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

[Opening remarks missing]

... we have laid down in this course. It is not true that the truth has to be run -- has to run down in the circulation of thought. Most of you obstruct any circulation of thought. As far as you go, you will not enter the state of doubt or protest. You will go on playing. We have seen in the -- your -- in your own papers, you have dealt with people who had not -- no time to play and therefore again forfeited their own bliss, because they wanted to be serious too early. All these Ten Commandments in these papers -- in many of your papers, have been mistreated as though they were natural laws.

So gentlemen, today I may -- must first make this statement: in the social science, there may be laws, but they are laws against which every one of us can trespass. As you well know, I have heard something about juvenile delinquen- ...

[Tape interruption]

... and you don't want to hear this. You want to identify yourself with nature. And you are waiting for the gospel that will prove to you that sex and everything -- digestion, the choice of profession -- can be given you by aptitude tests; that is, by nature. That is, it is unexceptional that any man under certain circumstances will act the same way. Every one of you knows that this isn't true. But you want to believe it, because you would like to disappear within a classification. People are very great -- this book, The Lonely Crowd, is -- is full of classifications and it is so enthusiastically read in this country because this country is today satisfied as -- as soon as people can be pigeon-holed, you can in this book rediscover how you are, and then you are happy. I -- as soon as I am found out, gentlemen, I'm terribly unhappy. I don't want to be found out. I want to remain free to do something utterly different. That's why I think a man cannot be a -- for -- for prohibition, and he cannot be for Alcoholic Anonymous, and he cannot be for public alcoholism, because every day I decide whether I want to be drunk or not. And it's a new experience each time.

This I said already when I was your age, at the University of Heidelberg. We had a terrific discussion then about prohibition. Even a German university, the prohibition, and the Anti-Drinking League was really quite strong. And the first speech in my life I've ever made in public is on this fact, that a student will neither commit themselves to -- himself to drinking nor to prohibition. But he must reserve the right to decide this in freedom as he goes along. Why he should have any lasting principles on such a minor question, I could not see.

So this is very serious, gentlemen. The first difference between the social sciences and the natural sciences which we have discovered, and for which the new social scientist had to suffer is that all the laws which are true in society, also can be broken. And they are broken, as any divorce shows you. Marriage must be a sacrament, but the people are divorced. That's not a contradiction. That's the beginning of wisdom. Man is absolutely exceptional animal, but it doesn't mean that there are no rules, which is very much against your grain. You would like to disappear behind a cloud of natural laws and then you say, "Isn't it natural that I stole the silver spoon?" Of course, it may be natural, but it is anti-social. So he has to be punished.

You -- as you know, the -- the idiocy of the last 50 years has to be said, "No capital punishment. All criminals must be educated until they kidnap the next person." And -- and so on. So we have -- we -- we have concentrated on the criminals and making them happy, and have made society unhappy. Why? Because this was in their nature. What can you do against nature? You can't do anything against nature. You can exploit nature. That's what we do in the natural sciences. We have factories to deal with nature, to break the will of na- -- of natural things. Gentlemen, with human beings, obviously, we not -- do not try to break the will of a human being. What's the way of dealing with the human will? Why is the human will unbreakable, and why does this same human will break all the divine and human laws? It's a very strange contradiction. You s- -- bring up the children.

I just was told the sad story of some grandparents yesterday night. They came to our house and said, "We are through with our grandchildren. Our children have deni- -- declined to make any demands on these children. They come into the room. They go out of the room, without asking any question whether people -- when people -- we are there. I bring them some gifts. They don't even say `Thank you.' They won't say `Thank you,' but they will play and break the -- the toy right away." And -- and that's called natural -- natural behavior. Other people call it piggish behavior. Pigs are very natural.

This is, by and large, the situation, gentlemen. You have the navy and the marine corps for the boys who have never obeyed for the first 20 years in their life. And you get -- the stricter the discipline the later has to be and the more stupid. Go to a factory. What stupidity do you have to do as a the -- as a clerk in an office today? Because you have never obeyed the first 20 years of your life. There you are allowed to play, and you -- only your own will. And so you are a natural being and perfectly worthless, and later you are made unhappy.

The relation, gentlemen, between the nature in you and your freedom is a very consistent one. It is -- to you it is absolutely mysterious that there are --

should be in the household of the human spirit these powers like exploring, or reading, or obedience or -- or teaching. I tried to show you that they are there total -- always. I told you last time that an explorer who read the book of nature like Humboldt is not -- understood by you, because you think the first three stages of a child's life -- obedience; listening, learning and reading; and playing -- is after all nothing serious. Gentlemen, today in a world where nobody obeys, as a child, and where nobody reads -- nobody learns anything -- you haven't learned anything. You haven't learned any of the languages which allegedly you have learned. There are two men in this class who are able to quote a French text in their paper, writing on a Frenchman. Two out of 160. The rest have never -- their language requirement was of no use to them. So you haven't learned anything. You have allegedly covered fictitiously certain requirements, gentlemen, but you haven't learned it.

Now, what's the consequence, gentlemen? As soon as you take away this one spec- -- color in the spectrum of the light of the human spirit, and say, "No obedience for children," you have to get the weirdest obedience for some grown-ups. You have to -- you get the slavery of grandparents, or you get the slavery of people in a factory, where they only are allowed, as -- as Charlie Chaplin always used to show in his famous movies, you see, these little -- little movement of -- of the left finger to get the gadget over the conveyor belt. That's in relation. The more you try to make the children happy, you see, the more unhappy you will make the grown-ups. There's an absolute proportion between not allowing a man to live a certain station, a certain mental phase at the proper age, and their -- this cropping up arbitrarily at another place. Human freedom, gentlemen, always is to be had. You can break any law, but somebody always has to pay the penalty.

Here we get the answer between nature and men. This thing, if I throw it to the ground, it will fall down; or if there is a tremendous draft in the air, it will -- may float. That's nature, you see. You can decline to obey, in your youth. But then you will -- or somebody else will have to pay the penalty for having to do as much {obeying} in a different situation, at another time. If you cannot get out of the amount of obedience that is necessary in a society, obedience is the carryingon from one generation into the next, of experiences. If the one generation declines to obey to this experience, there is a world war.

This country was -- was bolted, jolted into the world of reality in two world wars, against its will, because it wanted to go on playing. Do you think wars are just a luxury or an error? {War is} a simple way in which the laws of life are brought home to people who like to forget them in peacetime. You may be sure, gentlemen, that the -- the {organization} of this country and the prosperity will be visited on you. You will try to decentralize in your big cities but it is too late,

when we are destroyed in the next bomb attack. You could -- decentralize it now, and forego the third car in your garage. You don't like to do this. You are in a coma. You play.

This country is now absolutely abusing the Fourth Commandment. You are not serious when -- and you still say there is time to play. And you may say, gentlemen, that many of the people you have treated in your papers were serious too early. They -- they -- they -- they whip their body. Luther became a monk without seemingly good reason at the age of 20 and went through all the austerity and asceticism. It cannot happen to you. Certainly not. But you can play too long. And somebody will have to pay the price. You are very clever. You -- you marry then a girl who is then saddled with a young boy for the rest of their life, when she should have a husband 10 years older than she to whom she could look up. So all these poor women today are made in the first 10 years of their life -- in the marriage-life, too serious. And they all are crushed, because you have played all the time, yet you want to get married at 20 -- at 21. You have no right to do that. You have -- no man has a right after he has played 20 years to become a husband and a father. So who becomes the husband? The lady becomes. Who becomes the father? The mother becomes. And you push the perambulator.

Gentlemen, these laws are absolutely untrespassable. I mean, they cannot be broken, yet every one of us can break them. This is the -- the problem of society. Society is solidarity. One man's sin is another man's penalty. Not one of us, you see, can be told that on him it will be visited. Obviously the Gay Nineties in the 19th -- of the 19th century in this country must have been very gay indeed. The world war was far away. And the people who were killed -- the children of Theodore Roosevelt, who were killed in the Lafayette Squadron in 1918, they probably were a very virtuous people. But it is -- obviously that they paid the penalty for the indifference of the Americans in the coming world war, in the '90s, when everybody warned them that they should interfere, and that there would be no world war if the Americans would set the example for a common enterprise of the human race. And there have been Americans at that time who knew this, and tried to tell you. But they were just as much in a coma as you are. Nobody today can in an election year -- can talk business to the American people. It's play. It's a great fun to see Mr. Kefauver, and Mr. Stevenson shake hands with Negro children. It's fun. It's the Fourth Commandment ex- -- over-extended. But it isn't serious.

So, the first law of the social sciences, gentlemen, I think is a very important law: that there is only a social science inasfar as one man's doing, you see, has consequences for somebody else. Talking about society makes no sense if it deals -- starts from an individual psychology, and -- remains within an individual psychology. It's not interesting what you think you are doing. It's not interesting

what I think I am doing, you see, but it is very interested that I should omit a certain duty and then come to know that my grandchildren therefore may be driven from this country. This is important. That's the content of a social science, gentlemen. The content of a social science is that the action of one person and the passion of another person are lawfully connected. Otherwise there are no social laws. Take the business cycle. One man's -- one man's food is another man's poison. Here you see clearly one man speculates on the stock exchange, you see, and therefore becomes very rich. It isn't he who loses the money in the crash. Somebody else does. So we speak of a social law called the "business cycle." The people who -- who excel in the bust, and the -- those who excel in the boom -- in the boom are not the same people. Yet it is true that this is an economic law. Can you see this? Or Gresham's Law in money: bad money drives out good money. The people are settled with the bad and good money are not the same. They're just other people. Yet the law is a social law.

Now it is so simple that I'm always surprised that nobody ever says this to you, gentlemen. In nature, the quality is in the thing itself, in -- in human beings, gentlemen, because we have this strange solidarity in society, it is one man's action. You break the window in a girls' college and next day in Colby College no boy is admitted after 8 o'clock. Who is penalized? Not the boy who breaks the window, because he gets away. But all the other boys who otherwise might have broken the windows.

This doesn't exist in nature, gentlemen. Either this water freezes, or no water freezes. If you expose one -- one pond to the -- to zero weather, the -- the effects are on this pond, are they not, you see? But what I'm trying to tell you is that if you expose in -- in -- in -- in society one man to zero weather, the children of the next generation remain indifferent, and remain haughty. And remain sterile. That's a very strange effect, and a very gruesome effect.

The second thing I like to say today is that in this new science, which we are just starting, and against which there is a conspiracy of the natural scientists, because they don't like to hear that the social science has different method, and a different principle, and different intentions, and different prin- -- a different way of -- of looking at the universe is the distinction which you never hear made. And I think it is a useful one. It's a distinction between three degrees of mental reality. I think nobody can go to Heaven who doesn't know the difference. And yet it is totally unknown in this country.

There are three attitudes, gentlemen, of the human mind. This country at this moment holds to the truth that the human mind is a private affair, that you have private opinion. And if you want to -- you tell somebody in public what you privately think, but if you don't want, you don't tell anybody. It's your private

affair. Even religion, they have made it into a private business, so of course there is no religion. Religion is a public affair. But we'll see this in a more concrete example, gentlemen.

I invite you to begin to see that a child's mind is private because it is not committed. I want you to see that a protesting man, or a man like Christoph Columbus, sails under the open sky. He doesn't know where he is going. A man is -- must out -- get out into the open, protest. He's out in the open. And then you take, for example, a professional man, a man who has decided to be a bishop in the Episcopal Church. He is a public officer, the president of the United States, you see, or any man who promises you to be in the same spot tomorrow as today. You can come to my office every Wednesday, from 3 to 4, I'm committed. I hate it, but there I am, because I have made a public announcement in an organized body politic that I shall attend my -- attend to this business, you see. A child is not committed. A child plays with time. The public officer has a schedule, and an open life. Doesn't know where he's going, but he's going from danger to danger, from catastrophe to catastrophe, from epoch-making event to epochmaking event.

Who is living this way, gentlemen? I have already tried to shock you into a realization that this order of things, as I have put it here, is not the order of your life experience. Your life's experience is that you live privately, protectedly. And most of you think they can keep this mind in this private -- how should I say? -- this private, unendangered position all your life. You think, "My life -- my mind is private." Gentlemen, my mind is not private. My mind is public, but only since I am appointed here to teach you. It is public property what I tell you here. But I can only report on the great events in my life which have -- by which I have come out in the open. This is a very -- the dangers of this place are negligible. This is not real life here. This is already reporting on life, the classroom. It's an abstract situation in which I cull from my experiences, from my real life and systematize what has happened one day this way and the other day. I have told you such stories as far as I -- as we went along, which I -- I learned something in the -- under the -- what I like to call "under the open sky." Under the open sky. You experience such openness very rarely. Most of you are unable to make an experience under the open sky, because you have your private opinions. A man can only make a real experience, and a woman for that matter, if she can forget her private prejudices and convictions.

It is an open -- under the open sky, during the elections. You have a little bit of this revival atmosphere from July on -- to November, because it is undecided what the -- turn the events will take. Every word spoken there, you see, may have an ulterior effect which is not calculable. Most of the things here I s- -- are said in the classroom you mitigate, you dilute, to a question of an examination

issue. If you get your D, it's all right. That's the end. And next year, you have forgotten it. That's at best a public teaching, public office, but it is not an open event, because an open event has unlimited repercussions. If you -- during an election issue feel a little bit the vibration in the air, you know what revolutionaries feel when they go on the barricades. Or what the fathers of the Constitution meant when they said, "We'd better now hang together," you see, "otherwise, we'll all hang separatedly."

"Open" means that the meaning of what you say and what you hear is still uncertain. A real marriage can be performed in a church, or it can be -- performed under the open sky, or in private. Most marriage people discuss this in the last hundred years in this na‹ve fashion, and they said, " Free love is a private affair, nobody cares. We do as we please." Or they went to the church or to the sheriff and made it a public affair. Gentlemen, real marriage, of course, is neither a private affair nor a public affair. It's much bigger. You go to church after God in His mercy has illuminated your two hearts, that destiny has made you for each other. If you accept the consequences of this open meeting of two unexpected people, so to speak, who don't know themselves yet, who find themselves in the meeting, then you accept this great wisdom that marriages are concluded in Heaven and then are -- are incarnate and are embodied on earth. And then you wait for the necessity of marriage, and don't say you can marry by will, because that will not last, gentlemen. If -- if anybody in this room thinks he can decide himself, "I will" -- the ladies think they can -- it won't last. It must lead to a divorce. Whenever a will makes a marriage, it is no marriage.

This is -- therefore, gentlemen, real life comes out of the open, is then publicly sanctioned and then is inherited privately. Children live private lives. Fighters live open lives. And elders live public lives. That is, out of their open fight, their open suffering, their open -- their open {calvary}, there comes then an office. Jesus said that much in the -- in the -- in the Letter to the Hebrews, you know, this is all formulated, what I'm trying to tell you. The law of society is that you have to institute a new office outside the public and the private law of the country. When Jesus went to the Cross, the Letter to the Hebrews says, "It was outside the law," in the deeper sense, because He drew together the Roman enmity, and the Hebrew enmity, you see, and the Greek philosophy against Himself and created a new office. Today the popes in Rome claim that they are the vicars of Christ. They can only claim this, you see, because Jesus had no such office. He created the office. That's open. And obviously, it was very important that there was no earthly habitation for Him but the open sky, and the Bible very correctly says that there wasn't even an earthquake. In any revolution, there is an earthquake, because people don't know where they are going. There -- all the old definitions collapse.

So our whole civilization is built on this tripartition which is denied in this country today. This is a country in which the tripartition between open, public, and private is not recognized. Yet gentlemen, if you are only private citizens and later you want to have public position of trust, in a public utility, as vice-president or so, it will be of no avail, because you have never become a person. You become a person only if at one time some issue is -- becomes your issue willingly. You are just saddled with the great fight, for example, that your -- your environment shall allow you to marry this -- this woman, or shall you to exercise this profession, or shall allow you to invite a foreign- -- foreigner to your house, or to protect it -- a friend against the FBI, are all the things that are not desired by anybody. When Luther put the 95 Theses against the doors of the castle in Wittenberg, he didn't want to do this, but he couldn't have lived it down if he hadn't.

What is an open event, gentlemen? An event which we have not desired, but an event which confronts us with this situation, gentlemen: that we cannot forgive it us -- forgive us if we have not responded to it. A child falls into the river and you jump into it -- into this river, and you drown. You had to do this, because you would have despised yourself if you hadn't. And that's the only reason for -- for important action. The other day it was in the papers that a man was gagged and bound by a -- by a burglar, and a man hurried in the morning at 5 o'clock -- hurries along and -- did you read the story in the paper? -- and sees the man, and the man is able to -- to give signs and make it understood that he is just floored, and he is -- that he is -- robbed. And the man hustles and says -- the passenger and -- the passer-by -- and says, "I'm sorry, I have no time." That's the end of the human race, you see. There you see very clearly what an open event is. This man was on schedule. He had obviously a public office, you see, and he had a private mind. But he had no open heart. And gentlemen, the problem of open living is not the question of the open mind. That's always recommended to you. Gentlemen, an open mind is a sieve, and it is good for nothing. But an open heart you must have. This man didn't have to have an open mind to hurry on, you see, but he had no heart. He had a closed heart. And that's a real story.

And the story of the Good Samaritan is told in the Gospel, gentlemen, not for sentimental reasons, goody-goodies, charity ladies, et cetera. That's despicable. It's a very important thing. It is the power to open a response which breaks my schedule. The Good Samaritan faced the worst thing that can happen to a married man: that he was scolded by his wife because he didn't come in time for dinner. Anybody who can do this is not like this pig who says, "I'm sorry, I have no time," when he sees a man in need. Isn't that obvious?

There you see that a public office is still not the highest quality of life. The highest quality of life is to have an open heart. Imagine! It may cost the man the

election as president of the United States, that he has to -- to -- to jump into the river and -- and save the drowning child. He may get a cold, and he may not be able to make his presentation in time for his presidential campaign. Doesn't he have to do it, just the same? See? His own -- what is open? An open event overrules my old plans and categories for my own life.

And anybody who cannot experience such a situation, gentlemen, doesn't know what life is. And you try to live without this experience. Most of you cannot make this experience, of suddenly being confronted with an open issue which takes you away from your fleshpots, and from your parents, and from your {credits} in college, and from all your improvements on your own life, and from your getting rich, or getting a car. God may protect you. It is not agreeable to meet God under the open sky, gentlemen. But the -- society lives only by the people who at that time are not found wanting. This is a paradox. Perhaps you take this down, gentlemen. This event, that we are suddenly confronted with the unexpected, which carries us where we didn't want to go is not to -- nothing to be desired. The old doctrine that you must never cater martyrdom, it is not to be desired to go to the -- to the pyre, or to the -- go to the Cross, you see. Martyrs -- martyrs who want to be martyrs are not the right martyrs. Nobody must hasten to his doom. Obviously not. But the Good Samaritan, you see, is a different story. He was open to something that broke all his rules, his budget, his timetable, his loyalties to his family. It took him elsewhere.

And this is the problem, gentlemen, on which our whole society rests. The Puritans were people who did not desire to go to America. They were compelled to go to America. And then, there is a great country. And if you forget the Puritans and think that this is just a colonial country, for the exploitation of Spanish or English people -- as they teach now in the -- in the air academy in -- in Colorado, according to their history syllabus -- I had to revise it, and I'm just appalled. That's excluded. There is only public and private life, you see, and no open events. There is nothing bigger than man in this story, as it is told now officially in America. But gentlemen, such a story has never any appeal to any human heart. Why do I respect marriage, gentlemen? Only because I know that noble hearts have fought this out in the past, as I found out that you must be married for better, for worse.

Did I tell you the story, happened to me three days ago? Did I tell the story of this -- of this lady in the high -- high-church lady who fears that her husband -- her brother has now trouble with his wife because she is in the years of change, and they have -- always have been very happily married. First thing this -- this sister, this monster does, is -- after she has prayed in church, obviously -- goes to her brother and says, "Now, be divorced immediately. You can't be saddled with this woman. You are still young. You marry somebody else."

Because that was for worse, you see. That was also an open event. And it overtook -- of course it had -- make quite such a dent in the life of this -- these -- these married people. Now this -- this man is a noble character and he is through with his sister, instead of being through with his wife. But what a story, gentlemen. But why -- how is this possible, gentlemen, in this country? Because this girl, this woman, this high-church Episcopalian lady, this -- this real viper thought that life is planned. And he had -- she had planned for her -- her brother a happy marriage, and now he -- he was in trouble, so let's cut the Gordian knot. No trouble, no openness, you see, no acceptance of something not -- not provided for in the -- in the -- in the catalog at Sears, Roebuck of life.

So gentlemen, these three categories are the three stations in our real existence in humanity. The private life of children -- whether they go to public school or private school makes no difference. And you have a very difficult time, gentlemen. Most people think as you -- dialectically. You are all little Thomists. You think that what is not black is white, and what is not private must be public and what is not public is private. That's not true. There are three things. And the eternal revolutionary, the eternal independent man, the eternal free-thinker in this country says, "I'm out in the open. I go. When I -- the draft comes, I take to the hills."

Well, he -- ignores the public law of this country. He has a private mind and the open space. That's no life. That's the eternal revolutionary. That is, he tries to live also in two phases of life, but only the first four Commandments, you see, and the next three. Eternal protest. What Mr. -- my colleague, Mr. {West}, calls "rebel thought." That's comes under this category, these funny people who think that rebellion in itself is interesting action. It's most undesirable, you see. What I've tried to tell you is that the so-called "rebel" is only a fruitful rebel if he is forced to rebel because he's a conservative. If he would have never rebelled unless the injustice was so terrible, that even he must rebel, you see. A conservative who rebels, that's the real man. But a rebellious child that rebels, that has to be spanked; because it doesn't know, you see, that obedience is wonderful. As long as I have a decent president, and a decent judge, and a decent mayor, I obey, you see. It is only because unfortunately I have an indecent mayor, you see, that I rebel.

This you have to revive, I think. All of your thinking is so terribly sporadic. At times, you know one-half of this reality, gentlemen, of society: that people must be law-abiding citizens and good children. And then on the other hand, you worship rebel thought, and you are a revolutionary, and free-thinkers, and so on. Can't you integrate them and see that to every man there comes a portion of all three elements? It isn't so that you can ever live by one of the three, or two of the three. And don't remain so split, that in your leisure hours, you love the people

who pro- -- The Beggar's Opera -- who -- the juvenile delinquents, and the criminal in your movies, gentlemen, and on the -- in practice you pay your taxes, and you dodge the draft and you think you are law-abiding citizens. It is a very boring individual, gentlemen, this kind of -- of middle-class type which runs around in this country who, on Sundays and in evenings, in theaters, thinks it wonderful that a criminal defies the police. And when you come to his own life, I mean, he trembles that his wife may not be satisfied with him.

Gentlemen, it is much more important that you have important issues and overcome the resistance of the -- and the fears of your wife and say, "If you want me to be a decent man, you must allow me to take such courageous steps." And the reason that you say, "But -- these, the wife and children, you can't do this to me, you are a married man," that's very obscene. You know who was the only man in Eastern Prussia who resisted the Nazis? A man in a wheelchair with seven children. But he did it, and successfully. And they respected him. But if you here listen to these people who live on a -- on a half- -- half a -- a 50-percent diet of the soul, the logic would be: since he had six children and since he was paralyzed, he was the last man to protest. You will always find that the courageous people are not the people -- the bachelors -- the people of independent means, but somebody quite unexpected; a man who has not, according to you- -- to your standards, any right to do so, because he has to look out for a mother-inlaw, and for a father-in-law, and for 10 grandmothers, and therefore he can't do it.

There again, you see the exception as the rule, gentlemen. If a thing is necessary, you have to do it whether you have 12 children and 24 grandchildren, or whether you are free. It makes absolute no difference. The 12 children -- grandchildren will then be very proud of s- -- of -- of -- if their father did it, or their grandfather. It's all nonsense. But this is the logic used in this country today. And the young ladies are not ashamed to use this argument. It's a very poor argument. It means just that they have no trust in you. They don't think that you are men, but they think that you are just -- I won't say what. I mean, this is very serious, gentlemen. A society is always 90 percent cowards. But it is very important when the cowards no longer are intimidated by honorable standards. We are all cowards.

But when it comes to public discussion -- now comes my conclusion, gentlemen -- then the man, the Good Samaritan, must rank first in your estimation. He must put him over the scribe, and over the priest, you see. Obviously. And you must say, "The Good Samaritan did right." Now as long as in a marriage -- for example, in a family, and that's after all the center of discussion, where people speak, where this all is discussed -- as long as the -- neither the husband, nor the children, nor the wife takes the liberty of belittling the Good Samaritan, of

saying that he did wrong, because he wasn't for social security, as long as the standards are upheld, that the Good Samaritan is the carnal of our solidarity in society, that all our social laws are only retainable as long as there are Good Samaritans, it is allowed, strangely enough, it is permissible that the individual -- you and me -- do not fulfill this law. That is, as long as we have these three sections, and as long as the elders and the children are taught to look up to this middle sufferer, to this heroic form of life and say, "He did right and we unfortunately are just too weak not to do it," the order of society is still upheld by your mind, at least, because your values -- what we call "values," you see -- still support this order. As long as you -- as soon as you blind yourself to the existence of these founders of society, you see, and say, "Let's forget about these -- these idiots. They were fools, these heroes," you see, "we have a good life, and we have prosperity, and we have a larger income every year, and a new carpet, and therefore we live the normal life, under the rules of psychology. And -- and the Sears, Roebuck catalog." And then society collapses.

America went to the two world wars when this state of affairs had been reached. The only man who solved this, and tried to fight it was Theodore Roosevelt, as you may know. From 1900 -- 1890 to 1914, he tried to tell you that the real life was the heroic life. That much you know of -- of -- of -- of Theodore Roosevelt, and that's { } it. He tried, at least in military terms, to remind the people, you see, by his Rough Riders, you see, by his Wild West campaign, that they had to look up to a type of person, you see, who was not to be met with on the high-brows of New York. When it -- he disappeared, and as you know Mr. Taft was elected, a very -- man of great weight, and -- and gravity took over.

So gentlemen, the new features of society by which we have now lived for the last thousands of years, is our power to overcome gravity. I mean this very literally. Neither private living nor public life can overcome gravity. Man, however, ceases to be man if he isn't considered the uphill animal in creation. We go uphill. A founder is a person like George Washington who goes uphill. He goes up as an English gentleman and he comes down as president of the United States. And he therefore covers the Great Divide. All human life, gentlemen -- take Romeo and Juliet -- go over this divide between the Montagui and the Capulets, and come down on the other side where these two rifts no longer exist, where there can be union. Gentlemen, if you would consider yourself as a -- the -- the strange -- the strange factor in creation who can build the big Thompson Dam, under the Great Divide, that's an example of what is -- you take for accept it. Man is up- -- can go uphill. Whenever we love, you go uphill. Even the salmons do this, by the way. That is, all life is only life inasfar as it can go uphill. Inasfar as it has to go downhill, it is death. Gravity is death. Life is uphill-going. It is nothing else. Life -- if I breathe, I overcome my otherwise certain death and suffocation. At this moment, my breathing is a victory over death.

Now you can face this -- this problem, gentlemen, in two ways. America in the last 40 years has tried to face it by suspended animation. By diminishing the danger of death, they have thought they could extend life. Even to 150 years. Terrible. Real life, you see, overcomes much death by much life. You have to take your choice. Society can only live by people who can go uphill, and thereby breathe new life into an otherwise doomed corpse. At every moment, this society is doomed unless you find some people progressing, some people suffering, some people doubting, you see, and some people investing the -- their patient way into the new public offices of society.

The first people who have done this -- what time is it? It's a quarter --.

(Twenty {of}.)

Well, a break is in order.

[Tape interruption]

... and old routines. I have put it in the form of trying to tell you that man grows up as a private, little, additional {force} to an organized body of society. If you treat your own mind as childish, you will always speak of your private mind. A religion that says it's a private business is childish. Most religion in America is childish. Interesting, of course, is only public religion. Private is a preparation, underneath, within the one person, and you can decide in which great streams of life you want to {partake}. That's your private preparation for public office. Anybody has, of course, to decide into which of the great professions, or the great departments of life he wants to -- to disgorge, like any little brook has to decide which is its main river. The river finally has to end in the ocean.

They have tried -- I have tried to show you that the spirit of mankind is one, and that the mind is nothing but the little dam insi- -- called your skull inside which there is a little energy dammed up before it disgorges into the great stream. There is not one idea, gentlemen, there is not one science, one act of knowledge, there's not one act of education and there is no -- not one act of common sense which is not meaningful only within the unity of the whole human spirit, of the solidarity of society.

So we now -- I want -- would like to add at this moment to this fact that social laws only exist as long as we treat each other as members of one body, of one society, as one man's acts react on somebody else, as your abusing the law will force the people to change the law for me -- what I tried to tell you, which is the -- the interesting thing about society. Your mistake leads to the fences around my action. I'm forbidden certain things because you broke the law, or vice versa. As

long as you have solidarity, gentlemen, of behavior, it is perhaps not so very difficult for you now to grasp that the circulation of thought presupposes that there is one thought, one thinking process for all mankind. And what you try is to secure your part in it, your membership, your participation in this circulation of thought. But that your nice ideas, that you have your private ideas, or your private knowledge, or your private education is an illusion. You can be a gentleman, or you cannot be a gentleman. But a gentlemen is an Englishman, and an Englishman is a member of the Western world, and the Western world is an -- is a branch of mankind. Therefore, if a man is an Englishman, he's only -- is a gentleman, he is not a privately an English -- gentleman, you see, but he carries the stamp of the mentality of a gentlemen, which has come to him from a total. You remember what we said about the character of nations -- Germany, France, America -- that we receive in these tremendous powerhouses of the mental process a certain stamp, and that you are immediately taken in by anything that is common sense. And an Englishman is always impregnated by something that shows good breeding; and in Germany -- a German is always interested in something that shows scholarship; and a Frenchman is always impressed in something that shows a big idea.

That's just an example, gentlemen, of the solidarity of the human spirit. As you know, we live in a -- in a world which, for the last 1900 years, has proclaimed that it believed in the Christian dogma. Then in the 19th century, the dogma became rather unpopular, and people today who were -- if they want to slur a man, they say he's dogmatic. Gentlemen, of course, I'm dogmatic, and I don't see how any man with any pretense to have reason in his -- on his -- in his mind -- in his brain cannot be dogmatic. You are so dogmatic, the only difference between you and me is that you don't know your dogmas, and I know mine. So I can be spoken to, and you cannot be spoken to. You are full of prejudices. For example, you have the dogma that you have no dogma. You also have the dogma that nature exists, or evolution. That is, you do not see that these are transient, human attempts to explain experience, and that you at any minute must be ready to sacrifice the term "nature."

I tried to show you last time that it doesn't exist, that it is an isolation of reality that I and you never are natural, you see. Neither one. It is no use to call us "natural," you see. People who speak to each other, gentlemen, are each other not natural. I said we are creatures, because we are still in process of being unfinished. Therefore we have no final nature. Nature is always dealing with finalities. Creation is always dealing with unfinished business. You and I represent the unfinished business on this earth. Anything -- when a man tells Demosthenes he can't become a speaker because he stammers, he goes and says, "I shall become the most famous speaker -- orator of Greece." And he did.

Gentlemen, I knew a man -- the greatest actor of Germany, {Wassermann}. And he told me a story. When he was 15 years old, his voice changed, and he got what we call the "breaking of the voice," you see, when you can't sing. And he never recovered. He's still changing his voice. He's now 75. And so the -- all the experts said, "You can't become an actor." The first thing an actor -- must have is a voice that is not -- that is not hoarse. You are out. So he became the greatest actor of Germany, with a hoarse throat. And he still has it. That's why man has no nature.

Helen Keller is a good example. Everybody in America admits that she is a glorious person because she broke all precedent and said, "By nature I'm doomed," you see. "And I have no nature. Let's see." At the end, Helen Keller is a person in her own right. She's not super-natural. She's not unnatural. She has absolutely nothing to do with nat- -- nature. If you would put this down, gentlemen: for society, all the terms about nature -- "super-nature," "natural," "unnatural" -- do not apply. Man is neither natural, nor is he unnatural, and he certainly also is not supernatural. But a human being cannot be reached by the term "nature." He -- he cannot. Nature is that which a man has to defy in order to come to life.

Therefore, in baptism, the famous formula in the Church is that the child receives a name, that which nature cannot give. That's a very great sentence, gentlemen: man is that which nature cannot give. If mothers would only know this. That's the worst thing in America, that mothers have lost this respect for the fact that the -- when they give birth to a child, they expect it to be taken away from her and be given a name of the father, because otherwise the child cannot become a human being. The mother only gives child to the animal -- birth to the animal, but as soon as it receives a father's name, it receives something that nature cannot give. And a woman who has no respect for her husband cannot bring up her child, because that child has in the -- its name something that the mother has not given it. What is this, gentlemen? What the child -- the mother cannot give, what nature cannot give? In this country that's all abolished. People have such a nat- -- { } nature, the mothers think really that they don't need husbands. There are many rich women who, as you know, conceive now arti- -- by artificial insemination from -- from Anonymous, Alcoholic Anonymous. Well, the degradation of the human race has reached an all-time low. You buy germ, you buy sperm, because this child is nameless. No love has ever -- ever made this woman look up to some greater power of which she is the trusting servant. She's not the handmaid of the Lord. But she's just -- I won't say what she is.

Now, gentlemen, the social sciences have to do with that which nature cannot give. That's a negative phrase, I know, but I think at this moment, and at this juncture, it may arouse your appetite for the last week, where I have to show you

what that is. It is nothing mystical. We all live by it.

What nature cannot give is the content of the social sciences. Today I want only to say one thing. The question of questions is then: since a man ever -- a child is born, that it must receive something in addition to its nature. You all have received it, but you are, so to speak, neglecting it, and you are denying it in your official, naturalist creed, gentlemen. It is the opposite from wanting to go naked. It's the opposite from wanting to be natural. It is the hope that we can be clothed in our righteous mind, that we can be dressed, that we can be vested with the proper dress to be worn at this moment in the history of humanity. Everybody has to find his office, his place in a society, which has -- is wearing transient robes. Now, there's nothing mystical. Obviously, we are wearing different costumes from the students -- first students in Dartmouth College. I don't know if the professors in 1770 here would wear gowns or not. Has anybody seen old pictures? I -- I don't know what -- what they really put on in -- in their classes. At commencement we still wear our hood and our gown. It shows that this is a tradition, you see.

Now, believe me, gentlemen, you are such contempt- -- and despisers of formality and of dress that it's very hard for you to understand that in society, the dress is the expression of our peace of mind, and our mutual understanding. When I see a nurse, I know she's a nurse even before I know her name, and I treat her therefore as a nurse, and not just as a giggling girl. Also she may be just a giggling girl. That happens. And it's very bad, because nuns today are no longer nursing, but people who just make it a business to earn money. And -- and nursing is in a bad way in this country, as you well know. First you can't find enough nurses, and then they don't think that it is anything which should change their mind. They just nurse as they do anything else. You can't nurse a patient, you see, as you -- as you well -- a -- a few. There are no nurses in this country to speak of. It's very serious, because they have a dress, but here is such a naturalism in this country that people insist that even the dress shall not influence their mind. It would be better if the fact that there were a nurse's dress would also change their mind, a little bit, wouldn't it? Then they would wear this -- this dress righteously. The same is true of our -- of the -- of the gown at commencement. It is not an empty thing. Gentlemen, what is the gown at commencement? The gown of commencement is your humanity, a doctor -- a bachelor of -- of studies, a student cannot be, for example, dishonest. Most of you have been dishonest in writing their papers here. They have concealed their sources, or they have more often listed sources which they have never looked at. Both is dishonest. The gown is -- was, originally a vow. Anybody who put on the gow- -- a gow- -- the gown, took a vow to be truthful, honest, and brave; not to pose for any knowledge he hadn't, nor to conceal any knowledge he had. He had to take an oath that he -- on the open Bible that he would read it, and on the

closed Bible that he would meditate over it, and then protest what he found, or as the same of the book of the Roman -- of the law, you see, on the code, or the book of Galenus and the doctors.

Gentlemen, all this is gone, and therefore commencement is up in the air and it will vanish very soon. We'll have a reform college in which the only examination will be the names of the football coaches of -- over the last 30 years.

But then, what will happen? With the gown, there will also disappear the liberal arts college. That is, any great circulation of thought must express itself in -- in dress, in custom, in wearing a certain -- a certain countenance. Gentlemen, the spirit makes faces. The only ground for the existence of races is religion. Religion makes faces. You may look into blood and into cross-breeding as long as you can. You will not explain faces. Human faces are made by their faith, by their action, by their office in society. You can see a Madonna a real mother. She has a face which the prostitute just hasn't. It has nothing to do with genes, and physics, heredity, and all these -- you look in -- { } in the wrong direction for what makes a man look -- real looks. Of course, you have to learn to see. Lipstick you can see, of course, at the prostitute better than at the Madonna. But that's just lipstick. That's not beauty. It's not a face. They may be features.

Really, gentlemen, believe me -- if you begin to believe in the solidarity of society, you suddenly see people in a very different manner. You want them to express a function, a role in society, and their humanity can only become visible if they undergo the burden of doing something. Look at a doctor, look at a minister, a good man, or look at -- look at our -- at any man where you say he has a good face. You expect that he has been molded, that his face is not the result of his birth, but the result of his spirit. You all believe it, practically. I mean, you are -- demand from a sculptor and a painter that he should show the spiritual greatness of his -- of his object. But instead, as you know, at this moment, you have -- you have a -- a potato art. They'll paint a potato, and think you should see the Holy Ghost in the potato. Well, as long as they believe that the Holy Ghost shows in the potato, I'm still with them. But as you know, they have even destroyed the beauties of our creature existence, and they paint no faces anymore. And I think that is really quite terrifying today. Modern art is a -- is the true expression of your belief in natural science. When you believe that man has a nature, he has no face. And ...

[Tape interruption]

... ridiculous. That's material, isn't it? Like a sculpture in the stone. The poor sculptor can only imitate what the spirit has done to me. He has sculptured me. And he is going to sculpture you if you expose yourself to it. Isn't that obvious?

Why don't you think of it? I can't understand it. I can't understand it, gentlemen. But against this, your firm conviction is that you have a mind of your own. Gentlemen, anybody who says he has a mind of his own has no mind. I have no mind of my own. I try to think what has to be thought. It's a duty. It's an obligation. It's a command.

Gentlemen, when the Ten Commandments were given, that's of course to you old stuff and a poor lot. A man told me, "Ten Commandments -- poor lot." Gentlemen, you know how the -- what the First Commandment says? The First Commandment says what I have told you, but it has been quoted so stupidly so often that nobody understands that it is a very atrocious and very tremendous command. It says that anybody who lives after the exodus of Egypt and accepts this as their fate will be an Israelite, that he will be sculptured for the next 3,000 years in the image of this power. He will be this man, this God's servant. And they have believed it. Everybody has always lived so, gentlemen. I'm coined by events. And the events can only coin me if I believe in their higher meaning, if I live openly, you see, in acceptance. If this Good Samaritan says, "From now on, I must follow this path," you see, he has been sculptured by the event.

Now you read the First Commandment as I understand it, at least as I see it around in this country, as some ridiculous statement in space that there is somewhere is an old uncle on a -- on a -- on a satellite, probably of Saturnus whom you call "God Almighty." Gentlemen, that's idolatry. That's not the living God we sculpture through. This God is that spirit to which you expose yourself so that He has the right to sculpture you while you are alive. If He cannot -- if you cannot receive His blows and His hammer upon your face, you certainly do not believe in God. And therefore very few people believe in God. It has nothing to do with your philosophy, gentlemen. It is a simple fact: do you expose yourself to this unity which tries to form a solidarity of mankind and in which you have to find at this moment what has to be done so that this solidarity is reinstated? If you do this, you will be a very -- have very hard time, but you will have a human face. If you div- -- withdraw your -- from your -- you -- yourself from this order of -- of life, you will have no face. But you will be a customer of Miss Rubinstein's.

So. The First Commandment is what I have tried to explain today as a -- as the backbone of any social science, gentlemen. You can reformulate this -- this First Commandment, but it says that the power which molds human faces, and human convictions, and human minds is experienced in the middle of life after we are born, that it is nothing that is cau- -- you see, has caused my birth, but it is come -- comes into me after I'm born as a brat, as an animal, as a -- a mother's son, you see, because it makes me first into the son. A child is not either a son or a daughter. Even the words "son" and "daughter" are already great offices in humanity, and that's why we call the first man who allowed himself to be sculp-

tured all his life, we call him "the son." Just in general, "the son." You can call -- also call his mother "the daughter." And any one of us who accepts this, the daughter-to-be, the son, and the daughter of man, is in this process of receiving in these 10 commandments of the -- of the mind his office in the solidarity of the human race.