12/14 finited
E.F. Schumacher author of Small is Beautiful Harper & Row c.1977 E.F.S.
_A_Guide_for_the_Perplexed_ isbn: 0-06-090611-1
1. On Philosophical Maps (001)
III. The loss of the ~vertical~dimension meant that it was no longer
possible to give an answer, other than a utilitarian one, to the
question "What am I to do with my life?" The answer could be more
individualistic-selfish or more social-unselfish, but it could not help
being utilitarian: either "Make yourself as comfortable as you can" or
"Work for the greatest happiness of the greatest number." Nor was it
possible to define the nature of man other than that as an animal. A
"higher" animal? Yes, perhaps; but only in some respects. In certain
respects other animals could be described as "higher" than (hu)man, and
so it would be best to avoid nebulous terms like "higher" or "lower,"
unless one spoke in strictly ~evolutionary terms. In the context of
evolution, "higher" could generally be associated with "later," and since
(hu)man was undoubtably a latecomer, (t)he(y) could be thought of as
standing at the top of the evolutionary ladder.
None of this leads to a helpful answer to the question "What am I to do
with my life?" Pascal (1623-1662) had said: (hu)"Man wishes to be happy,"
^20 but the new thinking of the philosophers insisted, with Kant, that
(hu)man(s) "never can say definitely and consistently what it is that
(t)he(y) really wishes," nor can (t)he(y) "determine with certainty what
would make (t)h(e)im truly happy; because to do so (t)he(y) would need to
be omniscent."^21 {f} Traditional wisdom had a reassuringly plain
answer: (hu)Man's happiness is to move ~higher, to develop (T)H(E)Is(R)
~highest facilities, to gain knowledge of the ~highest things and, if
possible, to "see God." If (t)he(y) moves ~lower, develops only
(T)H(E)Is(R) ~lowest faculties, which (t)he(y) share|s with the animals,
then (t)he(y) make|s (T)Him(EM)self deeply unhappy, even to the point of
despair.
With imperturbable certainty Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) argued:
: No (hu)man tends to do a thing by (T)His(EIR) desire and endeavour unless
it be previously known to (T)Hi(EM). Wherefore since (hu)man is direct-
ed by divine providence ~to~a~higher~good~than~human~frailty~can~attain
in the present life.. it was necessary for (T)His(EIR) mind to be bidden
to something higher [WE] than those things to which our reason can reach
in the present life, ~so~that~(T)he(y)~might~learn~to~aspire, and by
(T)His(EIR) endeavours to tend to ~something~surpassing~the~whole~state-
~of~the~present~life [human evolution]... It was with this motive that
the philosophers, in order to wean (hu)men from sensible pleasures to
virtue, took care to appeal to the senses, the taste of which things
affords much greater delight to those who devote themselves to active or
contemplative virtues.^22
These teachings, which are the traditional wisdom of all (male) peoples
in all parts of the world, have become virtually incomprehensible to
modern (hu)man, although (t)he(y), too, desires nothing more than some-
how to be able to rise above "the whole state of the present life."
(T)He(y) hope|s to do so by growing rich, by moving around at ever-
increasing speed, by travelling to the moon and into space. ["man"]
It is worth listening to Saint Thomas:
: There is a desire in (Hu)man, common to (T)Hi(EM) and other animals,
namely the desire for ~the~enjoyment~of~pleasure: and this (hu)men(s)
pursue especially by leading a voluptuous life, and through lack of
moderation become intemperate and incontinent. Now in that vision
[the divine vision] there is the most perfect pleasure, all the more
perfect than sensuous pleasure as the intellect is above the senses;
as the good in which we shall delight surpasses all sensible good, is
more penetrating, and more continuously delightful; and as that
pleasure is freer from all alloy of sorrow or trouble of anxiety...
In this life there is nothing so like this ultimate and perfect
happiness as the life of those who contemplate the truth, as far as
possible here below. Hence the philosophers who were unable to obtain
full knowledge of that final beatitude, places (hu)man's ultimate
happiness in that contemplation which is possible during this life.
For this reason too, Holy Writ commends the contemplative rather than
other forms of life, when our Lord said (Luke X.42): ~Mary~hath~chosen-
~the~better~part, namely the conteplation of truth, ~which~shall~not-
~be~taken~from~her. For contemplation of truth begins in this life,
but will be consummated in the life to come {humanity evolving}: while
the active and civic life does not transcend the limits of this
life.^23
Most modern readers will be reluctant to believe that perfect happiness
is attainable by methods of which their modern world knows nothing.
However, belief or disbelief is not the matter at issue here. The point
is that without the qualitative concepts of "higher" or "lower" it is
impossible even to think of guidelines for living {ethic: sci/human}
which lead beyond individual {man} or {private} collective utilitarian-
ism and selfishness. {value: human public; subjective ego- WE}
The ability to see the Great Truth of the hierarchic structure of the
world, which makes it possible to distinguish between ~higher~and~-
~lower~Levels~of~Being, is one of the indispensable conditions of
understanding. Without it, it is not possible to find out every
thing's proper and legitimate place. Everything, everywhere, can be
understood only when its ~Level~of~Being is fully taken into account.
Many things which are true at a low Level of Being become absurd at a
higher level, and of course, vice versa.
We therefore now turn to a study of the hierarchic structure of the
world.
E.F. Schumacher author of Small is Beautiful Harper & Row c.1977 E.F.S.
_A_Guide_for_the_Perplexed_ isbn: 0-06-090611-1
1. On Philosophical Maps (001)
III. The loss of the ~vertical~dimension meant that it was no longer
possible to give an answer, other than a utilitarian one, to the
question "What am I to do with my life?" The answer could be more
individualistic-selfish or more social-unselfish, but it could not help
being utilitarian: either "Make yourself as comfortable as you can" or
"Work for the greatest happiness of the greatest number." Nor was it
possible to define the nature of man other than that as an animal. A
"higher" animal? Yes, perhaps; but only in some respects. In certain
respects other animals could be described as "higher" than (hu)man, and
so it would be best to avoid nebulous terms like "higher" or "lower,"
unless one spoke in strictly ~evolutionary terms. In the context of
evolution, "higher" could generally be associated with "later," and since
(hu)man was undoubtably a latecomer, (t)he(y) could be thought of as
standing at the top of the evolutionary ladder.
None of this leads to a helpful answer to the question "What am I to do
with my life?" Pascal (1623-1662) had said: (hu)"Man wishes to be happy,"
^20 but the new thinking of the philosophers insisted, with Kant, that
(hu)man(s) "never can say definitely and consistently what it is that
(t)he(y) really wishes," nor can (t)he(y) "determine with certainty what
would make (t)h(e)im truly happy; because to do so (t)he(y) would need to
be omniscent."^21 {f} Traditional wisdom had a reassuringly plain
answer: (hu)Man's happiness is to move ~higher, to develop (T)H(E)Is(R)
~highest facilities, to gain knowledge of the ~highest things and, if
possible, to "see God." If (t)he(y) moves ~lower, develops only
(T)H(E)Is(R) ~lowest faculties, which (t)he(y) share|s with the animals,
then (t)he(y) make|s (T)Him(EM)self deeply unhappy, even to the point of
despair.
With imperturbable certainty Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) argued:
: No (hu)man tends to do a thing by (T)His(EIR) desire and endeavour unless
it be previously known to (T)Hi(EM). Wherefore since (hu)man is direct-
ed by divine providence ~to~a~higher~good~than~human~frailty~can~attain
in the present life.. it was necessary for (T)His(EIR) mind to be bidden
to something higher [WE] than those things to which our reason can reach
in the present life, ~so~that~(T)he(y)~might~learn~to~aspire, and by
(T)His(EIR) endeavours to tend to ~something~surpassing~the~whole~state-
~of~the~present~life [human evolution]... It was with this motive that
the philosophers, in order to wean (hu)men from sensible pleasures to
virtue, took care to appeal to the senses, the taste of which things
affords much greater delight to those who devote themselves to active or
contemplative virtues.^22
These teachings, which are the traditional wisdom of all (male) peoples
in all parts of the world, have become virtually incomprehensible to
modern (hu)man, although (t)he(y), too, desires nothing more than some-
how to be able to rise above "the whole state of the present life."
(T)He(y) hope|s to do so by growing rich, by moving around at ever-
increasing speed, by travelling to the moon and into space. ["man"]
It is worth listening to Saint Thomas:
: There is a desire in (Hu)man, common to (T)Hi(EM) and other animals,
namely the desire for ~the~enjoyment~of~pleasure: and this (hu)men(s)
pursue especially by leading a voluptuous life, and through lack of
moderation become intemperate and incontinent. Now in that vision
[the divine vision] there is the most perfect pleasure, all the more
perfect than sensuous pleasure as the intellect is above the senses;
as the good in which we shall delight surpasses all sensible good, is
more penetrating, and more continuously delightful; and as that
pleasure is freer from all alloy of sorrow or trouble of anxiety...
In this life there is nothing so like this ultimate and perfect
happiness as the life of those who contemplate the truth, as far as
possible here below. Hence the philosophers who were unable to obtain
full knowledge of that final beatitude, places (hu)man's ultimate
happiness in that contemplation which is possible during this life.
For this reason too, Holy Writ commends the contemplative rather than
other forms of life, when our Lord said (Luke X.42): ~Mary~hath~chosen-
~the~better~part, namely the conteplation of truth, ~which~shall~not-
~be~taken~from~her. For contemplation of truth begins in this life,
but will be consummated in the life to come {humanity evolving}: while
the active and civic life does not transcend the limits of this
life.^23
Most modern readers will be reluctant to believe that perfect happiness
is attainable by methods of which their modern world knows nothing.
However, belief or disbelief is not the matter at issue here. The point
is that without the qualitative concepts of "higher" or "lower" it is
impossible even to think of guidelines for living {ethic: sci/human}
which lead beyond individual {man} or {private} collective utilitarian-
ism and selfishness. {value: human public; subjective ego- WE}
The ability to see the Great Truth of the hierarchic structure of the
world, which makes it possible to distinguish between ~higher~and~-
~lower~Levels~of~Being, is one of the indispensable conditions of
understanding. Without it, it is not possible to find out every
thing's proper and legitimate place. Everything, everywhere, can be
understood only when its ~Level~of~Being is fully taken into account.
Many things which are true at a low Level of Being become absurd at a
higher level, and of course, vice versa.
We therefore now turn to a study of the hierarchic structure of the
world.