<SPAN name="XVI"></SPAN>
<h2>XVI</h2>
<h2>REASON, REASON!</h2>
<br/>
<p>In conclusion, I must insist upon several
results of what I may call the 'intensive
culture' of the reason. The brain will
not only grow more effectively powerful
in the departments of life where the brain
is supposed specially to work, but it will
also enlarge the circle of its activities.
It will assuredly interfere in everything.
The student of himself must necessarily
conduct his existence more and more
according to the views of his brain. This
will be most salutary and agreeable both
for himself and for the rest of the world.
You object. You say it will be a pity
when mankind refers everything to reason.
You talk about the heart. You envisage
an entirely reasonable existence as a
harsh and callous existence. Not so.
When the reason and the heart come into
conflict the heart is invariably wrong.
I do not say that the reason is always
entirely right, but I do say that it is
always less wrong than the heart. The
empire of the reason is not universal, but
within its empire reason is supreme, and
if other forces challenge it on its own soil
they must take the consequences. Nearly
always, when the heart opposes the brain,
the heart is merely a pretty name which
we give to our idleness and our egotism.</p>
<p>We pass along the Strand and see a
respectable young widow standing in the
gutter, with a baby in her arms and a
couple of boxes of matches in one hand.
We know she is a widow because of her
weeds, and we know she is respectable by
her clothes. We know she is not begging
because she is selling matches. The sight
of her in the gutter pains our heart. Our
heart weeps and gives the woman a penny
in exchange for a halfpenny box of
matches, and the pain of our heart is
thereby assuaged. Our heart has performed
a good action. But later on
our reason (unfortunately asleep at the
moment) wakes up and says: 'That baby
was hired; the weeds and matches merely
a dodge. The whole affair was a spectacle
got up to extract money from a fool like
you. It is as mechanical as a penny in
the slot. Instead of relieving distress you
have simply helped to perpetuate an
infamous system. You ought to know
that you can't do good in that offhand
way.' The heart gives pennies in the
street. The brain runs the Charity
Organisation Society. Of course, to give
pennies in the street is much less trouble
than to run the C.O.S. As a method
of producing a quick, inexpensive, and
pleasing effect on one's egotism the C.O.S.
is simply not in it with this dodge of giving
pennies at random, without inquiry.
Only—which of the two devices ought to
be accused of harshness and callousness?
Which of them is truly kind? I bring
forward the respectable young widow as
a sample case of the Heart <i>v</i>. Brain conflict.
All other cases are the same. The brain
is always more kind than the heart; the
brain is always more willing than the
heart to put itself to a great deal of
trouble for a very little reward; the brain
always does the difficult, unselfish thing,
and the heart always does the facile,
showy thing. Naturally the result of
the brain's activity on society is always
more advantageous than the result of
the heart's activity.</p>
<p>Another point. I have tried to show
that, if the reason is put in command of
the feelings, it is impossible to assume
an attitude of blame towards any person
whatsoever for any act whatsoever. The
habit of blaming must depart absolutely.
It is no argument against this statement
that it involves anarchy and the demolition
of society. Even if it did (which
emphatically it does not), that would not
affect its truth. All great truths have
been assailed on the ground that to accept
them meant the end of everything. As
if that mattered! As I make no claim
to be the discoverer of this truth I have
no hesitation in announcing it to be one
of the most important truths that the
world has yet to learn. However, the
real reason why many people object to
this truth is not because they think it
involves the utter demolition of society
(fear of the utter demolition of society
never stopped any one from doing or
believing anything, and never will), but
because they say to themselves that if
they can't blame they can't praise. And
they do so like praising! If they are so
desperately fond of praising, it is a pity
that they don't praise a little more!
There can be no doubt that the average
man blames much more than he praises.
His instinct is to blame. If he is satisfied
he says nothing; if he is not, he most
illogically kicks up a row. So that even
if the suppression of blame involved the
suppression of praise the change would
certainly be a change for the better. But
I can perceive no reason why the suppression
of blame should involve the suppression
of praise. On the contrary, I think
that the habit of praising should be
fostered. (I do not suggest the occasional
use of trowels, but the regular use
of salt-spoons.) Anyhow, the triumph
of the brain over the natural instincts
(in an ideally organised man the brain
and the natural instincts will never have
even a tiff) always means the ultimate
triumph of kindness.</p>
<p>And, further, the culture of the brain,
the constant disciplinary exercise of the
reasoning faculty, means the diminution
of misdeeds. (Do not imagine I am
hinting that you are on the verge of
murdering your wife or breaking into
your neighbour's house. Although you
personally are guiltless, there is a good
deal of sin still committed in your immediate
vicinity.) Said Balzac in <i>La
Cousine Bette</i>, 'A crime is in the first
instance a defect of reasoning powers.'
In the appreciation of this truth, Marcus
Aurelius was, as usual, a bit beforehand
with Balzac. M. Aurelius said, 'No soul
wilfully misses truth.' And Epictetus
had come to the same conclusion before
M. Aurelius, and Plato before Epictetus.
All wrong-doing is done in the sincere
belief that it is the best thing to do.
Whatever sin a man does he does either
for his own benefit or for the benefit
of society. At the moment of doing it
he is convinced that it is the only thing
to do. He is mistaken. And he is mistaken
because his brain has been unequal
to the task of reasoning the matter out.
Passion (the heart) is responsible for all
crimes. Indeed, crime is simply a convenient
monosyllable which we apply
to what happens when the brain and the
heart come into conflict and the brain is
defeated. That transaction of the matches
was a crime, you know.</p>
<p>Lastly, the culture of the brain must
result in the habit of originally examining
all the phenomena of life and conduct,
to see what they really are, and to what
they lead. The heart hates progress,
because the dear old thing always wants
to do as has always been done. The
heart is convinced that custom is a virtue.
The heart of the dirty working man rebels
when the State insists that he shall be
clean, for no other reason than that it is
his custom to be dirty. Useless to tell
his heart that, clean, he will live longer!
He has been dirty and he will be. The
brain alone is the enemy of prejudice and
precedent, which alone are the enemies
of progress. And this habit of originally
examining phenomena is perhaps the
greatest factor that goes to the making
of personal dignity; for it fosters reliance
on one's self and courage to accept the
consequences of the act of reasoning.
Reason is the basis of personal dignity.</p>
<p>I finish. I have said nothing of the
modifications which the constant use of
the brain will bring about in the <i>general
value of existence</i>. Modifications slow and
subtle, but tremendous! The persevering
will discover them. It will happen
to the persevering that their whole lives
are changed—texture and colour, too!
Naught will happen to those who do not
persevere.</p>
<p style="text-align: center; font-weight: bold;">THE END</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />
1 of 2
2 of 2
Previous
Next
Update Required
To play the media you will need to either update your browser to a recent version or update your Flash plugin.