Ethical Record Vol

K. The ISSN 0014-1690 Ethical Record Vol. 91 No. 4 APRIL 1986

EDITORIAL methods of working and time to study and think about various Come on in to aspects of running the meetings, Help SEES! halls, publications and membership. NEXT MONTH members of the Just as members may often feel Society have the opportunity to critical of what is done (or left un- hear from its elected General Com- done), new committee members mittee and officers (paid and volun- often fail to take into account what tary) about their activity in the last has gone before. (So perhaps we year—at the Annual General Meet- should have a few "training" ing on Sunday, May 18; in the sessions before the real thing! ). afternoon. New members to replace Of course, it also happens that those retiring (five this year) are to the more long-standing members of be elected and suggestions for the committees often don't take into f utu re made. account the lack of knowledge of The General Committee will then what's gone before of the new appoint new officers at its first participants. (For example, we meeting in June. By that time those adopt "standing orders" at the be- who have served for the past year ginning of the first new meeting of will have spent many hundreds of the new General Committee, often hours between them in maintain- before the new members are aware ing the activity of the Society. of what these are). While their sort of dedication is There are certainly ways in available and providing the Society which we can improve our com- has a viable function, useful results mittee work, but it is to be hoped can be forthcoming. However, it is that those anxious to assist will not essential for additional members to be deterred (as has happened in the participate in its organisation and paSt). this cannot be done without com- If you cannot join (or come for- mitment and time—commitment to understanding the problems and Continued on page 2

CONTENTS Page Coming to Conway Hall: J. Berry, Fenner Brockway, Michael Foot, George Hay, J. McDonnell, Jasper Ridley, Shanks 2 Development As If People Mattered: Alan Berresford 3 lbsen's 'Rosmersholm': Private Life and Public—Part 1: T. F. Evans ...... 5 from Lourdes to the Iron Curtain: Frank Ridley (summary by Ellis Hillman) . . . 8 Viewpoints: B. 0. Warwick, George Swade, David Murray George Walford, David McDonagh . 11

The views expressed in this journal are not necessarily• those of the Society.

PUBLISHED BY THE SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY CONWAY HALL, RED LION SQUARE, LONDON WC1R 4RL SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY

Appointed Lecturers: H. J. Blackham, Lord Brockway. Richard Clements, OBE. T. F. Evans. Peter Heales. Harry Stopes-Roe, Nicolas Walter Hall Manager: Geoffrey Austin (tel. 01-242 8032) Secretary: Jean Bayliss (Wed-Fri, tel. 01-242 8033) Honorary Representative: Sam Beer Chairman General Committee: Barbara Smoker Deputy Chairman: Honorary Registrar: David Wright Honorary Treasurer: Victor Rose Temporary Honorary Librarian: Edwina Palmer - Editor, The Ethical Record: Peter Hunot

COMING TO CONWAY HALL Sunday Morning LECTURES at 11.00 am in the Library April 6. JASPER RIDLEY, The Levellers. April 13. J. BERRY. The Role of the Morning Star. April 20. STEPHEN HOUSEMAN. How Not to Interpret Darwin. April 27. GEORGE Hay. What H. G. Wells Wanted. May 4. NO MEETING. May 11. J. MCDONNELL.After the Greater London Council—What? Sunday FORUMS at 3.00 pm in the Library April 13. K. SHANKS. Work and Welfare—Helping Disadvantaged Youth. April 27. PHILIP RASMUSSEN. Greenpeace. Sunday Social at 3.00 pm in the Library April 20. DON LIVERSIDGE, Can Man be Peaceable. REMEMBER THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING—Sunday May 18 at 2.30 pm (see back inside page for details). CONWAY MEMORIAL LECTURE—FENNER BROCKWAY and MICHAEL Foor—in the Large Hall on May 21, 1986 (see page 7). SPES Sunday Chamber Music Concerts—at 6.30 pm in the Main Hall Tickets £1.30 April 6. London Festival Players. HANDEL,J. C. BACH, BACH. April 13. Bochmann String Quartet, Yolande Wrigley. HAYDN, BRAHMS, ELGAR. April 20. Thea King, Charles Tunnel!, Susan Tunnell. BEETHOVEN, ARNOLD COOKE, BRAHMS. April 27. Chilingirian String Quartet. SHOSTAKOVICH, DOHNANYI, BRAHMS.

Continued from page one perience to indexing and sorting books; from discussing financial ward for possible election) the new implications of proposals or how to General Committee, you can assist obtain first class lecturers and on one or more of the many sub- spread the cause of a rational, committees, where everything from humane way of living is needed. expert building maintenance ex- Will you help now?

Copy date for the JUNE issue, Ethical Record—May 1st 2 Ethical Record, April 1986 Development As If People Mattered ALAN BERRESFORD

Summary of his lecture to SPES, Sunday February 2, 1986 THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO DEVELOPMENT, and many per- spectives on what should be done. I want to present to you one such perspec- tive based on my own experience and that of the Institute of Cultural 44llairs*, a non-governmental organisation with which I work. We live in the world, one global village, but it is a divided world, a world of imbalance. It is a world where 450 million people are starving or mal- nourished, where an area the size of England and Scotland becomes barren land every year, where two-thirds of the world's housing is inadequate..Our planet is desperately in need of healing and reconciliation. The majority of the world's poor is caught in the poverty trap. Some people try to blame the famines we are seeing on nature. Rather, natural disasters are the events that tip the scale for those already living on the edge of subsistence. There are four main factors which cause the poverty trap. L Food This is basic: people need enough food to eat. Paradoxically, globally we produce enough food for the world's population. But it isn't just a matter of redistribution. Food aid given from countries producing a surplus to those in need often damages the local agricultural economy. In some places, the encouragement of cash crops has displaced local food production. In others, over-production has caused desertification. Finally, agricultural assistance is usually given to men although often the women spend most of their time on the land. More emphasis has to be given to local food production to enable self-sustenance. 2. Aid None of the western donor countries has consistently achieved the UN target of allocating 0.7% of their GNP to aid. Britain's record is poor: aid has dropped from 0.52% in 1979 to 0.33% of GNP in 1984. But it's not just quantity that counts, it is also the quality. Studies have shown that aid is not reaching the poorest people, but rather is being spent on large projects or is tied to trade. I Trade The economies of the majority of the world's poor countries are dependent on a few primary products. The world recession has led to a fall in the real prices of these products, about 10% during 1985 alone. In addition, protec- tionism is still practised by some western countries. Thus it becomes harder and harder for developing countries to earn the necessary foreign exchange to import needed goods and services and to pay interest on debt. 4: Debt The debt crisis began when there was a need to use the petro-dollars generated by the rise in oil prices in the seventies. Many developing countries took large loans. But with the world recession causing prices to fall and the rise in interest rates, debts have become harder to pay. IMF austerity measures have sometimes helped economies get back on track, but usually at greatest cost to the poor. There have been a number of efforts in the last few decades to assist development. There have been strategies of transfer of capital and resources, Ethical Record, April 1986 3 transfer of technology of various kinds, building of infrastructure, bilateral and multilateral aid programmes, and of course numerous disaster relief operations. However, the majority of these approaches to development have not led to significant self-sustaining development. There are several reasons. Most of them relied on the "trickle-down" approach: that if one injects resources at the top, the benefits will eventually trickle-down to the majority of the population. Studies and experience have shown that this simply does not happen. Some of the efforts actually create a new dependence on outside resources and do not give the local population any degree of self-reliance. The approaches are almost always economic: they use the economic indicators of success and tend to ignore the local cultural values. Finally, they usually employ the approach of "doing development to" a population, pbople sometimes get in the way of successful projects. The result is a lot of money and effort has gone into development, but the poor are getting poorer and there are more of them. The Institute of Cultural Affairs International has been involved for the last four years in a programme called the International Exposition of Rural Development. This was based on the theme "Sharing Approaches That Work", and involved project personnel exchanging experience of undertaking local development. Some 50 countries participated, and through a series of symposia and project description laboratories selected a number of projects to attend a ten-day event in New Delhi in 1984. Since then there have been follow-up events in many countries to disseminate what was learned and to continue the process of sharing. The results are in the process of being published. That experience allowed us to see that there were many examples of locally based efforts of sustainable development. The Exposition identified four factors contributing to successful local development approaches. I. Development is a multifaced reality. One cannot analyse and separate out different problems and treat them distinctly. For example, dealing with health involves water, sanitation, nutrition, agriculture, income, women's welfare and so on. It is an evolving journey. Approaches that work do not depend on blue- print plans with set calenders and budgets. Local development efforts require that the people gain self-confidence and build on their experience. It is more a question of creating an environment in which development is possible. It is a participatory process. Sustainable, long-term development requires the involvement and participation throughout of the population. • Some kind of catalyst is required, whether it be some kind of external group, or an education programme. What works in development is giving people the opportunity to take responsibility for their own future and then assisting them to realise that. The ethical issue we face is how to empower local people and to enable their contribution. The discussion afterwards raised some key questions, including how to initiate local efforts how to improve trade conditions as a course preferable to increasing aid how to be involved in the media's dissemination of information and, in particular, of successful approaches how to encourage a responsible approach to birth control and population how to enable voluntary contributions to development efforts. 0

* Further information on the work of the Institute of Cultural Affairs may be obtained from Alan Berresford at 277 St. Ann's Road, London N15 5RG. 4 Ethical Record, April 1986 Ibsen's tosmersholm': Private:Life and Public—Part I T. F. EVANS Lecture to SPES, Sunday February 9, 1986

IBSEN'S DRAMARosmersholm, in common with the majority of his other plays, tells a story which is deceptively simple on. the surface but, which on closer examination and thought, shows itself to be most subtle and 'com- plicated. The title of the play is the name of the family house of John Rosmer, a pastor, a man of noble character and a great concern for the public good. His views are conventional but his wife, an affectionate woman. does not share his conviction that he should devote his life to the ennoble- ment of the human race. Before the play opens, Mrs Rosmer has taken a companion in her home, a strong-minded young woman named Rebecca West. Rebecca is a free-thinker and she feels that Rosmer, if he can be per- suaded to share her views, will be able to have a great influence .on the community and, in effect, help her to advance herself in the cause of progressive thought and ideas. Mrs Rosmer, feeling that there is no longer a place for her in this situation, drowns herself in the mill-race. The action of the play, as always with Ibsen, consists of unravelling the past and trying to assess the precise nature of its effect on the present and the future. Rosmer, now that his wife is dead, comes more under Rebecca's influence than ever, and admits, first to the reactionary Rector Kroll, the brother of his dead wife, that he is moving away from the conservative side and towards the liberals. Later he tells this also to Mortensgaard, the editor of the liberal newspaper in the town. This "apostasy" of such a figure as Rosmer. as Kroll calls his change of view, drives all the characters to reconsider their positions. Rosmer has gradually come to realise that it is Rebecca who means most to him in his new life and he asks her to marry him. She, feeling haunted by the thought of the dead Mrs Rosmer, is tempted to accept but does not do so. In confusion, Rosmer broods on his own guilt and Rebecca, in an attempt to bring him some peace of mind, confesses not entirely truthfully that she had, in fact, deliberately driven Mrs Rosmer to her death. Feeling that he has been tricked by this young woman, Rosmer is driven back to Kroll. At the end of the play, Rebecca confesses once again, this time with complete truth that, in reality, she had come to live Rosmer passionately, a fact that she had hitherto kept concealed. Rosmer, however, has had an effect on her. She explains that "The Rosmer view of life does ennoble . . . but it kills joy". Both are confused. Rosmer feels that he has lost his power to ennoble people. Rebecca declares that she has been ennobled. He demands proof and it is agreed that both have sinned and should expiate. She must take the way that the dead wife took but Rosmer, convinced that they are now spiritually united, insists that "man and wife should go together". The play ends as they commit suicide hand in hand in the mill-race. Anyone who knows the play will realise that this is a most inadequate summary. It does give the main outline of the "story" but, if any proof is needed that the drama is worthy of ejtended analysis and that such analysis can be made, then no less a figure than Sigmund Freud should be consulted. Freud was most attracted by the character of Rebecca in whom he saw the working out of a sub-conscious incest-motive. (Rebecca is revealed during the play to have unwittingly been the mistress of her own father, sometime Ethical Record, April 1986 5 before she comes to Rosmersholm). Freud treated Rebeáca as if she were a real patient in his consulting-room. All this can be immensely fascinating to anyone -who is at all.interested in Ibsen, or in Freud, or simply in human beings and what makes them behave as they do. These thoughts on Rosmersholm are, however, but a preamble, if a lengthy one, to what is to come. Rosrnersholm was begun by Ibsen in 1885, finished in 1886 and first performed in January 1857. A hundred years later, it still has a compelling effect but there is one theme in the play, not yet mentioned, which, if minor, nevertheless strikes a very contemporary note. When Mrs Rosmer died, there were suspicions about the real state of affairs between her husband and the young masterful woman now left alone with the widower in the house. (It might be necessary to state here that despite the deep passion which Rebecca finally admits to feeling for Rosmer, there is nowhere the slightest evidence that they so much as touched each other until the moment when they go hand in hand to death) Despite the suspicions and rumours, the best people, of whom Rosmer was one, kept their thoughts to themselves, for fear of the harm that a revelation, or even a suspicion, of immoral conduct might do to the conservative cause. In an ironic way, the other side did not try to make capital out of the developments either. They thought it possible that Rosmer might be lured to their side of the political divide, as did happen. When Rosmer tells Mortensgaard that he is joining the liberal camp, he wants the editor to make public that he has abandoned his Christianity also. Mortensgaard is cautious : we've quite enough freethinkers on hand . . . What the party wants is the Christian element—something everybody has to respect. That's what we're so dreadfully short of He advises Rosmer to be prudent. Shortly before she died Mrs Rosmer wrote a letter to Mortensgaard, in which she set down her suspicions of her husband and Rebecca. Rosmer would not wish such a document to be Made public. The other side is not idle either. When it is known that Rosmer is to move from the conservative ranks to those of the radicals, the local paper, the County News comments not simply on "spineless deserters" and "judases who boldly acknowledge their apostasy as soon as they think the opportune and most profitable moment has come" but goes on to refer to perverse influences—perhaps extended also to matters that we will not for the moment make the subject of public comment or animad-version. Rebecca says to Rosmer; "They're pointing at me, you realize". The political apostasy of Rosmer is to be condemned and what are thought to be his private offences against conventional morality are to be used by his opponents as political weapons. The interaction of public and private themes in this way has not abated. Caesar's wife, it is said, must be above suspicion. So, it seems, must Caesar himself, or, since we live in a monarchy, so must a king. King Edward VII is thought by some to have been an admirable constitutional monarch, even by those of his subjects who could not approve of the indiscretions of his private life. Of course, -there were differences of opinion. Thus, while the Writer Rudyard Kipling wrote after Edward's death that "he was a great King", Beatrice Webb, the previous day, had written of "the ludicrous false sentiment which is being lavished over the somewhat commonplace virtues of our late King". - On earlier occasions, Beatrice Webb had written sourly, not of Edward's virtues but of his vices. Edward's grandson, Edward VIII brought the conflict between private life and public duty right into the open and thereby provoked a great deal of excitement and what was called a constitutional crisis. Edward, known for his amorous adventures when Prince of Wales, Ethical Record, April 1986 came to the throne as a rnachelor of forty-one. While the information was kept from the general public, it was known to an increasing circle close to the Court and in the press that he had contracted a close liaison with an American lady, much experienced in both marriage and divorce. He wanted to marry her. Conventional opinion, in church and state advised against it. He abdicated. It may not have been an event of very great importance but, at the end of this year, when the fiftieth anniversary of the occasion will be celebrated—if that is the correct word—much ink and time will be spent on it. One very interesting side-line is that the leading article in The Times the day after the abdication (reproduced in The Times on the forty-ninth anniversary last December) did not include a single reference to the lady in question, Mrs Wallis Simpson, nor to the fact. that the King wished to marry her. Since the dreadful day in December 1936, we have had nearly a half- century of cosy domesticity and . married bliss in Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle and the various other royal homes. Will this state of affairs remain? There had been newspaper speculation and comment on the sexual adventures of the present Prince of Wales before his marriage. We live in a much more inquisitive, not to say prurient age than a hundred years ago or fifty years ago and present-day investigative journalism can more easily discover and broadcast (in all senses) that which in a previous age it was easier to keep hidden. Yet, just suppose what would be public reaction should—and this is a hypothetical question— Kings Charles III turn out to be in the line of succession to his predecessor King Charles II, not merely to Edward VII. It is almost a relief, paradoxical though it may be, to turn from such mind- boggling possibilities to some things that have actually happened in the political field. Thus, in 1886, again a coincidence, the. political career of Sir Charles Dilke, a prominent Liberal Member of Parliament, was brought to an end when he was involved as co-respondent in • .divorce - suit. The respondent was found guilty of adultery with Dilke but, such are the vagaries of English law, the case against Dilke himself was dismissed. Not for the first time, however, being found "not guilty" in a British court had just as serious an effect as a verdict of "guilty" would have had:Parnell, the leader of the Irish party, was broken politically a few years later as the result of an undefended divorce action brought by the husband of his mistress. A few years later still, the literary fortunes of Oscar Wilde were severely damaged by his trial and conviction for homosexual offences. Happily literary fame can be resuscitated in time.

Part 11 will appear in the May issue

CONWAY MEMORIAL LECTURE In the Large Hall Wednesday, May 21, 1986, at 7 pm Speaker: Fenner Brockway Moncure Conway: His Life and Message For Today In the chair: Michael Foot MP

Ethical Record, April 1986 7 From Lourdes to the Iron Curtain

FRANK RIDLEY

Summary by Ellis Hillman of the lecture to SPES, October 20, 1985

THE LATEST DOGMA OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH to be defined officially by Pope Pius XII in 1950 was the doctrine of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, her bodily ascension into heaven. This had long been a "pious opinion" in the Church and probably would have been declared a dogma earlier but for the continuous opposition of the Dominican Order headed by Thomas Aquinas as far back as the xilith century. The Virgin Mary, however, appears to be nostalgic for her terrestrial birthplace and a large number of visits have been reported, particularly in recent centuries. As far back as the lecturer knew, none of these have been officially declared to be bona fide visits, the acceptance of which would be binding on all Catholics. The three most famous of these are probably Guadelupe in Mexico in 1531, Lourdes in the South of France in 1858 and most recently at Fatima in Northern Portugal in 1917. One must observe, however, that all of these visitations correspond closely with the contemporary developments in the World policy of the Vatican. In Guadelupe, for example, shortly after the conquest of Mexico in 1519– 1521, the appearance of the Virgin Mary seemed to support the previous colonial conquest, particularly as Cortes and his Spanish Conquerors had been largely instrumental in overcoming the fierce resistance of the Aztecs because of a superstition prevalent among the Mexican natives that a white God had appeared in Mexico in former ages and that his white descendances were due to return. In the case of Lourdes, which is still probably the most famous of the Virgin's alleged visits to this planet, her appearance in 1858 coincided in a most remarkable manner with the current development of the doctrine of Papal Infallibility, annunciated at the first Vatican Council held on July 18,1870. Up to that time a new dogma could only be proclaimed by the joint voices of the whole episcopate. When, however, Pope Pius IX (1846-1878) —the longest reigning Pope—decided to claim Papal Infallibility for the Pope in 1854, he launched a trial flight by proclaiming the doctrine of the Immacu- late Conception of the Virgin upon his own authority. This again had been a pious opinion for a very long time but had been opposed by the Domini- cans who had originally been led by Thomas Aquinas back in the xilith century. When, therefore, the Virgin Mary appeared to a young shepherd girl Bernadette Soubirous, aged 12, and proclaimed "I am the Immaculate Conception", she was anticipating Papal Infallibility 12 years before it was officially defined. The last major visitation was at Fatima in 1917, and was in some ways the most interesting and perhaps ultimately the most important, for Fatima was not a Christian saint, but the daughter of Mohammed, the great rival of Christianity, and has amongst some of the fringe Shi-ite sects acquired a celestial status not unlike that of the Virgin Mary in the Catholic Church. Consequently, when the Virgin Mary appeared at Fatima she was holding out an olive branch to the great rival religion of Islam to form a united front against the modern forms of Atheism and Scepticism which had developed 8 Ethical Record, April 1986 in the Western World during the French and Russian Revolutions; a fact recently emphasised by a well-known American ecclesiastic, Monsigneur Sheen. In 1929, 12 years after Fatima, the last survivor of the vision, Lucia dos Santos was ordered by her Bishop to repeat what the Virgin Mary had said. The result was startling. Lucia claimed that the Virgin had warned her against the spread of Bolshevism and the prospects of another World War leading to the destruction of Christianity. This marks again a striking contemporary development of Vatican policy, which in 1917 at the time of the Virgin's appearance had been favourable to the Russian Revolution for Tzardom had been the main opposition to the Catholic Church in Eastern Europe. However, since the accession of Pope Pius Xl in 1922, the Church has swung into strong opposition to the Russian Revolution and what is usually described as "Atheistic Communism"? This change of policy being due to the vigour of the anti-religious propaganda carried on by the Communist International during the 1920's. The above list of Virgin appearances is not exhaustive—two recent appearances at Knock in the Irish Republic should be mentioned.

Heard But Not Seen At the present time widespread interest has been aroused, particularly in France by the striking news that the Virgin Mary though invisible to the naked eye is carrying on a conversation every night in the Croat language in the formerly Catholic country of Croatia which is now in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The Virgin has "jumped the gun?", she has leapt over the Iron Curtain for as far as the lecturer knew for the first time since 1917. He could not say whether the extraordinary impact made by these visions— encouraged the Vatican to give world-wide publicity to this first offensive of our celestial visitor in a professedly atheist and socialist country. At present, the Virgin does not appear visibly, but whilst remaining invisible carries on a fairly lengthy conversation with a group of young Yugoslays punctually at 5.45 in the winter and 6.45 in the summer. A very interesting psychological experiment was carried out in 1984 by Professor Henri Joyeuse of the University of Montpellier who examined the children and reported in the French magazine "Paris-Match". This report entirely cleared them of fraud or of suffering any particular malady. This, in the lecturer's opinion completely agrees with his previous thesis about the reaction of the children when the Virgin obligingly appeared at Lourdes and Fatima. The question however, still remains, what is the truth behind these stories? We must remember the adage of Schopenhauer, that we will what we do, but we do not will, what we will to do. In a wordly Church in which miracles are second nature, there is nothing surprising about such appearances. What is very surprising is the inability of the Yugoslav professedly Marxist government to have educated its citizens more efficiently during the 40 years that have elapsed since Marshal Tito established a Socialist Republic in Yugoslavia! Does this signify a sad decline in Communist ideology since the days of the Militant League of the Godless in which Anti-Religious propaganda formed a part of the Marxist programme? Is this thc beginning of a new offensive against the so-called Communism, starting at its weakest and most accessible point—on the western front of the Soviet bloc? The lecturer's view was that while there are some psychological difficulties, perhaps impossible to explore on our present somewhat limited information, it seemed to him fairly obvious that arising from the differences between the Franciscans who Ethical Record, April 1986 9 were dominant in the area and the Episcopacy representing the Vatican, the issue had now reached the point where it constituted a major clash between the Catholic Church, in the first instance; and Yugoslavia, and perhaps, ultimately the entire "Socialist bloc".

-According to information received from both English and French journals, it would seem that the Virgin appeared originally to a group of young children in Medjugorse in the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina which itself is a part of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which since the end of the Second World War has been under Communist rule. The witnesses to this "miracle" runs entirely true to pattern as reported by previous occurrences at Lourdes and Fatima. All the basic characters are fundamentally the same. A traditionally Catholic area—Croatia up to the First World War was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire—with Croat troops played an important part on the Catholic side in the Thirty Years War (1618-1648)—the recipients were young adolescents and finally it appears to coincide precisely with the current policy of the Vatican, the Ost-policy of Cardinal Cagarali, the present Principal Secretary of State who inaugurated this policy in the reign of Pope Paul VI. N.B.—Actually, Yugoslavia's smaller neighbour, Albania still retains the anti-religious view of Marxism, and had the Virgin appeared a few miles further west, she would, no doubt, have been arrested by the Security Police! N.N.B.—It is rather odd to note that more visitors estimated, to date, of about two-and-a-half-million people, at least as large as the total population of Albania, have conducted a pilgrimage to the site in Yugoslavia. In closely knit traditional Catholic communities such visions are nothing unusual. '

Fraud? The lecturer gave as his opinion that dealing with such celestial phenomena, one must disregard completely the attitude of the actual participants and the use made of their communications by interested parties, in this case, resident in the Vatican. He stated that there is no reason to believe that these children were deliberately fraudulent, since in a primitive society there is nothing abnormal in such visions. When, however, we compare the vast worldly experience of the Vatican, which has been involved, they may not know much about the next world, but certainly knows a great deal about this one—it is difficult to believe that they are acting in complete sincerity. The only possible suggestion the lecturer made was that these phenomena are essentially backward in character. All those who have seen the Virgin Mary from Mexico (Guadelupe) to Yugoslavia (Medjugorse) all have this in common that they are all extremely young. The most recent appearances of the Virgin at Fatima was very soon followed by the Space Age. According to astronomic law, and the considered opinion of astronomers, no actual object can proceed at a speed greater than 186,000 miles a second, without disintegrating. All Catholic theologians agree that the body of the Virgin must be a natural substance, therefore it is bound by astronomic law. Accordingly, the Virgin Mary must be going or returning from one of her visits to the earth (we hope she will not be mistaken for Halley's Comet!). In conclusion he said, it is an ironic thought that the Vatican's astronomers must be peering through their telescopes feverishly searching for the Flying Virgin as she glides from galaxy to galaxy. Trying to follow the cosmic journeys of the Virgin requires a theological angle upon which countless preceecling generations were never called upon to comment. ELLIS HILLMAN 10 Ethical Record, April 1986 Viewpoints

Mind and Brain—"Non-Matter" and the Tradition of Criticising Materialism - Bill Horsley's argument against the proposition that "Mind is no more than a function of the brain" (ER, March '86, page 5) is very much in a particular tradition of criticising materalism. It shares the mistakes of such as Eddington, Koestler and Capra—and adds some of its own. The general strategy of this tradition is to take isolated utterandes of physicists and certain interpretations of modern physics and claim that these somehow refute materialism. It fails to consider criticisms of these interpretations and it does not discuss similar idealist remarks by earlier physicists. Because to do the former would be to admit that these idealist readings of physics do not have the solidity of scientific facts, but are more like philosophical speculations (a distinction which I know is over- simplified, but will do for now); to discuss the latter would reveal that physicist idealism is not just a reflection of the internal development of modern physics. As an example of a "fact" cited as entailing only one conclusion, consider the use made of the existence of people with relatively tiny brains, but above average intelligence. This does not at all lead to being "forced to abandon the materialist hypothesis". Oddly enough Horsley accepts this in the sentence following the above quote: "It is the structure of the brain, not its size that is significant". But of course, to say that it is structure not size that counts is to refute only the crudest imaginable biological reductionism (big brain = great intelligence); but it still accepts that it is brain that matters. Horsley's remarks on the beginnings of modern physics are misleading. It is at best highly questionable to claim that "Ernst Mach . . . disbelieved in the existence of matter". He rejected the position that science could tell us anything about "things-in-themselves" and thus could neither believe nor disbelieve in the existence of matter—all that we know are the organisations of our perceptions; not what might be "behind" them. Horsley then writes that this "astounding paradox . . . is endorsed by the discovery of the 'emptiness' of the atom". A pity that the implications of using "emptiness" in quotes is missed. The atom is not empty—it is "empty"; categories like solid, empty, particle, wave, matter have their applications, are conceptually "at home" in the macro world; applied to the micro world they are at best metaphors. The argument that modern atomic theory shows that matter is really insubstantial was destroyed a long time ago in Susan Stebbing's criticism (of the physicist idealism) of James Jeans and Arthur Eddington (Philosophy and the Physicists, Penguin 1937). It seems characteristic of the stance of people like Horsley that as many as possible of the figures of the cultural "establishment" of the last century are dragged on stage to utter a few odd lines that supposedly run counter to the supposedly dominant philosophy of materialism. But in this particular essay they are frequently not even allowed to speak, but are merely gestured at as mute witnesses before being hustled off the stage to make way for the next one. It is certainly the case that Freud did not hold a behaviourist view of the mind; it is as true that he was a materialist from first to last. The greatness of Freud was (in part) to show that an ontological Materialism did not entail a reductionist approach to the mental. Freud was a materialist who demonstrated the richness, complexity and potential of organised matter. (I would be interested to see on what basis it is asserted Ethical Record, April 1986 11 that Freud's openness towards the possibility of telepathy, etc. derived from J ung.) Did Darwin really hold that evolution requires "endless time, and a power which observes"!! And to follow this with the remark that "Einstein . .. has had a lot to say about the effect of the observer on the observed" is just silly—Special Relativity holds that the rate of time depends on velocity, precisely to preserve the requirement that the velocity of light is an absolute so that the laws of physics will hold for all observers. Einstein's attitude to the importance of the observer in quantum mechanics was of unrelenting scepticism. But behind all these particular mistakes and confusions is a more funda- mental conceptual error. The general thrust of Horsley's reasoning is that somehow modern physics shows that matter is really immaterial and that therefore, the brain (which is material) cannot be the determinant of the mind (which is immaterial). But suppose that we accepted that in some sense the brain and all matter is really not "matter" at all but something else (Schelling:."nature is only intelligence turned into the rigidity of being"), what difference would it make? It would still leave us with the situation that the non-matter of the brain was in important ways a different form of non- matter to consciousness (a brain can be weighed, etc. but a mind cannot be). So we Would still face the question: is the non-matter of the "mind" dependent on the non-matter of the "brain"? DAVID MURRAY,London NW6 A Few SPES History Points From Peace to Bombs-1898 and 1941 In 1898 the Tsar of Russia was proposing a reduction in the dangerous arms build-up in Europe. The South Place Ethical Church (now South Place Ethical Society) submitted a petition supported by large numbers of non- members, to the then foreign secretary, Lord Salisbury, welcoming the Tsar's proposal. In October 1900 SPEC proposed the formation of an International Peace Alliance and gave a detailed constitution and procedure. In the 1930s, Professor C. E. M. Joad, lecturer at Birkbeck College, was one of many public figures who were regular lecturers at SPES. Whilst not entirely agreeing with Soviet policy, Joad, in his book Art of Thinking compared the greed of Fascist monopoly with Soviet People's Democracy. Joad wrote at the time, "(despite the difficulties) . . . It is our tradition to meet every Sunday morning—in the words of propaganda it would be a victory for Hitler if we stopped doing so-. I wonder if, in the German bombing in June 1941, whether or not the bomb that destroyed the building adjoining Conway Hall, was really intended for SPES?! GEORGE E. SWADE,East Horsley

Some Reasons for the Choice of Red Lion Square I am delighted to be able to answer the question raised by Henry Feuchtwanger (ER, March '86, page 12). I have the advantage of having been elected to the General Committee of 1924. While I had no part in the decision to move to Bloomsbury, I heard the discussions on the move, and the development of the new site. The then existing circumstances were that our congregation did not live

12 Ethical Record, April 1986 locally, it lived in the far suburbs, to where it had moved, with the expansion of London of 1920. Our members made a public transport journey to town to attend the Sunday morning service. Red Lion Square is within walking distance of the British Museum, and several sections of London University. It was hoped that our presence would attract the attention of students and like minded people and provide a source of potential members for the Society. The actual site of Conway Hall was then owned by the Electric Tramway System. Following the clearance of the Seven Dials slum area, it was proposed to route the trams from the Kingsway subway, along Theobalds Road, across our site, through the side of the square and so on down to the embankment to rejoin the system. When this plan was abandoned, the authorities sold their unwanted site— but stipulated that the buyer must not be a private individual, but a public body, presumably to protect the environment. The New River Company was slightly involved. Being adjacent to the City. the Finsbury site had become valuable for redevelopment. B. OLIVERWARWICK, Woodford Green

We Reason Because We Want Something Disagreement is welcome when it comes in a letter as constructive as the one from Stephen Houseman in (ER, March '86, page 9). Rather than "man" as a generic term I prefer "society", as making it more clear that woman is included. Society certainly is rational; the great scientific theories, for example, although linked with this or that name, all depend on the work of forgotten investigators over centuries, they are best seen as social achievements. But the great plays and paintings also are social achievements (so are films, good and bad), and these are not rational constructions. Society is rational but not exclusively rational; it is richer than that. The same is true of individual people. Stephen Houseman finds the diverg- ence of outlooks "distressing", and that is a response belonging to the sphere of emotion rather than of rationality. He confesses to "a strong personal predilection for a rational approach", and that predilection is not itself rational, it is what inclines him towards rationality. I am like him in this, and so are all of us who strive to be rational, although not all of us realise it. We reason because we want something, even if that something be only to know ourselves rational, and that want is not an outcome of reasoning but precedes it. On re-reading this it begins to appear that Stephen Houseman and I are not in any deep disagreement after all, and that's a pity; I was enjoying the argument. GEORGEWALFORD, London

It is Not Contrary to Reason To be Irrational I am surprised to see that Stephen Houseman (ER, March '86, page 9) feels there are great differences in the way people see the world. It is true that we do not all agree on all things but it is also true that we do agree on most things. Ethical Record, April 1986 13 Even in religion, which has no date at all to go on, we find more agree- ment than disagreement and the "great" religions argue only over marginal detail. I'm reminded of when Bertrand Russell had to go to prison for his pacifist stance and he was asked his religion. "Agnostic" he said. "How do you spell that?" the gaoler asked. "A-g-n-o-s-t-i-c" said B.R. "It's very odd. Never mind. We all believe in the same God, don't we?" In science, where we have date, there is even more reason for the agree- ment we have but we still debate on marginal matters, and we have lots of them. They are interesting just because they are not obvious. Here we do see many rival theories, but they are only marginally different from each other. If we take physics in the 1980s we see that the various theories are of their time and different from the 1880s or 1780s when they were alio of their time. Science never says one thing in particular but the rival theories at any one time tend to disagree only on the margin. George Walford and Adrian Williams seem to be very confused men, to me, and their respect for Hegel (Schopenhauer rightly calls him "this silly Christian") is the source of their muddle. Denying man's reason is like denying that he has a nose on his face. The fact that some people like religion and that they are willing to lie and cheat to defend it does not mean they are being unreasonable, merely that they are dishonest. Schopenhauer quite rightly explained the enjoyment they got from denying the fact of death. It's not a pleasant fate after all and a few lies may let us forget it for a time. We may say that is silly but it is not at all contrary to reason. It's a quite understandable. The whole idea of the irrational is a mere muddle that tends to dismiss rather than to explain the phenomena. I would hope that Stephen Houseman would see this and not be so worried! DAVID McDomkon,Birmingham

Domesday Book 1086-- Do We Need Another? Nine hundred years ago this year William the Conqueror carried out his famous economic survey of England. The result was the Great Domesday Book, a folio of 700 pages, covering most of England and Little Domesday Book, an octavo of 900 pages covering Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex. Cumber- land, Durham, Northumberland and Westmorland had been so blackened by William's army that it was not considered worthwhile surveying them. Domesday is not exciting reading but it is interesting to learn that in 1086 woods of oak grew up to the gates of London and in these forests there were game, red and fallow deer, boars and wild bulls. Londoners went hawking and hunting with dogs. Westminster had 200 swine, Kensington 200, Tottenham 500 and Harrow 2,000. There were six vineyards in Middlesex. You may find your home town in Domesday but you are not likely to find your ancestors. We are all related to everybody else but immigrants if we go back to 1400 but there's not much Norman blood left even in the Royal Family. S.B.

There will be an Memorial Meeting in the Large Hall at 2.30 pm, on Saturday, May 17, 1986, for BETTY BEER and FANNY COCKERELL. 14 Ethical Record, A pril 1986 SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING SUNDAY, MAY 18, 1986 2.30 pm for 3.00 pm in the Library at Conway Hall Tea at 4.30 pm Nominations are now open for the vacancies on the Society's General Committee. The election will take place at the Annual General Meeting. Nomination forms may be obtained from the Secretary and must be returned no later than SundaV, April 6, preferably by March 34. The business to be transacted at the AGM will include the appointment of Trustees in accordance with Rule 8 (I) and Rule 20 (3) (g). Nominations are invited and should be sent to the Secretary. All nominations for this appointment should have a proposer and seconder, and be countersigned by the nominee. Without the signed consent of nominees nominations will not be considered valid. Closing date for these nominations, is April 6. Motions to be debated at the Annual General Meeting may also be submitted. They must have a proposer and seconder to be accepted and must be handed to the Secretary no later than Sunday, April 6, preferably by March 31, in accordance with Rule 20 (3) (h) and Rule 21 (9). Reports from Hon. Officers and sub-committee chairmen for inclusion in the ANNUAL REPORT should he sent to the Secretary by March 5. NOTE: TO BE ABLE TO VOTE AT THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEET- ING IT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE PAID YOUR SUBSCRIPTION FOR THE CURRENT YEAR. THUS IF YOUR SUBSCRIPTION IS OVER- DUE PLEASE PAY IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

IF YOUR SUBSCRIPTION IS DUE PLEASE FILL OUT THE RENEWAL OF SUBSCRIPTION FORM BELOW.

RENEWAL OF MEMBERSHIP FORM Name (BLOCK LETTERS PLEASE) Address

I enclose £ (minimum £4) as my subscription fee for l986." I enclose £ as a donation to the South Place Ethical Society.: I enclose £ (minimum £2) as the overseas members' rate. TOTAL £ Due to postal rates it is unfortunately necessary to charge overseas members an extra £2 above the minimum subscription rate. : The Society is constantly in need of funds. Thus, any donation over and above the minimum subscription rate, large or small, will be gladly received. Ethical Record, April 1986 15 South Place Ethical Society FOUNDED in 1793, the Society is a progressive movement whose aim is the study and dissemination of ethical principles based on humanism, and the cultivation of a rational way of life. We invite to membership all those who reject supernatural creeds and find themselves in sympathy with our views. At Conway Hall there are opportunities for participation in many kinds of cultural activities, including discussions, lectures, concerts, dances, rambles and socials. A comprehensive reference and lending library is available, and all Members and Associates receive the Society's journal, The Ethical Record, free. The Sunday Evening Chambei Music Concerts founded in 1887 have achieved international renown. Memorial andFuneral Services are available to members. Membership is by £1 enrolment fee and an annual Subscription. Minimum subscriptions are : Members, £4 p.a.; Life Members, £84 (Life membership is available only to members of at least one year's standing). It is of help to the Society's officers if members pay their subscriptions by Banker's Order, and it is of further financial benefit to the Society if Deeds of Covenant are entered into. Members are urged to pay more than the minimum subscription whenever possible, as the present amount is not sufficient to cover the cost of this journal. A suitable form of bequest for thOse wishing to benefit the Society by their wills is available from the office, as are Banker's Order and Deeds of Covenant Forms.

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM TO THE HONORARY REGISTRAR, SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY CONWAY HALL HUMANIST CENTRE RED LION SQUARE, LONDON WC1R 4RL The Society's objects (as interpreted by its General Committee in the light of a 1980 Court ruling) are the study and dissemination of ethical principles; and the•cultivation of a rational and humane way of life; and the advancement of education in fields relevant to these objects* Being in sympathy with the above, I desire to become a Member. I will accept the rules of the Society and will pay the annual subscription of . . . (minimum £4 plus £1 enrolment). NAME (BLOCK LETTERS PLEASE) ADDRESS

OCCUPATION(disclosure optional) HOW DID YOU HEAR OF ME SOCIETY? DAM SIGNATURE *Formally, the objects of the Society are the study and dissemination of ethical principles and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment. The Ethical Record is posted free•to members. The annual charge to subscribers is £4. Matter for publication should reach the Editor, Peter Hunot, 17 Anson Road, London N7 ORB (01-609 2677) no later than the first of the preceding month. ciE David Neil & Co Printers South St Dorking