temperament and method. In our time, the most neglected aspect of sex is its psychology. Those with the lesser emotionalism should immediately become acquainted with such knowledge. Sex superstitions, and the resulting ignorance of sexual psychology, are the main factors in our educational system, which tends to push every learner toward, into, or even beyond the psychopathic borderland. It is ig- norance and fear of remedial evolutionary psychol- ogy, and the resultant morbid psychologic impera- tives, which bring about most juvenile delinquency, marital misfits, crime, riots, revolutions and wars. Our greatest need is an education for outgrowing in- stead of intensifying the childhood love-hate and inferiority-superiority complexes and their deriva- tive, the sado-masochist complex. This outgrowing of conflicting impulses cannot be promoted by means of ‘‘inspirational psychology’’, pedagogical indoc- trination, or suggestion-therapy. Such methods can produce symptomatic changes, and increase the sug- gestibility. Thus regression by counter suggestion remains imminent. We need an education based up- on evolutionary psychology, to promote conscious psychosexual maturing of the young, and for an ac- celeration of the natural processes of psycho-social evolution. (19) HUMAN ANIMALS t is a beautiful Sunday in 1940. A radio newscaster has informed us that last night Londoners suffered a most de tructive airplane bombing. Here, in the Connecticut countryside, all is still peaceful and perfect. The air is clear and cool. The sun is bright and balmy. In the long run, physical nature is always beneficent, if only we will make an intelligent ad- justment to its habits. Only human animals deliber- ately condition each other’s energies, so as to pro- duce avoidable lunacies. Only the human animal is capable of making a godly virtue out of the symp- toms of its own insaity. Only human animals con- sciously organize a forced exploitation of their own kind; or plan the useless destruction of social values and millions of human lives. Only the human animal mistakes the symptoms of mental disorders for sup- ernatural favors or divine commands. Birds, flowers and sunshine have neither illusions of moral grand- eur, nor of unpardonable “sins of the flesh.” Only the human animal has created sadistic gods and be- guiling devils. Birds, flowers, and sunshine do not invent supernatural morals, to justify insane anti- social compulsions. We humans could also enjoy the comforts of mutual aid, instead of moralized sadistic orgies and conquests, if only we were same enough and sufficiently, democratic-minded to induce a gem- eral desire for accelerating the natural process of the democratization of education, work and welfare. Olu R INSANE HUMANITY n a crazy world it is dangerous to deny beliefs which are popular symptoms of its insanity. Only in an insane asylum is it wholly safe to express all sane opinions. There it is safe because the officials never take seriously any of the ideas of inmates. Outside an asylum the great man is the one who does a little mature thinking and expresses it with- out getting killed and without the need of killing others in self-defense; one who can be among them without being of them; one who can conform to their insane conventions without becoming insane. Among maniacs illusions of moral grandeur are glorified and moral heresy is penalized, because they will not allow the world to be made safe for sanity and in- telligence. Persons who are both sane and intelligent will not argue about the ‘moral” value of psycho- pathic symptoms, or the ‘infallibility’ of pious illus- ions. Instead they will classify conflicting claims of truth according to the relative maturity of the im- pulses and intellectual methods which produce them; that is, according to their relative degrees of approach to the unattainable absolute truth. Of that, the evolutionary psychologists are the best judges. When we develop a leadership which is devoted to acceleration of the natural process of psychosexual maturing and psychosocial evolution, then we will Soon tolerate both sanity and intelligence. (21) PESSIMISM, OPTIMISM AND BEYOND T he professional optimists and the equally delud- ed pessimists are both sick. Both groups are manifesting only different symptoms of the same inferiority-superiority complex. Each of these symp- toms has its own degree of intensity, usually de- termined by “unconscious” subjective experiences and processes. These may be rationalized with the help of great differences in the quantity, variety and complexity of experiential and cultural data. At the extremes of emotional intensity, the professional optimist may develop most extravagant illusions of grandeur; and the chronic pessimist may become a manic-depressive. All this should be seen in con- trast with persons who have the scientific tempera- ment and method. As applied to the human emotions, the scientific temperament implies having outgrown the conflicting impulses of youth, which tend to ex- press themselves as pessimism or optimism. When we transfer our conflicting emergies over to the single purpose of accelerating the natural processes of psychosocial evolution,then any latent optimism or pessimism will soon be outgrown, and replaced by a calm contentment and an uncomplaining accept- ance of whatever comes to us, as a result of our best adjustment to all “natural laws.” By this method, practically all of childhood’s illusions can be out- grown. (22) PEACE of MIND U. to reform means the suppression of rebel- lious attitudes, the joining of some church. As an accepted member of a respectable mob, the reformed one feels a great elation and a new sense of security, compared with his former feeling of haunted guilt. Knowing nothing of the psychology of illusion- formation, he calls his new elation “a peace which passeth all understanding.” He may even call it “the peace of God.” All this is the illusional peace of “split personalities.” That is why it is not under- standable by them and must be referred to those psychologists who specialize in the emotions of “split personalities.” It can be best evaluated by the evolutionary psychologists, who understand also that different contentment which comes to psycho- logically mature and well unified personalities. The realistic contentment of healthy, mature and in- telligent minds, cannot be brought about by the tricks of suggestion or “inspirational psychology”; but will come only through a conscious outgrowing of the love-hate complex and all its derivatives. Such persons are relatively free from the urge to- ward wishful and fearful thinking. Consequently they are also relatively free from the oscillations be- tween fits of depression and fits of exaltation. That peace of mind is wholly beyond the understanding of all “split personalities.” (23) WORLD GOVERNMENT AND PEACE There are those who insist that we must have world government in order to gain world peace. Others insist that we must have world peace first, in order to get world government. Here is the old egg- and-hen problem all over again. I suspect that if we had a world population composed of well-unified personalities, instead of “split personalities,” and if these well-unified personalities were psychologic- ally mature, we could have peace either with or with- out world government. All past wars have been fought for the supremacy of the ideological symp- toms of the “split personalities” who were the real “leaders.” As I look back over history, I see a more or less blind striving of the oppressed ones, toward the democratization of welfare. The obvious con- tention was against a particular mode of oppression, not against all oppression—not for democratized welfare, as such. With a better understanding of psychosocial evolution, and its democratizing pro- cesses, our leaders could help the masses to adjust to it...For such persons, all specific aims would be sub- ordinated to the better adjustment to that “law.” Even international differences would be held sub- ordinate to the desire for a better adjustment to that “law.” Thus a general, lasting peace without fear or force, could be achieved. (24) “LIBERTY” UNDER THREE “LAWS” W lien humans first tried to explain the habits of nature, they invented a super-human intellig- ence. When frustrated by other humans, some “lead- ers” invented “divine laws” with supernatural re- wards and punishments, in order to secure subservi- ence. Serfs received “soul liberty” in the hereafter, as a reward for servitude here. In time rebellious serfs invented the theory that “the voice of the peo- ple is the voice of God”. Thus began ‘‘democracy”. I later came legislators who were not priests, and some clergy accepted a separation of church and state — on paper. However, they insisted that no man-made law was valid if contrary to their con- ception of “divine law”. Thus began “liberty under (man-made) laws”, and “Christian Democracy”, and demands for secular democracy. In time, some considered man-made laws to be just as ignorant and tyrannous as “divine law”. These demanded “lib- erty under natural laws’’. The priests again agreed, but claimed that all “natural laws’ are God’s crea- tion and therefore are “divine law”; and that one priesthood is its only divinely authorized interpret- er. Some scientists’ conception of “natural law” in- cludes the conditioning of the emotions for an ac- celerated psychosexual maturing and psychosocial evolution. When these and other “natural laws” are equally and more thoroughly understood, and gener- ally obeyed, then we will approach near to having equal and maximum liberty under “natural law”— not the priests’ “law.” (25) THREE SPECIALTIES Sºlº seems to be a process of coming to know more and more about less and less. Car- ried to its logical extreme, this seems to mean that one might come to the place of knowing everything about nothing at all. The most perfect human samples of such specialists are the “spiritual” sky pilots and the mystical theologians, who claim to know so much about the unknowable. A second group of specialists consists of those persons who are most successful in getting ‘‘the mostest for the least- est,’’ as does the new-born babe. “Beggars for sky,” the successful salesmen of stocks and bonds that represent little or no visible or tangible asset. Yes, our successful “democratic” statesmen are all close seconds. A third kind of specialist could be one who admits his own mental limitations to be such that he cannot know anything about the supernatur- al; nor have any absolute truths about anything natural. If such persons study problems of human nature they might also become specialists in the psy- Christ’s sake,” the salesmen of “mansions in the chology of other specialists. For this they would de- velop standards by which we can decide, among specialists who make conflicting claims of truth, which one is the nearest to the unattainable absolute truth. The yardstick for deciding such questions would be the relative maturity of the impulses and intellectual methods which were used in arriving at their claims of truth. (26) HOW DO YOU THINK? D o you do your thinking after the fashion of in- fants, hystericals and of the ‘social scientists”? That is to ask, do you think only through and for your sensations, feelings and fantasies? Do you do only wishful and fearful thinking, through and for your own unconscious loves and hates? Or — is your thinking deliberately done to insure a maximum of correction for your immature and conflicting urges? That is, for the checking of your love for your sensa- tions and habits? Or to secure a maximum of illu- sional comfort Or for your more intelligent adjust- ment, to all the known facts of life, including the “natural law” of your emotional and intellectual growing up? Do you use such methods of objective thinking as require the constant deliberate correc- tion of every predisposition, in relation to every one of your personal and social problems? In short, do you think for the justification, or for the correc- tion of your childish prejudices? Do you both desire and succeed in subordinating your existing cravings and habitual actions to the acceleration of the whole- some processes of our evolving, maturing human nature? That is to say, our psycho-social evolution? If you really do that kind of thinking, then you have almost outgrown the erudite infantilism of the pund- its who run our schools for the mass production of standardized robots and popular brands of culturine. (27) MY PET PREJUDICE B.º. that he had been psychoanalyzed, a friend of mine says that whoever has submitted to that discipline ought to be wholly without preju- dice. Another tells me that we should be wholly with- out feeling. Feeling and prejudice are but the mani- festation of psychologic energy. I too am prejudiced ‘(predisposed) just as certainly as those trees before my window are a product of predisposed seeds. One was predisposed in favor of becoming an oak, and the other of becoming a maple. Like nursing babies, some full-grown human animals are very deeply pre- judiced in favor of mouth sensations. They suck thumbs, chew gum, smoke cigarettes, and suck pipes. Also, like babies, and some exploiters, they crave much for nothing. Psychologic infants crave the guidance of someone like an “infallible” father. Be- cause of this urge very many accept some “infall- ible, unchangeable and irreformable” authority on etiquette, such as the Prophet, Seer and Revelator of the Mormons, the Calif of Mohammedans,the Pope of Rome, or Emily Post. I regard the prejudice in favor of any of these “authorities” as being childish. I be- lieve that the only unprejudiced persons are dead; that only the living can have a conflict of prejudices; that only the insane will provoke a war to establish superiority of their habitual prejudices. I too am very much prejudiced — in favor of the use and the fruits of the most mature impulses and intellectual methods of which I can conceive. (28 TOWARD MUTUAL TOLERATION L. from artificial fears, deluding hopes, and their destructive hates, demands a new kind of education. That service for a larger toleration in- vites us to contend for freedom where it is most need- ed, least demanded and most feared; where it is in the seeming service of objects that we disapprove for the apparent benefit of persons whom we dislike, and against others who can sincerely use persecution to promote some ‘‘higher” liberty. It invites us to de- fend tolerance for all despised minorities, in opposi- tion to the “guardians of public welfare,” and a- gainst those who claim “divine sanctions” for their own intolerance. It invites us to accept the enmity of tyrants whose good will we prefer; distrust from those whom we seek to help; and scorn from “prac- tical” liberals who demand miraculous results. For such, the overthrow of tyranny degenerates into re- venge or becomes an end in itself, instead of a means to psychosocial maturing. We must resist all tempta- tions, which in the name of liberty would retard liberation, or merely establish new tyrants for old ones. To do all that without applause, surrender, dis- couragement or complaint; and without self-pity or self-glorification — that requires emotional stabili- ty and intellectual maturity. When this is accompan- ied by a greater self-understanding, then we may en- joy a mature and realistic mutuality of understand- ing, without which the larger tolerance will never become permanent. (29) FOOLING THE PEOPLE braham Lincoln said: “You may fool all the peo- ple some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all the time; but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time”. That was before the days of radio and modern newspapers. I say: you can fool most of the people most of the time, and the rest of the people all of the time. In politics and business, you can fool most of the people all of the time, and the rest of the people most of the time. In effect it is the same as if you could fool all of the people all of the time. Don’t blame the fools for their foolability. Primarily, the fault rests with the clergymen be- cause they are the principal promoters of morbid psychology in the young, through a “moral train- ing” based upon artificially imposed fears and de- luding hopes, where they should teach only respect for “natural law”. Secondarily, the fault is with our educational system, where they confirm, and glorify, the intellectual symptoms of this emotional disorder, instead of helping the young to outgrow it. Next comes the periodical press and the radio broadcast- ers, who play upon this artificial, deluding fear-psy- chology, for their gain, and at the same time intensi- fy the deluding fears, and standardize the symptoms of the crowd's sick emotions. So our wholesome in- fantilism develops to a general mental disorder. Some become “educated” egomaniacs, who fool near- ly all of the people nearly all of the time. (30) MY SELF-ASSERTION L. many another, I have found myself puzzled by irreconcilable urges. On the one hand was the de- sire to cooperate fully with all others for promoting human welfare. On the other hand was my devotion to individualism. This conflict came into being be- cause I saw so many applications of the latter doc- trine which made impossible the accomplishment of the former. Without knowing it, I was a “split per- Sonality” and the above seemingly irreconcilable conflict was symptomatic. Later I was psychoan- alyzed, by one who started me on the road to a fairly well unified personality. As I outgrew my irrecon- cilable urges, my energies became detached from specific goals, and were transferred to the use and the fruits of more mature intellectual methods. Where formerly cooperation and individualism had been functioning as if ends in themselves, or as a means to some very specific end, these theories I now saw as rationalizations for abstracted aspects of the natural process of psychosocial evolution. Thus viewed, absolute individualism and the complete subordination of the individual to the needs of co- operation are seen as different aspects of the unat- tainable perfect society. If this could ever be achiev- ed, a complete voluntary cooperation and absolute individualism would have become identical. Now I am content to do my uttermost toward accelerating psychosocial evolution, as the best means toward the unattainable perfection. (31) MY “SCIENTIFIC VITUPERATION” A n acquaintance writes that the “scientific vitu- peration’’ which I apply to some whom I critic- ize shows that I am not objective in my thinking a- bout human problems. I am aware that my scientific name-calling is mere vituperation to all those who are unable to translate my words into anything re- sembling the concepts which they symbolize for me. Perhaps my correspondent had not taken the trouble even to search for the psychologic meaning of my ‘‘vituperation”. Hence he could not suspect that for me this “scientific wituperation” symbolizes fairly exact concepts of scientific psychologic classifica- tions. Let me illustrate. If I call some educator an erudite infant, T mean that he has accumulated much learning and is using it with immature intellectual methods to support some very infantile impulses. He is not mature enough to use his cultural and experi- ‘ential acquisition to check and correct his “uncon- sciously” acquired, and more or less consciously held, childhood predispositions, which he does not recognize as prejudices. Or again: if I say of some politician or judge that “he is duplicating the intel- lectual methods of the insane”, I mean just that, and I have a fairly detailed idea of the inner processes, by means of which the morbid emotions of the insane make themselves effective in action and thought. (32) THE RIGHT TO BE A FOOL he most “sacred” right of every American is the right to be a fool. So our children are “morally.” trained and “educated”, by means of pedagogical in- doctrination and “inspirational psychology” to choose the “right” misleader, and to be morbidly suggestible. Thereafter they buy only the right soap, heavenly lipstick, socially correct laxatives, and be- come infallibly right as to which of hundreds of dis- agreeing religious sects has the only “infallible, un- changeable and irreformable” theology. They reject all new ideas as dangerous, which do not fit into the framework of “legitimate” debate, about the reſa- tive importance of Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum. All other ideas create a “clear and present danger” and must be suppressed. Although this was the justi- fication for every tyranny, from the beginning of time to the Spanish Inquisition and Adolf Hitler, yet, when enshrined in a decision of our Supreme Court, every fool “liberal” approves this painless destruction of our Freedom of Speech, as the sacred duty of all loyal fools. All “good liberals” enjoy an illusional freedom of speech by auto-suggestion, sup- ported by the fact that they have nothing vital and new to say. So it is that we all enjoy the sacred right to be fools, and to be constitutionally protected a- gainst the “clear and present danger” of being dis- illusioned as to ideas which are useful to our mis- leaders. (33) PRIMITIVE INTELLECTUAL METHODS housands of controversial discussions, have shown me the childish intellectual methods of our “leaders’’. I will state them in four categories In the first method, the disputants use the same words to symbolize irreconcilable ideas. In the sec- ond method, the disputants use different words to symbolize the same mental content. In a third me thod of discourse the disputants apparently think that they are talking about knowable, objective real- ities, but they express themselves in words that usu- ally symbolize only feelings and fantasies about the objectives. A fourth kind of intellectual “duststorm” is created, when the disputants use mostly words which symbolize nothing in the objective realm, that is knowable within the common limitations of our human intellects. These words are supposed to sym- bolize supernatural (unknowable) realities. All per- sons in any of these classes do most of their thinking about social problems through and for their feelings and fantasy life — by wishful and fearful thinking. In discussing social problems their words seldom have any uniform, generally accepted and generally uunderstood objective meaning, even when they seem to be thinking about knowable things. Ignor- ance and psychologic immaturity prevent the dis- covery that their only disagreement is over the mean- ing of words. So they never debate the relative ac- curacy of their concepts. (34) MATURE INTELLECTUAL METHODS - think of mature intellectual methods (the best of objective thinking) in contrast with the methods of primitive peoples, present day children, the insane and erudite psychoneurotics. All these do mostly wishful and fearful thinking, and use tricky special pleading, to justify their childhood’s impulses, and emotionally exaggerated hopes and fears. Those who are psychologically mature use retrospective intro- spection, and so learn something about the common limitations of our thinking faculties. From this they learn that they cannot have the absolute truth about anything; nor know anything about any absolute, not even its existence. Therefore they waste no time on such subjects. By the same method they have dis- covered the mental mechanisms by which our child- hood impulses and valuations mislead us later in life. Through evolutionary psychology they acquire a vi- vid picture of the greater desirability of the fruits of mature intellectual methods, over and above the fruits of all wishful and fearful thinking. This furn- ishes the motive for a self-discipline, which produces the habit of using all of their cultural and experien- tial equipment for the correction and outgrowing of the primitive impulses, and the intellectual methods by means of which the latter make themselves effec- tive in action and thought. Thereby the conflicting impulses of infancy, and later life, all become trans- ferred to the use and the fruits of more mature in- tellectual methods. (35) FREEDOM FOR SILENCE Unabridged freedom of speech implies the right to choose the language, the vocabulary and the time *or expressing one's claims of truth, so as to make them most effective. That also implies the right to remain silent if the time and the occasion do not seem propitious. I agree with the Continental Con- gress that intellectual liberty is necessary “whereby oppressive officials are shamed and intimidated into more honorable and just modes of conducting af- fairs”. I agree with Thomas Jefferson, who summar- ized all the pre-revolutionary contenders for free speech. He said: “It is time enough for the rightful purpose of civil government for the officials to inter- fere, when principles break out into overt acts a- gainst peace and good order.” (See: Reynolds vs. U. S., 98 U. S. 165.) under our Bill of Rights, no expres- sion of any opinion can be lawfully prohibited or punished on the pretense that it holds or emits any objective force that can create a realistic “clear and present danger”. If no legislative body has authority to prohibit or punish any opinion as such then it fol- lows that no governmental agency can have any au- thority to make any inquiry as to the existence of any opinion, upon the pretense that such informa- tion is necessary in order that appropriate legisla- tion may be passed for its suppression. (36)