Amazing articles on just about every subject...



Regimes: Individuality - Courage Through Life's Relations

( Originally Published Early 1900's )



I. FIRST RELATION CONSIDERED: Fear of Husband or of Wife. It should be observed that you are not here instructed in the matter of getting on with an uncomfortable person; that is an endless subject. Our discussion solely concerns courage cultivated for the sake of happiness and self-realization where some form of fear obtains in either woman or man for the other.

FIRST REGIME: Dispelling Fear in the Fearful. This work should begin with the person who inspires fear. It is damnable selfishness and selfish damnation (these words are deliberate and meaningful) to permit fear in any human being, if the feeling can possibly be dispelled. You are, therefore, invited to know whether or not your life-mate fears you, and, if such transpire to be the case, to make the dissipation of that fear the chief business of your life. For methods you must look to your better self, resolved persistently to work for the achievement of the end. If you will patiently strive to convince the other person that fear for you is unnecessary, that it really hurts you, and that you wish the feeling to be removed forever, you will assuredly accomplish the liberation, by so much, of a handicap to individual happiness and growth.

SECOND REGIME: The Cessation of Domination. Life in such intimate relations tends to develop, unconsciously in one party, unrecognized, it may be, in the other, habits of interference, dictation, domineering, disclosed in matters of dress, preferences, antipathies, reading, thought, use of property and money, friend-ships, art-tastes, politics, religion, and so on. There is no justification here. If you say, " Why, this person has not sufficient judgment for these decisions," re-member that life is for growth, that no one can grow without freedom, that no freedom can be exercised without making mistakes, and that mistakes are the necessary cost of that freedom which is indispensable to development. You do not own a human soul merely because you marry that person. Marriage, like sex, is a convention and a convenience in universal life's long history, evolved for the sake of life only. You do not exist to be a married person. You do not exist to be a male or a female. You are a male or a female, and you are married, in order that life — your own and that of others — may realize individuality. This relation of marriage is a means, not an end. The personalities involved can never rightly surrender selfhood to the relation or to the other contracting party. The contract calls for cooperation of body, not surrender, and mutual cooperation alone. Otherwise, here is anarchy. The contract calls for cooperation of the mental life, but such cooperation cannot possibly be surrender or capture. Also is there here a demand that soul-life shall be free to grow alongside soul-life,--soul by soul,— and when the idea "alongside"—soul by soul — is realized, each soul is boundlessly free to realize itself.

Now, here are some interesting truths which we may present under the heading, To Every Soul a World. The individual idea constitutes a nucleus,— as, physically in the cells of the body,— and this idea-nucleus builds for the person his or her world, according to which, and in which, the soul must grow. That idea, if free and developing, determines, as I have previously said, every other idea in the personality. Doing so, it expresses itself in ten thousand ways. The endeavor to express the nucleus-idea creates a personal world in which the soul would live — the world of physical action, of dress, of taste, of thought, of amusement, of social or business activity, of religion and dreams and ideals. This statement is true in each case. You see, then, that you thus create your own life-world. Whether or no the ideal of the self be attempted, there is a world for every one of us, and in the sense that the ideal is for all, for each of us there is a life-world which may represent the self at its growing best. So, in marriage, the man has his world: shall not the woman have hers? Or, must the woman overspread the man's? What is the vast importance of a necktie or a millinery hat? From kind of necktie to kind of religion, such matters are always mere incidentals, since the main thing is for-ever — just individuality realized. The clothing and the faith are simply passing phase-expressions of the self individualizing; are, thus, parts of the person's individual world. That world belongs to its creator, the man or the woman, and its complete integrity is an inalienable right which no other may justly question, determine or meddle with. That world may be wrong according to your judgment, but your judgment is for your world, and none other. In later experience the person to whom that world belongs may see that it has been wrong (the necktie an atrocity, the religion more or less mistaken, and so on), but it is the inalienable right of the soul to make its own final discoveries in all these matters, assisted, it may be, by the opinions of others, yet never coerced; to make its final discoveries and profit thereby. The invitation, then, which our study indicates is that you cultivate a most sacred regard for the other person's individual world and life, refraining from all coercing interference there with. By so much you will assist that person to freedom and courage.

THIRD REGIME: Sharing Worlds. It is oftentimes just the unknown that inspires fear. You do not, perhaps, really know the inner world of the person with whom you are so familiarly associated. That world is, let us say — business, art, society, religion. The other person's reticence walls you out, and you are in awe of him because you are unfamiliar with his realm. Since you cannot break your way into that world, then, the remedy for your fear rests with its occupant. The urgent thing is that he shall open the doors to you so that you may share that world with him. No person may rightly bar out husband or wife from the inner kingdom of psychic individuality, so far as general partnership therein is concerned. Some subtle things are, of course, never disclosed to any human being, and no honorable person fails to respect such sacred factors. Nevertheless, you are obligated by the association of marriage to take the wife or the husband into your confidence in all matters which concern the welfare of the two lives. You are, therefore, urged to diminish reticence and to disclose to the life-mate the greater phases of the inner personal life. By so much, again, you assist that person to freedom and courage.

And there is a reason for this advice, other than the cure of another's fears. We now approach th. inner phases of the married life, in order to bring out our thought. The sex-life is universal in all the worlds of plants and animals. The significance of this fact is three-fold:

Sex exists, first, for the perpetuation of life.

But life perpetuates for the evolution of higher forms.

Each individual is a variation from ancestral individuals.

Sex operates, therefore, in a way to combine variations, and thus to secure higher (and varying) individuals.

But the combination of two individual factors prevents either from a fixed perpetuation by restraining its purely individual tendencies. Sex operates to combine variations, but also to restrain tendencies of certain fixed types.

In sex combination, then, the ideal is reached only through the cooperation of the individual worlds — the worlds which build around the nucleus-idea of the soul life.

The person with whom you are associated for life needs your inner world for variational development — assuming that your personality is wholesome and worthy. For the same reason — on the same assumption — you need that other person's world for the best in your life — and other lives to come. By reticence and self-inclosure either person commits a double robbery: the robbing of self of ideas, tastes, influences, experiences which would tend to variation and improvement in the world of self, and a similar robbing to the hurt of the other life-mate. Both parties must remain the poorer for such mistaken method of life in marriage.

FOURTH REGIME: Assertion of Selfhood. If fear is your difficulty in this relation, you are urged from henceforth to be yourself, to insist, practically, yet without ostentation, upon your own individuality. Such insistence means two things, which are of the greatest importance:

Individual assertion means, for one thing, the utmost valuation of your own experience. It is a characteristic tendency of the timid or fearful person to under-value personal experience, and hence, his opinions and judgments, and so on.

But one's own experience is one's own knowing and developing relation to the Universe. You come to know and to unfold through your own experience only. Any other person's experience may be valuable as a consideration, of course, but even then the real value of it will issue alone from the fact that the consideration in some way goes into your own experience. Only through your experience can another experience help you. We always are driven back, then, to experience purely personal to ourselves. It is this experience, and this alone, by which you are to know the Universe and thus unfold your individual selfhood.

Now, your experience is, and has been, just itself. This " just itself " constitutes its supreme value, no matter what it is or has been. It is, therefore, always a mistake to belittle one's own personal experience, since that is the only experience out of which you can make anything for life's improvement. One who had had all sorts of "occult" experiences was heard to speak contemptuously of certain phases through which he had passed. His hearer remarked:

"You should not entertain contempt for the egg-shells out of which you have been hatched. You have gotten past them now, of course, but you have become what you are through all that past experience."

Here, then, is the suggestion. You have not been decreed to the experience which your life has developed, but you have really had just that experience and no other, and this it is that has made you what you are. Above all, you are invited to stand for that experience, to properly value it, not to discount it, to utilize it for the utmost freedom, courage and development.

It is a fundamental thing that if you will insist on your own individuality and experience, courage will infallibly begin to grow in your soul and displace fear and all its fell brood.

Difficulties Confronting Individuality. Now, the determination to be one's self (at the best, it is always assumed in these discussions — and you alone can rightly decide what is your best self)— this determination involves a number of difficulties, to which we now turn our attention.

1. No one's selfhood may be asserted at the ex-pense of any other selfhood. Always, when this is attempted, the self so assertive robs itself of its true best.

Nevertheless, it is error to confuse true selfhood with personal happiness. Self-assertion may diminish happiness either in the one or the other in the marriage relation. This presents the difficulty.

It may be that you are surrendering something of individuality for the sake of another's happiness. This can be none other than error. Such surrender simply perpetuates a wrong. You may say: " If I insist upon being myself, free, active and courageous, this person's happiness will inevitably suffer." A great heresy lurks here. No one has right to happiness at the expense of my selfhood: the Universe is not so constructed. Any-one's selfhood is the sacredest thing in existence, and demand for it is the supremest of duties. One who derives pleasure (not happiness) from the sacrifice of another's happiness (not pleasure) is guilty of gross selfishness, and by so much injures his own personality. One who permits such pleasure (at the expense of happiness) is particeps criminis in the ruining of a human soul.

You are, therefore, urged to have the courage of individuality, even at the expense of another's pleasure or selfishness. You can adjust to the individality of your mate without surrendering your own. This will assist each person in building the ideal life, while surrender will only increase your timidity and fear and permanently injure the both of you. Self-insistence, seeking right adjustment, must infallibly unfold the spirit of courage, and that more and more.

It is a mistake to value happiness (superior to pleasure) as a supreme end in life. The goal of existence is individual development, and this guarantees the highest type of happiness, but all so-called forms of happiness which depend on the sacrifice of that goal (individuality) are false, exactly because they so depend.

2. Oftentimes, in the relation here discussed, one is tempted to sacrifice individuality, not only because of some other person's misconceived happiness, but in the interest of one's own peace in life. Such an one, to describe the fact plainly, prefers a valueless peace to a complete personality. It is a case of psychic abuse of self.

Setting aside all lesser and all false considerations, now, you are urged to stand resolutely and persistently and heroically for that individuality which Nature intended in your birth. You are invited, to this end, to make the following declarations of independence your own for life, whatever may betide as the outcome: <> "I am!"

"I am inalienably myself ! "

" I realize in daily life the supreme idea of mine own individuality!"

" I live my own life, freely, fully, courageously! "

" I build the inner world of my best selfhood and I alone!"

" I create the personal experience that is mine — and I alone!"

" I value my personal experience immeasurably. I is my highway of unfoldment and life!"

" I adjust to any person, but I sacrifice no whit of my personality! "

" I wish happiness to all, but I shall be my true self, at balance with every other true individual, dominated by no false claims of others!"

"I seek the happiness of the self at its best, and none other, and for this goal I pay any price! "

" I stand for individual freedom and the courage of the free soul! "

" I am inalienably myself ! "

"I am!"

FIFTH REGIME: Assertion of Courage. It has already been suggested that you can only know courage through its experience. Also, experience has been divided as outer and inner meaning, experience in relation to things external and experience in relation to the inner life. At bottom all experience is internal — within the self. You experience, in either phase, through activities of the self. If you had never had an inner experience effectively denoted by a world of Nature, you could not begin with experience of an external life, since the objective world is only what you make it by your perception and thought. You are compelled, in dealing with any new experience, to begin with your inner world of thought and feeling. If it be said that we first discover the outside world, and that we discover the inner world only by reflection, the answer is that the discovery of the outside world is also an inner process. The only Universe you know you create within.

Herein lies the secret of the power of auto-suggestion. In auto-suggestion you assert and assume to be a fact that which has not really become a fact. Yet, by the assertion and assumption you begin to make it a fact in your inner life and for yourself. When you assert a thing, you form an idea of it — begin to experience it as thought. When you begin to assume the thing as real within, you begin to experience it as feeling. If you really assert and assume, you not only affirm that it is, but as well that it surely will be — only more so. In other words, in regard to this thing, you decide, affirm, resolve. By so much as you go on with the assertion and assumption, you disclose persistence. You see, then, that you now experience this thing as Will.

Thus, the inner experience has evolved thought, feeling, Will. You have really experienced the thing with the whole of yourself. You have put yourself into that thing. You have incorporated that thing in your-self. By so much you have become that thing.

You will find, moreover, a strange occurrence taking place at this point: The meaning of the thing will grow on you, and the thing itself will unfold within you. New meanings will emerge. New developments will occur. The process is infallible.

You are, therefore, invited to assert daily for months:

"I am courage; perfect, unflinching courage." But you are also invited for long to affirm:

"I assume — feel —realize — within —courage; perfect assertive courage."

And you are invited to persist in the assertion and assumption until they become one fact: perfect, unflinching courage.

Always, thus, you will develop new meanings in courage, make these real elements in experience, and bring thought, feeling and Will to bear on the realization of the goal — that is, the entire self as courageous.

This process will bring to you a larger and a richer life. If such a course shall finally mean the severance of the relation of marriage — better separation than the stunted life. That outcome need be rare only, since the human animal is almost infinitely flexible, and, for the majority of people, means good and not ill. But if it chance to mean ill, and demands your last sacred right, selfhood, the final "farewell" seems the only alternative.

II. SECOND RELATION CONSIDERED: The Home Life — The Child. The above considerations apply equally to other relations of the intimate life: such as, brother and sister, employer and employee, and so on. Always the solution of fear-troubles induced by close relations involves remedies sought through adjustment and assertion of complete individualism.

One phase of the relation of the home life is not to be sought through the preceding regimes, except in a very general way. The relation of parent and child calls up the elements of such regimes, indeed, yet demands special application up to a certain varying age, from which age the main principle, conceded and asserted individuality, becomes the one admirable guide to the culture of courage. This leads to

A Fundamental Principle in Child Government. Life is an art, and a child's learning of this art must go on under direction until it discovers the fact and the value of personal experience and discovers how to utilize experience in the conduct of its own affairs. The direction which is meanwhile demanded, and the discovery of experience and its utilization by the child, however, are precisely the factors which require care and intelligence on the part of parents. Thus we come to our regimes.

FIRST REGIME: Concession of the Right to Make Mistakes. The goal here suggested, individuality through personal experience, indicates that the tendency to make mistakes is an inalienable right —in so far as these may minister to personal success in the end. Experience without mistakes is an impossibility. This fact must be conceded. Experience profiting by mistakes is the great teacher. This fact asserts the right of every individual to commit some errors in his life, so long as the motile of right conduct prevails. It is here that the right of self-government appears. Before the human self can know what experience is, and what it is for, some one must put his own knowledge and experience in responsible relation to that self. Government must begin with oversight, but go on to the independence of the governed. The right of government by oversight obtains in the interest of the coming independence. The right of parental authority is not based in the parenthood; it is based in the fact that here is a young life which does not as yet know enough to govern itself. For this reason, there is only one goal for the government of parent over child, the development in the child of ability to take authority-government over to self-government. All along, in the young life, since this alone is the goal, it must be conceded that the child has an inalienable right to that degree of self-assertion which involves mistakes. The goal of self-government can never be realized without experience, and without a measure of blunder and folly experience can never occur in the human career.

You are urged, therefore, to concede to the child three things:

(a) The right to its own personal experience;

(b) The right to make mistakes in the course of that experience;

(c) The right to that degree of courage which issues from a consciousness of a growing independence and the expectation of a future self-government.

When you succeed in placing the child on the throne of its own judgment-will, you initiate its surely coming final career.

If, in the meantime, you induce the child to depend on itself, to endure the consequences of its mistakes, to understand and profit by its own experience and to be sanely courageous, you initiate, or assist in initiating, its surely-coming final career for success of some infallibly valuable kind.

SECOND REGIME: Cultivation of the Child's Courage. The preceding regimes will " make good" for this present regime. If you throw the child upon its own resources, and teach it to heroize amid the consequences of its own mistakes, you assist in unfolding its courage. You are urged, however, to go beyond this in the following respects:

1. Fear breeds fear, and courage inspires courage. If you reveal your fears, the child will imitate you. If you mimic courage, the child will take your leading. You are thus invited to smother your fears in the child's presence and to assume courage and self-control before it for the sake of a brave young life.

2. Courage thrives on encouragement. Thus you are urged always to inspire the feeling and will of courage in the child's soul.

3. Courage expands in the light of reason. The fears of human life that have no basis in fact whatever are legion. Here are some fearless statements which all men ought to confront:

There are Nature-Fears: savage and child quake in presence of the great Mother.

Here are the Dark-Fears: man-child and years-child are always fearful when light fades.

Here are Death-Fears and Grave-Fears and Ghost-Fears: undeveloped mind forever trembles in presence of the Mystery.

Here are Religion-Fears: the majority of men and women are by these incessantly haunted.

This book denies the validity of all these fears in toto. There is nothing whatever to fear in Nature, darkness, death, grave, other-world, religion, in all this Universe: neither Creator nor created. There are dangers everywhere, and this fact calls for reason and self-preservation, but at the same time it admits the statement as correct: there is nothing in or under the heavens to be afraid of.

It is heresy and a fallacy that danger justifies fear. Danger justifies only the exercise of reason and the action of the instinct of self-preservation: these only. There is nothing in danger to be afraid of. Danger is to be avoided, met, turned aside, overcome, destroyed (and it may be) without a particle of fear as a feeling, disturbance or panic.

Only one thing might seemingly justify fear — thyself gone wrong; yet even here the call is for the righted and the fearless self resolved on better things through harmony with reason.

First Invitation. I urge you, with these clearing statements, to deny and sweep away totally and for-ever every known and imaginable thing —or so-called reality — as a justification of fear; to be done with every notion involving fear-feeling regarding Nature, Stygian Darkness of Empty Space, Death, Grave, Other-World, Religion or Deity.

Religion, Child of the Infinite, sweet Guide to reasonableness and wholeness, beautiful Simplicity of fearless selfhood — Religion has been massaged, and clothed, and rouged, and starved, and made odorous of the grave and pallid with death's bloodlessness, until now she is oftentimes more prostitute than Heavenly Vision, more tyrant than Friend, more devilish than Divine, more feared than loved — hateful obsession of souls warped and twisted by innumerable fears. And if this seems hysterical writing, remember the long hysteria of carnage, death, torture and awful fear which has haunted the world by reason of religion misunderstood and misapplied in a vain attempt to take the world by brutal force.

Second Invitation. You are invited, therefore, to destroy all these fears within yourself, and thus to banish from the child's life the very suggestion of fear, so prevalent in the common home atmosphere. If in this effort you call to your aid your will and your reason, the child will imitate you and in time will ac-quire the habit of courage-reasonableness. The imitation will appear in its objective life because it has appeared in your objective life. In addition to such out-come, which must be evident, a further result will obtain: the psychic and etheric activities of your inner life will, in some way — telepathically, perhaps — communicate to the child's inner world. Unconsciously to you and to him will pass into his deeper mental sphere the incessant suggestion of a reasoning way of looking at things and of the consequent attitude and habit of courage. Your deeper life surely influences those with whom you are intimately associated, and in various "occult" (through natural) ways. You influence others by impressing your inner personality upon all objects of common use, no less than by direct contact.

The rose that greets an angel's face,
Tossed to the street, exhales a grace
Beyond its perfume, as it lies
Upon a waif's pale cheek, and tries Life sordid to idealize.

The flower from an evil breast
Has quaffed the soul its hues expressed,
And she who wears it now must bear
The life it breeds a-lying there —
A glittering symbol of despair.

And the truth here indicated is a conclusion from scientific study. It is not as yet "true science," since it eludes the ordinary pickaxe methods of so-called true science. Nevertheless, many facts now conceded in the realm of matter-force or force-matter suggest very strongly that subtle ether-movements are incessantly passing in to and out from every material object, that the human person, be he all matter or all spirit, does originate such movements, that such movements pass from person to object and from object to person, and so, that we are always influenced in " occult" but natural ways by things which have long been associated with human beings, and by the "personal atmosphere" of the people about us.

If such conveyance of influence between persons and things be real. it is surely as real between persons and persons.

Always the home-life has its complex personal atmosphere. In this atmosphere, amid such influences of things, the child lives. Above all is it constantly assailed by the unseen forces of the personal life around it. What that life is, the child is likely to be, more or less. If the home ether-life, to express it so, is full of fear, even though unrevealed by word or action, fear will enter the child's soul. If the home life is vitalized by reason, freedom and courage, the child's soul will be subject to the influence of such factors. It will grow into fearless intimacy with Nature, for example. A boy just able to toddle about, whose father is a naturalist, forms a child's acquaintance with a college professor, and greets him, both chubby hands full of live insects, with a shout of glee, "Buggums, Bates! Buggums!" In the same brave atmosphere of reason, the child should know no real fear of darkness. Here also, religion should mean sweetness and light rather than rubbishy ceremony, intolerant theology and hell and deific wrath. And here the All-Good should come, by inevitable and natural communications, to be the Eternal Thought Beautiful.

Third Invitation. You are invited to break away from all bondage and to enter the free world of courage for the sake of courage. If, meanwhile, you try to develop the larger life and the true courage in the child, you will find the satisfaction of the constant response to your example and teachings.

Fourth Invitation. And you are urged to appreciate the fact that the child's life and thought-world are real. The fact that the child's life is imaginative by no means lessens the reality of its world. The realm of imagination is after all merely the realm of things in thought. But this is true of the world of external Nature: it is also, to each of us, only a thought-world — however actual as an external reality it may be — and is. There is absolutely no hard-and-fast criterion of difference between the world of imagination and the world of reality — except that the inference of the latter seems inevitable. The so-called real and the so-called imagined is in each instance, thought, and no more for us. Experience alone can discriminate things of pure imagination from things actually existent aside from imagination. The child's world is all its own, and it is as real to him as the adult's world is td' the adult. The child's fears are begotten of this seemingly real empire of dreadful things — which he imagines because he has been taught to imagine it. It is your privilege to assist him in building a thought-world which shall be free from such evil suggestions.

III. THIRD RELATION CONSIDERED: Sex in the Social Life. Individual fear for the opposite sex is common. Such fear may obtain as bashfulness, embarrassment, timidity, or fear in the usual sense, or even as antipathy. All these phases may be regarded either as the outcome of unfamiliarity or as the pro-duct of traditional teaching. In the one case, sex timidity would disappear with familiar association (sex-timidity should not be confused here with fear of certain individual traits appearing in either man or woman), or with association inspiring regard. In the other case, timidity needs but a just understanding of sex as a condition to reveal the utter uselessness of the feeling. These propositions lead to the practical regimes demanded for development of courage.

FIRST REGIME: Fear Dispelled Through Social Life. Every rightminded person naturally idealizes the opposite sex. The tendency to do this is one of the most valuable of psychic activities. There is in the human soul a universal initiative in this direction. The initiative, in other words, is a broadly working tendency, as the bent toward individuality is a broadly working instinct. The value of the tendency to idealize the opposite sex is evident when the general initiative gives rise to the special initiative of sex-love for some particular person. The special idealization re-creates a loved person and builds around that beloved object an altogether unique world. The one whom we love is always more the ideal then the real. The lover's truest mistress is the creation of his passion. The hero of a Woman's soul is only suggested by the actual man. This fact comes very close to a law which obtains in religion, as, indeed, the sex-life lies so closely thereto that it ought always to be taken as a sacred experience. The Buddha, the Christ,— each is forever a gift to the worshipping world of that world's own idealizing imagination. Nor does this fact destroy the value of religion; it really enhances and validities religion. In the sex-life, also, no statement of the kinds made above can destroy the idealization of passion. That initiative of imagination which leads to sex-union, is the guarantee of the sex-life, and the philosopher who knows the truth goes as blindly into love as the veriest boor. In its general form the tendency makes the sex-life possible. In its special initiative it makes the sex function actual.

When, however, the idealizing tendency operates to excess, it begets that common condition, sex-timidity, or sex-fear. The boy fears the girl and the girl fears the boy — at the proper age. In either case here there may not be the slightest consciousness of idealization, but the tendency indicated lies back of timidity or fear (other than antipathy) in so far as it is due to sex rather than to individual traits. The problem, therefore, is this: how to remove the inspiration to fear, yet leave intact the vital idealizing tendency. The problem suggests the present regime. The right social life re-moves the mystery of the unfamiliar sufficiently to banish fear, but does not touch the general initiative of idealization. Observe, at this point: it is said that the right social intimacy tends to accomplish these two things. Whether or no such be the outcome in regard to the idealizing tendency (or ought to be the outcome), the death of fear certainly does follow right social acquaintance.

If, then, you are timid with people of the opposite sex, your remedy consists in associating, incessantly and in the most friendly way, with individual women or men. You should never yield to the temptation of flight, but should resolutely hold yourself to social con-tact, however emphatically you may feel at any particular time that this is exactly what you do not desire. Nevertheless, social contact should be social indeed. It is sex-fear which you are seeking to rid yourself of, not fear of individual members of a sex. If you lose your timidity in the presence of some women or some men, your trouble may still linger on. In such case you have merely conquered individual occasions of fear. You are urged to go beyond such accomplishment, and to conquer sex-fear by means of familiar social contact with men or women in numbers, meeting them individually, in groups, in crowds, and to persist in such social contact until the fear for any man or any woman because of sex shall have vanished from your life. With this persistent effort may go, as psychic encouragement, the assertion and assumption of all these pages.

" I am what I am ! I have no cause for fearing you.

I am, with you, unobtrusive yet perfect courage." The outcome of this regime is infallible within its intended scope.

The scope of our present work, however, is not designed to cover pure psychic antipathies. Antipathy founded in sex-reality is rare, since the great Nature of Things works precisely to the contrary in the interest of universal evolution. Individual cases of antipathy, therefore, are not common, and when they occur, are abnormal. This fact does not render sex-antipathy the less unpleasant. The experience ought to be unpleasant to the person who has it, and certainly is to those with whom the person comes in contact. If you are conscious of aversion for others merely because they are not of your sex, you are doubly abnormal in case you do not desire a cure of the antipathy, and are emphatically commended to the work here suggested.

Assuming that a remedy for the evil is desired, you should seek to discover all the fine traits and qualities, all the admirable activities of the opposite sex — doing this with perfect fairness — and, to this general end, all similar factors in individual men and women within the field of your observation. In the meantime, of course, you are urged to ignore, utterly, every other contrary evidence.

The existence of evil traits in human nature is to be conceded as of no importance whatever, for their consideration here is absolutely without value. What good can be accomplished by discovering or dwelling upon the faults of other people? The facts "go with-out saying; " let them alone.

The existence of noble qualities in human nature is also a fact, but of the greatest possible value. The search for such qualities and the constant dwelling thereupon always prove beneficial, both to self and to others.

It is not only an evidence of highmindedness, but is also a motive of high uplift in mind to seek, discover, acknowledge and dwell upon all virtues and exellences in the opposite sex.

Should such a regime fail in your own particular case, the only remaining possibility is the birth of a noble passion in your soul for some individual man or woman. When real love for a woman or a man unfolds in the heart of man or woman, sex-antipathy dies per-force. So concluded Oliver Wendell Holmes in "A Mortal Antipathy." Thus, to cite another instance, a marvelously beautiful queen had been dominated for years by actual aversion for all individual men, and had endured with the utmost pain the very touch of the king's hand, her soul being as ice at the thought of love; but when the sovereign had asserted his kingship and had proved himself so truly a monarch that he inspired an impossible passion in a daughter of the people, the queen's heart yielded and she discovered within her soul a great love for the man — too late. And then the queen became the superior — a woman in love.

SECOND REGIME: True Knowledge of Sex. It is an evidence of the preeminence of Nature that the physician, the surgeon, the scientist, may know human nature to the last knowable atom, yet retain the idealizing tendency here suggested. A truer knowledge of sex would certainly dispel many false views of men and women for women and men. Especially is the notion of the superiority of one sex over the other entirely groundless.

There is no fundamental entity which we are to call sex. Sex is not, so far as we can perceive, a psychic reality in itself. The ascription to Nature of male and female essences is purely imaginary. Similarly, the notion of two cooperative principles in Being, or in Deity — the notion of the Divine Fatherhood and the Divine Motherhood — has merely a fanciful value.

Many scientific works appear to assume that sex is universal in the sense of being fundamental, and in some instances writers in the science field go so far as to speak of the "male" cell and the "female" cell. Such cells may indeed issue from male or female bodies, but there is no real sex in either instance. Either "male" or "female" cell will reproduce female or male forms of life, indifferently, up to a certain larval stage of physical life. The one form of cell has been seen to enter the other form, and, before the two had completely united, before the inner nucleus of the one had merged with the nucleus of the other, the whole has been divided (in experiment), so that the two nuclei occupied the one portion of the division, the other portion being without nucleus,— and each portion has produced a temporary living form.

The union of the male and female cell is conjugation, and the function of conjugation is restoration, so to speak, of energy. The cell, without conjugation, is capable of a larval form of life, but its energy is not sufficient for the further development of that life. Conjugation affords a condition in which is supplied the greater energy demanded for the fully developed type of life.

The factor, sex, is functional, not essential — not of the essence of things in itself.

The fundamental function of sex is conservation of energy. In mathematical physics, the parallelogram of forces illustrates this truth. Two forces meeting at right angles, proceed combined on a line of forty-five degrees. Sex corresponds to the forces: the resultant action is not a fundamental; it is merely an outcome of the meeting. The sex-correspondence is not the two lines of force, however, but is merely the fact of the to-be cooperation for the resultant. Or, to illustrate in another way: a thought has its own mental energy, and it may fail to realize its own possibility until it is re-energized by contact with another thought. The function of contact is not of the essence of thought; this is incidental to the upholding of the thinking activity.

Sex is functional to the physical life we know; but it is not of the essential nature of the psychic life, so far as we know.

There can be no superiority based solely in or de-pendent on sex. If two factors are indispensable to the production of a third — not in its initiation, but only in its completion — the conclusions are:

Neither is essential to the nature of that third;

Both are essential to the completion of that third;

Neither can be superior to the other, so far as its own existence or nature is concerned — at least, evidence of such superiority must be looked for elsewhere.

The superiority of man regarded as a class over woman regarded as a class is not demonstrated by history, since the question of superiority must involve those elements in which women surely are superior — thus far in the world's life. (The apparent contra-diction here is balanced by the ensuing para-graphs.)

The superiority of woman as a class over man as a class is equally not demonstrated by history, since as truly the question of superiority must involve those elements in which man surely is superior — thus far in the world's life.

Human superiority is wholly individual, never a determination of sex. If an individual man proves to be superior to some individual women, this is a case of individual (not sex) endowment — a fathomless mystery — and of personal effort — a very plain affair.

If an individual woman proves to be superior to some individual men, this case is explained precisely in terms of the former statement.

We are compelled to deny the actual superiority of men in any large and fair field. And we see no reason for holding that woman is in any actual sense superior to man. Whatever degree of inferiority or superiority appears anywhere in members of either sex is due to the social history of the two sexes.

If, therefore, you are hampered by fear of woman because she is woman, you should remember that she is simply a human being, primarily, and a woman, secondarily, because of her marvelous part in the drama of life. And the same proposition applies if you are fearful of man because he is man. If you are right-minded the rude truth about the other sex — that the individual woman or man is just human, body and self — will assist you in meeting the other sex without fear. Moreover, the fact that woman instinctively tries to surround herself with mystery and beauty will clothe that rude fact with ideals essential to her place in life.

In London's "Martin Eden," the woman whom Eden loved stained her lips eating cherries. So, she was human, after all. "She was pure, it was true, as he had never dreamed of purity; but cherries stained her lips. She was subject to the laws of the universe just as inexorably as he was. She had to eat to live, and when she got her feet wet she caught cold. But that was not the point. If she could feel hunger and thirst, and heat and cold, then she could feel love — and love for a man. And why could he not be the man. `It 's up to me to make good,' he would murmur fervently. `I will be the man. I will make myself the man. I will make good.' "

Our regime consists in the two suggestions: Re-member the fact that every woman is simply a human being, fundamentally like your psychic self. And, remember, too, that her ways, adornments, mysteries, are just the instinctive efforts of her psychic self to play its part in life's huge history.

Reversing the matter for the opposite sex: Re-member that a man is merely a human being, and that his aggressive ways are but expressions of a psychic self whose first law is to die for the object of its love.

These suggestions are based on sex considerations only. If the individual man or woman proves fearful by reason of traits peculiar to individuality as manifested, the present regime must give way to other methods as herein outlined.

IV. FOURTH RELATION CONSIDERED: Employer and Employee. In "Power For Success" the relation of employer and employed is discussed with reference to getting on in life. That object of effort is not now before us. Our sole concern is the destruction of fear and the development of courage in either master or servant. (These words are here used because of the wide scope of their meaning). The relation, then, suggests :

The Employer's Responsibility. Respect for rightful authority is always legitimate, and respect for the man who deserves it is admirable. The feelings of respect, deference, veneration, have nothing necessarily to do with fear, however. Neither the feelings nor their corresponding attitudes involve distress, nor do they tend to initiate flight. These are the characteristics of fear in all its forms: a sense of danger, a nervous disturbance, an impulse to get away from or to overcome the inspiring cause — some instinctive action which means self-preservation. The action, flight, even in assault by the fearful, is negative (though positive in its manifestation), really signifying an effort to put the cause of fear away from the self. If, then, the employer, or anyone in authority over others, arouses such psychic activities, let him remember that he has induced fear in a human soul.

Such inspiration of fear is not always conscious in the employer himself; nevertheless, the contrary is often true. And the man who becomes timid, bashful, fearful, in the presence of his employer is not always really conscious of the fact; but the contrary is very frequently the case. Responsibility comes up in both instances. Nevertheless, the greater fault lies with the employee, since the fear is his and the cure must be sought in himself. No man need in any degree be fearful of an employer if he wills, desperately and persistently, to be self-possessed and courageous. Provided, the employer be a human rather than a beast.

The employer who consciously inspires fear in his people is a demon if he enjoys that fear, and unfit for his position if he is indifferent. So, also, of any person who controls labor. The conquest of fear, then, raises responsibility for the employer. With him should our regimes begin.



Home | More Articles | Email: info@oldandsold.com