{ } = word or expression can't be understood
{word} = hard to understand, might be this

...so far willing to accept this -- this { }. You can only ga- -- go by your own experience. And you can go Greek and say, "The body is wicked and the mind is good." Or you can believe in Christianity again, which has always said that the spirit incarnates, and that what you see here in yourself as a human being is the incarnation of a word spoken, creating man. And therefore all this, what is you: mind, body, and soul, is good. And so there is no quality -- it is not more anthropomorphic to speak of God's hands, or God's feet, as of His mind. And yet everybody in this country for the last hundred years poked fun at the Bible and said, "Oh, it's so superstitious because -- they speak of the prophet and the heart of God in the Bible. And they speak of His hand, stretched out."

But man in his -- in his pride, you see, thought it was perfectly reasonable to speak of God's spirit, or God's mind. But what -- all we know of God, gentlemen, is anthropomorphic. And it is not more dignified to speak of God's mind than of His hand. We have to speak this way in order to hint at something. And your hand is in no way less a creature than your little brain. But you all harbor, especially when the mind wakes up and develops, as in your -- in your -- time of life, you are very prone to think that the -- your mind is superior to the rest of you. The soul -- that is, your power to love, and to hope, and to show faith -- is probably superior to your passing being. Your mind.

And let me say therefore, because I wan- -- this wasn't underscored sufficiently in this report, gentlemen, that the mind and the body are on equal -- on an equal level of dignity, or of value, or of importance, of reality, because both change. You and I both have to survive a change of our body, and a change of our mind. And we have to survive more than one change of our body, and more than one change of our mind. Therefore you and I cannot possibly be identified with this arrangement -- passing arrangement of being mind or being body.

When you are -- 7, you lose your teeth, your first teeth. And you come therefore to know yourself as somebody superior. And that's why children are allowed to go to school at that age -- about that age, because it's the first time that they grow mentally above their body, that they have to learn to distinguish lasting things and changing things. That's the reason why a child at 4 cannot go to school, or isn't put into school, because it has not survived a bodily change.

Now you at this moment survive mental change. The great incision of your mind, obviously, comes when you go to college. And -- if you don't change -- change your mind in college, don't go here. I have been told that -- that one should try to keep a Dartmouth student so innocent that he leaves college with

the same mentality as he enters it.

And I could only answer, "Then please close the college." It is against the meaning of a liberal arts college that a man should leave it with the same mentality as he has entered it. Why should you come here?

But this is a tremendous requirement. It is very dangerous. It is dynamite. It means that your mind isn't good enough as it is, and has to be changed. And you have to learn -- even more, you have to learn how to change your mind with honor in this college. The whole problem of a man is how to change his mind, you see, all the time, constantly. But there is of course something attached. You mustn't change your mind because it's dangerous now to be a liberal. You mustn't change your mind because there is a Mr. McCarthy. You mustn't change your mind because there are the Russians. That's not a good reason to change your mind. What you have to learn is that you must change your mind as free men, but you must change your mind.

So today it is very necessary for you to recognize this, because I see on this campus, people change their mind every minute, but for the most outrageous reasons: to get a promotion. That's no reason to change your mind. But on the other hand, you can only understand human weakness and human frailty all around you, and how people sell out to the highest bidder, and what they call "enlightened self-interest," then promote things they do not believe in, because there is underlying the universal human condition of having to change our minds. Then we can -- may proceed, you see, and -- investigate when and how one does change one's mind decently, and how one changes one's mind indecently. But we come from an era, you see, in which the progressive mind, and the liberal was so convinced that he had his life's principles: progress, and pursuit of happiness, and the freedom and -- and so on and so forth, that now, where I see in this country all -- everybody running for cover, going to church, subscribing suddenly to tenets they have laughed ab- -- over, you see, the existence of God or Christianity, five years ago still -- I can only say, because they had the idea of fixed convictions, they are -- completely unable now to change their mind honorably.

I have never believed this. I have always thought that my soul proves my identity, and that because I have a soul, I have the privilege of changing my mind and my body as often as is necessary. Every seven years, you shed your skin, and eve- -- certainly in about the same time, a man changes his mind. And he should. Therefore, it is not a mental act to get married, because if you get married from the mind -- from the will of men, then obviously you have to get a divorce, because after seven years, you have to change your mind.

So you must know, gentlemen, that marriage, for example, or friendship, are not based on the will of the rational mind. If they are, then they are too fleeting. They are no -- good. Your family is not in existence and a reality because of your mental or your physical qualities. If it were, an invalid would have no family.

I told you already about the -- the -- the question of -- a woman suddenly having an automobile accident and having very poor looks. Well, that's no reason for a divorce.

But you are firmly convinced that man rules his life by his mind. And therefore you are very unhappy creatures. "Judge not, lest ye be judged." We have no mind to judge our own lives. The mind has a very subordinate capacity of orientating us in a given situation. It's very important. I use my mind, I think, very well. But I've never exaggerated its importance. The mind is the inner reflection about -- over a given situation. But the mind is quite unable to tell you that you must emigrate and leave the United States, or Germany, as I had to do. That's a different voice that tells you this. That's your heart. And -- when the Bible says a man must leave his parents, his father and his mother, and cleave to the wife of his choosing, that's obviously not meant as a rational or mental decision. And if you try to make it such a decision, you see, then you fall into the trap -- snare of modern psychology, which mistakes the soul and the mind right through the -- you can say: the underlying principle of American psychology is the fallacy that "mind" and "soul" are interchangeable terms.

Perhaps you take this down, gentlemen, because at least when you die, you must remember that one man has told you the truth. In Ame- -- this country, of course, that's how everything is sold -- and everybody is sold down the river, by this hoax: you are told that psychology is the knowledge of the mental processes. That's -- the famous definition by William James in his Psychology. And that's still going on, on this campus. The whole department is -- is sold to this doctrine. It isn't true. And so in their -- in their -- in their fury now, they run for cover and try to have -- bring in physiological psychology and deal with the body and what the doctors otherwise do. Half of the psychology in America is simply pseudo-medicine, or pseudo-physiology, because they only have the mind and the body. And they are quite convinced that mind and body are two things. And they -- say -- the -- psychology is the famous science, you see, of -- without its content. "Psyche" means Greek soul. So the modern psychology is the knowledge of man without a soul, because by definition, it is either mind or body what they're dealing with.

So gentlemen, what I have tried to te- -- been trying to tell you is very important. You may know that in the Greek tradition, the -- there are three

qualities which constitute the human soul, or the human character: will, thinking, and feeling. And it is -- of this pagan, Greek root that modern psychology then has tried to build its edifice. I mention this so that you can at least have some point of comparison with what you hear in all the other departments, that you see that this is in open -- in open antagonism, or in open conflict with these long traditions.

For the last hundred years, this has plagued mankind, this fallacy of the Greek mind, of the liberal mind, that mind is soul. Voltaire began it, and the Greek -- the French Enlightenment. They said, "If you are clever, then you are good. If you are educated, then nothing can go wrong." Now you just look at the very clever Nazis, or very clever Communists. Cleverness has nothing to do with goodness. Education doesn't help a man from behaving. The idea that by education we are good is one of the gravest errors of humanity. The result is always that you get scoundrels and criminals of very high standing. You can do anything with education. You can abuse it. Ninety percent of the educated people lose their red blood corpuscles and go anemic, or -- or soft. This -- doesn't seem to me to be very good. It's very dangerous to be educated.

So gentlemen, if you compare will, thinking, and feeling, and try to find the -- the organ, the crucial situation in which we have tried to put man -- mind; body; at this moment in space: inward and outward; and the soul, knowing that it is in process of unfinished creation, and the role being that of us which is already definite, there. This would be the there-ness, and this would be the emptiness, the -- that what is still to come. The mind would be the reflector, and the body would be the insistor, that which here at this moment occupies space.

When you see that the greatest -- and we said, the soul, you see, in the arts, is dealing with problem of loving. The body must will. The mind does reflect. And the role does represent, makes present again that what already has been, re-presentative. So we need four verbs: to will, to reflect, to love, and to represent, in order to describe any normal human being. There is nobody -- if you see a child acting -- any one of his games, it's representative already. He wants to give a funeral, or a christening, or if you ever have seen child -- -- children play, how -- they are very great actors.

So we do in fact -- this is our psychology in this course, gentlemen -- always split, or irradiate, or diversify into representative actions; into willful actions, by resisting pressure; in reflection, which you call "thought"; and in loving actions, by which we try to get out of our ruts and out of our present day and unite in new form -- into new forms, be it friendship, or be it a new nation, or be it a new town whi- -- or a new club which you found. Wherever you enter a new compound, a new body, you strip yourself of your physical resistance

against the outer world, because you take in something of the outer world and amalgamate, assimilate it, you see, without resistance. You love it.

So love is nothing so sentimental, gentlemen. It is the -- the possibility of creating new forms in reality which stick together and which form a new body politic, a new unit. I mean, think of all your families. At one time they didn't exist. Yet there is a whole group now. It's certainly in existence, I suppose with aunts and mothers in-law, and all such problems. Well, because a new unity has been posited by this act of commitment, by this act which is perfectly unnatural -- anti-natural in the realm of mere resistance of bodies against each other, others' interference, and intervention. The body in you says, "Stay away. This is mine. This is yours." But love says, "Come in. We live together."

Now here is the -- the -- this is the Christian psychology. That's the biblical tradition which we now have to make scientific today. And -- the hour has come -- there is much of course -- many attempts are going on over the last 50 years to penetrate the hard shell of the liberal arts college tradition, with its Greek, pagan, Alexandrinian, and to my mind, terribly superficial mentality. But our physi- -- departments of sociology, of economics, of psychology -- they all are still subscribers to the tenets of Aristotle, which is pre-Christian, which did not know that man lives by the word, and -- because he's spoken to and because he's loved. But as you know, all the Greeks thought that they could describe man by himself. This is the whole difference. In Christianity, a man cannot live unless he is spoken to. Unless God says, "Adam, where art thou?" Adam does not know who he is. He must answer.

The simple doctrine of this -- classroom -- of co- -- of Philosophy 9 therefore is an appeal to your experience, that you have to be allowed to play before you know -- begin to know who you are, because in playing, you are already sent into the world in a peaceful way. You are already allowed to play. It's a permit given you by other people. It's a sign and token of their love that you can play. You are not alone in this classroom. And you are accompanied by a sendoff of other people, who have told you, "Go here. We haven't been able to go to school. Go to school for us. Get new senses. Get new sports. Get new dignity. Get new aims and goals. Do it, because we for- -- unfortunately have to make," you see, "a living, and we can't therefore prepare ourselves for the good life as you are allowed to."

So gentlemen, you are here if you really know what a student is, as guests, as messengers, as deputies of a loving society, which has so much surplus that it can send out a sacred spring in the form of students, and say, "This spring shall jump higher, shall grow better, shall go further than we."

The Greek mind says, "All this city of Athens is rotten." That's what Socrates, after all, tried to tell them, and Plato. "And we are the elect. We live in the academic ivory tower. We live and look at all this in a critical mind. And therefore our mind is superior to their mere physical existence."

And there you get the whole terror of the mistake, gentlemen, of will and love. In the Aristotelian, and in the Platonic, and in the Communist scheme, you have thinking, feeling, and willing. You have three instead of four. And therefore, will is asked to also fill out the gap of love. Now will deals with outer things, with external things. "I will have this chair. And I'll take it," and then we struggle, because you want to take it, too. Two wills clash, in space. Will is always space-bound. And will is always opposed to another will.

Now the Greeks thought -- and that's why they went homosexual, and why they -- paid no attention to the revelation coming to man through his love for women -- that's why these -- this pederastic homosexuality ruined Greece, because love was made a subdivision of will. You can open an American textbook in -- of psychology as of today, and you will find that love is made a part of will, which is the most ridiculous performance. And it makes you very unhappy, gentlemen. I mean, not only that it is wrong, as your own experience shows. Everybody knows that will is the opposite from love. Love does not want its own, and will wants its own. And if you carry -- will into love, you will be impotent. All the willful lovers are impotent, because love is the power to disarm. And will is the power to arm.

That's why all acts of -- of sexual satisfaction which are willful ruin your nervous system, because it is -- cannot be initiated by your will. It -- you -- love must be stronger by you. You must be overcome by this feeling. And then you disarm and you go to pieces. But it is a difference whether you go to pieces under the real impact of an experience, or you go to pieces because you want to get intoxicated with some willful feeling.

Now this is the first thing: the confusion between will and love. The second confusion is, gentlemen: that thinking is not reflection of three other -- the three other situations of human life: of the situation of loving, of willing, you see, or of qualifying, so to speak, dignifying, being a -- playing a role, then thinking has no content. Then you can think anything. As soon as you however return into your real experience, you know that you have to reflect on everything that goes on. Anybody wants to know what he is doing. But the doing doesn't come from the thinking, because we have to eat, we have to sleep, we have to represent, we have to make love, we have to write poetry in order to get this love, we have to praise God. And then we think about it. We can write a theory about it. Thinking, gentlemen, is the accompaniment of our acts of living.

Obviously very necessary, but nothing per se. You cannot think in a vacuum. You cannot think without at the same time, you see, building on your experience. That's what I've tried to tell you in this course, that all your thinking comes from the real 20 lives in which you have lived. In play, in study. You know the school, you know your parents' home, you know your community, and everything that's in your mind is the -- some reflection on what you have lived, what you have done, what you have experienced, and what has been done to you. Wouldn't you agree?

Now you see the empty mind, or the proud mind, or the ivory tower mind or the -- the alleged philosopher I do- -- think it's a poor philosoph- -- the Greek mind feels that thinking starts inside itself, that it hasn't the re-flecting, mirrorlike, looking-glass obligation, or commission, or -- or duty, or role, but that it is something that can think up the world by itself. And then come these funny utopias, you see, which are forbidden to the human mind. You -- nobod- -- not one of us can think out a utopia and -- no where, because we only think somewhere. We think out of somewhere. And as you know, the modern masses are poisoned by utopias. "Utopia" means something that cannot be found anywhere. Well, our -- your and my mind are perfectly incapable of thinking up anything that has no existence, you see. It's impossible. We are bound by our experience. We are empirical beings, as the -- the philosophical term would say. We live by experience. Not what you call "experience" only, but everything that we have to march through. The ways of life, we said last time at the end, you see, are represented by the role, and the body, and the soul. These are ways, paths, trails blazed, and traveled, and marched upon. You can also call them -- roots of -- of -- boat of your -- of your soul. Of the ship of state. But the thinking can only reflect real roads, real trails, real pathways.

And this ghastly idea, gentlemen, that you think out the universe then leads to something so unreal as the United Nations, where 67 nations -- Costa Rica and Russia -- are all treated as some abstract idea of state. And -- nobody can love each other because I do not live -- love woman in general, but I love Elizabeth, I live -- Lottie -- I live Charlotte -- I li- -- love somebody who is really this, and nobody else. And so you can love Germany, or you can hate France, or you can love England -- love Ireland. But it is no -- no -- of no value to number them and say, "Ireland, 1; and -- and Great Britain, 2; and Scandinavia, 3," et cetera. That's how the -- why the United Nations will never function, because there people are treated -- the nations are treated in the abstract.

Now I defy you -- treat these girls in Smith in the abstract, and they will just send you home. You cannot -- and if a girl there at Smith knows that she is just a filler, that she -- how do you call it? -- a blind date, you see -- she is rather suspicious, because she doesn't want to be treated as a blind date. She wants to

know that she herself has been perceived by you and conceived as your -- as your addressee -- as your alter ego. She wants to be token -- talken -- talked to in person. And nothing is worse than a relapse into the will when you make love to a girl in -- in Smith. That's promiscuity. And promiscuity is the worst confusion -- perversion of love. Love is selective. And the minimum a student has to say to his girl is, "You are unusual." If you can't write a poem, at least tell her that you think she is unusual. Then she may begin to listen to you. But if you say she is usual, she will not date you, because "usual" means that she is like somebody else, you see. And in this very moment, you are willing your own sex satisfaction with any one girl, because you are in a terrible hurry, and great need. But you don't care for her, and she knows this very well, and she makes this great distinction between your will and your love.

Ja?

({ } think of God { } form a utopia, the ultimate utopia.)

Outopos means "somewhere in space," or "nowhere in space," literally. Ou is "no," and topos is "place." Now God is nowhere in pla- -- space. So if you mean this identity -- negative identity, then you would be right. Otherwise I think it's just a bad joke, what you're saying. A utopia is a description of a state, or a country or a heaven to come, which nobody has seen. God certainly has created you, and He is -- therefore He has been there before you were. And He is here now, and He is to be. So it's no use calling Him "a utopia."

(Well, what's faith? Faith is a utopia.)

What?

(What's faith? I'm -- faith in God, that's almost as bad as no -- I mean, you don't think about -- there's no reality of that in life. You don't get any of that -- you get faith from realities of life. How can you think of that?)

Do you think you are real? You are real?

(As far as I know.)

I don't believe so. You are abstract. You are -- have abstracted of your real self, of your real man. The poor man. You're -- perfectly benighted at this moment. But you think you are real. You are in a classroom. You're perfectly unreal, Sir. But the God who has such patience with you, He's very real. He hands you -- holds you in the palm of his hand. As long as you say you are real, nobody can help you, because you haven't -- buried your soul. Only a man who

knows how unreal he himself is, knows what is meant by the acknowledgement of a divine power which can make you more real, which can help you to -- realization. We are unreal. We all are.

Gentlemen, we are very unreal indeed. And of course, the self-centered Greek mind says, "I'm the only -- the mind is the only real thing. The rest is unreal." You treat your body as you treat your third teeth, you see, as a mechanism. That's why you can say this bold sta- -- make this bold statement that you are real. Are the -- is any configuration of the physical world real? Is the atom bomb real? It's just electrons. Just atoms. The whole of -- result of physics is to make us understand that our physical configuration is so passing, that it's very unreal, because it's just accidental. Change any minute, you see. You -- as long as you say you are real, are -- we are just at odds. No -- no -- that will be -- as long as you have not been yearning for becoming more real, and don't -- don't feel how little reality you have. Ja?

(No, what I mean is this. You said before that the -- the Greeks thought -- really thought that thinking came from within itself. And you thought that thinking came from living. Okay. How can -- we don't live faith. I mean, it's no actual -- it's not there, it's intangible thing, faith is. So how can we think about that in your sense of the word?)

I'm not quite sure that I even understand now your question. You bring in the word "faith," is that it? F-a-i-t-h. Well, I think it is perhaps dead, this word today, for your understanding. So I'm not going to use it at this moment. I try -- shall try to give it up. We'll have this -- this question before us, after we have dealt with war and work a little more -- a little more fully. But let me say you one thing -- tell you one thing: God is the power that makes you and me speak. Speak. And even your sentence, "I am real," is lent to you. You can't say this inside yourself, because "I," and "am," and "real," are words of thousand years of good standing. And slow development. And you just try to understand and handle them in their right meaning. In their full meaning. Otherwise your sentence would make no sense. You want -- to tell me this, I must understand, too.

So if you -- would acquiesce at this moment, in this very, perhaps strange sentence -- it's the middle sentence, between what you call "real" is what I call "real," in the middle. Speech is something physical. I am shaking the air; you are shaking the air. And yet, it is nothing physical in the sense of the physics of our {day}, because why these sentences at this moment in this classroom have to be spoken, that is only understandable when you launch your life into the stream of eternity. The meaning of this hour here cannot be interpreted by this hour, because it comes from somewhere, from the founding of Dartmouth College,

and Dartmouth College, the founding comes from the history of college life, and colleges come from the Christian Church, and the Church comes from the Jews, and the Jews came from Egypt, and the Egyptians came from the troglodytes. Therefore, any one sentence which we speak testifies to our being -- riding on a wavelength of thousands of years. And by speech, we acknowledge this. And as far as you sit here, or I stand here, we would just be physically confined to this moment, and in this -- in this classroom.

But what we say, Sir, you and I assume tacitly, to make sense within a tremendous poem, a tremendous song of mankind that has been on -- gone on in the prize of our cre- -- praise of our creator for thousands of years, and we also know that these words are put on our tongues not by our own volition, but as a response. And this -- the first voice is not ours. And we -- just give answers. And once you begin to see this, God certainly is not outside this word as a pensioned-off official who once created the word. When either -- you and I, you see -- have the power to speak the truth, then He's present at this moment in this room, and laughs probably very much over our very foolish efforts to interpret Him. Or you and I have no reality, because then we are really just electrons, when we just are moving here to no reasonable purpose, and will be destroyed.

So be satisfied at -- for the time being. I know it is not the full answer -- with this one suggestion that God is the power that makes men speak. Speak -- I mean in the full sense, you see, of meaningful utterance. This very sentence of yours, "I am real," cannot be spoken by you outside a -- a world of man in which this can be translated into any language of the world. It's not just an English sentence. I -- but you would claim that this sentence makes sense in China, and in Burma, and in Africa. And any Negro will answer, and also say, "Well, I want to be real. These Americans, they say they are real, and they say we are not real. We are just benighted. We are F4." Or how to do they call it -- this Point Four program? It always reminds me of F4 in the military service, you see.

At this moment, however, let me -- I'm glad you brought this up. I mean, your -- this -- you have the question of all questions, my dear man. I -- obviously nobody has the right answer to this, the full answer. But what I have told you at least is a minimum answer.

But you must turn around and say that since man began to speak, he has always fel- -- feel -- felt that the power to sing, the power to create, the power to have children, or to marry, and to name children -- not just offspring, you see, to -- to love them constantly, and be recognized by them as parents, that all these powers are of a nature that transcends you and me, that is bigger than you and me.

Therefore, it is fantastic to say that God is of our making. The whole place for the divine comes in where we realize that we are not of our -- our own making. You have not -- are not able to make a tree. And once you realize this fully, then you know that we put the word "God" necessarily there, where we know that we can't do it ourselves. Therefore it is not utopian, because Plato's state is very studied. It's labored. He thinks it up. He says, "I have reasons to think this is the best state." But the wrath of God, you see, no human being would think {out}. If you and I had our way about God, we would say, "He has always to forgive us. He has to be nice." You know how all these idiots who say, "This can -- there can be no God, because there is a world war." Well, if you know what is meant by the power of God, you will know that we have to learn from Him who He is. We can't tell him how He has to be. Then you have a utopia.

That's why I'm -- letting -- getting a little irritated by the confusion of the things we manipulate, the islets we make, you see, the -- the -- the utopias we -- we fabricate for our full clothes, you see, and what we experience to come, above us, and make you by saying -- speaking up in this class a bigger man, because it -- it takes something to say this, which is not demanded by your physical environment at this moment. You go -- anybody who speaks goes against gravity. Gravity and inertia would always say, "Please, don't speak up. Don't stick your neck out."

It always takes an anti-physicist, so to speak, an anti-physical bent in us to go upstream. And how can you explain the existence of something that according to the laws of physics simply cannot exist, you see, a victory over gravity. According to the law of physics, we all have to live by gravity, by inertia. And it would be more inert to sit here and co- -- let this hour pass without asking your question. But you speak, Sir, and rightly so, because you want to get -- use your body in the service of something that's much more important than your body and the -- the law of physics. You want to know, in order to reorganize this body, and to know where to turn with this body. You get direction.

Now: thinking, feeling, willing. Feeling, gentlemen, in this -- in this fabricated, Aristotelian males' individualistic psychology, based on no empirical experience of real living, is then both the loyalty felt to the old city, and the feeling for friendship which is the kind of abstract ghost in i- -- in -- in the ivory tower. The love of the -- point, there takes the place of the love to women, and to procreation, and to creativity.

So thinking is made its own motor, so to speak. It's made the beginner, you see, the initiator, instead of the reflector. Love is subdued into -- into a part of the -- I have read such -- oh, I have to tell you. There was a famous theologian

in Germany. And he published three books on love, on Christian love. And the first sentence says, "Love is a subdivision of will." Because he had gone to school, and he hadn't read the Bible. But he had all -- studied all this wrong psychology, so he simply began his book with this. You can think what in three volumes on love then can be the result. Love is then just a private enterprise of anybody willing to love.

Gentlemen, there are many people in this country who will to love. That's not love, you see. Love always is the em- -- the -- empty yourself of your selfwill; then you will become able to love. The -- many psychiatrists know this by now. The disease of many high-strung people is that they -- they choose to will to love, which you cannot do. Many marriages have broken down because women, for example, who have -- talked themselves into the will to love, then they remain frigid. The frigid woman is the person where will takes the place of love. Love is surrender, and will is effort. Love is effortless; love -- will is tension, love is relaxation. And if -- one -- the two things here are confused, you see, you get this terrible situation of so many women unable to show -- to be real lovers. They are so high-strung that they only now think that a -- a -- a person has to be willful, has to will. They are very unhappy. You see them by the hundreds. Beware of them. They are not good for marriage. And at least then the boy has to be relaxed. I mean, you are much -- in this country, the man is -- is more able to be relaxed than the women are. They are too high-strung. Too much tension.

So it is all very practical. A wrong psychology, gentlemen, really taught to millions of people in a school does something to your life, of course, that works. And it de- -- deflects your natural course of living.

Feeling then, gentlemen, tries to -- so to speak, to glue, in a sentimental glue, together what is separate. The definite role in society, where we are clothed, with a vested interest, where we own property, where we are president or a candidate for Congress, where we are our mother's son, where we are Dartmouth students, and the soul that yearns for transforming all these worldly appearances into the fruit of our own seed -- of our own spirit, of our own faith, of our own destiny. And you can imagine. This -- these psychologies always take then feeling: it must always lead to sentimentality. Or just to physical, I mean, to just {senses}. This is what feeling gets -- begets you. Thinking is then leading into abstraction, instead of reflection. Anybody reflecting on a real, good game is not abstracting. He is reflecting. He is -- it passes once more in his mind. He -- he is repeating it once more. That's very good. It's sharpening your wits. But the thinking becomes abstract, the feeling becomes sentimental, and love becomes will.

So these are the three heresies of the -- governing and ruling class in this

country, called the psychologists. They run the show.

Such a group of psychologists got $8 million to develop a scheme of selecting the Air Force officers. And the first thing they built was a toilet -- a restroom so constructed that they could watch the men when they fulfilled these requirements of the human body. And from this they deducted the fitness of -- for leadership of the candidates in the Air Force. Now gentlemen, witch-burning is not any worse. We live today under the -- that -- those people who would have been burned for -- 400 years ago as witches. Now I don't know what's better, to spend $8 million and the future of the Air Force on them or to burn them. I still think I prefer the burning.

That's America. Fortunately the real generals, after some consideration say, "Well, we will pay the $8 million so that the public thinks that we are scientifically minded, but we won't go by tho- -- the results of this experiment." That's always the saving grace, that there is still somebody here with a sense of humor who says, "To heck! Good-bye." And so it's all done in vain. But the -- the -- I have seen this -- this martyr-instrument, this restroom, where they could peep through the keyhole. Not through the keyhole. It was much more handy. Eight million dollars a year on this budget alone. And that's called -- science in this country.

When I went to this country, the greatest psy- -- psychiatrist and psychologist of -- living in Europe after -- after Freud, Mr. Jung, in Zrich, warned me and said, "You will find that two-third of what's called science in America is trash." And you have to hear this from one man at least during your youth, that it is trash. Absolute trash. There's not one word of usefulness or truth in all that. And you can -- you know it, if you only would -- like I to- -- didn't I give you the story of the hugging of the Yale people in -- at Yale University? Wie?

(No.)

It can no longer be doubted that -- that children need womanly care -- motherly care? Well, another time I'll tell you the story.

I mustn't tell my stories too often, you see. But keep this in mind, and decide for yourself. And you will always find that when you love by willpower, you will be divorced. Nobody can be married by will. You can only be -- stay married for 50 years, then you accept this as your destiny. And that's not of your own will. It's a discovery that comes to you beyond your own will, it's stronger than your will. That's why Dante in his new life, in the great story of his love, says, "{Venit quidem fortior qua me}." "And there came into my life some god -- the god of love -- who was stronger than myself."

Now love is not the only god, you see. The people -- Sir, what's your name? Pardon me. What's your name?

(Wetzel.)

Wie?

(Wetzel.)

Ja. Wetzel. The people who say that God is a utopia, you'll always find these rationalists, they will always accept one deity in their life, and that's the goddess of love, because any male -- any really virile man needs love. Some woman must stick to him. And he cannot explain this, but he accepts this. I just heard yesterday the story of the Duke of Windsor and Mrs. -- what's her name?

(Simpson.)

You see, with the caviar. Have you read the story? In -- she bo- -- he bought caviar for her. It was beluga, and the best he could get and she said, "It's salty, my dear."

And he said, "But it's the best caviar I could --"

"It's salty."

And here he went down on his knees and five times she said, "It's salty." Then the waitress withdrew, because she wanted not to -- to be indiscreet, and listen to the further quarrels of the royal couple. But she's certainly this -- what's her first name?

(Wallis.)

Ja. You see, "honest whore," you can call her. This honest whore. She is really -- there is a famous play in the Shakespearean days, The Honest Whore. She dominates this man, you see. She's the only deity he has, the poor man. He abdicated his -- his crown.

You always get a partial god or a partial goddess when you abolish the whole. If you believe in God, then you can recognize that the love is only one power in life, and that it -- sometimes you have to rise above it. Even the wife -- love of your wife must not trespass on your duties to God and man. And if your wife is a coward, you still have to -- cannot break, you see, your resolution to defend the liberties of this country. Or if she says, "Don't be -- run away from

the draft," you have to say, "My dear ma- -- woman, you have to take it." Or you will find that she's very jealous of all your mental and intellectual friendships. And some of my friends -- some of my stu- -- former students have accepted this. The only law they knew was the command of their wife. And they have broken away with me -- from me, because the wife feared my influence. And the virile ones have said, "Your love is -- all right, I love you, but I love this relationship, and the all -- this is -- what goes with it. My -- my life of the spirit, I love this, too." And they simply have compelled this woman to believe in more than the deity of God -- of love.

The -- so you see, then the -- the belief in God has some very practical results. If you don't believe in God Almighty, you believe always in a partial deity. Either in alcohol, or in women, or in betting, or in gambling, or in politics, or in art, or in science. These are all gods. Only they are minor gods. Very minor. But you people, who say they don't -- God is an utopia, you are all ruined by the god of science, for example. There is nobody who speaks who does not believe in a god, because he wants to be believed in as speaking the truth. And the truth is always bigger than you and me. And that's your God at this moment.

And therefore, the whole question of -- gentlemen, of the belief in God is -- is a very practical question. I will not believe a scientist in this country who only says that psychology is right. Then he builds these restrooms. And everybody bows to him and says, "This man is a scientist." And we waste our budget. Do you think we need this, this military budget which we have? I'm sure we don't. You could do it for one-third. But -- the soldiers have to be overfed, and the scientists have to be overfed, and the colleges have to be overfed, all out of the military budget. And nobody -- hush, hush -- nobody -- nobody -- is allowed to say anything about it. It's taboo. That's the god in this country at this moment. You have so many changing gods.

Since I have come to this country, gentlemen, there have been at least 20 different religions. You had to believe in a different god every year in this country. I am fed up with this. It is much simpler to believe in one god than to believe every year in another god. It's I think too much, you see. Now you have to have a McCarthy religion. And before, you had a Roosevelt religion, you see. And before, you had a Truman religion -- a "Truman Doctrine," they called it. And I don't believe in any of these temporary religions. I'm perfectly indifferent to Mr. McCarthy. What do I care? And I do -- am perfectly indifferent to the New Deal. These are not my relig- -- is not good enough to be a religion. But you have treated them all as the religion of the day -- and you would have liked to execute. You don't know this, but in this country it's very dangerous not to share the faith of the day, you see. Then you are ostracized.

(I think, Sir, you went a little far in calling these "religions." I mean, the point is still a correct one, but as far as the Truman Doctrine and McCarthyism, while they might fill some sort of a need, I think we don't { }.)

Well, you understand very well what I am { }. That's enough.

I'm not saying that the measure itself has anything to do with religion. You see, the Four Point po- -- program, or the Truman Doctrine, that we had to defend Turkey and Greek. But you will very well know that everybody at that time who contradicted it was treated, you see, as an outcast by the party-man, you see, by the -- you were an isolationist, just because you didn't think that Turkey was such a wonderful ally, you see. Or so on, you see. So it is the -- never it is the measure itself which I wish to attack, you see, or criticize. What is done. But the projection as though this was the ultimate to which man had to dedicate himself, you see, totally. You understand? Shall we have a break here? Have a little...

[tape interruption]

...Well, I think it will be answered as we go on. It is more important at this moment to take a step into the problem of man who -- man -- the man of war, or the army, and to see what war does to man. Obviously the war separates men and women. Even if you have women soldiers now. It isn't sex. They are not there as women. They are there as men, or like men. So I am -- the army is the world of the men. It's a man without a home. It's outside the home. That's quite important, because what I'm now trying to s- -- tell you about the Army is a man's world. And that's why it is called a man's world. Originally gentlemen, and that is perhaps for you quite well to remember, government, nations, peoples, tribes, were organized because of war. And therefore, the part that was dealing with the relations of the women and children was not under law, but was under mores, under habit, under all kind of influences. But certainly not under law. Nothing that happened in a home could be taken to court. Such a quarrel had to be settled, you see, here.

I think it's the same with the school. The progressive educators try to introduce courts for litigation in schools. Well, I think it's the end of a good school when you can litigate, and have a -- have a -- go to court there, with -- because of the punishment of a student. That's all fictitious. Where there is a good spirit, you laugh all the quarrels off. And if we can't settle our quarrels, this course is doomed. I mean, you can then run another course, but Philosophy 9 would, for all practical purposes, be doomed if we would put it under law. We have to be here in a spirit that is pre-legal, so to speak, this side of the law. Do

you understand this? I mean, as in a family. When you go to court, a husband and wife, that's usually for a divorce, when the marriage is finished. Otherwise you try to have no judge within your family life.

That's important, gentlemen, because this must -- you must know this. We live here in a civilian tradition, so uttermost -- civilian, that you have forgotten that all law originally martial law. Law is the order between soldiers who come home, and who owe each other respect because they have fought in the ranks together. That is therefore the law-giving character of war.

Weil -- because this was misunderstood in this country so totally, gentlemen, you got the crisis of 1929. In 1929, the American people were told that there had been a First World War. And that after this, the world trade and the world economics had lost their balance. We had spent, as you know, the American people had sent $15 billion to Europe as loans. And nobody there could pay it, of course, because there were reparations, and damage, and all kind of things. That -- to the great surprise of the American people, because when they gave this money as loans, they never thought it had any connection with the First World War, so to speak, and its upsetting influence.

Gentlemen, there was another thing linked up with this. When you ask a whole -- the whole manhood of a nation to go to war, and have universal service as we -- you introduce in the First World War, then these people cannot be left to accident when there is an economic crisis. So in 1929, as you know, the New Deal was begotten from the economic crisis. It took four years, because people understood that a man and his family cannot on the one-hand side be asked to serve in the army of his country, and on the other hand be of no concern to the government when he is destitute and has no work. So we got the PWA and they got the CCC.

Now, why do I mention this, gentlemen? In this country to this day, there is a total lack of mis- -- of understanding of the constitutional powers of a war. War makes constitutions. The Constitution of the United States, as written in -- by the federalists, was the result of the experience of the Revolution War, from 1776 to 1783. And I can give you on this chapter and verse. When the Constitution of the United States was under debate in the various communities, the mayor of New York, Mr. James Duane, D-u-a-n-e -- ever heard of him? Who has heard his name? Well, delighted! -- made a speech in Albany, in which he said, "They should -- good people should understand that the Constitution only contained those lessons which the Revolution War had taught them." They needed a commander-in-chief -- that would have to be the president. They needed a congress, you see. They needed the states for -- at that time for levying men, and for -- for levying taxes. And they should understand that the Constitu-

tion was not a newfangled idea. But it was the result of dire experience. And it was an experience that cannot be forgotten, because war experiences are irretrievable. You can never go behind an experience made in wartime.

This is what the United States, however, have tried to do in 192- -- up to 1929, in this country, or up to 1933. And you people who now speak down about the New Deal, you shouldn't do this. The Republican Party has been saved by Mr. Roosevelt. All the rich people in this country are only rich today because of the New Deal. And for no other reason, because the New Deal -- the rich people could not help themselves. Mr. Roosevelt had to come and -- and rescue them. That's why there is still private property today in the United States. And you can be so anti-Communistic. It's all very silly. I have known too many of these stout Republicans. They have been my best friends. Somerset Club in Boston, if you know what that is.

And -- but -- we had this in Europe, too. People can never for- -- be forgiven when they had the jitters. And somebody else had to -- to rescue them. And the rich people in this country, down to 1933, did not know what to do, how to restore the economics of the United States. They hadn't the faintest idea, because they didn't understand something very similar -- simple, gentlemen, that a war changes the Constitution. The change -- wrote by the two world wars is a very simple amendment to the Constitution -- hasn't to be passed by twothirds or three-quarters of the states at all: that a soldier cannot be -- left on the street when he's unemployed. This was not understood, and therefore you got the bonus. The veterans' bonus, the American Legion bonus is the short-sighted idea that those who happen to have been to war are the beneficiaries, and their alleged widows, who -- very often are not their widows, as you know, but later inventions.

But you see, this was the Civil War experience. There the actual veterans of the Civil War, and their widows, and their families received pensions. But today in the world wars, something else has happened: universal service. Therefore anybody is a potential soldier. And all -- even because he may not have served in the actual army of 1917, when the crisis hits him in 1933, you cannot let him run wild, because the country needs him as a potential draftee. And such a draftee must be kept fit. And you know that a man who's unemployed becomes after two years a perfect misfit. You cannot use him for anything. When you have a man unemployed, it very often takes twice as long to restore him to efficiency than the time during which he has been unemployed. You have forgotten all this, because you don't know wha- -- at your age you haven't met with these 11 million people unemployed in this country.

Well, what I am trying to tell you, gentlemen, that wars -- make the law

for peacetimes. And th- -- in this sense, all law is martial law. You speak of martial -- court-martialing as something very secondary. The source of the authority of the law is that it is necessary for the peace between the homecoming gentlemen of the army. Because they have fought the enemy together, their property rights, their contract -- rights of contract, the duties against each other must be well-defined, because one doesn't want them to go to war against each other. That's very simple. And if you, gentlemen, abolish the civil severity of the law between the citizens, you invite vendetta. That is, you dissolve the Union; you dissolve the state. In this sense, you must understand, martial law is the application of the solidarity of an army in wartime to their -- the relation of the members of such an army in peacetime.

Goethe, the German poet, and he was a minister as you may -- of the -- a cabinet minister besides, and a great administrator, he has coined a very important phrase which I think you should write down: "If you abolish capital punishment for murder, you invite vendetta."

(You invite what?)

A vendetta. Vendetta. That is, the blood -- blood feuds, that is private, the -- men taking the law in themse- -- in their hands. This is unknown here in -- over the last 30 years, this has been such a civilian atmosphere that people have only debated whether it's good for the murderer to be beheaded. That's not an interesting question, you see. The humanity of the humanitarians has gone to such lengths that they have forgotten the origin of the law. The origin of the law is the solidarity of people who fight a common enemy. And there is a limit. If I am exposed -- or my children, or my wife -- to be kidnaped, or raped, or murdered by a comrade in arms -- a potential comrade in arms, then the army is dissolved. And then I either turn against this buddy.

Think of the terrible trial going on in Italy at this moment, you see, which will be a blot on our escutcheon for a long time to come. Two officers killing their superior officer. It's a terrible story. But that invites vendetta. I'm glad that the Italians at least persecute the case. We sit back here and do nothing, for some -- from some threats of seeming paragraphs. And they run around, here, these people. And you have to greet them in the streetcar. Sit -- sit next to a murderer.

Gentlemen, that's the dissolution of the organization of government. And you are very, very hazardous about this -- very slipshod and very indifferent. You do not know that since the army at war is the fountain of all the rights we grant each other as equals, this whole sentence, "All men are born equal" is of no good if you don't practice it. And it is practice, and this comes only to the consciousness of the American people fully when you are one in arms, when you

have this reliance on each other, as you had in Korea. These people who have fought together can fall out if you do not make very strict laws that they have to give each other honor and respect, and deference, and thereby give everyone his opportunity.

So we have three things, gentlemen: the misunderstanding of the economic upheaval by the First World War; the misunderstanding of the duties against potential soldiers, as exemplified by the bonus for the veterans, as against the New Deal with its duty against the unemployed; and we have the complete misunderstanding of the meaning of capital punishment. Capital punishment between soldiers of the same army is indispensable, because it reminds people that inside this army nobody takes the life of the other. And no life imprisonment can have the same meaning, because of this mirror of the civil law. The civil law mirrors the constitution of a country at war. It mirrors it. It's a reflection on it. It is the lesson learned. What we mean by "lesson" is always a reflection on something that we were forced to enter in. We had to enter into this Union in order to defend the -- the -- this continent against the British first, and later against the Secession, and later against a Europe united in itself against the United States.

Each time, I could show you, each of these wars has altered the Constitution. Wars alter the Constitution, and you are very much hamstrung, because you think of the Constitution of something on paper, and not of something enacted. But when the Congress says, "Be it enacted," the so- -- humility of this phrase is that they have become aware of what must be enacted. It has already, so to speak, become just, and righteous to do so. And now it is only enacted. That is, it is carried to its articulate formulation in a written law. But gentlemen, laws are not arbitrary. Laws are necessary. They are indispensable. You have to pass a law when it is just. If you think that you can invent laws, then you are a civilian, utopian, Platonic mind who really believe that the mind begins inside itself, { }, you see, and know the best state.

Gentlemen, we begin to think because there is war upon us. That forces us to think. Where would the United States br- -- brainpower be without the -- Russia over the last seven years and without -- Hitler in the previous five years? This country is only kept on its toes, as you know, because it has enemy. One, the real -- the full enemy before, and now the potential enemy. This country would have gone to sleep. We would all have to live in women's clubs, and to listen to these odd and boring lectures, which these women have to listen to, if this was America without Russia. The enemy is making you think. That's a reflection on the potential future war. And that's good thinking, very wholesome thinking. But if you -- think where America would be without this reality the w- -- of the war, of the army, of the enemy upon you, well -- you would all take

Education 16, and believe that people were made good by education. That's what you all believe.

Well, I don't believe it. So I dismiss the class.