SOUTH 710Acz ETHICAL Socierf Conway Hall Humanist Centre� Red Lion Square, London, WC1 SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY

vox =MO mgccaoD)

Vol. 73, No. 4 APRIL 1968

CONTENTS

EDITORIAL 3 SCIENCE AND ETHICS: CHALLENGE AND COUNTER- CHALLENGE4 by Pro.f. H. Levy POWER POLITICS AND THE MORAL LAW 6 by Dr. John Lewis THE DANGERS OF "DETACHMENT" IN SOCIAL STUDIES. 7 by Prof. T. H. Pear HUME AND ETHICS . 9 by Maurice Cranston, M WHO SAID THAT? 10 THE POPULATION EXPLOSION . 1 1 by Jack Parsons BOOK REVIEW: THE OUTSIDER'S VIEW 14 by H. J. Blackham TO THE EDITOR . 15 OFF THE RECORD 16 SOUTH PLACE NEWS 17

Published by SOUTH 710Acz ETHICAL SOCIErf Conway Hall Humanist Centre Red Lion Square, London, WC1 SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY

OFFICERS : Secretary: Mr. H. G. Knight Hall Manager and Lettings Secretary: Miss B. Palmer Hon. Registrar: Miss E. Palmer Hon. Treasurer: Mr. W. Bynner Editor, "The Ethical Record": Miss Barbara Smoker Address: Conway Hall Humanist Centre, Red Lion Square, London, W.C.1 (Tel.: CHAncery 8032)

SUNDAY MORNING MEETINGS. 11 a.m. (Admission free) Apr. 7—H. J. BLACKHAM, B.A. Issues of World Order Violin and piano: Margot MacGibbon and Frederic Jackson Apr. 14—(No meeting) Apr. 21—RICHARD CLEMENTS. O.B.E. The Humanism of Maxim Gorki Soprano solos: Jessie Wooderson Apr. 28—MAURICE CRANSTON, M.A. Jeremy Bentham Bass solos: G. C. Dowman

CONWAY DISCUSSIONS — TUESDAYS, 6.45 p.m. (Admission: members free, non-members 2s. Refreshment break at 7.45) Theme for the month: RUSSIA TODAY Apr. 2—Soviet Life and Culture: V. Chubarov (Counsellor, Soviet Embassy) Apr. 9—Soviet Education and Art: N. Turkatenko (Head of London Bureau. Tass Agency) Apr. 16—(No meeting) Apr. 23—Soviet Technology and Science: A. Chuev (Counsellor, Soviet Embassy) Apr. 30—The Soviet Union Today: N. Makarov (First Secretary. Soviet Embassy) (This ends the Conway Discussions season, which resumes on October 1)

SOUTH PLACE SUNDAY CONCERTS, 77th Season, 1967/68 Concerts 6.30 p.m. Doors open 6 p.m. Admission 4s. Apr. 7—MARTIN STRING QUARTET and GWYNNE EDWARDS: Webern Six Bagatelles; Turina "La Oracion del Torero" String Quartets; Mozart G mi.. 1(516: .Brahms G. Op. Ill String Quintets. Apr. 14—(No concert) Apr. 21—NEMET PIANO QUARTET: Mozart E flat, 1(493; Brahms C mi., Op. 60 Piano Quartets: Hindemith No. 2 String Trio. Apr. 28—CAMERATA STRING ORCHESTRA and THEA KING: Mozart Divertimento E flat, 1(137: Telemann Concerto for Four Violins: Britten Variations on a Theme of Frank Bridge: Stamitz Clarinet Concerto: Bartok Divertimento.

The Objects of the Society are the study and dissemination of ethical principles and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment. Any person in sympathy with these objects is cordially invited to become a Member (minimum annual subscription 12s. 6d.). A membership application form will be found on the back cover. THE ETHICAL RECORD (Formerly 'The Monthly Record') Vol. 73. No. 4 APRIL 1968

The views expressed in this journal are not necessarily those of the Society EDITORIAL TUE QUESTION of religion in schools has been subjected to extensive discussion in the past few months —by committees of educationists, of churchmen, of humanists — and there has been a noticeable shift leftward on the part of each group. January saw the publication of the Gittins Report — the Welsh counterpart to England's Plowden — with a condemnation of the compulsory nature of religious instruction and worship in primary education, both because of the effect shown since 1944 of turning the children against religion and because of the inevitable unfairness to atheist and agnostic teachers. The latter point is an important one that had been glossed over in previous official reports. It •is of some importance even in secondary schools, where the teacher who opts out of morning worship may be jeopardising his chances of promotion; but in primary schools, where each class has its own teacher who is normally expected to take the statutory periods of religious instruction in that class, non-Christian teachers are faced with the additional dilemma of (a) imposing on their colleagues by handing their class over to another teacher for this subject (the only statutorily compulsory subject in the school curriculum), (b) breaking •the law by simply letting the provision of religion go by default, or (c) offending against their own moral sense and against the first principle of education itself, by teaching as true something which they do not believe themselves. What price integrity, the honest pursuit of knowledge? No sooner was the Gittins Report printing ink dry, than the British Humanist Association issued an excellent statement on religion in schools, worked out jointly with the National Secular Society and the Humanist Teachers' Association— representing a great step forward, of a unifying (indeed, almost "ecumenical") significance, since 1965, when the B.H.A. collaborated with a group of Christians in producing the pamphlet Religious and Moral Education, which gave away so much of the Humanist case that •the N.S.S. and FLT.A. both dissociated themselves from it and the N.S.S. brought out a rival statement, Religion and Ethics in Schools. The new joint Humanist statement demands the elimination of specific religious indoctrination and its replacement by moral education and teaching about religion. • Meanwhile, a commission of the Church of England is deliberating the same subject, and there is little doubt that it too will be found to have turned against the more bigoted provisions of the 1944 Education Act, through which the Churches sought to impose on children beliefs that adults generally were rejeoting. It is fitting 'that Human Rights Year should witness this attack from all quarters on the law that violates the 'religious freedom of British children and their teachers. 3 Science and Ethics: Challenge and Counter-Challenge BY PROFESSOR H. LEVY

WE ARE pieces of matter with certain properties in common. Each of us individually changes—we call it growth and development—not in isolation, but as members of groups within an all-embracing group we call society. The changes that show themselves in the wider group we refer to as Social Evolution, while the corresponding structural changes and modes of behaviour in the individual we refer to as Human Evolution. At some stage in human evolution man became conscious of his environment ; he acquired a new property of awareness, and therefore of self-consciousness, and of the power of thinking. We know little yet of the nature of the awareness and therefore of the nature of the imagination and of the thinking of other animals, but clearly a dog, for example, has a wide range of discrimination between inanimate objects, insects, cats, men, and other dogs. In a certain sense it is legitimate to say that a dog "knows it is a dog", although it does not appear to express that concept in terms of what we call a language. With us thinking, feeling, judging and valuing lean heavily on language for preci- sion, for detailed discrimination and for communication. More, language, being impregnated with words for images of things, ideas and feelings, existent or latent in the physical world and in the social environment, provides us with the objective material out of which to shape totally new situations, and so the work of the individual craftsman, whether in poetry, in fiction, in logical thinking, or in mental speculation, becomes part of the social heritage to be taken over by the oncoming generation. Strands a Science For language to express common-sense it has to probe into what is common to all, and therefore must formulate its findings into statements that are either true or false, and it must develop criteria that enable us to discriminate between the two. Science is concerned with precisely such propositions, and such criteria about the external physical universe common to us all. Out of this there has emerged three developing and interlocking strands of the total activity we call Science. (0 A technique for seeking to set up situations that are repeatable. This is experimental science, and relies not simply on the naked senses with which Nature has provided us, but also on complex instruments which, like telescopes, microphones, and thermo- meters, are direct extensions of our sense organs. It passes even far beyond this by. providing us with totally new sense organs such as geiger counters, and a multitude of other devices, which enable us to "snoop" on others. T can see no reason why we may not shortly be able to read another's thoughts once the structure of "brain waves" has been decoded. Thus may one aspect of private life become public. Here is a challenge which sooner or later will have to be met. (ii) A body of knowledge about the world around us, formulated not only as propositions that are asserted to be true, along with the limitations within which their truth is asserted, but also arranged in a systematic and logically interconnected fashion so that what is usually referred to as causality manifests itself as a logical necessity. Many of these propositions, as has frequently happened in the past, will challenge anciently held cherished beliefs and the institutions that have been erected to maintain and spread these myths. This is the part of science that challenges falsely based ideologies. A great deal of all this could never have seen the light of day without the kind of symbolism we associate with mathematics. The 4 concept of number is basic, and the logical network that mathematicians have devised is an essential part of the apparatus of prediction that is so characteristic of this sector of science. (iii) Technology, the field of social application of (i) and (ii) above. The Industrial Revolution began while science was relatively speaking quite primitive. Every schoolboy knows practically the whole field of science as it was in the early days of the seventeenth century, but today we have not merely world-wide scientific organisations and academies devoted to specialist studies in the most minute detail, but huge industrial competing firms like Krupps, I.C.I., etc., fighting each other for the recruitment of qualified research workers, with the tax- payer meeting the cost of the trained brain, whether drained or not. The New Industrial Revolution dominates us with its nuclear power, electronics and computers ; and workers at the labouring and artisan level can now almost be brushed aside. Industrially they are becoming obsolete in an age that is potentially one of plenty rather than scarcity ; and this again throws up one of the most formidable of challenges. For capitalist society which has produced this machinery of plenty makes its profits out of the existence of scarcity. Redundancy of whole classes of worker is the beginning of the death of the wage system whose function will no longer be that of remunera- tion for work done, but simply part of the social machinery for the distribu- tion of goods. We are witnessing a challenge posed by technology to the whole obsolete system of capitalism.

The Rest of the Story All this, however, is only half the story. We human beings, having come to understand something of the nature of the physical world, have thereby changed our own environment and therefore ourselves. If in the sciences we ask what is true and what is false about the physical world, we find ourselves also asking what is good and what is bad in individual and social behaviour. A society which strives after what pays best will naturally produce science and technology, but there is little financial profit in nurturing and discover- ing what is felt to be good and what bad. We are well into the Second Industrial Revolution while the First Ethical Revolution has hardly begun. The Ten Commandments, the Old and New Testaments belong to the pre- scientific age. There were no atom bombs, no military rocketry disguised as space research, and no computorised factories. We have "progressed" to the stage of asking whether it is right or wrong to blot out whole cities and hundreds of thousands of human beings at one blow. Science and technology have thrown up a definite challenge to mankind. Has it the ethical capacity to sense its significance, and the will to take the necessary action to implement its judgment? I say mankind deliberately, because science and technology have thrown up a universal challenge to the whole world. Has it the moral stamina and the rational understanding to appreciate the fact that geographical boundaries are now obsolete with the coming of radio, tele- vision and radar ; that disputes between localised governments can no longer be settled by individual or even group combat (the atom bomb which every industrial power will shortly possess will see to that)? What shall it profit a state that it permit any group within it to sell for gain an H-Bomb to any potential enemy? Societies, motivated by profit to individuals and to groups. can move forward only into strife and chaos, and cannot develop in a manner that befits a modern age of planned science and technology. The challenge to mankind is to recognise that ethically it is one, and that science and technology stand ready to be harnessed towards one end, and one only —to meet the needs of a united mankind. (Summary of a lecture given on January 28)

Trust people. Most people are honest, and it is still cheaper to trust them even if they are not. —Prof. C. NORTFICOTE PARKINSON

5 Power Politics and the Moral Law BY DR. JOHN LEWIS

THE QUESTION posed is whether the possession of political power does not. on many occasions appear to rulers to give them the right to set aside the moral law, on the principle that the welfare of the state is the supreme good. This way of looking at the matter, however, really begs the question. There are indeed cases where the moral law is overridden by those in power, with no other excuse than the fact that the possession of state power gives them the right to make their will the only criterion of what is right. Rut there are cases in which political power gives the right to question what many citizens hold to be morally right. When WO years ago the Factory Acts were passed, political power deter- mined to reject what the factory owners regarded as their moral right to work their employees as long as they liked and for what wages they liked, and to employ whom they liked, even children of six or seven-years-old. The Rhodesian tobacco planter believes, on the other hand, that he has a moral right to legislate contrary to what the African natives regard as right. In America it is believed that the state has the right to override the moral scruples of young men who do not feel it right to fight in Vietnam. Some little time ago it was argued that no scientist has the right to set up his private conscience against the requirements of the state and question his employment in making poison gas or atomic bombs. Minorities Has a minority the right to question the authority of the state and opt out of legislation which it thinks an infringement of the moral law? Can we allow people to break laws drawn up to prevent the spread of infection by notifying certain diseases, to control the traffic by the regulature of the Highway Code? In other cases people may well think that what is in their interest is in the interest of everyone: "What is good for General Motors is good for America". We do not, however, concede this right. We believe that the majority is entitled to make and enforce what it regards as being for the good of society or of the great majority. If a minority declares that this is an infringement of personal liberty, the reply may be given that not everyone's liberty is being infringed—only the liberty of the minority which is contrary to that of the majority. Denial of the liberty to exercise economic power may secure other liberties for the many—their freedom to work, their freedom from want, their right to security. Objection to this state intervention overlooks the liberty of the millions whose liberty is enlarged by interference with the privileges of the few. Nevertheless, it must never be forgotten that the objecting minority may he right, and what they demand for themselves may be for the benefit of all. The majority is not always right. Hence any legislation that is passed against the opinion of a minority must always remain open for later revision and present criticism. (Summary of a lecture given on January 21)

I believed only thus far in life after death; that if I were killed some of my works —my own creations, pictures, books —might live on a few years after me, that the love of living people would do the same, and that my child and her descendants would move and talk and feel a little like me after I was dead. -PETER SCOTT : The Eye of the Wind 6 The Dangers of "Detachment" in Social Studies

PROFESSOR T. H. PEAR

IN THE last two decades the nature and degree of the relations of an author, scientific researcher or medical practitioner towards "his" material have often been considered from many standpoints. Technical terms are detachment, commitment, ego-involvement, alienation, "positive" treatments, tfansference (positive and negative), empathy and opting out. Certain assumptions in these writings cannot go unexamined. One is that social studies, such as sociology, anthropology, psychology and economics, though they must at first be based on the experience and behaviour of individual persons, must turn such records into "facts" suitable for conceptualisation, quantification, measurement and statistical treatment. Seldom are individual persons taken into serious account in many articles and books published in English and described as "sociological". Yet even if man in "insignificant and ephemeral"—one physicist's view—the sciences which deal with "non-man" are produced by human brains. Is there a risk that, since many social scientists are appearing to be so impersonal and detached, non-social scientists may come to regard them as conveniently detachable in practice? Years ago the Royal Society declared that it would not concern itself with socially interesting studies. The establish- ment of the Social Science Research Council was opposed for many years. An objection may be heard that the attitude of the questing scientist must be detached, otherwise he would forfeit the name of scientist. But it depends on what you mean by science, a philosophical issue which is by no means dead. Space Research—and Nearer Home A spectacular exhibition of apparent detachment from man and his needs was given in the discussion "Escape into Space?" at the 1967 meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. I was present, and heard the whole of the (unedited) exchange. There were nine speakers oh the panel ; all world-famed. Some of the professional space-researchers admitted at the outset that their investigations would not have been rendered possible if they had had little importance for war, industry or national prestige. (Such frankness was rare 20 years ago.) A public admission, this, of non-detachment. Thc programme stated: The race (between the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R.) is now to get to the moon by 1970. The expenditure by the "Space nations" is prodigious—the combined total must be over 0,000,000,000 a year. Space programmes provide livelihoods for hundreds of thousands of workers and attractive inducements for scientists and technologists. There are, at the same time, misgivings.... It is suggested that the Space Cult is "warping science" by over-financing some disciplines at the expense of others.... It is argued that the expendi- tures on space research are disproportionate in terms of thc needs on this planet; that it is diverting human ingenuity which could help to solve urgent world problems; and that it is an "escape into Space" from responsibility. -As the discussion heated up, the lack of detachment in the scientists was very noticeable. One biologist, however, expressed disapproval of the use of human beings in missiles: a view not shared by the allegedly detached scientists. Though, throughout the discussion, human values and needs were often acknowledged, there was no representative of social studies on the panel: this.risk had been "escaped". The attitude of some speakers seemed

7 to be that so long as they could get financial support, and this was undoubted, they would investigate what they liked, by methods chosen by themselves, and that other people might as well resign themselves to this state of affairs. (This view was not shared subsequently by Dr. Edmund Leach in his Reith lectures, "A Runaway World") "Detachment" may have several meanings. The assertion that the moon became detached from our earth is clear, but how detached are surgeons who transplant a heart and persevere in spite of repeated failures? Are they oblivious to the possibility of increasing national prestige, and the certainty of social and material reward? They can at least claim, as space-researchers seldom can, that they are desirous of benefiting mankind—though the phrase is unfashionable nowadays. A social anthropologist's detachment ("some do and some don't") is understandable, in view of the fact that "going native" may be viewed by some as a slip from grace, and by others (or by the same person at another time) as a legitimate attempt to increase empathic insight. Dr. Leach's alternations of detachment and involvement made his lectures more exciting to hear, but often puzzling. Perhaps he likes it this way. I am not alone in observing a tendency of many social scientists to write in abstractions when a few concrete examples might well be vouchsafed. Eminent living sociologists have written "Sociology is about other people"; "In sociology we slum" ; and they have urged their colleagues to show more empathy with their "subjects-. But today "sociology" often covers studies which would more accurately be called social psychology, and this should be remembered in considering the criticisms mentioned above.

Personal Recollections May I describe how I came to see the risks of "detachment" in many branches of psychology? At school, on two separate occasions, I. heard discussions between masters. Considering subjects offered for university examinations, a dedicated physicist contemptuously dismissed "Logicand- psychology" (I think that for him this was one word) as a "refuge for the destitute". In another group, one master asked "How do you think?" and was answered "In words, of course", but he objected "In pictures". There could have been few hints in my school education that individual mental differences were important, theoretically and practically. At the university I studied physics and chemistry, accepting the sharp distinction—it seemed obvious then—between "pure" and "applied" science. (Nobody told me about the life of Leonardo da Vinci.) I was pleased that personal considerations did not complicate these sciences, and psychology attracted me probably because its investigations were usually carried out with apparatus borrowed from physics. The phrase "ivory laboratory" was still uncoined. In WUrzburg I took part in experiments on thinking and musical appreciation, considered impersonally. In Manchester I would spend happy days in the dark room, observing entoptic phenomena and after- sensations of colour and movement. I came to suspect that pupillary-width might be brought under voluntary control as a result of conditioning, and this would become a personal ability. In World War I, I realised in military mental hospitals that images, hallucinations, dreams, delusions and obsessions happened to persons and must be studied in unique contexts. Obsession with minute details of proce- dure might be commoner in a senior N.C.O. of a crack regiment than in a British equivalent of Private Angelo. After returning .from hospital to university, I found that my chief interest was in healthy persons and their social relations. The lack of osmosis between some sub-departments of social studies has attracted American novelists. Alison Lurie, in Imaginary Friends (Heinemann, '1967), though seizing the novelist's privilege of highlighting, 8 affords food for thought by investigators who are unlikely to write novels. Professor A, author of a classic of descriptive sociology, and a walking proof that social scientists can be human beings, is regarded by some younger students as having compiled case-histories and somewhat simple- minded social diagnoses of "nuts and sluts". In contrast, his colleague Professor B implies that the old-fashioned non-specialised so-called humanis- tic social scientist is becoming extinct. There are, however, sceptics who regard B as a walking I.B.M. machine for processing other people's raw data, and not really interested in anything less than 100 cases: the "Numbers Racket". Professor C, an obviously academic intellectual, is almost unaware of how prejudice feels when you're at the receiving end. So a student might ask "Can you remain scientifically objective in a social study, or must you risk becoming emotionally involved?" 1 have had many opportunities to observe detached attitudes in colleagues (by no means all) who were studying physical sciences, medicine, and, of course, history. Perhaps sociology has attracted investigators who regard differences between persons as rather a nuisance—suitable only for treatment by novelists, biographers and gossip columnists—and resemblances as being more important, since they provide easier bases for concept-formulation. It has been said that Freud was less interested in an individual patient than in the reciprocal interplay of the hypothesised Ego, Id and Super-Ego, while Adler's title for his approach—Individual Psychology — speaks for itself. (Summary of a lecture given on January 14) Hume and Ethics

MAURICE CRANSTON, M.A.

HUNIE was the most completely sceptical moralist of the eighteenth century. It at indeed his scepticism which puts him at odds with Voltaire and other leading philosophers of his time. Whereas the French ahilosophes put forward a modified form of religion, upholding belief in the Supreme Being in place of belief in God, and a modified form of natural law ethics, stressing the rights rather than the duties of man, Hume suspended judgement entirely on the question of the existence of a deity, and put forward a theory of ethics based on nothing but utility. Hume explained the origin of the idea of justice among men as a conse- quence of the existence of scarcity in the state of nature. The life of man on earth was characterised from the first by shortage. There was not enough to go round ; so men had the choice of fighting over the little there was, and probably dying in the process, or of working together to improve the scarce resources of nature, each respecting what others accumulated. Thus Hume said that the notion of justice must have arisen with the institution of property. Hume rejected the myth of a social contract as the basis of society, but he nevertheless argued that a sense of common interest reduced men from their earliest contact with one another to regulate their conduct by certain rules. Each observes that it will be to his interest to leave his neighbour in the possession of his goods provided that he will act in the same manner in return. They are like two men who pull the oars of a boat. A shared interest drives them to act in concert. The idea, prevalent in the Age of Reason, that morals rested on benevolence was unacceptable to Hume. He said that benevolence in itself was far too weak to compete with the passion of self-love or avidity. The only passion strong enough to restrain self-interest was self-interest itself,

9 enlightened and altered in its direction. It is when men understand that they can gratify their appetites better in a system of ordered society than they can gratify them amid the violence of universal anarchy, that their self- interest itself becomes the foundation of morality. As self-interest is man's strongest passion, it makes civil society secure. It was this chain of reasoning which led Hume to utter his famous remark: "Reason is, and ought to be, the slave of the passions". Reason, Hume argued, was only a faculty. It could show us how to realise what we desire, but desire itself was not part of reason. Reason was not the seat of man's generosity or probity or courage any more than it was the seat of his cowardice or meanness or untruthfulness. Passion prompts a man to act charitably towards a friend in need, and reason tells him how to execute such an act. Reason is thus the tool of the sentiments or, in Hume's more colourful language, "the slave of the passions". It was a mistake, Hume suggested, to talk of a conflict between reason and passion. The conflicts which take place within a man arc conflicts between one passion and another. Sonic passions are calm and tranquil ; and the mistake that was made by theorists was to confuse the operations of calm passions with the operation of reason itself. What was called strength of mind was really the prevalence of the calm passions over the violent passions. Violent passions were harmful because they blinded man to his own self-interest. Thc calm passion of cool self love prompted a man to obey rules which were in his own interest as much as in the interest of everyone else. Political Implications Humes moral teaching had political implications which he was not slow to elucidate. The propertyless mob in the modern world appeared to him as a collection of men governed, or apt to be governed, by violent passions ; therefore Hume disapproved of democracy. The ownership of property, correspondingly, he saw as a good school in self-control and the practice of cool self-love. Thus Hume favoured the kind of political system in which legislation was confined to an aristocracy of property-owners, much as it was in fact in eighteenth-century England. He certainly did not share the hankerings of Voltaire and the French philosoplies for enlightened despo- tism any more than he shared the enthusiasm of Locke and the English Whigs for the doctrine of Natural Rights. Hume was a conservative for another reason. Since there was no possible knowledge of God or the Moral Law, he thought it was a fortunate thing that most men in their daily conduct we.e guided by tradition, custom and habit ; for tradition, custom and habit embodied for the most part the kind of rules which men had found by experience to be advantageous to society as a whole. Doubt was a very proper attitude for a philosopher, but Hume had no wish to impose (in the fashion of Humanis-ts of the twentieth century) the burden of doubt on thc young and the ignorant. (Summary of a lecture given on February II)

Who Said That?

"The sanctions of Sinai have lost their terrors, and people no longer accept the authority of Jesus even as a great moral teacher. Robbed of its supranatural supports, men find it difficult to take seriously a code of living that confessedly depended on them. 'Why shouldn't I?' or 'What's wrong with it?' are questions which in our generation press for an answer. And supranaturalist reasons — that God or Christ has pronounced it 'a sin' — have force, and even meaning, for none but a diminishing religious remnant." (mp tot Inning) tlaMoom Jo dottspa 'uosuicioN urpf : lamsuy 10 The Population Explosion

JACK PARSONS

Tins is not a new phenomenon in history: the world population explosion started about 1650 ; the ancients warned us about the possibility ; many writers before Malthus dealt with the topic, and Malthus himself was about 150 years behind the times. Nor is it just a problem concerning the Indian peasants or "the underdeveloped world"; it is a world problem affecting us all, including Britain (as the graph shows). Our own population explosion started over 200 years ago and shows no sign of stopping. The earth took about 5,000 million years to produce its first 1,000 million humans (by 1830 AD.); the second billion appeared in 100 years (1930), and the third in 30 years (1960). By about 2000 A.D. the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh billions are expected, and the last of these will have taken about five years. If we look at population doubling-times, we see that while the time of each doubling has gone down from about 75,000 years, before the invention of agriculture, to about 32 years at the present day, the size of each doubling has gone up from a few millions to 3,1 (American) billions. Except during the great plagues, the population of Britain has never stopped growing rapidly since the Domesday Survey, since when it has doubled nearly six times. It has been "exploding" for more than two

vkiia ; Britain I I 60 mithor? I I PO Lachor> rowth: X World and BriLain Companz. 3,000 -nithion 50 milfloo

40 million

2,000 30 trillion

20 mittion

1,000 milorf

10 macro • f e

13eLtc0.0

1000 1500 . 2000 Years A .D. centuries now, and during this time has never grown at less than .+% a year —the rate during the great population scare of the 1930s. This may seem a negligible increase, but in fact it means the population doubles every four life spans—and this clearly cannot be sustained for more than a brief moment of human history. Britain's present growth-rate is about I% a year, giving a doubling-time of one-and-a-half life spans, and this means that, without catching up on the housing backlog or allowing for any improvements in design or increases in the standard of living, we shall have to build the equivalent of 70 new Nottinghams or Cardiffs in the next 32 years. Sir Donald Gibson, President of the Royal Institute of British Architects, asserts that the number of buildings in Britain must be doubled in this period—and the building industry of Britain is already "almost in a state of total war". Even now, at the start of this new urban cancer, population density in England and Wales (800 per square mile) is the highest in Europe with the sole exception of Holland (900 per square mile)—a country so concerbed about its balance of land and people that for centuries and at enormous cost it has been carving more space from the sea. Our population is denser even than Japan's (650 per square mile), more than twice that of India, and six times that of China —all three normally thought of as grossly overpopulated countries.

Biological Compound Interest What is not generally appreciated is that population tends to grow with compound interest whilst production—including food—tends to grow with simple interest. Malthus pointed this out in 1798, and his analysis was basically correct. Biological systems tend to—and, where the environment permits, actually do—grow at fantastic rates of compound interest. All human beings start off as two cells, one from each parent, which then fuse into one. This then divides into two daughter cells, each of which divides into two again and again. After nine months, and about 37 doublings, an individual built up of an estimated 350 billion cells emerges. (At present, on the world stage, this little drama is enacted 225 times every minute.) A human being is in a sense a population or colony of cells, and a process very similar to the one which makes him is going on in the earth's total colony of human beings, except that the built-in mechanism for slowing down and eventually terminating growth without catastrophe seems to be missing. To take a concrete example: two human infants starting all alone in the world with an instinct to double themselves as the cells do (that is, to have a family of four surviving children) could repopulate Britain to its present level in 600 years, the whole world to today's level in 750 years, and completely cover the earth's land surface with human flesh in 1,200 years. Many people deny these basic facts or attempt to explain them away with the same few sad little fallacies. I wish I had space to deal with them all, but a few words about the most prevalent and most pernicious will have to suffice—the fallacy of productivity. People often admit there is a population problem but argue that it can, must, and will be dealt with by raising the production of food and other goods and services. This is fallacious in two ways, one logical and the other factual. It is logically impossible to increase productivity infinitely on a finite earth, so that population growth must stop one day, and in reality this must be soon. As for the practical fallacy, let us take as evidence the past performance of the world's economic and scientific machine since the Industrial Revolution—a revolution of productivity above all else. It is impossible to get experts to agree about what constitutes an adequate food supply, but it seems likely that about half the world's population is not properly fed, so that our modern society is producing one underfed human being for every one properly fed. Is this progress? Is this the goal we are aiming for—level-pegging? Can we concentrate on the ratio and ignore the 12 numbers. involved ; must we not note the elemental fact that the total number of people now alive and underfed is three-and-a-half times the total population of the world, fed and underfed combined, at the time the Scientific and Industrial Revolution started 300 years ago?

Food Situation Worsening If anyone can look at the evidence and still think that we are forging ahead with production and will do even better in the future, the words of Dr. Sen, Director-General of the FAD., in his 1967 report should disabuse him: Any remaining complacency about the food and agricultural situation must surely have been dispelled by the events of the past year. . . . World food production . . was no larger in 1965/66 than the year before, when there were about 70 million less people to feed. But for good harvests in North America world food production must almost certainly have declined. In fact, in each of the developing regions except the Near East, food production is estimated to have fallen by 2% in total and by 4 to 5% . per caput. . . Thus the food situation is now more precarious than at any time since the acute shortage after the war ... [and this] comes after a long period in which production has only barely kept up with the rapidly mounting population. Optimism beyond this point—that somehow, even now, the earth will be made to yield three times as much food within 30 years, so that a doubled population could be adequately fed—is surely pathological. Even if it were possible to produce the food—and the effort is not even being made—by means of more pesticides, farming the sea, controlling the weather, and so forth, this would require a modification of the environment on so huge a scale that the delicate balance of nature could be changed in such a way as to make the earth uninhabitable by man. There are five possible outcomes for this calamitous state of affairs: (I) Natural, man-made or extra-terrestrial catastrophes on a totally unprecedented scale; though even these could afford only temporary relief unless they exterminated us. The sudden manifestation in man of innate biosocial mechanisms for population regulation, similar to those found in many other species, of which there is no sign. Control by intelligent and humane means by democratic societies. (Time is getting very short for this.) Control by ruthless authoritarian elites whose only criteria would be efficiency and self-interest. "Natural" limitation of population, by the age-old mechanisms of ruination of the environment, famine, violence, and disease. There is little doubt which choice a Humanist must make. A really aged Briton has seen our national population double. A middle- aged man has seen the world population double, and might very well live to see it double again. This state of affairs has been brought about by "death control"—the development and use of modern medicine—and if this process is not to go into reverse, there must be population control, or chaos. There can be no question whether, but only when and by what means. (Summary of talk given in Conway Discussions on January 16)

Man comes into life to seek and find his sufficient beauty, to serve it, to win and increase it, to light for it, to face anything and bear anything for it, counting death as nothing so long as the dying eyes still turn to it. And fear and dullness and indolence and appetite— which indeed are no more than fear's three crippled brothers— who make ambushes and creep by night, are against him, to hold him off, to hamper and beguile and kill him in that quest. — H. G. WELLS : The History of Mr. Polly

13 Book Review The Outsider's View Patterns of Sectarianism: Organization and Ideology in Social and Religious Movements, edited by Bryan R. Wilson (Heinemann, 1967; 63s.)

HUMANISTS may be horrified to find their movement studied along with the Pentecostalists, the Exclusive Brethren, the British Israelites, and five other more or less bizarre sects. There we are, though excluded from the sectarian movements, and by way of contrast. The study is a contribution to the established sociology of religion, and the editor, well known for his work in this field, is author of one of the last titles in the New Thinker's Library, Religion in Secular Society. The last chapter is by Susan Budd, with the title "The Humanist Societies: the Consequences of a Diffuse Belief System". Mrs. Budd attended meetings of South Place and other Ethical Societies and of the N.S.S. groups, read extensively in the literature of the movement, and examined the records. Her territory included the R.P.A., and her chapter generalises from her experience of all three branches of the movement. Her title states the theme: she is concerned to describe the effects on the charac- ter and oranisation of the movement of vagueness and uncertainty in its beliefs, goaffls, and methods. She notes the division or oscillation between a religious orientation (even if anti-religious) and a political orientation, with the tendency of the religious and anti-religious to fade out and the political to hive off—recently exemplified by Lady Wootton's resignation from the B.H.A. because of its political line. She concludes that the movement is held together in spite of indefinite aims by a "strong protective ideology" which rationalises internal conflict as itself healthy and valuable—humanism is the toleration and encouragement of free thought, argument, disagreement. This of course is an outsider's view, and in this case the view of an outsider trained to bring to bear on her own observations a fund of sociological comparisons. She has seen the game but she has not played it. Some of_her statements are dubious, but most of what she says can hardly be challenged. All the same, the all-important things are missing because she was not in a position to say them: the unformulated content of the older ethical movement which informed and inspired its adherents, the explicit and developed, and proclaimed, if personal ideas and ideals of its leaders, the active social con.science that kept the movement always in contact with "progressive- social action. These were always stronger manifestations of "ethical ideology" than correspondence columns in the journals or discussions at the end of meetings. Also it is the crystallised past at which Mrs. Budd has been looking, in effect, not the drives and trends in the present fluid movement. Indeed, the chapter might well be retitled: "The Consequences of a Diffuse Study of thc Humanist Societies". H..1. BLACKHASI

"But the besetting sin of the unbeliever is credulity . . . ." said MARGHANITA LASKI in the 1967 Conway Memorial Lecture, "The Secular Responsibility"

the text of which is available as a booklet from Conway Hall at 2s. plus 3d. postage.

14 To the Editor

Religious?

As a neo-positivist (yet a Life Member of R.P.A.' B.H.A. and S.P.E.S.), I •was interested in the letters in the February ad March numbers of ri The Ethical Record criticising the use of the word "religious" in the brief Objects of the Society. The originators of a word, and most of its users, may not be aware of its real significance. once framed the definition "Religion is a fusion of human energies subordinate to the highest duty of man". To the theist, this is "God", to whom man is responsible. One who denies this is an atheist, but he may still have the same urge— the paramount sense of duty to Humanity — and 'believe that others should 'have the same. One may accept "religion- in this sense without necessarily becoming a Comtist. So leave the wording of the S:P.E.S. Objects alone! F. L. GLASER London, N.W.2

Stefan Tara's suggested alternative to "the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment" is splendid. R is because af the wording of the official Objects of S.P.E.S. that I am only an Associate of the Society instead of the full member I would certainly be if the wording were "the cultivation of a rational secular outlook". I should like to take this opportunity to say how much I enjoy reading your bright and penetrating editorials even when on occasion I may not be quite in agreement with them. MARION °MATS Liverpool, 9

Your readers who have been attacking the use of the word "religious" in our Objects should consider the point of view that Miss Marghanita Laski put forward in her Conway 'Memorial Lecture, The Secular Responsibility: "... to ask whether a religion is true is no more useful than asking whether a bicycle is true. The first question should be 'Does it work?' ". Without the power of inner compulsion (or "impulsion", if there is such a word), even a Humanist or Ethical movement just won't be able to move, any more than a motor-car without petrol. Now, a good name for such inner power in human beings and human societies is "religion", so that "a 'rational religious sentiment" should be an acceptable description of a necessary element of our raison d'etre as an Ethical Society. Neither "moral" nor "secular" expresses the idea of an inner power. If the heart stops beating, the mind becomes useless! ROBERT I-1. CORRICK East Molesey, Surrey

Legal Luminaries The March Record allocates letter space to the defence of chief justices and public prosecutors. Since when did these bureaucrats in •the law industry require defending in a humanist journal? The Editor's comments in the January issue are quite acceptable tb many readers. Those who feel such kinship with the legal luminaries as to side with them against her should take their unworthy cause elsewhere. H. MCCORMACK London, N.W.4

I5 Bulgaria :Hurray for the Bulgars! For according to your correspondent L. Camerman, they "have closed the door to many an epidemic invading Europe" from lands beyond the Dardanelles. And yet, poor Bulgars! The bedrooms in their newly built hotels "stank of hor.se-manure and similar smells" left by the hordes of Turks, Arabs, Iranians, Indians and Chinese who insist on visiting 'Bulgaria. I avonder how Mr. Camerman could tell that the offending •parties were always from beyond the Dardanelles? G. N. DEODFIEKAR London, W.10

Immigration Law The National Secular Society adds its voice to those who are protesting against the Commonwealth Immigrants Act, directed against Kenyan Asians. There can be no question but that the Act is racially inspired, and represents a victory for those politicians who are cashing in on the anxiety and prejudice which exist in certain industrial cities. Insofar as this anxiety is rational and not irrational, it is based on issues of housing, employment and education. As more people emigrate from 'than immigrate to Britain every year, failure to solve these problems is clearly not created by an overwhelming influx but by government ineptitude. There are certain areas where temporary difficulties are caused in schools when substantial numbers of Asian children arrive because most of them do not understand English, but this problem does not arise here as the Kenyan Asians all speak English. We believe the new law is wrong because it is morally objectionable, in discriminating among British subjects and citizens solely on the grounds of colour; self-defeating, in raising anxieties about citizenship status and provok- ing migration which might otherwise not have occurred; illegal. It isn't just that the measure is contrary to the spirit of the United Nations, the International Declaration of Human Rights and Human Rights Year. The people concerned have British passports, identical with those of citizens of the United Kingdom, under an agreement entered into when Kenya gained independence in 1963. We know that the present Government has often repudiated its own pledges. let alone those of its predecessors; but the issue is not one of promise or privilege that can be revoked: it is a question of private international law, likely to create stateless persons and every bit as illegal as the initial action of Hitler over German gypsies and Jews. DAVID TRIBE President, National Secular Society London, S.E.1

Off the Record Tweedledum Outdoes Tweedledee In 1965 1 ventured to predict in this journal that having a substantial Labour majority in Parliament would make no practical difference to the country at all, since a Labour government would take precisely the same courses of action as a Conservative one, whatever they might promise before getting to power. In view of the recent highly unethical Commonwealth Immigration Act, I must now apologise for the inaccuracy of this prediction: no Conservative government would have dared to introduce such a measure in the face of Labour opposition. B. S. 16 South Place News New Members We are pleased to welcome the following new members in the Society: P. R. Connor (Hemel Hempstead), P. Dansey (Burgh Heath), (Mrs. A. Eisner-Heublunn (N.W.6), C. J. George (S. Croydon), N. Gould (N.W.6), E. R. Grenda (N.3), M 0. Hill (N.5), T. A. Kelly (N:W.6), Melville Kress (Tennessee), S. E. Parker (W.2), 1'. E. Perry (Enfield), H. Shayler (N.5), Mrs..M. Walsh (Axminster), G. W. Weston (Carlisle), Mrs. M. E. Williams (W.9). Development Fund Donations We gratefully acknowledge the following further donations to the Development Fund: Mr. Saunders £2, J. C. Rapley LI 10s., Mrs. Mitchell if Is., A. H. finnis 12s 6d., L. Kearton Parker 10s., C. Rawlinson 7s. 6d., Mrs. NI. Clowes 2s. 6d., A. Gainswin 2s. 6d., A. 0. Hooper 2s. 4d. All who value the work of the Society are urged to send donations, addressed to the Hon. Treasurer at Conway Hall Humanist Centre, and specifying the Development Fund. Obituary We have learned with great regret of the death last September of Mr. H. L. Bullock of Bristol, a member of S.P:E.S. for over thirty years. He had worked as National Officer of •the National Union of General and Municipal Workers, (during the 1940's) and •at that time lived in London, when he became an esteemed member of the S.P.E.S. General Committee. Annual General Meeting Our A.G.M. will be held in the library at Conway Ball on Wednesday, May 29, at 7 p.m. Any member 'wishing to have a motion on the agenda should submit the motion via the Secretary so as to reach him by April 2. There are eight vacancies (seven •for three years, one for one year) to be filled on the General Committee, and nominations for these should reach the Secretary by Sunday, April 28, in accordance with the Rules of the Society. Candidates, who must have been members of the Society for a minimum period of twelve months, must be nominated by two members of the Society and must have agreed.to serve on the Committee if elected. Nomination forms may be obtained from the Secretary at Conway Hall. The nominees are also requested to provide biographical notes of not more than 50 words. Thursday Social As an experiment, largely with the idea of bringing into Conway Hall lonely people living or working in the area, there is to be an evening social on one Thursday each month, rather on the lines of the monthly Sunday Social. The first of these evening socials will take place on Thursday. April 25. (See •page 19 for details.) Easter Ramble Saturday, April 13— An all-day Easter walk in the Stour Valley. Meet at Victoria Station to catch 9.40 a.m, train to Herne Bay (fare 19s. CD. return), arriving at 11.15 a.m. Walk via Hoath to Upstreet for picnic lunch, then to East •Stourmouth and the tow-path to Minster. Catch bus to Cliftonville for tea with Humanist Holiday party. Return from Margate (pay excess). Walking distance about 12 miles; expenses about 35s. (Bring own lunch.) All Humanists are invited to join this walk. Leader: B. 0. Warwick.

17 Kindred Organisations Two humanist happenings on Saturday, April 6: in the afternoon, from 2 p.m., a sale organised by Sutton Humanist Group in aid of the Agnostics Adoption Society is being held at the Adult School, Benhill Avenue, Sutton; in the evening, the National Secular Society holds its Human Rights Year Dinner at the Paviour's Arms, S.W.1, with after- dinner speeches by Renee Short, M.P., John Mortimer, Q.C., Peter Jackson, M.P., Miss Jocelyn Barrow, and David Tribe (compere). The next N.S.S. Public Forum is on •the subject of Divorce, one of the speakers being Marjorie ,Proops, and is to be held on April 18 at Conway Hall. (See page opposite for f urther details.) The Rationalist Press Association's Annual Dinner will be held in the House of Commons on Friday, June 28, when the speakers will include the Baroness Wootton, Lord Ritchie Calder, and Dr. David Kerr, M.P. Tickets at 30s. from 88 Islington High Street, NI The R.P.A. has also announced an essay competition with prizes granted from the F. C. C. Watts Memorial Fund. The subject is "The Knowledge Explosion", and entries (of not more than 2,000 words) should be received at •he above address by June 30. Unfortunately for some of us, there is an age limit of 30—and entries have to state the age,. There may still be a few vacancies for the Easter Humanist Holiday Centre (for all ages) at Cliftonville, Kent, from April 11 to 20 (or odd days). Enquiries to Mrs. M. Mepham, 29 Fairview Road, Sutton, Surrey. On Easter Saturday, our own ramblers (see page 17) will meet the holiday- makers, and on Easter Sunday local freethinkers will join them for an informal discussion. • A weekend course on "Moral Education of the Child at Home and at School" is to be held at Pendley Manor from June 14 to 16, the lecturers being Mr. Fl. J. Blackham, Mrs. Bet Charrington, and Dr. James Hemming (all active in the B.H.A.), and Mrs. Mary Walters (lecturer in liberal studies). Bookings (with 10s. of the £4 fee) to the Warden, Pendley Manor, Tring, Herts. The B.H.A. is holding a social at 13 Prince of Wales Terrace, W.8, on Saturday, April 27, at 8 p.m. The latest local Humanist group to be opened is Kingston and Merton Humanists, who will be meeting at the Community Hall, St. Georges Street, Wimbledon, on Friday, April 5 at 8 p.m. The secretary is Mrs. S. Ward, Flat 4, 37 The Avenue, Surbiton. The Student Humanist Federation is proposing to publish as a book the proceedings of its 1968 Annual Conference on the subject of "Drugs" — actually, soft drugs— when the speakers included Francis Huxley, Dr. Jerome Liss, Tony Smythe, David Pedley, Prof. Francis Camps, and Steve Abrams. They pretty .unanimously came to •much •the same conclusions as those put forward by the Editor of this journal ten months ago, when four readers took strong exception to her views. In advance of the book's appearance, a brief outline has been produced as a factual four-page leaflet, Going to Pot?—available from •the 5.1-LF., 13 Prince of Wales Terrace, W.8. COMING AT CONWAY HALL

Tuesday, April 2 6.45 p.m.—Conway Discussion* Wednesday, April 3 7.30 p.m.—Central London Fabian Society Sunday, April 7 11 a.m.—S.P.E.S. lecture* by H. J. Blackham, B.A. 2.30 p.m.—Discussion of morning lecture 6.30 p.m.—Concert* Monday, April 8 7.30 p.m.—Society for Friendship with Bulgaria: films, slides, music Tuesday, April 9 645 p.m.—Conway Discussion* Wednesday, April 10 7 p.m.—S.P.E.S. Meditation Class for Beginners 7.30 p.m.—Central London Fabian Society : Brian Lapping of The Financial Times on "More Power to the People- Friday - Sunday, April 12-14 From 10 a.m.—Socialist Party of Great Britain: Annual Conference Wednesday, April 17 7.30 p.m.—Central London Fabian Society: The Rt. Hon. John Silkin, P.C., M.P., Chief Whip, on "Parliamentary Reform" Thursday, April 18 7 p.m.—S.P.E.S.Whist Drive; members and friends welcome. (Light refreshments will be served) Friday, April 19 12.30 to 2.30 p.m.—N.P.C. "Spotlight on World Affairs" luncheon; lecture, 1 p.m., "The Lesson of Hiroshima", by a survivor. (Light refreshments available) Saturday, April 20 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.—National Peace Council Forum 3 to 6 p.m.—Country Dancing (S.P.E.S. and P.L.) for all over age 14. No upper age limit, and beginners welcome. Plimsolls or light pumps to be worn, please. Instructress: Eda Collins. (Admission 2s. members, 3s. non-members: tea obtainable) 7 to 11 p.m.—Holiday Fellowship Dance (admission 5s.) Sunday, April 21 11 a.m.—S.P.E.S lecture* by Richard Clements, O.B.E. 2 p.m.—Discussion of morning lecture 3 p.m.—S.P.E.S. Sunday Social in the library. Tea will be served at 3.45, after which Miss Rose Perry will speak on "Berlin— East and West", with slides. Members and friends welcome. 6.30 p.m.—Concert* Tuesday. April 23 6.45 p.m.—Conway Discussion* Wednesday, April 24 7 p.m.—S.P.E.S. Meditation Class for Beginners 8 p.m.—Connolly Association: Commemoration of the centenary of •the birth of James Connolly, Irish patriot and socialist Thursday, April 25 7.30 p.m.—S.P.E.S. Thursday Social: H. G. Knight on "China", with slides. All welcome (Light refreshments will be served) 7.30 p.m.—British Mensa: Prof. Jack Cohen on "World Population: The Responsibility of the Biologist" Saturday. April 27 2 - 10 p.m.—Display by the Gillian School of Dancing Sunday, April 28 11 a.m.—S.P.E.S. lecture* by Maurice Cranston. MA. 2.30 p.m.—Discussion of morning lecture 6.30 p.m.—Concert* Tuesday, April 30 6.45 p.m.—Conway Discussion*

* See inside front cover for details

19 South Place Ethical Society FOUNDED in 1793, the Society is a progressive movement which today advocates an ethical humanism, the study and dissemination of ethical principles based on humanism, and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment free from all theological dogma. 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 Asso- ciates receive the Society's journal, The Ethical Record, free. The Sunday Evening Chamber Music Concerts founded in 1887 have achieved international renown. Services available to members include the Naming Ceremony of Welcome to Chil- dren, the Solemnisation of Marriage, and Memorial and Funeral Services.

The Story of South Place, by S. K. Ratcliffe is a history of the Society and its interesting development within liberal thought. Minimum subscriptions are: Members, 12s. 6d. p.a.; Life Members, £13 2s. 6d. It helps the Society's officers if members pay their subscriptions by Bankers' 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 to be found in the Annual Report.

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM

To THE HON. REGISTRAR, SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SociETy, CONWAY HALL HUMANIST CENTRE, RED LION SQUARE, LONDON, W.C.1 Being in sympathy with the aims of South Place Ethical Society, I desire to become a Member and enclose entitling me (according to the Rules of the Society) to membership for one year from the date of enrolment.

NAME (BLOCK LEITERS PLEASE)

ADDRESS

OCCUPATION (disclosure optional)

How Dm You HEAR OF Tile Somer., ?

DATE SIGNATURE

The Ethical Record is posted free to members. The annual charge to subscribers is 8s. Matter for publication should reach the Editor, Miss Barbara Smoker, 6 Stanstead Grove, S.E.6. by the 5th of the preceding month.

David Neil & Company, Dorking, Surrey