Vol. 60 No. 6 JUNE 1955 Threepence

Notes of the Month Custos

Our English Ways

Erasmus Darwin, Scientist and Poet W. E. Swinton

The Importance of the Individual T. II. Pear

The Struggle for Survival Archibald Robertson

Seven Prime Ministers S. K. Ratcliffe

The Biblical Patriarchs—II P. G. Roy

Conway Discussion Circle Correspondence

Friday Discussion Group South Place News

Society's Activities

•

SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETI

SUNDAY MORNING MEETINGS AT ELEVEN O'CLOCK

June 5—W. E. SWINTON, Ph.D.—"Thc Religion of Albert Einstein"

Piano Solo by MARY NASH

Toccata in E minor .. Bach

Hymn: No. 103

June 12—JOSEPH MURUMBI of Kenya—"The Colour Conflict"

'Cello and Piano Solo by LILLY PHILLIPS and FIONA CAMERON

Sonata in G minor ..Hymn: No. 208

Handel

June 19—PROFESSOR T. II. PEAR, M.A.—"The Cult of Austerity in Social

Studies"

Tenor Solos by ANDREW COLO

Tomb of Ajax . .. D. M. Stewart

If it's ever Spring again .. Christopher le Fleming

Hymn: No. 141

June 26—ARCHIBALD ROBERTSON, M.A.—"World War or World Peacer

Bass Solos by G. C. DOWMAN

Silent noon . Vaughan Williams

Where-e'er you walk .. Handel

Hymn. No. 207

(Questions after the lecture)

SOUTH PLACE SUNDAY CONCERTS, 65th SEASON

Commences on October 2, 1955

Officers

Hon. Treasurer: E. J. FAIRI4ALLHon. Registrar: MRS. 1'. C. LINDSAY Conway flail, Red Lion Square, W.C.1

Secretary: J. HimON HYND

The Monthly Record is posted free to Members and Associates. The Annual

charge to subscribers is 4s. 6d. Matter for publication in the July issue shouldreach the Editor, G. C. Dowman, Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, W.C.1, bylune 10._

The Objects of the Society ,are the study and dissemination of ethical

principles and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment.

Any person in sympathy with these objects is-cordially invited to become aMember (minimum annual subscription is 10s.), or Associate (minimum annualsubscription 5s.). Life membership flO 1N. Associates are not eligible to vote

or hold office. Enquiries should be made of the Registrar to whom subscriptionsshould be paid.

2

TheMONTHLYRECORD

Vol. 60 No. 6 JUNE 1955 Threepence

CONTENTSPAGE

NOTES OF THE MONTH, Custos.3

OUR ENGLISH WAYS ..5

ER.AcCinis- DAitviiN, W. E. SWidlon 7

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE INDIVIDUAL, T. H. Pear .. 9

THE STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL, Archibald Robertson

SEVEN PRIME MINISTERS, S. K. Ratcliffe 14

THE BIBLICAL PATRIARCHS—II, P. G. Roy 17

CONWAY DISCUSSION CIRCLE 18

CORRESPONDENCE .. 19

FRIDAY DISCUSSION GROUP 21

SOUTH PLACE NEWS .. 22

SOCIETY'S ACTIVITIES .. 23

The views expressed in this journal are not necessarily those of the Society.

Notes of the MonthTHE PRESENT POSITION of the Roman power in world affairs makes aproblem of extreme importance and perplexity. Despite the tone of thePontiff's periodical utterances, the Vatican is certainly not to be reckonedan ally of the forces working for peace and settlement. Its political enmityis,not confined to Communism but is almost, if not quite, as implacablethwards every form of revolution ngainst what is absurdly called thespiritual Power. The great revolt of the nations has spread in our timeto the republics of Latin America. It began in Mexico thirty years ago.Today it is being directed with grim determination by the Argentine Govern-ment which, under President Peron, is displaying a temper of completedefiance, the control of the schools being a crucial issue. In material re-sources and political awareness Argentina has made enormous advancesin recent years, and there can be no doubt that Peron is enjoying a senseof security that was not 'his at the time when the death of his wife madeBuenos Aires a centre of world news. He has clearly embarked upon a

3

thorough anti-Roman policy which if continued will sound the note forall South America. Over that continent the rule of Rome has been absolutefor 400 years. Its overthrow in the sphere of social authority would be anevent of immeasurable significance for Spain and the other Europeancountries where the Vatican has retained its hold after a century of secularuprising.

Equal Shares For All?The problem of differential wage rates is likely to come to the fore

more and more often as the gap between payment for skilled and unskilledwork narrows. It is sometimes posited as an ethical question : Why shouldone worker receive more wages than another ? Ideal justice, it is argued,would make no such distinction. Fair shares ought to become equal shares.Indeed, if some people have been underpaid in the past, why should otherswith no real grievance receive an unmerited increase when the wrong isredressed ? Bernard Shaw believed that it was humbug to talk about aclassless society until wages were equalised. A more moderate defence ofthe trend towards egalitarianism was put forward by Barbara Wootton inher latest bock.

But whatever may be said in theory, it is difficult to believe that locomo-tive drivers, for example, will be content to receive the same wage-packet asporters in the measurable future. They are not alone in protesting againstthe lowering of status which this would seem to imply. Only another revolu-tion in our social habits would destroy the symbolic value of money asa measure of prestige. This has occurred in upper levels, where a writer orscientist or artist is not judged by the size of his bank balance. But thestrongest resistance to a yard-stick that does not make income its standardis encountered, ironically enough, in the non-professional classes. Thedilemma is that although full employment increases the bargaining powerof the unskilled, the spread of mechanisation puts any major industry atthe mercy of a small number of key men, as recent experience shows.

Storm Over TelevisionThe B.B.C. bowed to the Catholic storm over the T.V. play Family

Portrait which was first presented at Easter. True, the humble apologyoffered to the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster was accompanied bya refusal to stop a repeat performance: but when all allowances havebeen made for the difficulties of the Director-General, it is lamentable thathe should write "there is no doubt now in anyone's mind that it was amistake-. Wherein lay the fault? Chiefly that "the Holy Family" were treatedrealistically, like any other family disturbed by a prodigy in their midst.ft was assumed, by the author, that Mark was right when he referred tothe brothers and sisters of Jesus. This, declares the Cardinal, is "contraryto sound scholarship and the beliefs of all Christian bodies". Yet it hasbeen held even by Anglican bishops. To pretend that "brothers and.sisters"should really be translated "cousins" suits the rigidity of orthodoxy ratherthan the rigours of scholarship. It is a novel and disturbing ruling thatwhatever is deemed offensive to Catholic Mariolatry should be suppressed :for that is what it may amount to. We can be sure that in future evenmore .apprchensive eyes will be turned to religious pressure groups. Butfor the intervention of these clamorous minorities there would have beenno repercussions whatever. The Catholic Church is feeling its strength inthis country and with every victory its arrogance will grow.

Aldous HuxleyMany readers will find a point of special interest in the decision to make

room in the Penguin series for the novels of Aldous Huxley. It ensures the4

capture of a large new public for a novelist. with a highly varied career andreputation, who underwent a singular change of front in middle• life..Nowriter of fiction in our day can be said to offer a more striking contrastwithin twenty years than that between the author of such stories .as Crthne

Yellow and Antic Hay and the student of mysticism revealed in Grey

Eminence and its successors. The earlier novels of Aldous Huxley, likethose of Evelyn Waugh, may be said to typify the moral anarchy wffich,in the general view, was characteristic of the two decades following• theFirst World War. Both are men of unusual gifts. It could have been pre-dicted that neither would stay where he was. The line of , Mr. Huxley:sdevelopment is the more surprising, and it is permissible.to Wonder how anovelist looks upon his, past when he releases for a .new ?generation 'ofreaders the work he produced at a time he has, long.outgrown. I

•Equality: a Dilemma

The present. wave of strikes and strike-threats has brought to ,the frotha problem of social policy, to. which the public has hitherto given littleattention. It would be true to say that in recent years the nation has notbeen disturbed by the general movement in the direction of economicequality. We have grown used to the important fact that, large bodies ofmanual workers.are earning more, often much more than civil servants andother- professionals, and. we are realising that a measure of social juSticesuch as a living wage for all workers on the lower, level brings unforeseendifficulties. Better pay at the bottom tends to narrow the gap betweenskilled and unskilled, and men .and women on its upper grades assertunanimously that this cannot be permitted. In the world of .work .and'wageS the ideal of equality does not prevail. On the contrary there is -thestrongest feeling ;that • prestige goes with pay and always must. Hence , theinsistence of the unions upon. the necessity of differentials, and the need fortheir continuing revision. Soviet Russia was made to recognise this truthsoon after thet revolution and has applied it ever since all round. Ourmost immediate illustration is found in the railways. The saving of a nationalstrike turned largely if not entirely, upon the differentials. There is animposing array of arguments in favour of the abstract development ofsocial equality, but its application in the sphere of work and pay is revealedas.an impossibility. Could anything be plainer that this, that human naturewill have none of it?

Our English WaysA RICH FIELD for inquiry and discussion is opened by Professor T. H.Pear in English Social Differences (Allen and Unwin I8s.), a book of freshand fascinating interest. The author is well known to South Place audiencesand holds a place of distinction among British psychologists by his tenure.of the chair at Manchester Univeisity. He notes that few psychologists havegrappled with the problem of national character. This would seem to bectirious 'indeed, for there before them has. been spread out the materialsfor unlimited study, which could rightly be described as a challenge alikepermanent and ever changing. Professor Pear has recognised this challenge.Flis'bibliography shows a complete knowledge of the literature of the subject,and his twelve chapters contain an abundance of concrete observation, setout with delightful skill, concerning speech, food, dress and behaviour:

Social differences, of course, are directly related to the predominant, factsof class and caste. It was never true that the English people, since the:dawnof. the modern age, have been divisible into three plain divisions—upper,Middle, and lower. Before the industrial revolution an advancing_ middle

5

dass had broken the old pattern, and within living memory the class systemhad become a chaos impossible to describe to ourselves and a hopelessbewilderment for the foreign observer. We have witnessed a most remarkableexpansion of the middle class, together with the break-up of the artisanpopulation., National education, new occupations, the widening of oppor-tunity, and the economic liberation of women have wrought an indescribablesocial change. Where, today, for example, are we to look for the staticVictorian working-class family ?

It has long been accepted that in England there is more social discontentthan in any other country of Western Europe ; that is to say, more envy ofthe people who happen to be better off in income and in easier circumstancesas regards occupation and home conditions. Professor Pear finds it par-ticularly interesting, with his happy gift for illustration, to track the evidencesof this national trait in speech, dress, sport, domestic habits and what not.Colloquial speech and changes of dress provide endless instances. Phrasesare taken up and abandoned in the process of imitation. In everyday inter-cOurse, the mysterious business of status is indicated by the phrases that are.habitually used, by the ways in which fashion is followed or disregarded,by-the choice of amusement, and in countless other ways. And, as we shouldexpect, Professor Pear finds that in this respect language and accent arethe surest guide to status. His chapter on this theme is most entertaining.He• has listened methodically and has thrown his net so widely over theevidences of change that he would seem to have missed almost nothing inpopular usage.

I note, however, one important omission. He does not discuss the con-tinuous phonetic decay, particularly in vowel sounds, which is surely themost noticeable feature of "educated- speech since let us say 1900. In ourgeneration the O's and A's of so-called standard English have gone topieces. The diphthongal vowels now heard in every class-conscious ,assemblyare a tell-tale sign, which alone is enough to advertise the linguistic failureof the privileged schools. It was a clear duty of theirs to uphold the levelto which all the great Victorian speakers conformed.

Professor Pear, I believe, overstates the influence of the B.B.C. in respectof the approach to standard English. Any debate in Parliament providesa test, as do questions from the floor in a radio programme. Every one ofthese has an individual sound. Not one in ten comes near to the academictype. The English dialects, of course, are disappearing, but the local accentsare unquestionably holding their own.

In dealing with the broad divisions of custom and habit in English lifeProfessor Pear is notably accurate and perceptive, but here and there hewould seem to have fallen somewhat below his opportunity, as, for instance,in his comments on the social differences made by the Established Churchand the denominations. He remarks that in some parts of the country thesecontinue to be important. He might well have emphasised permanence ofthe division in the social life. Here, indeed, is the standing proof of ourtwo nations : an example of co-existence, peaceful perhaps but not cordial.In America a stiff Anglican speaker was asked whether he believed therewas any way to heaven other than the one offered by the C. of E. His replywas illuminating. There may be, but no gentleman would take advantageof it ! Until the close of the nineteenth century nonconformity held theallegiance of many wealthy families, particularly in the north. This is nolonger the case. Professor Pear notes that on beginning work in Manchestervery few of the persons he had to deal with were members of the C. of E.

The silent revolution in English life, already in process before the FirstWorld War, was hastened by the Second World War and has been carriedtowards a culmination in the Welfare State, it has involved a transformationof the class structure such as could not have been imagined in the nineteenth

6

century. It has Meen accompanied by a movement in the direction of socialjustice and civility which sympathetic outsiders have contrasted With analleged deterioration of manners in certain continental countries. This beingso, we are led to ask whether the widespread forces of social change havereacted to any serious degree upon the fundamentals of national character.An answer to that question would lead along lines of analysis not venturedupon in the valUable and enlightening book dealt with here, but in thisconnection there is one matter upon which there can be little•dispute. TheEnglish people •were known to the world as emphatically independent intemper and self-reliant in action, standing everywhere on their own feet.They have grown to be, over a great extent of the common life, contentedlydependent upon public service and State authority. We may well wonderwhether this is to prove an enduring change and a change for the better.

Erasmus Darwin, Scientist and PoetB Y

•W. E. SWINTON

ERASMUS DARWIN, the, third son of a studious father, was born on December12, 1731. As a boy he displayed a scientific taste in his games, or gatherhobbies, for all his life he disliked sports and games, and some of thesemere tri become seriofia interests in his later daysr-He-was born-at ElstonHall near Nottingham and educated at Chesterfield School. Later he wentto St. John's College, Cambridge, and in 1754 proceeded to Edinburgh topursue the final courses of his medical education.

His medical career was not specially notable in his early days, but ontaking up practice in Lichfield he soon became well known and highlyesteemed. He was a lai-ge, physically strong, and very energetic man andhis foithright manner no doubt endeared him to as many as were, on theother hand, affrighted by his apparent rudeness. He was, for a time at leasta contemporary in Lichfield of Samuel Johnson and the pair had little incommon. Hesketh Pearson, a descendant and a biographer of Dr. Darwin,attributes Johnson's dislike to the medical man's agnosticism, though onemight well ask whether Johnson was ever attracted to anyone as volubleand opinionated as himself.

None the less, Darwin succeeded in Lichfield and such was his famethat it is reported he was offered the post of physician to George III. Thepost .was declined, probably to the great advantage of science.

The truth of this last remark will not be immediately obvious. How couldthe practitioner in the pleasant but small cathedral town exert an influenceon any wide area of thought, scientific or otherwise?

Part of the answcr lay in 'the virility of the man. In the midst of aflourishing and widely spread practice, he none the less found time forprofound thought and natural history studies but he was able to writescientific essays of considerable merit. Some of the essays indeed were veryhighly considered at the time and were translated into several foreignlanguages. It is true their interest has not lasted, that much of his writingsare only subject to review as a result of his grandson Charles's recommenda-tion..Yet, in their own time, they were notable for the originality of theirviews.

Dr. Darwin was a poet and scholar, as well as a scientific author. Indeedthe quality of his verse might have been great if the scientific personalityhad not protruded so much, if the classification of Linnaeus had not beenso obvious•in the verses about the beauty of nature. Yet some of his poemspersist for their prognostication, and a few extracts are still preserved inthe Oxford Book of Eighteenth Century Verse.

-7

His main writings were Zoonomia published -in 1794 and a great poem,iiublished in two parts:Botanic Garden!, 1789 and 1791. He later publisheda Continuation orthe- Zoonomia (1796) and in 1800 Phyrologia or ThePhilosophy of Agriculture and.Gardening.

Of these the Most important from the modeim point of view is uedoubtedlythe Zoonolnia, a work that was mainly pathological with a section 'on"generation".'Dr. Darwin held that the main constituents of Nattire werespirit and mattef'. Life itself was a special force. So far there is nothingoutstanding or peculiar about these tenets. But he believed superabundantlyin the place. of irritation sin all life. Every 'manifestation of the liVingorganism was taken to Move the power of irritation,. which caused thecontraction. not Only of muscle fibfes .but even caused Movement in thecells of the brain which in turn produced ideas:Life Was thus a verydefinite response to the effects (or irritation) of the environment.

But .his rather peculiar views on "generation" gave a .new turn to theembryology Of the 'time and one that especially appealed to the Teutonicmind. Birth resulted from the impregnation of the female by a filamentfrom the father. To this !filament , the mother-to-be added matter throughnourishment. This .was •a process of accretion and not a development ofnreOtdained structures thieugh maternal ndurishreent. 'Di. DafWin.“saw in

thC,Biblical story of Eve's creation from Adam'S fib a confirmation 'of .histhoughtit thus considered that the development Of the child was greatlyinfluenced by theparental environment, so that where the constant attentienof 'one _Oarerit Was missing, as in illegitimate children, the children weremuch mord like their mothers.

This environmental effect may Again be noted. The detailed developmentof any organism, even the most humble, is obvieusly not so easily explainedAs this but he postulated that the organs also were produced by irritationas needed. He actually points to the development of the antlers' of stagsand the spurs of cocks aS examples. He considered that such things sOobtained were reproduced and inherited by the offspring.' Taking' three of these concluSions the general respOnse to irritation';,the effect of the parental environment off, the unborn young ; •and theproduction or organs by direct contact with the struggle against the' en-Vircinment, there seems little doubt that Dr. Darwin did predate Lamarck insome at least of his thought, though there may he some doubt as to how'fAti Da'rwin hiMself had read and been impressed by the works of theGerMan Caspar Wolff. ..

It was. a natural consequence of such beliefs that Dr: Darwin should'expeet a large number 'of intermediate forms between animals, but he wasnCt interested in species of their generation and the shadow of his grandson'swork was small and passed by With no effect. But he may welt have fore-

shadowed, some of Goethe.'•'Despite ihis literary industry and Medical saccess, Dr. Darwin had still

a great number of interests. Fle was a founder of ithe Lunar SOciety, acompany of men of many interests who chose their meeting nights ihoieon which the full Moon would illumine their homeward ways. In, through,'of, from the proceedings of this dining and diScussidn- group, Darwin was'brought' into contact with many of the leading figures Of his day. WithWatt and Boulton; with. Priestley; and of course with the gentle and,friendly figure of Wedgwood the potter, with whom the descendants ofthe family were to be so intimately related. To most of the engineers,acientists,, and dilettantes the hearty Doctor could add something te theirtaste. He could talk to all of them on equal terms. He was the first doctorand'Perhims the first map—to use the Speaking tube ; he invented a speakingmachine ; dug the first artesian well, invented a rotary pump, improvedcanal locks, and made a copying machine.r.

He was a zoologist, botanist, atomist and physiologist, engineer, meteorolo-,

gist, moralist, temperance advocate, friend of the poor, poet, and, the

progenitor of men and women who were themselves to achieve gteat

tinction. In this welter of respectability it is-heartening to know that he was

not exactly divine. When his first wife died, he entered into a liaison with

a „widow and had two illegitimate daughters. He subsequently married ,a

very handsome widow, and at her insistence, moved. to Derby where his

medical practice prospered as before and none of,his interests flagged.:

His constant advocacy of total abstinence is mentioned by all of his biog-

raphers and he is reputed to have done much tO assist the poor in this .way,

though it is only fair to say his efforts were directed to his own level of

society-as well. Yet here again, he had had his day, for there is onc delight-

ful occasion, when on )a boating trip with friends, and.,elevated to a high

(and very unusual) degree for him, he jumped into the water and making

his way to the river bank gave an eloquent if rather ,uncalled for address

to the astonished onlookers. It. was in Derby, and long after this that he

died„ on. April 17, 1802. •

.is. said , that he was.-an agnostic, yet -his writings also can be used a

deep reverence for the words of the Bible. Some of his works were •"hon-

ourecr (to quote Charles Darwin), by the Pope by being placed on the Index.

His -poetry is said to have been uninspired, yet pleasant fragments remain

in .anthologies. Much of his thought was.in advance of its 'time. His life

was distinguished and he was destined for further distinction in being.the

grandfather of Charles. Robert Darwin and of Francis Galton. Let me end

by, two-quotations: the first on a favourite and meteorologicalitheme:

the nations who inhabit this hemisphere of the globe, instead of destroying

their seamen and exhausting their wealth in unnecessary wars, could be

induced to .unite their labours to navigate the immense masseS -of ice in

the polar regions the more southern oceans, two- great advantages would

result to mankind; the tropic countries would be much cooled by their

solution, and.,our winters in this latitude would be, rendered much .milder

for.•a century or two, till the masses of ice again became enormous.",

' And, frOm a• poem 'entitled .5/earn Power: ' , ,

"Soon shall thy arm, UnConquer'd Steam, afar

Drag the slow barge, or drive the rapid car;

. Or on wide-waving wings expanded bear

The flying chariot through the_ fields of air.

—Fair Crews triumphant, leaning from above,

Shall wave: their fluttering kerchiefs .as they. move;

Or warrior bands alarm the gaping crowd •And armies shrink beneath the shadowy cloud."

That was Erasmus Darwin, M.D., writing in 1792.

„ (Summary of a lecture delivered on April 3)

The Importance of the IndividualB Y

T. H. PEAR

TO SAY THAT 'the individual, as he functions in our natith-tal pattern

of civilisation today, is important may seem to parochially-min'de'd hearer's

a platitude too obvious to be worth utterine, yet others may deem it a

craven or perverse contradiction of an important fact. A•sociab psychologist

by inclination, I am always interested in purveyors of pdpular hunionr,

wit and jokes, however impolite, uncultured or,in bad taste they may seem,

' 9

for often they give a hint of ideas fashionable amongst "ordinary" people.A remark heard recently on the radio was "Wc are sent here, they say,to do good to others what are the others sent here for ?" -

Is this .an individualist protest or does it express only lazy selfishness ?One may justifiably ask oneself : "What is the importance of the individualin a so-called civilisation threatened with instant annihilation in ways whichour fathers never knew of ?" Is the individual ever mentioned by thosewho discuss the military uSes •of atomic energy'? Does he featly matterif he is mentioned for politeness' sake ? Must he not subordinate his personalwishes to the demands of family, school, village, town, nation ? That heOught to do this may seem morally demanded, but should he stop there?And if he prefers to subordinate his personal desires to what •he considersto be demands for the welfare of mankind, will he not encounter insuperableobstacles ?

Reading about events in totalitarian countries. we may wonder if theindividual is ever respected there. But is he not neglected in other countries ?Think of the Japanese fishermen appallingly damaged by a "scientific"experiment with "peaceful" intent, of the Crichel Down case, of the demandsof military conscription, of the increase in mass entertainment, with con-sequent narrowing of choice for the individual. Is he neglected by thescientist ? I doubt if, when on duty, many physical scientists ever thinkof him, and some "scientific" medical men tend to shun the individualcase.

But, it may be objected, surely the individual is not. neglected bypsychologists! Are not many books •being published at present with theword "Personality" in their titles ? Is not this evidence of their authors'respect for the person ? They deal with Personality, certainly, but definedin ways which might surprise the ordinary man as much as he was taken'aback when he learned what psychologists mean by Intelligence. Howmany psychologists study' in detail individual persons acting intelligently ?

There are social studies which deliberately avoid considering the person.It seems to me that most sociologists (there are exceptions near home)

• do this. Yet some sociologists, I feel sure, expect the social psychologistto complement their studies by taking care of the study of persons.

This is not a hint that generalisations about the nature of social groupsand their concerted action are not extremely important and interesting,yet it is conceivable that some generalisations about society would beless elegant had they taken into account more single and more variedinstances.

Professor Gordon W. Allport, directing his remarks at some co-workers,alluding to the easily offended dignity of those who have sacrosanct ideasof what constitutes "scientific" psychology, writes : "The same psychologistswho shun the deeper problems of emotion lest they seem emotional,' andwho overlook the whole field of sentiment lest they appear sentimental,will now avoid the person lest they become personal."* Here we find our-selves on the sidelines of a battle, this time not of words. The antagonists,as they seem to some thinkers, hold different views of the aim of Science ;one is that the aim is nomothetic (to lay down laws) the -other that thereis also an idiographic aim, to describe and explain the individual case.

Where does this belief, that the only scientific way to study Personalityis to ignore persons, lead us ? In several directions none of them, I submit,useful except in a restricted sense. If I may quote from my recent. bookEnglish Social Differences: t

"The Personalistic Psychology of William Stc n", in The Study of Personalityed H. Brand, 1954, Chapman and Hall, p. 161.

I 1955. Allen and Unwin, p. 39.

10

. . . how far can the general practitioner be rigidly scientific ? andif he couid be and was, would he not become the 'medical technieirin'of 'whom some doctors disapprove ? Who would then deal with thepatient's disabilities, inabilities, disorders, as distinct from nafrowlydefined 'diseases'? And would the patient,'qua patient, •be allowed tobe neurotic, or even normally worried or subject to conflicts ? Wouldthe average doctor be happy if his 'non-scientific' problems were handedover entirely to almoners, social workers, psychiatric social workers,marriage guidance counsellors, family welfare advisers, poor men's law-yers and specially selected priests ? Most of these perform their functionsexcellently when properly chosen and trained, but would the increasein their responsibilities and numbers decrease those of the doctors, aswe understand the term ?".

In writing this book, I was often unable to avoid considering the singleand not necessarily a typical case. Consequently I doubted generalisationswith which hitherto I had been content. For example, the common assertion,often true, that education at one of the two oldest English universitiesaffords social advantages superior to those offered by all other universities,suggests that its accuracy might be checked by examining, not the obviousmisfits or maladjusted, but graduates, who when they were "up", did notexperience many of these social advantages, because they went to the wrongcollege of the rieht university. How many such instances have ever beenrecorded in detail ? How do individual cases of delinquency among childrenof the . upper classes compare in quality -with those–among the poorerchildren who come into the courts because of offences dealt with insidemany boarding. schools ?

Snobbery is often attributed to a particular class, yet one can distinguishsnobbery of birth, wealth, property, education, culture and perhaps todayof tested intelligence. Observers note that privilege today is not so muchof wealth, but rather of occupation ; there is now scarcely any job withoutits "perks", whether it be the privileged travel tickets of the railway workerand his family, the cheap canteen lunches of the factory worker, or theexpense allowance—stretched to cover tax-free dinners to his friends atall the best restaurants—of the company director. How many privilegedpersons have described what they feel about this possession?

How can one write scientifically about feelings of superiority or inferioritywith regard to one's own and others' ways of speech without consultingdifferent types of people who stiffer from or enjoy them ?

There are fashions in all studies : one at present prevalent amongpsychologists is to avoid, even to deprecate, intensive study of the singleperson. This remark, of course, does not apply to many psychiatrists, andclinical psychologists. Such study involves face-to-face contact, and psycho-logical as well as ordinary tact, also much time.

(Summary of an address delivered on April 17.)

The Struggle for SurvivalB Y

ARCHIBALD ROBERTSON

ALL WHO REJECT the supernatural are committed to the view that manoriginated from an animal ancestry by a similar process to that whichdifferentiated other living species from one another. That process has beenan unceasing struggle for existence, in which variations favourable to theorganism have been preserved, while those unfavourable to the organismhave been destroyed. The variations which have enabled man to survive

many .Species far better equipped than he is with' organs of offence anddefence, are his erect posture, which frees his hands and makes him athol-using animal; his large and. convoluted brain, which makes languageand• reasoning possible; .and his. capacity for mutual aid on a large scale,which language, reasoning and the use of specialised tools make 'possiblein.their turn. These requirements are man's evolutionary equipment, withoutwhich he would not be man.

The ,fact of the struggle for existence can be interpreted in a one-sidedand misleading way. By attending only to those characteristics which mansharcs.with other animals, and ignoring those characteristics which make himman,. the struggle for existence can be dressed up as a moral law and used,as ,Herbert Spencer used it, to defend laissez - faire individualism . or, asexponents of powerrpolitics use it; to defend 'imperialism and war. But sucharguments arc self-refuting. If the struggle for exiMence among individualsis absolute, there can be no moral law and no rules of the game; everyoneis free to win how he can; and if he can win by combining with others .in aunion, . a party, or an .international conspiracy, why not? The fact is 'that,while man is forced by nature to struggle in order to survive, he is not forcedto struggle•any particular way if he can find a better way, and the attemptto deduce political conclusions from merely biological data breaks down.Mutual aid is an evolutionary weapon. •

The.primary struggle of man, in fact, is not against his fellow man, butagainst brute nature. We call this struggle by a very simple name—work."Man goeth forth to his work and to his labour-, says the psalmist; thatis, to war with brute nature, to shape her to his purposes and to shift whathe has, shaped until it becomes food, drink, clothes, a house, a road; a car,an aeroplane or any useful thing you like to name: So far from strugglingagainst his. fellow than to produce these things, he needs his co-operation atevefy stage. Civilisation depends on division of labour; and division of labouris 'a form Of mutual aid. The struggle for existence and 'co-operation•forthcistence are not mutuallY exclusive, but complementary..

How comes it, then, that in the sort of things that get into the newspapersof on that radiO' element of struggle. is much more evident than the elemehtof co-operation? There are several answers to this, some of whiah I• mustbegin by rejecting a's half-truths or over-simplifications. There is, for example,the Christian answer that man is a fallen creature—that because he hasdeliberately disobeyed God he is congenitally. incapable of doing good orbehaving decently unless the grace of God comes to his rescue. This:is ahalf-trfitfi. Pecthle certainly .do evil, but they also do good without theintervention of God (unless we are arbitrarily to, postulate his interventionmerely to save a dogma). As we have seen, man could not have survivedin the struggle for existence or attained what civilisation he has unless hehad acquired the habit of Mutual aid; i.e. of doing good.

Then there is the Malthusian answer that man continually reproduces hisspecies faster than his food supply, and is therefore forced to fight hisfellow man 'to keep. alive. This-is' an-ciiver-simplification. So 'far from thestruggle between man and man arising from inability to produce enoughfood to maintain him, it has arisen, as a matter of historical fact, preciselyfrom his ability to produce more than enoughiSuch an institution as slaveryor serfdom, such classes of men as priests or kings, such organisations asthe Greek city-state, the Roman Empire, the Catholic Church or modern

f national governments and business undertakings could never have comerink, 'being-at all unless producers had been able to produce enough tomaintain not only themselves, but whole armies of non-producers as well.

-And in fact the struggles and wars of which we read or of which we hear'on•the radio are not struggles between famishing people, all flying at one

;12

ahother's •thrOats for a crust of bread to feed their. starving families (asoh The Malthusian theory they should be) but operations,carefullyiplannedby governments who themselves are not going. short at all, and who haveto resort to consgription to make Ordinary People fight for them.

The answer to the question' why mutual aid, though essential, is muchless conpicuous in the world than mutual struggle is that the scale ofmutual aid at any. time -ts.no greater than is necessary to the survival ofthose who practise-it. Primitive .mad hunted collectiVely ',because, given theprimitive weapons at his command, that was the only way he could hunt atall. The hunting horde had to be mkitual aiders or perish. But that did notmean that they would be friendly to another horde who poached on theirhfinting-groundi Mutual aid within the ;group,. struggle without !, tater, onwe reach, a stage . when some human groups have domesticated animalsand-practise 'agriculture; and .are thus able to produce.thore; than theirbarerikeev. and later still a skage, which we call civilisation, i.e. ,city lifebased on a division .of labour .between craftsmen and peasants, people andpriests. To keep a city going obviously needs more mutual aid . than tokeep a hunting horde going. But again, mutual aid within the city, strugglewithout—at least until the time when cities learn to co;operate,. or onecitY'imposes'its rule. on others and founds an empire. But such a structure

.inherently unstable. It rests, not on real community of interest, but onforce. As RousseaU put it, "So long as a people is •compelled to obey anddoes obey, it does well ; but s6 soon as it can shake off.the,yoke andidossshake it off, it does better".

In this'there is no longer a question of the biological struggle fot existence.Once the discovery is made that human beings can produce more thantheir- keep, conquerors do not want to destroy the conquered, buti to keepthem alive 'and. make 'them work for them. It is therefore misleading •oapply the Daiwinian term; "survival Of the fittest", to what happensimhenOne dation conquers'.another. Both survive ; but.one survives in a subjectcondition and Macs' the dirty work, while the other survives as a. master raceand enjoys itself, "until. the times do alter". Nor can there' be any truthin' die theory 'advanced by the late Sir Arthur Keith .that "Nature": useswar as a' pruning-hook to Weed cut inferior races and perpetuate Superiorones. For conquered laces are dot (except for • a few extreme cases likethe Tasmanians' on the frontiers of civilisation) weeded out; and conquering?aces have never, tricd to keep their breed pure—they have interbred withthe conquered all through the history of conquest. •

The :whole natbre' of the struggle for survival has been altered 'by ;theapplication'of modern' seience to industry and war. In the first place, whetherthey know it or not, producers and distributors at opposite ends ofiitheearth in fact co-operate in shaping and shifting things which we use 'everyday.'We are not a hunting horde : we'are not a city ; we are not eveh anempire of the ancient type ; we are, in spite of "iron" and "bamboo eur-taids, bne world, and only by Working as one world shall we be able tomeet triumPhantly the challenge which (according to 'Lord Boyd-OrrI do not speak of one-track Malthusiaris) world population will present toworld production in the next fifty years: . •

Ili the second place, the cewning of the.atomic and hydrogen boriMs makes itlimPdssible 'any longer to regard war as a pruning-hook, a test of inan's higher qualities, or any other of the high-sounding things we were taught ;to call it'in the days Of our youth. Another war will not prove the superibilty 'of anyohe or anything. There is a struggle for survival on 'now 'with 'a :vengeance: But; it is not a struggle for the survival of any nation or any ."ism", ;of 'any "free world" 'or; any "Unfree world"..: it is a struggle for - the survival•of Man. Man has survived up till now by practising the mutual

necessarY.to maintain the 'limited groups in which he has lived-and'13

worked: He now lives and works in a world group. He will survive, onlyby fidelity to that, and by consigning all loyalties which cannot coexist withit to the dustbin of history.

(Summary of a lecture delivered on April 24)

Seven Prime Ministers, B Y

S ,K. RATCLIFFE , •THE RETIREMENT OF a Prime 'Minister after long service, •especiallywhen' he is 'one of the most conspicuous men in the world, cannot be otherthan a significant event. It provides an opportunity for looking anew athis great office and considering bdth the change§ that the Premiership hasundergone' and its relation to our political democracy. Also it furnishes atheme of contrasted personalities. •- Britain, of course, is the parent of parliamentary government : it is oursystem' rather than the American. It has been copied the world over 'andis at present being adopted by some nations that appear to have in theirtradition and habits -no basis for a structure of this kind. We all take pridein the triple form of Parliament. Cabinet, and Prime Minister. We do notquestion its greatest virtues, namely stability and ease of transition. ABritish Prime Minister is secure, first of all, by being the head of a majorityparty. In this fespect he holds a position of authority as remote as possiblefrom that of the President of the United States, who, even after the greatestelectoral triumph, may find himself without command in the Congress. Theeasy continuity of Parliament makes the most striking contrast to the Frenchsystem, with its shthing minorities. When we say that the Queen's governmentmust be carried on,, we are affirming both principle and practice. The Britishcitizen -cannot imagine a situation comparable to that of France when thecountry can be without a government for weeks on end.

There are two questions in particular that ask themselves at this time :first,-,whether our peculiar system can be relied upon for the choice, of theablest available leader and secondly, whether as a rule the chosen PrimeMinister can be regarded as in any real sense representative. The first questionhas been decisively answered at times. During some thirty years Disraeliand Gladstone were the only possible party leaders. In the years before'1914, Mr.: Asquith's mastery was not seriously disputed, and from 1940by universal consent Winston Churchill stood alone, until victory wasachieved: The question as to representative quality, of course, touchesanother matter.

There are, for instance, many among us who would argue that Baldwinand Neville Chamberlain were' truly typical Englishmen. All that we cansay in this- regard is that the line of Prime Minister since the death ofVictoria has exhibited to a marked degree the wide variety of British abilityand character. Not seldom the choice is easily predictable, whereas in othercases it may seem accidental. That formidable parliamentarian JosephChamberlain held the view that there was only one place in the Cabinet,worth having, the first, and he was himself the single example in his time.of a seemingly predestined -leader missing the prize.

During the first half of the twentieth century there have been nine PrimeMinisters. If we set aside Balfour as a statesman. belonging wholly to theVictorian age, and Bonar Law by reason of few months in office, we havethe legendary and convenient number seven In style and mental quality no

'two of these were 'similar, while the unlikenesses were glaring. Who, -forinstanc could measure the distance between a Baldwin and a Churchill?

We are inclined to judge a premier in the main by his character as legislativeleader, and in this respect the record is often surprising. Thus, Campbell-Bannerman;whose short term followed the long period of Conservative rule,made history by his South African policy after the Boer War. His steadfastLiberalism created the Union of South Africa. Not the most farsightedobserver could have predicted that this example of co-operation betweenSmuts and the British opponents of the Transvaal War would prove to bethe first step toWards an independent Afrikaner republic, -Ramsay McDonaldhad no record to speak of in legislation. As head of two minority Govern-ments he could not have had it, whereas Mr. Attlee, as head of the firstLabour Government with an adequate majority, was enabled to carry througha series of .measures unsurpassed in importance. Stanley Baldwin's name isassociated with the Act completing the process of universal suffrage, andwith. the Government of India Act (1935) which was designed to makedominion status for united .India a permanent basis for the Indo-Britishconnexion. In the politics of empire there could hardly be a more,strikingirony than the British acceptance, twelve years later, of an India partitionedfor independence.

Before the building of the Welfare State there is no legislative period moresuccessful that the five years of co-operation between Asquith and LloydGeorge. Nor, by contrast, is there any modern clash of leadership more

- dramatic- in--character - or more. momentous in. results than that betweenthese two opposites.

They were enabled to Work together by r'eason of the support given byAsquith to Lloyd George's pioneer measures of social reform includingthe, beginning . of national insurance, Asquith himself being the authorof old age pensions. The break between them in 1916 was unavoidable,since the majority of the nation was demanding a driving policy for theending of the war. There could be no resumption of the partnership, for, asLloyd George had shown during the coalition, he held lightly to the older ties.The man who had most to do with the last revival of Liberalism was-theone who destroyed the party to which he had seemed to be indispensable.

In any comparison .between the two war Prime Ministers, the moststriking contrast lies in the character of their national leadership. LloydGeorge's command of the post-war Coalition, which meant his dominanceof the Conservative Party, was maintained against a powerful oppositionin Parliament and the country, In other words, he was never the leaderof a united nation. In the crisis ,of 1940 the call for Winston .Churchillwas virtually Unanimous; and there is a special interest in the fact thatat several stages of his career his warmest support came from the Labourside. This was notably true of his denunciation' of the Munich compromise.

There can be no question as to which of the two must fill the largerplace in history. Lloyd George was politician and orator and in the makingof the peace he was hampered by impossible conditions. His knowledgeof Europe was limited; he could not steer his way between the conflictingpurlioses of Clemenceau and Woodrow Wilson. The successive biographiesmake clear how greatly his position was weakened by. his' dependenceupon subordinates who were not trusted by the country. His ixtraordinaryreadiness and adaptability were unequal to the demands of the pOst-warsituation,. nor could they survive for the recovery of his position whdn itbecame clear that the Coalition had lost the confidence of the country.The strength of the earlier Lloyd George had its roots in the, sounderhalf of the people. After 1919 this could no longer be said of him.

Now that Sir Winston Churchill has retired from the field of action itis possible to form a tentative estimate of his unparalleled career, the

.stages of which are wholly-clear. We think of his twenty years as a leading-15

Liberal and the double change of party, a' feature not to be found in thedase-of!any other British statesman: We think" also of his ten years. banish-Ment 'from 'the: counsels. of the Thry Party; beginning with his exclusionfrOm 'the National Government under_ Rannay MacDenald. ThiS 'periodWas ' marked-by his sustained attack upon the -Tory leadership until:theoutbreak of the second world war. Iri.the annals' of.intra-party conflict..thisepisode 'stand§ alone. ,

'There Was.his die-hard assault unon the India Bill in which he set himselfagainst ' the', united weight of the parties; and it culminated in his mostremarkable parliamentary performance; the exposure of • Nazi Germany'swar plan.' 'Here :Sirl.Winston displayed.the power -of full knowledge andinflexible purpose as against the weaknesS and complacency of Baldwin andChamberlain. ; I

M ost all,' at this time; we think ' of his amazing all-round mastery., Hisadministrative genius found play in all the most. important Cabinet .postswitE the.exception of the FOreign Office. 'In intellectual achievement he. hashad'ho equal aMong his'predecessors. He is historian and biographer, andthere is no department of the Government where his personal force has not

. been felt.•fhere is a' special interest •in the' fact that, alike as,,writer andMationaLorator, he is self,made, having begun with manifest disadvantages.The nation's debt to' him for 1940 ris immeasurable and at this date it ismniversally.'acknowledged that .there was Ino basis for the party, accusationthat he was a warmonger. .• ...; His has beeQ the most consistent and resonant voice demanding conference.wittnthe leders in Moscow. There could, be no more convincing proof that-his ,overmastering aim, ns-he .neared resignmeht, was the establishment of abasis for world settlement.. And, finally, there is the note of affection •that

-.was-heard from all'sides of the, House of Commons.as he left the Chambei,which his personality .had.dorninated through the most critical years....-The one thing to say -about Sir Winston's., oratory is that, in, modern. . .

.times the hour anchthe man have never been so . splendidly matched. Itis possible to doubt vvhether this combination, can ever recur. ,

No.recent change in. the ;political world has been more notable than thattim.the department . of public speech. Until the .end of the that great war

. piatory was of supreme importance in the shaping of public optimism,l and. the .inass .meeting was a dominant .feature ,of all election icampaigns.Almost of., necessity the head of a ..Gevernment 'had tO. be a.,niaster of!assemblies, in the mi0-1920s. The .decisive effect of hroadCasting-wis first,made .evident in the election of 1931. yife should fin0 it difficult -to gaugethe ihfluence of. radio during the past two. decades. It has radidally 'trans-

formed the method Of popular. appeal; and in so doing..given 'a turn, topublic speech that will not be reversed. The seven we are dischssing 'offer

+telling, illustrations of the change. Asquith had the gift of ,stateMent al once. MaiSive and, cthivincing. His wdric was done 'before the Coming iadio.LIdyd' George's platform triiimphs' Were' all outside broadcasting. RnmsayMaeDonald, for many years first favourite .on the 'Labour platforni, wasineffective on the air, while Stanley Baldwin discovered here the mediinnfor an' influence ,that Could never hive' been his if 'he had spoken with the

:unaided Voice. It was 'reserved fdr Sir Winston 'Churchill to demonstrate ,thei fulleSe power by speech and pen and pet:sonar force. " •

'As.We consider thd Seven"Premiers Logether, we may dote in especial HOW'ithey Maintained- the 'coritinhity of Cabinet ' and Parliarrient:rDespite 'the'conflicts of, personal ambition and party faction, -that' realitV was neverimperilled.'

t. 'The centraSts between them are most striking.--,iri character and ability, - aS in political theory. Throughout the half-century their. conduct and policies :arOuseci the fiercest 'controversy, for such' is the nature of Tarty government.

The 'reeord iri 'general, however, levies us' witli: at least • one . cOnvidtion:Their patriotism could never be questioned. Each in turn was resolvedto uphold the prestige of the high office to which he had been called..

, (Sununary 'of an address delivered on,May 15.)

The Biblical Patriarchs — IIB Y

P. G. ROY

ISAAC

WHEN ABRAHAM THE JUST returns • from. his military exploit • against thearmies. of the four Kings. (C.X1V), he is treated to a Lord's .Supper byMelchi-ztdeq = King of Justice (or.Righteousness),. who is "king.of .Salem*and priest of the God Most 'High". This priest-king who had no father normother made a 'strong impression on later scriptural speculations (ps.. 110/4,1-leb.!5/6,. etc.),' because this King of Justice. was God-Father himself, being"without father, without mother; with descent, having, neither beginning ofdays, nor end of life" (Heb. 7/3). Consequently, Ivffilkh-i-zedeq himself wasa. god,' to be exact, the .Molokh-Zidyq of the .Phoenicians who, accordingla Philo of Byblos, was• also called "Israel",, and, sacrificed lehtid '(Juth),his -only-son, to stop .the spread of an epidemic-'There are. several 'otherreports when semitic tribes, in particular the Phoenicians, made the siffiremesacrifice of their first-born • sons to Molokh, and even the O.T. knows. ofstich instances in Palestine, particularly in the Valley of Hinnflm (Ge-hin-nom, Topheh; see 2 .Kg. 3/27016/3i 17/ I7, 18/10 cl 21, etc.). ;And :eventhe King-Of-Righteousness of the New Testament knew rio better than tohave his only son, Jesus; sacrificed for the' purification and salvation .of thefaithful. Abraham-zadiq does likewise with his son; lshaq or Ylichaq• =.•TheOne Who Laughs; or Smiles.t . •

When in the last minute the human sacrifice is replaced, by a ram, 'thisgoes to.show that Yizchaq is the Ram God, just, as the Homeric lphigeneia—a form of the goddess Artemiswas replaced hy her proper victith, thehind. In the Greek mythology a ram is sacrificed fol. Phrixos; the eninitybetween Sara and Hagar equals thaf between Nephele (lat. nebula) and Int)whQ 'driven' insane by'luno, throws herself, together with her Son Melikerte's(title Phoenician god Melkqart = City' God), into the sea. Hagar Und'her sohIshmael flee into the, desert which, just as the sea, is the dwelling place .ofthe evil spirits.

For the primitive husbandman fertility in man,' beast and soil Meantwealth and happiness; the Greeks worshipped this agency in Puri, theShepherd, 'the Romans in the old Italic god Faunas (from faveo : tofavour, befriend),with goat-head and hoofs. Goats and sheep are symbolsof fecundity; he-goat and ram, in particular, impersonate-sexual virility.

After having slaughtered a he-goat at the Lupercalia, a festiihil in Feb-ruary, the Roman priest made with the blood-stained knife a mark on 'theforeheads of two youths (as a substitute for their sacrifice); whereupon the

•If Salem is to stand for leru-salem, it may be noted that that city Was:not

a ,Seinitic foundation, as the first settlers were Arameeris and Clieti tribes. Itsname is riot' derived from shalem = peace, but from a 'sun deity 'of•Asia Minor(akin to Ass'yr. Shalam, Egypt. Sharamana), with Jeru- having del/eloped bymetathesii from URI.

t Isiael as a whole is,YahveffiSefirstflorn '(Ex. '13/2; see 2 Kg. 33/10 and 2'Sarn.21/6) and hence eligible for sacrifice (Ex. 4/22-23): hence circumcision at theinitiation rites. At the spur' of the moment' even Moses has through 'lliiitope'ra-lion to be saved-from the furious onslaught of a 'demoniacal Yahveh. - "

twolads had to screw up their faces. Now, the facial distortion of the humansacrifices was euphemistically called the "Sardonic" grin (or laughter), andthat exactly is the meaning of "Yizchdq", or Isaac. And Roman womenthought it conducive to pregnacy and childbirth if they •exposed their wombsto the goat-skin thongs with whom the ecstatic Luperci lashed them.*

Whilst in our temperate zones the Saviour is a sun god, in tropical coun-tries the rain gods, or other agencies connected with Water, are the life-givers.Yizchdq's shrine was the well Beer-Sheba sheba has.the meaning of "seven"or "to make an oath"; for a time he stays at the well-of-the-Living-and-Seeing-One (Gen. 24/62; 25/11), and it is by a well that he, Faunus, findshis Fauna, whose name is Ribh'qdh (Rebecca), the volptuously buxombride.t

Isaac,. the • fertility god of old, earns manifold what he sowed (Gen.26/12f.), and wherever he digs a "well of springing water" comes up. Forthe rest, the 'story repeats many traits previously.ascribed to Abraham, asthe two had 6riginally no connection with each other: Ezra and Nehemiaor later priests.who collected the tribal traditions of the Hebrew confedera-tions and fused them into one national epic to the glory of .their novel, god,had to relate the different tribal and local heroes and deities rather than tryto eradicate them from the popular memory. ,

In this doctored form—the only form known to us—YizchAq the manand. Abimelech,: the king, make a sworn covenant of mutual friendship(26/28) at Beer-Sheba, the Swear-Well or Seven-Well; and the former called"upon the:name of the Lord"; the same happened at Beersheba previously,with an oath !and seven lambs, when •Abimelech made a covenant withAbraham (2I/23f.), with the only differenee that this time the name of theLord is given as El-Ohim = the God of Yore. Faunus-Aion-Pdn were thegods of old; the latter, in particular, was famous for the pranks he liked toplay in order to frighten people. Gen..31/53, Jacob "sware by the fear of hisfather Isaac"—literally: Yizchfici the Scare.t The universe trembles for fearwhen in tropical rains and thunderstorms the God of Yore awakens andmakes Nature prolific.

* The Jewish phylacteria (thephillim), kept in the shape of male testicles, havesimilar thongs made of goat skin.

f This name needs some explanation. In Arabic it denotes a cord with loopsfor tying lambs or kids (root rahaqa = to tie, bind) for the purpose of fatten-ing, and mar'bio, the sty, ete., where this is done. Primitive people generally likebuxom women and consider stoutness in the female as sensual beauty. I lence thesect-inn meaning of "to embellish" (speech, etc.) in the Intensitive.

Pachad abijn Yizchaq.—The plural of "pachad", scare, has the meaningof : testicles.

Conway. Discussion CircleOn Tuesday, December 7, Professor Hyman Levy spoke on "The

Challenge of the Atomic Age". He said that a high level of understandingn scientific .and technical matters, now considered as commonplace, had

only been achieved in the last 300 years, and from 1850 to 1950 the rapidgrowth of knowledge had been-even more marked. With this new knowledgewe must set our course and mould history, or the future would say, that weallowed events to guide us. It was in our power to shape the future, or to letchaos reign. Before the Industrial Revolution people had no conception ofhow, future societies might develop, and the atomic bothb was beyond theirimagination. Because of the new situation that had emerged we were in abetter position today to understand the past and to glimpse the future. It

18

would indicate lack .of moral 'responsibility if we did not direct ,our knotvrledge to satisfy the new values which must develop from the change.,

The history of science was experimentation, and our knowledge had Beenachieved over 300 years through observation, experiment and re-eximinationin our laboratories, and a careful selection of past experience. *Scientificexperimental work was bound up with scientific theory and these togetherenabled us to see the world more rationally than before. Society had changedin humanistic ways; and there was not only a wider .understanding ofmaterial things; but of values also. One did not proceed without the other,Professor Levy said that when he was a young man there had been only;asmall group of research workers, approximately 300, but today the numberwas nearer 100,000. Research, the atomic bomb, jet planes and new materialswere-transforming the world.

The average man was.apt to think that his values, his goods, his clothesand moral outlook were all being changed by people who knew, and; hewas content to leave matters to them. But no one knew; it was all a matterof experiment. The scientific world was an ordered world, and no one couldact alone. Theories had to be expounded and evidence be convincing beforethe highly organised machinery of study and practice was alldwed to pro-ceed. Theory and experiment were' interlocked, and the planning wasplanned. There were no miracles in science, only experiment, practice, and- -patient perseverence. If there were miracles they were '5iitside the scientificfield. Science was a system of law and order and up to the 1920s it was notconsidered the duty of the scientist to say how his achievements should, beutilised. Today it was beginning to be appreciated that science was a mani-festatiOn- of society, and that the scientist had a social responsibility. Wehad reached a high degree of technology but we now needed extra know-ledge to solve the new problems which had thus- been raised. We haddeveloped cars to travel at seventy miles per hour, and these vehicles stoodstill because of traffic congestion,•and only succeeded in polluting the atmos-phere. There was negation of energy; but if a social scientist' were consultedhe would foresee this: The Chancellor of the Exchequer only controlledeconomy in a limited field but did not take into account lost energy : the lossof hours in travelling, the time and energy used, not in providing somethingdirectly useful, but of maintaining services, and recording results, to enableothers to be productive. We must assess efficiency by judging the 'energyused effectively for social purposes, and the output achieved, and if thiswas not done we would not understand the society we lived in.

r I n a controlled experiment the outcome to a certain extent was known,but anything might happen in society. In science we had similar values,and agreed about procedure, but in society there were many irrationalities. Inpeace time great care was taken of children, yet, in war everyone wasbombed.. We should eliminate our uncivilised ways, and use all our know-ledge by conscious planning and controlled experiment. We had the meansto satisfy our values and emotional needs, but we required the orderedfreedom of the laboratory to help us to control the forces of this atomic age.

L B.•

CorrespondenceThe Strike WeaponTo the Editor of the Monthly Record.Dear Sir,

In your May issue CUSTOS states: "There are several.basic,things-that maynot be lost sight of. One is that so long as the British system endures,no leader or party will argue seriously for the abolition of the right tostrike." Does Cus-ros really believe that the right to strike is vital- to the

19

British system? The British system endured long :before'the:strikeiweaponexisted,' and will, I hope, endure long after the strike weapon- has•beeneliminated: .

The 'right to strike evolved during •the-l9th century as a necessary defencecif the• 'worker against: uncontrolled exploitation by capitalistic- enterprisein' the days. of 'widespread unemployment. We. now live in the era. of LheWelfare state with its nationalised industries and services and..with fullemployment. The strike weapon not only has no place in ,such .a statesystem, It is lethal to it. Unless we get the strike weapon out of :the welfarestalesystem during the next ten years that system will perish: ;

Yours faithfully,- .. •is GEORGE' ADCOCK, •

CUSTOS writes; No democratic government, stirely, would seek to-deprive'the citiien of the theoretical right to withOld this labour. 'Rut the centralissue now is the use •Of •the strike' weapon under the 'cbriditiOnc: of 'the.Welfafe state. Off•that matter I' arh in full agreement with Major Adcock.

,,t, • . No Labour philosophiTo the Editor of the Monthly Record.Dear Sir, .

The comments .by Cus-ros on the newspaper. ,strike ;were quickly, givenextra emphasis bje the threatened strike of . the railway footplate staff,which was only averted at the last moment..But the lack, of any.consciousfundamental ethical purpose in the Labour movement is. not onlyishown inthe sectional character of wage movements and strikes. It-is 'much moreclearly shown in, the confusion about the ,H-bomb and international rela-tions and the limited practical expression given to professions:of fraternitywith workers in other lands, including those under Communist •rule...Cusrrosis completely off the mark when he calls for a "decisive, authority";.tosettle:the problem. Where there is confusion, of thought and lack .of moralpurpose, it is not dictated discipline but more constructive.-thinking and theworking out .of more satisfactory aims and methods that is. wanted. ,

Many thoughtful trade unionists and Socialists are concerned .about themental and moral malaise in the Labour movement, as shown by thegroups which. have been set up to promote a more constructive attitude,although unfortunately their separate activities overlap and confuse analready complex situation. There is not only Tribune and the Bevan ,groupbut Victory for Socialism and thc Labour Peace Fellowship, and morerecently the World Order of Socialists suggested by G. D. H. Cole. .

It is noteworthy that at the very moment that trade unionists and Socialistsare worried about the gthical deficiencies of their movement, some of usin ,the Ethical movement are concerned about the inadequacy.of our o:-

.pression of the social implications of Humanism. Surely, we, have someresponsibility to supply the outlines of a philosophy of labour„reward andnational,co-operation, to which a Humanist would add •"international co-opgration7. This is a matter in which there could be a useful exchangeof constructive ideas of mutual benefit to trade unionists, Socialists andHumanists.

Yours-faithfully,J. HENRY ILLOYD

.;Agnostic or Atheist?

To'tbel Editor of the Monthly Record.Deal: Sir, • - •:" In his article on Joseph McCabe in the May' issue, Archibald Robertson writes "McCalie described himself as an' Agnostic." The word :shOuld :be

1,20

"Atheist"' which McCabe always preferred as being less ambiguous,although he held that both words usually mean, "one who does not believein God".

Yours faithfully,BARBARA SMOKER (Miss)

ReligionTo the Editor of the Monthly Record.'Dear Sir,

You may perhaps regard it as a compliment that readers should takeshort refresher courses by reading through back numbers of the.Record?

As an example of this excellent practice I should like to refer to an addressby the late (and lamented) John Katz (February 1944) on "ComparativeReligion". In this he deals with the history ,of religions and quotes (I)Herbert Spencer as regarding it "as in a single line in the evolutionaryprocess-, but seems to dismiss this as resulting in "a procession of abstrac-Eons"; and (2) Freud as regarding it as "an infantile complaint". I shouldlike to suggest that if J. Katz's scientific status had been that of a biologistinstead of a mathematician (I hope this is correct)—retaining his brilliantalertness—he might have seen the essential truth in each of these: Spencer'srecognition of the evolutionary process and Freud's of the infantile charac-ter. But not as a "complaint", it being surely much too vast and natural.a phenomenon to be anything but a part of the evolutionary process, whilehuman understanding has been at a very low level.

It may be a matter of great practical importance to recognise that theestablishment of religion during the last twelve hundred years has beenlargely due to the activities (behind the scenes), rightly and very naturally,of the women. And now that we are engaged in this dangerously clumsyand unnecessarily painful business of its.abandonment, is it not again theirresponsibility to establish the authoritative leadership capable of guidingthis growth efficiently?

The child has outgrown the nursery—we are juvenile now (or should be)and no longer infantile. Perhaps someone might ask Mr. William Grahamif it is not dangerous foolishness to try to keep the child always in thenursery.

S. L. SYMNS

P.S. This would be the "scientific philosophy of religion" for which lateron he asks!

Friday Discussion GroupOn January 14 Mr. Frank A. Wilby discussed "Education in America"

and said that there had been free education in the U.S.A. since 1640 anduniversally free education since about 1840. The general scheme was forchildren to commence school at the end of thcir fifth year and to passthrough eight annual grades which enabled them to move to the High Schoolfor four more years. Students can thcn enter University for advancedspecialised training. There is a minimum of governmental control in educa-tion and local bodies exercise the main control. Schools are paid for bylocal rates plus a State grant paid, in some States, on an equalisation basis.The Government is able to provide school food at very low rates fromits stock piles. There is no sex discrimination in the pay of teachers andsegregation of coloured students is now illegal. There are variations in thestandards of educational establishments and to the variety of conditions,owing to the large area covered by the States.

21

Yours faithfully,

• During the debate it was said that equal pay for teachers did not causethe shortage of teachers, and that while promotion was regardless of sex,the responsibilities usual for men forced them to have more drive tosecure•,the higher administrative posts. The school leaving age was higherthan-in England, partly to preN?ent the exploitation of children and partlyto protect labour against unfair competition, but chiefly to raise the socialand cultural levels of the population. The problems of mixed racial classeshas been much less since the alterations to the inimigration quotas. Wherenecessary special English classes were run to aid the integration of Spanishspeaking children. There is no religious instruction in State schools, probablythe original settlers themselves had fled from forced religion. English schoolshad a more independent air than American schools, which tended to conformclosely to recognised methods. Americans tend to give more freedom totheir children in the schools however, corporal punishment is still applied,although restricted and usually as a last resort. The grading of educationalcourses enabled a student to decide how far he should go. Most Americandegrees were well-earned but the huge size of the States contained somecolleges of lesser standards.

The'aim of American education is not solely to provide vocational trainingfor "go-getters", its aim is to try to develop good citizensfiip. The 'highstanding of civil conditions in the United States proves that the educationalsystem is a success.

Junior Discussion Group

On January 21 Mr. Platts-Mills discussed "Russia's Contribution toPeace" and said that the sixteen Soviet Republics did not regard war asinevitable. The first action of the U.S.S.R. had been to issue the demandfor "Peace and Bread"! There has been no outside act of aggression byRussia for thirty-seven years and no Russian soldier has moved on foreignsoil without the assent of the Allies. The rise of modern China was a majorevent in world history and much desired by Russia, and yet there hadbeen no reports of Russian intervention. The only outstanding question ofthe Second World War was the German question. Germany began as afour-power Government and U.S.A. divided Germany into two. Russiahas proposed the withdrawal of all troops and that elections be supervisedby Germans themselves. German rearmament is the key to peace or war.The object of Neville Chamberlain's bargain with Poland was to makeGermany go east against Russia. England supplied material to Finland whenfighting Russia but sent no aid to Poland.

During the debate it was said that there were no ideological differencesbetween East and West that could not be settled. The declared aim of Russiawas to destroy capitalism and Russia had refused to accept neutral observersin German elections ; she never intended a settlement to take place. Englandhad helped Finland because of treaty obligations and for the same rcasonshe had declared war on behalf of Poland.

The increase of wheat and cotton production had wrought changes inthe U.S.S.R. Life was blossoming in the Soviet Union and the standardof living could be compared with that of Britain. It was this rising standardof life, the "Soviet Way of Life", that was the best guarantee of peace.

South Place NewsSunday Social

On April 17 M iss D. Walters and Mr. R. T. Smith, who have oftenand so agreeably entertained us, presented "In Good King Charles' GoldenDays". It was very well received.

Thursday. Evenings . . .

March 17. Hilda Hutton and friends gave a musical.evening. Miss Hondasang some charming soneS accompanying herself at the piano, and with VictorThurdin (clarinet) and W. Faulkner (violin).played some pleasing trios.

April-21. Geoffrey Elkan made his debut at these .soeial eveningS, speakingof "Making Music". He revealed a good knowledge of his subject andexpounded it in an interesting way. The lively discussion which followedpaid tribute to its appeal. We hope to hear him again.

April. 28 Jack Cummins was "Talking ,at Random": He makes all histopics fascinating; with a good deal of autobiography he was able fo giveplay to his great sense of humour. . .

May 5. Miss I. Percival spoke on "Haute Couture: Scenes in the Salon".She gave a most interesting account of the world of fashion from the inside,illustrating her talk with stories about some of the famous personalitiesshe has met during her career as a designer at a well-known London dress-house. Her informative and amusing discourse was especially appreciated bythe ladies and she also had plenty to say which was of interest to themale members of her audience.

Birth

On April 19 to Dr. and Mrs. H. D. Jennings White, of 52 CorringhamRoad, Golders Green, N.W.11; a son, Clive Lionel.

InvitationMrs. Hilda de Vere (née Hilda Langelaan) informs us of the death, on

February 6, of her husband. She writes: "If any of you can spare time,I shall be delighted to see you, for I am very lonely". Her address is BelaMonto, Old Coach Road, Wrotham, Kent. A friend also writes: "Mr. deVere was well known to a wide circle in various parts of the couoty ofKent. He was a good friend to all those with whom he came into contact,and a wonderful scholar. His vivid personality and idealism must haveinspired many students with enthusiasm during his long career."

We send Mrs. de Vere our warmest sympathy.

Society's ActivitiesSunday Social

June 19, in the Library at 3 p.m. Richard Clements: "The Sociologyof Oliver Goldsmith".

Spain

The annual Continental holiday of the Progressive League will be onthe glorious Costa Brava from August 6 - 21. Comfortable guest house,home farm produce. Sea bathing, excursions by motor coach and by boat,picnics, lectures, music 'and poetry. Friendly and informal, non-membersare cordially welcomed. Cost : £36 Ss. Full particulars from , HolidayOrganiser, 10 Park Drive, N.W.11.

The Library, Conway Hall

The Librarian will be in attendance on Sunday mornings.Additions to the Library:The Sea Around Us, by Rachel L..Carson. Olive Schreiner, Her Friends

and Times, by D. L. Hobman. Adam in Plumes, by ColM Simpson. Presented23

by our member, William McLachlan of Townsville, Northern Queensland.One of the most fascinating exploration dramas of modern times; the

discovery in 1933 of the high valleys of central New Guinea and theirinhabitants, and twenty years later, aspects of their lives—violent, religious,erotic—revealed in vivid first-hand impressions and in the findings ofpioneer missionaries and anthropologists now in the field.

New MembersMr. Granville Burgess, 29 Russell Court, W.C.1; Mr. S. W. Carter, 18

Mansell Road, Greenford, Middlesex; The Hon. Mrs. Ursula Grant Duff,16 Mulberry Walk, Chelsea,. S.W.3; Miss S. Gunewardene, 104 Kew Green,Kew Gardens, Richmond, Surrey; Mr. W. T. L. Morgan, 11 Heath Street,Riverside, Cardiff; Miss E. D. Parry, 15 Bryantwood Road, London, N.7:A. St. John Wright, 5/6399199 W0.1 (1st Cl. SSM) R.A.S.C., ChiefClerk, General Staff Branch, "G.S." Branch H.Q., British Troops in Egypt,Middle East Land Forces, 14.

Change of Address of MembersMr. D. A. Boswell-Philips, Assistant Purser, C/o Union Castle Mail S.S.

Co., 3 Fenchurch Street, E.C.3; Mr.. A. J. Horn, National Liberal Club,Whitehall Place, S.W.1; Dr. H. Levon, C/o Box 1513, Port Elizabeth, S.Africa; Mr. A. F. Sibbald, Ste. C Harvard Apts., 198 Furby St., Winnipeg 1,Manitoba, Canada.

New AssociatesMrs. Inge Hyde, Coldrum House, 28 Horsted Way, Rochester, Kent; Mr.

R. F. Naish, 479, Gillott Road, Birmingham, 16; Mr. M. Spencer Pickering,62 Grosvenor Road, Wanstead, El 1; Mr. N. S. D. Staveley, 37 Lorne Road,London, N.4.

RamblesSunday, June 12. Enfield. White Webbs Park and Old Temple Bar. Take

1.30 p.m. train Kings Cross (Suburban line) to Gordon Hill (Countryafternoon ticket 2s. 8d. return). Leader: Miss E. Palmer.

Saturday, June 25. Visit by coach to inspect plans and developments atBasildon New Town, Essex. An official of the Basildon Corporation willact as guide. Coach leaves Portland Place, W.1 at 2.15 p.m. Bookings 7s. 6d.to the Ethical Union, Prince of Wales Terrace, W.8.

Sunday, June 26. Train at 1.53 from Charing Cross, 2 p.m. LondonBridge to Caterham. Tea at Oxted. Leader: Ted Haycraft.

Friday Discussion GroupFridays at 7 p.m. For members under thirty-five years.

June 3—The Reverend Smythe. "What is Truth?"10—Group meeting.17—Theatre visit. St. James' Theatre "Separate Tables".24—Discussion on "Separate Tables".

CorrectionThe Face of Violence in the Monthly Record, May issue on page 18,

for Scot, read Crump.

Printed by Farleigh Press Ltd. (T.U. all depts.), Beawood Rise, Watford, Herts.