The Ethical Record Vol. 89 No. 2 FEBRUARY 1 984

EDITORIAL of hand—no clear-cut issues, no Think, Discuss, Define wide enough consensus. But it is IN THE STREAM of information winter and the weather dithers cold about events that assails those of or wet; days are too short. us who believe we keep (even a Of course decisions are being little) abreast of those events and made, based on assumptions about the news, can we deduce in what the needs of people, about their direction 1984, advancing apace, is nature and, sometimes, tentatively, going? What happenings will on the future. These decisions will become the historical bench- in fact, seriatim, determine what marks? Can we discern the valid happens (that's why such things are from the outpourings about some so important—though it does not non-event, distinguish the accuracy mean that what is is intended to of the optimistic or pessimistic happen will do so). prognostications? At South Place we have the self- It is bad enough looking back imposed duty to think; helped by and trying to determine what was the most able lecturers we are able of importance in the past—or to to muster: maybe to define con- look forward to try to predict cepts, elucidate situations, explore likely developments. In the test- attitudes, correlate information, tube of actuality itself, the suggest necessary actions. This (chemical) reactions are too close issue contains a number of contri- and confusing! butions of importance in this On the economic front, hints of respect—both from lecturers and "revivals" are made, then with- by members: and, at the meetings, drawn; fears of disasters appear discussions continue to be lively and fade again; in politics a feel- and, largely, coherent—lecturers ing grows that things are often out Concluded on page 2

CONTENTS Coming to Conway Hall: Tom Evans, Joan Freedman, Peter Hcales, Stephen Houseman, Marcia Saunders Anthony Smith, Barbara Smoker, Harry Stopes-Roe . 2 Human Scale in Philosophy: Peter Heales • 3 What is this Third World?: Nicholas Hyman . 8 From the Honorary Representative: Ray Lovecy . 9 From the Secretary: Elizabeth Sutton . 10 Viewpoints: Betty and Sam Beer, Peter Cadogan, Cohn Mills, R. C. Proctor, George Watford . 12-15

The views expressed in this journal are not necessarily those of the Society. Microfilm and reprints available—details on request.

PUBLISHED BY THE SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY CONWAY HALL, RED LION SQUARE, WC1R 4RL Telephone: 01-242 8032 (Answering machine out of hours)

SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY

Appointed Lecturers: H. J. Blackham, Lord Brockway, Richard Clements, OBE, T. F. Evans, Peter Heales, Harry Stopes-Roe,

. Hall Manager: Jim Smith (tel. 01-242 8032) Secretary: Elizabeth Sutton (Wed-Fri, tel. 01-242 8033) Honorary Representative: Ray Lovecy Chairman General Committee: Fanny Cockerel] Deputy Chairman: Norman Bacrac Honorary Registrar: Cynthia Blezard Honorary Treasurer: Ben Roston Honorary Librarian: Jim Herrick Editor, The Ethical Record: Peter Hunot

COMING TO CONWAY HALL Sunday morning meetings at 11.00 am in the Library February 5. Tom EVANS. The Price and the Value. February 12. H. STOPES-ROE. The Open Society. February 19. BARBARA SMOKER. Atheist Liberation. February 26. ANTHONY SMITH. The Communications Revolution. March 4. PETER HEALES. The Philosopher King : Myth, Fantasy or Attain- able Ideal. March 11. STEPHEN HOUSEMAN. Must Man Be Rational? . Sunday FORUMS at 3.00 pm in the Library February 12. MARCIA SAUNDERS. Democracy and the NHS. February 26. DAVID HASLAM. The Interdependence of Rich and Poor. Sunday SOCIAL at 3.00 pm in the Library February 19. JOAN FREEDMAN will give an illustrated talk on The Joys of a Painting Holiday (Rain, Wind or Shine). Tea at 4.30 p.m.

Dates to Note:—At the General Committee Meeting on January I I, it was agreed to hold the Society's Annual General Meeting on Sunday, May 20, at 2.30 p.m. It was also announced that scientist Sir Alan Cotterell, FRS, Master, Jesus College, Cambridge, had agreed to give this year's Conway Memorial Lecture on Thursday, May 10.

February Concerts Sunday February 5 at 6.30 pm Hanson String Quartet. HAYDN, BRITTEN, BRAHMS.

Continued from page one often leaving with thanks for a to us this year, we can continue to useful exchange of ideas, study the background and to help So, though it may be difficult to to define the ethical bases for pin-point what is really happening human activity. 2 Human Scale in Philosophy By PETER HEALES His lecture to SPES on Sunday, July 3, 1983

PHILOSOPHY has always had a reputation of being abstract and remote from the concerns of "real life". Today, perhaps, that reputation is stronger than ever. The study of philosophy (as opposed to "philosophising", that practice often despised by the professional philosopher) is now an academic.discipline controlled by examining bodies and by the demands of academic careers. Its purpose eludes most laymen, though the more cynical would maintain that its only object is to ensure the continued existence of philosophy departments. A more reasonable approach would be to compare the work done in philosophy departments with the research carried out in, say the science departments of universities. The layman of today displays a touching faith in the value of such work, believing that all such work contributes to the grand design of scientific discovery and technological advance. He is helped in his faith not only by a popular mythology of science but also by a scientific press which can invest a project requiring years of painstaking work with the fantasy and romanticism of a detective novel. I am not suggesting that the "layman" is grossly misled; but I am suggesting that his appreciation is uncritical. Describe to him the actual work of a group of actual scientists in a research laboratory and he may be hard put to it to see any connection with the tangible results from which he benefits in everyday life. A similar situation pertains in the case of philosophy. The work of professional philosophers is in itself abstract and of little interest to anyone else, but it does produce practical results in everyday life. Activities which impinge on our everyday lives, such as administration, legislation, medicine, politics, are all influenced, albeit indirectly, by the techniques of thought, analysis and argument developed in the philosophical "laboratory". The current developments in "information technology" also owe much to the pioneering work of philosophers and logicians. The analogy between philosophy and science is valid up to a point, but must not be carried too far. The differences are probably greater than the similarities. Firstly, in so far as philosophy is useful, its use is most apparent in those areas of our lives covered by "the humanities". To borrow jargon from the world of computers, science is mainly (though not exclusively) applicable to the "hardware" in our lives; the physical environment; our

Sunday February 12 at 6.30 pm. Allegri-Robles Ensemble. DEBUSSY, MOZART, RAVEL. Sunday February 19 at 6.30 pm. Chilingirian String Quartet (in aid of the Musicians' Benevolent Fund). HAYDN, TIPPETT, SCHUBERT. Sunday February 26 at 6.30 pm. Amici String Quartet. HAYDN, ARRIAGA. Colin Horsley. DVORAK.

March Concerts Sunday March 4 at 6.30 pm. Lindsay String Quarter. PURCELL, TIPPETT, DVORAK. Sunday March 11 at 6.30 pm. London Festival Players.. BEETHOVEN, SCHUBERT. 3 bodies regarded as machines or objects; the physical tools we use. By contrast, philosophy is principally (though again not exclusively) of use with the "software" in our lives; principles of conduct, aims and intentions, ways of looking at and judging events, and methods of expressing all these publicly. Secondly, and perhaps as an extension of the first point, the application of philosophy touches us individually. We do not want to leave "to the experts" those areas of our lives addressed by philosophy as we are content to do with the sciences and professions. This fact no doubt explains some of the dissatisfaction felt over the remoteness of the modern academic philosopher. We expect anyone who claims to be a philosopher to address himself in some way to our personal needs and concerns and not to be merely a worker in an abstract field, apparently disinterested in life and living.

Abstract Thinking Is Essential Philosophy has always dealt in abstractions; there has always been difficulties of communication between philosophers and others because of that. Indeed it is that ability to get at the abstractions behind our ordinary concrete thinking which makes philosophical thinking valuable and powerful. Abstract thinking is essential to all positive and creative human activity; philosophy develops that mode of thinking to a high degree and uses it to reflect upon our activities. Philosophy is for that reason a difficult discipline; the issue however is not whether individuals find it difficult to gain access to philosophy, but whether the discipline can be used for practical and realistic purposes. History furnishes examples of philosophy in use. Arguably the most famous philosopher of all time was Socrates. The "Socratic" method of teaching is often discussed. He himelf is reported to have likened himself to a "midwife", bringing forth the ideas and principles which his subjects hold within themselves perhaps unknowingly. In Plato's dialogue "Meno" he is portrayed demonstrating that an uneducated slave can recall a mathematical theorem without the benefit of prior tuition. Whatever we think today of Socrates' alleged technique, it is clear that he fulfilled the role that is now occupied by a trained counsellor. A second role which philosophy has traditionally played is that of rationalisation (often but not always in the best sense of that term). Plato and the "system builders" who have followed him down the ages have consistently offered themselves in that role. For individuals the effect of such philosophies may be simply to provide some personal framework within which to understand the complexities of life; with the easing of feelings of perplexity and discomfort. In public affairs such philosophies may express the essence of a whole mode of thought and possibly provide the conceptual foundation for new institutions, as Plato's philosophy provided a secure intellectual base for early Christian theology. Philosophy has often provided a means of justifying political stances and initiatives. The number of occasions on which philosophers of any merit have written expressly for that purpose is probably very small. Their overt purpose is more likely to be to contribute to a philosophical debate which proceeds in the background to public events. But philosophers in the past have often been participants in public affairs, and their allegiances and public policies are usually, as might be expected, in alignment with their philosophy. There are of course occasions when philosophies have been appropriated to a "cause" after the event, as the Nazis sought justification in the philosophies of Schoppenhaur and Nietzsche. Deductions from the history of philosophy give only a rough, and rather obvious, account of the many uses of philosophy. The point is that it does have a use; it does satisfy needs that people actually feel. They are not all 4 particularly "lofty"; and most of thein are personal, "experiential" needs, rather than physical, but they are real, practically based needs for all that. The way in which a philosophy satisfies needs, or is applied in practice, depends, naturally, upon its content and structure. Much philosophy reflects the concepts and ways of understanding the world of the philosopher's era and culture. But into that intellectual environment which he or she shares with the majority of those with whom he can communicate the philosopher brings (as in a sense we all do) a sense of direction and purpose which, in his lifetime, he may share with very few or no-one else at all. There are a number of themes which recur throughout the history of philosophy and which serve to illustrate the point. One theme draws attention away from the everyday world of hard fact, and suggests that there are more important matters to be considered. This is the theme pursued by the idealists and metaphysicians. Naturally, there is often a religious feel to such philosophies, but not necessarily so. Einstein shares with Pythagoras a compelling regard for abstract mathematical relations as the all-important reality behind everyday experience. Plato, Spinoza, and Hegel are notable among philosophers for thrusting in the direction of a super- sensible reality. They each conceive their purpose quite differently, they use different vehicles to express it in their different cultures, but they have the fundamental theme in common.

The Reality Which Explains Observable World By contrast a second recurring theme draws attention towards practical everyday reality and eschews any suggestion that there is any other "reality" which underlies or explains the observable world. They are the "emperi- cists" and "positivists", who as might be expected, are much more numerous today in our science-based culture than hitherto. Nonetheless they have a considerable stake in the history of philosophy and include among many others Protagoras, Hobbes, Locke and Bertrand Russell. Much of the history of philosophy could be represented as a debate between these two themes, with some philosophers standing firmly on one side or the other, whilst less committed philosophers have sought compro- mises. There has also been a third approach which has attempted to hold the balance not by compromise but by finding the cause of the dissension in the nature of the human being. Some, like Kant and Wittgenstein, have found the source of the problem in our intellectual apparatus, whilst Sartre and other Existentialists have looked more towards the human will. Expressed as philosophical analyses, these themes appear as remote and as abstract as any technical work in philosophy. Many people who might be at a loss when confronted with a philosophical analyses express these themes by word and deed in the very way they lead their lives. The prac- tical application of the themes can be understood by considering the answers their adherents typically give to important questions.

What is it to be Human? IDEALISTS : As a human being, you are not really a part of the world; you are part of a "world system" which transcends it. POSITIVISTS : As a human being, you are part of the material world and entirely subject to its laws; it is folly to consider yourself in any way free of the material world. EXISTENTIALISTS : As a human being you are master of your destiny. In the last analysis, the circumstances of your life are determined by you, whether knowingly or unknowingly. 5 Are There Superhuman Agencies? IDEALISTS : Yes. The prime agency is usually referred to as "God": the intelligible "prime mover" of the system not the personal god of orthodox Christianity. Human beings can be responsible only in so far as the superhuman system permits them to so be.

POSITIVISTS : Yes, Human beings are subject to the system of the material world. The system is blind and totally indifferent. To the extent that human actions are determined by the material system, we cannot be genuinely responsible for what we do.

EXISTENTIALISTS : No. Human beings stand totally alone, and are ulti- mately responsible not only for their actions but for all that happens to them.

What is the Purpose of Life? IDEALISTS : Purpose is given to us; it behoves us to try to•understand the transcendant system in order to know what that purpose is so that we may carry it out.

POSITIVISTS : There is no purpose. The world exists but it is senseless to ask why it exists; our lives take place as part of the material system but have no intrinsic value. Even when we are aware of specific purposes as we live we may be deluding ourselves; "hard line" positivists would argue that all our actions and thoughts are totally determined by the material system. EXISTENTIALISTS : No purposes are given to us; we create purposes for our lives and in our lives and it is an essential part of our natures as human beings that we seek to fulfil those purposes.

The above statements are over-simplifications; they are not truthful representations of any specific philosophy. But by outlining the thrusts of three broad types of philosophy they illustrate a general point: whilst all philosophy has a practical human application some philosophies have a more human scale than others. I should like to use the term "humanistic philosophy" for any philosophy which has a genuinely human scale; one that addresses the human situation directly rather than a system whether abstract or "material"; one that gives humankind a proper significance but does not exaggerate it. There is no single "humanistic philosophy"; there are many possible theories which could be considered humanistic and most philosophies have many humanistic elements; possibly no philosophy so far put forward is fully humanistic. A fully humanistic philosophy is still in the future, but perhaps not very far in the future. There could be many humanistic philosophies; the debate could be as rich and varied as that engendered by traditional philosophy. Any humanistic philosophy is characterised above all by an attitude to life and the problems it poses. It would recognise the following principles in some form or another: • Human beings live in a world which they experience. The only legitimate, and indeed the only possible real, concern of human beings is the world they experience, and their relationship to it. Empiricism and positivism embody this principle but in addition contain a dogma about the nature of the world of experience. To that extent they are humanistic philosophies, but a humanistic philosophy need not hold that human beings can only experience the world of the physical senses. 6 The natural universe is no other than a neutral background to life. It obeys laws which, in principle, can all be• discovered. No aspect of the world is "occult" or hidden from us by secret powers; the bounds of human knowledge are set only by the logic and practical limitations of our methods of observation. Human life is meaningful because human beings themselves create purposes and adopt values in which they find meaning. There are no supernatural designs or purposes; there are no gods. If there are beings other than flesh and blood humans living in and experiencing the world, their relationship to it is the same as ours. Conversely, human beings are not totally subordinate to the world they experience; the experience of freedom of choice and self-determinism is real and not a mere "epiphenomenon", though like many human experiences it can be exaggerated. The principles are stated baldly in an attempt to determine what a humanistic philosophy would be like. There are many arguments against these principles as there are arguments for them. But all philosophies must start with a set of principles which must be accepted without argument. To argue without prior postulates would be like trying to use a lever without a fulcrum. The above principles are, I believe, the essential postulates of a humanistic philosophy. If they are accepted then certain consequences follow. Any humanistic philosophy would go on to make points such as the following: All human beings are of human value, both as individuals and as members of society. All individuals have the same basic rights- and . • freedoms and must accept the same basic responsibilities. Justice and a stable regulated society are essential to the enjoyment of rights and freedoms, and for the discharge of responsibilities. Our moralitY is based on the recognition of human interdependence and the need for mutual respect. Human problems can only be solved by human beings using their intellectual, moral and social capabilities. Our future as a race depends entirely on how we manage our relation‘, ships with each other, and with the natural world. Our moral responsibilities as members of the human race require that we extend our concerns from ourselves to our community, our nation,' the human race as a whole and the world we live in. Everyone shares a responsibility for the wellbeing of every other person, and we are collectively the custodians of the whole world now and for the future. COThe problems which human beings experience collectively can only be resolved by the creative use of scientific method, combined with an open exchange based on mutual trust. This means firstly, that what we accept as fact must be based on accurate observation subjected to methodical and impartial interpretation; secondly, that conclusions and proposals must be presented fairly, with the highest regard for objective truth and legitimate individual interest; and thirdly, that every individual must keep an open and flexible mind, being willing always to reassess his commitments, actions and thoughts in the light of fresh evidence, rational argument and honestly expressed intent. 0

Humanist Holidays, 1984• Easter—Llandudno, April 19 to 26. There are still a few twin rooms and two family rooms available. Reductions for children sharing with adults. Deposit £8. More details of holidays in March issue. Enquiries to Betty Beer, 58 Weir Road, London SWI2 ONA. Telephone: 01-673 6234. 7 What is this Third World? By NICHOLAS HYMAN Summary of the lecture on Sunday, January 8, 1984

THE FIRST QUESTIONiS when WaS the third world? This initially construc- tive stereotype came after "the undeveloped countries", and assumed a fixed first world industrialised with stock exchanges and broadly "Western" features, and an "Eastern" second world, also industrialised and so "com- munist" as to lack stock exchanges. Three-quarters of humanity are in the third world, though the boundaries are countries of the mind, which even the term "north-south" misses defining. Greenland, or in these islands Romany people, have many "third world" characteristics, if illiteracy, wretched life expectancy and recent unplanned urbanisation as well as relative poverty are the hallmarks to look for. Many "third world" features are akin to the interwar reality of, say, Liverpool, and of Warsaw and Budapest just after the 1945 liberation. The new class formations which fight peasant wars in Vietnam and Mexico and Angola are not "proletarian" in a Eurocentrically Marxist sense, but valid move- ments of national liberation.The new rulers of Algeria or Cuba, like those of South Africa later in this decade, are more generous towards civil rights than their macabre predecessor regimes, yet the Turkish caution over new popular governments has applications all over the contemporary third world: "The trees said, when the axe came to the forest, 'The handle is one of us'." Peace, Health, Education . The second question focuses on the aspirations of third world peoples and governments (not coterminous, even in Thatcherland or Reagan's realm). Peace, health, education and cultural mobility, rather than a millionaire's baton in every knapsack, seem prevalent and, on balance, realistic goals. Pharmaceutical industries' (that is, multinationals') transfer prices and secretiveness, the obscenely flourishing international arms trade, and the assumptive racism which passes oft for responsible reporting of third world societies in the "Western- media, are each areas where third world aspirations have to take on the sometimes bland and seemingly immovable balance of world power, stacked against the world majority. The third question concerns the relationship between disarmament and world development, spelt out in Clyde Sanger's Safe and Sound (Zed Press, 1982). The depotism of an Amin or Pol Pot is no more to be justified or profited from than the nazi and fascist liberticides of the last world depres- sion. Enthusiasm for military rule in South America and West Africa is in the capitals of "the powers", and bodes ill for their own attachment to democracy and social justice. Intervention against socialist-leaning and conveniently tiny Grenada was projected while Maurice Bishop was still alive: yet neighbouring Haiti, or the hell of Paraguay, cannot hope for illegal and bloody liberation from their oppressors at Washington's hands. The specific British component in third world consciousness is a flawed amalgam of good (if guilt-striken because ex-colonial) intentions, and the bitter residue of Suez and the Gilberto-Wagnerian conflict in the South Atlantic with a third world government, Argentina. As Britain de-indus- trialises, and its currency turns on the price of oil, parallels with third world dependence crop up. Little-reported British practices, in Oman rather than Lebanon, in Diego Garcia as well as the fatuously named Fortress Falklands, still guarantee in some third world capitals less mistrust for Washington and Moscow than for declining Britain and its companion 8 in nuclear-armed folie de grandeur, France. From Sweden, Canada, and the European NATO member-state of Norway, Britain can learn the basic premise of formal reciprocity with third world countries, and loyalty to international forums' carefully reasoned and feasible goals. The survival of UNESCO and the strengthening of the United Nations through a merging of third world views to become the operative consensus on say the South African and Palestinian injustices are cases in point. The alternative to one world is after all a planet not habitable by our species. The nuclear spectre, like genocide for the earlier Tasmanians and Patagonians, is one real cut-off future. Also within reach is what in our present impoverished material and ethical state must seem a utopia, in which the third world has the most important role. Thomas Hardy glimpsed "consciousness, the will informing".

From the Honorary Representative A new Book on Ethical Societies; Snobbery; and Norwegian Humanists

ONE OF OUR SUNDAY MORNING LECTURERS, Dr. Tan MaCKillop, is at present on sabbatical and teaching at the University of Southern California. He recently advised me that Cambridge University Press have agreed to publish his book on British Ethical Societies. The book refers in some detail to SPES and is a publication we must have in our library and will be of great interest to our members. Some revisions still have to be made but when it is published I will arrange for an announcement to appear in the Ethical Record. The title has to be finalised. My own Boswell: A good deal has been written and discussed on class- consciousness in England, how endemic it is, why it persists, and what are its consequences, especially its drawbacks. Into all such discussion enters more or less clearly a connection with snobbery, and sometimes the latter is itself the main theme, with class-consciousness and social stratification seen rather as a symptom than a subject in itself. Even in such a case, how- ever, it is seldom if ever that any attempt is made to say what snobbery is, and from this circumstance one might infer that the question is one of some difficulty. A little reflection, curiously enough, leads to the conclusion that snobbery is not only easy to define, but that the definition in itself points directly to the nature of its evil effect in society. For snobbery is almost entirely a matter of according (or demanding) respect without regard for merit. This is not to say that the snob cannot have merit; often enough merit is there in fact. The characteristic circumstance however is that, be the merit great or small, respect is not in the upshot based upon it. This can quite readily be seen in snobbery of birth. What merit can there be in the fact of a particular ancestry? Either there are real heredi- tary endowments, in which case these are the true "merit" to which respect may well be given; or these endowments may be conspicuously inadequate to warrant particular respect. Yet snobbery will so confuse the true basis of respect in the former case as to make its exaction in the other seem a matter of natural justice, of common equity to those who are "equal" in birth. This is no less true of snobbery of wealth. No doubt that wealth gives power—but is power a merit? Is it to be given respect regardless of its mode of exercise? Demonstrably, some kinds of merit do give power, even 9 wealth. But wealth certainly, and power probably, can cbme to hands sadly deficient in those merits, such as they may be, by which the benefit was built into something of significance. As to intellectual snobbery, no analysis can be made realistically without some measure of overlap, or intrusion, of other forms of the oddity. Last December we were pleased to welcome a visitor from the Norwegian Humanist Association to a Sunday morning lecture. I took him for a brief tour of Conway Hall and he took photographs of our large hall, library and the outside of the building in Red Lion Square. He was Stein Thue who was in England for a short study course (assisted by the British Council). He was also able to visit the offices of BHA, RPA and NSS. His studies were based on the Moral Education Resource Centre at Lancaster, established by the Social Morality Council (an organisation which the BHA helped to found nearly 20 years ago). John White of the BHA, told me that Stein had told him that there are over 20,000 Humanists in Norway in a popula- tion of four million—the equivalent of a quarter of a million British Humanists! Note: A typographical error in my last notes (Ethical Record, January 1984, page 9) gives a wrong impression in the third line of the last para- graph—"most" should read "must".) RAY LOVECY

From the Secretary Fitful Sunshine, Members Arrears and This Month's Speakers

HERE IN THE SOCIETY'S OFFICE in the Library at Conway Hall I write this note to you all. Several weeks have passed since I communicated with you for the first time through the pages of The Ethical Record. My three months' or so "probation" will shortly end. This has been an interesting, challenging and, at times, exhausting period for me. There is much to squeeze into the three days that I am employed to carry out the duties of the Society's Secretary. Additionally, I give as much extra-mural and intra-mural time as my other commitments allow. As the Honorary Repre- sentative, Ray Lovecy, mentions in the January issue, there is quite a back- log of work to catch up on, not to mention learning about nearly 200 years of the Society's history! In the cold dawn of the first few days of the New Year, the fitful January sunshine is today filtering through the Library window that overlooks Red Lion Square. It is illuminating the shelves of books which surround me, including the many rare and interesting volumes which comprise our reference and lending library. I resolve to do more reading and learning . . . but administrative details and the daily office routine require my immediate attention. And I am only at the beginning. . . . Not the least of these duties, to which I alluded in the last issue, are keeping membership records up to date. I am concerned that some 20% of the Society's membership have still, even in the last days of the Society's financial year, not yet renewed their annual subscriptions. I wrote a personal letter to each member still in arrears which I enclosed with the last issue of this journal. If you know that you are one of this number, please pay your subscription immediately or otherwise your membership will lapse. You will find enclosed a separate Membership Subscription Renewal Form for the Society's financial year March 1984 to February 1985. A few Of you have already paid this subscription and I have sent official receipts for these. Some of you. are of course Life Members or pay by Banker's Order or Covenant. Please mite that all annual subscriptions full due on 1st March 10 1984 (minimum subscription £4.00). Please complete and return the form to me (or to the Honorary Registrar), with your subscription, as soon as possible. The form incorporates too a Banker's Order Form and Form of Covenant. If you already pay by standing order please check with your Bank that it is for the right amount and correctly dated. As already mentioned, donations over and above the minimum annual subscription rate are always welcome. Members will appreciate that subscription dues are very low bearing in mind current day costs. As I pointed out in the last issue, an increase in the number of members can help spread the load, and with this in mind I have included a special form with the enclosed subscription renewal notice, inviting each of you to nominate others, whom you think interested, for membership. Speakers and Themes for February One of my more rewarding tasks is arranging the programme of lectures and forums at Conway Hall on Sundays. Details of our Sunday morning lectures, afternoon forums and concerts over the next few weeks appear on page 2. Tom Evans, speaking on Sunday, February 5, will be known to most of you already. His lecture on Tawney last year was I understand very well received and a summary of this has appeared in a previous issue. This time he speaks on The Price and the Value—an intriguing title. On February 12, appointed lecturer, Dr. Harry Stopes Roe, is also well known. The title of his lecture is The Open Society. It is just 15 years since the British Humanist Association had a large public seminar on this same topic and he tells me that the BHA 1984 Annual Conference will be on this theme. The concept of the Open Society is central to Humanist thinking. Barbara Smoker, who again needs no introduction to you all, will lecture on February 19. Her theme Atheist Liberation will doubtless be stimulating and thought provoking. (On a personal note, I was interested to hear Barbara Smoker speak on LBC, on the afternoon of last December 23, about the origins of many seasonal "Christmas" or "Yuletide" traditions.) The last lecture in February, on the 26th, will be Anthony Smith who is Director of the British Film Institute. A person well versed in the geo- politics of information and all the new cultural technologies such as video, cable, TV, etc., he has chosen as his title The Communications Revolution. We have two Forums arranged for February. On February 12 Marcia Saunders of the Islington Community Health Council will talk about Democracy and the NHS. She has recently become a member of SPES and we are pleased to welcome her. She tells me she feels strongly that peoples' health and well-being are dependent upon our working towards democracy in the NHS. The Forum on February 26 has as its speaker David Haslam from War on Want, a charitable organisation of which we all know. I happened to see him in a programme on television in early December and was much impressed. I am glad he has agreed to speak. The title of his talk will be The Inter- dependence of Rich and Poor. ELIZABETH SUTTON

National Secular Society Annual Dinner On Saturday, March 24, Patricia Hewitt, former General Secretary of the National Council for Civil Liberties will be the guest of honour at this year's NSS Annual Dinner. This will be held at the Paviours Arms, Page Street, Westminster, SW1, at 6.30 p.m. for 7.00 p.m., on Saturday, March 24. Further details from the Secretary, NSS, Terry Mullins, 702 Holloway Road, London. N19 3NL (Telephone: 272 1266). 11 Viewpoints

(Note: The Viewpoints published on this and subsequent pages are all those received to date since the last issue. Keep it up! Next month, perhaps the Editor will be able to make a choice of the best letters received. . . .)

Humanism, Change and Nature Secular and Ethical Are Compatible What does Humanism mean to me? I feel that it may be well defined by referring to the 's excellent aims. These state, firstly, that supernaturalism is the enemy of progress, and so the State must be completely secular. (I also feel that life would be the better when society is secular! ) Next, it affirms that progress requires freedom of speech, publication and criticism for all. Finally, it affirms that this life is the only one of which we have any knowledge; so human effort should be directed to improving it, and secular humanists accept it as a duty to promote human welfare. Technically, the objects of the South Place Ethical Society are still the study and dissemination of ethical principles, and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment. I feel that and ethical Humanism are compatible, in the sense that religion derives from, or con- sists in an analysis of the human predicament, with a target for action by humans and humankind, and a means for achieving that aim (or those aims). The analyses, targets, and means provided by religion are all fatally flawed, in my view, but we Humanists must be prepared as Humanists to analyse, aim and act to improve this life. Otherwise we grant religion the monopoly of virtue. I do not, incidentally, accept Tony Benn's view that in rejecting god and religion, we can merely transfer over religious ethics into our Humanism. Religious people may be wrong in accepting the supernatural but it really is rather naughty to insult them by implying that their world views are totally irrelevant to their ethical systems! Or is it Humanists who are being insulted? Because the National Secular Society has decided, practically speaking, to ignore its duty to promote human welfare—valuable as cleric-bashing may be as an antidote to religion—and because there are some secularists who find it necessary to pursue an anti-socialist vendetta, I have felt obliged to resign from the National Secular Society. I still feel that socialism— considered as a four-stranded ideology (R. N. Berki, Socialism, J. M. Dent and Co., 1974) of egalitarianism, moralism, rationalism and libertarianism— is logically most closely linked to Humanism. But it is naturally unhumanist to make socialism or any other viewpoint, a party line for Humanists.

"Tempora Mutantur, et nos Mutamur in Illis" (Anon) "Times change, and we change with them" I was reminded while reading David Ibry's comments (Ethical Record, January 1984, page 18) of a quotation whose source I forget. "They all said together, 'You just can't change human nature! ' And then they all sat back and smiled". Mr. Ibry says that to believe that is to believe human nature is different from what it is, is hypocritical and ignorant. He is wrong to assume non- socialists have the monopoly of virtue, since Marx used the word utopian 12 to describe the attitude Mr. Ibry condemns. Marx believed that socialism had to be scientific—that we had to plan changes in society instead of merely allowing them to occur, and to do so by applying the necessary results of the social sciences. Most socialists join Marx in repudiating utopianism, though they may not be neo-marxists. However, where Mr. Ibry goes wrong is to believe that human nature is immutable. A study of history and anthropology shows human nature to be adaptable within broad limits; a study of psychology shows that its adaptability is not infinite. The idea of immutable human nature (whether intrinsically good or. intrim sically evil) is designed to inhibit constructive attempts at change. Mr. Ibry should draw the conclusions of his own human beliefs and reject this religious myth along with the rest.

"Natura Enim Non Imperatur, Nisi Parendo" "We cannot command nature except by obeying her" Regarding Ben Warwick's comments (Ethical Record, January 1984, page 17), he manages two erroneous statements (not fallacies) himself. Firstly, Mutual Aid is just as valid a description of Nature as the Battle for Existence; as often as not, Nature is not red in tooth and claw. Secondly, humanity is able to control—within limits—the naturally available supplies of food. Whether we are owed a living by Nature, which Mr. Warwick personifies, doesn't enter into it. J. L. Hutchinson (same page) rightly says that two of the basic problems here are production and distribution of food and wealth; but the main one is how to ensure that the solutions to the first two (which can be found) are implemented. COLIN MILLS

A Concept Independent of Consciousness? Norman Bacrac (Ethical Record January 1984, page 13) undertakes to clear up some of the confusion caused by irrationalists. He provides defini- tions of three terms, one being "matter", of which he. says it is "that which

Apologies/Corrections for Errors The Editor regrets the mistakes which creep into some of the material published in the Ethical Record, sometimes, as in the announcement of the concert on page 3 in the January issue for Sunday, January 29, making a nonsense.. .. Please do point out any errors to keep the Editor on his toes! NORMAN BACRAC points out the following corrections which should be made to his useful contribution of definitions (Ethical Record, January 1984, pages 13 and 14):— The third paragraph of his contribution, page 13—"given accuracy" should read "given currency'; line 3, page 14—"preserve" should be "reserve"; the sentence starting "This is the doctrine . . ." should continue "that consciousness cannot exist apart from matter and that the content of consciousness is determined by the activity of the brain"; and in line 7, "deserve" should be "derive". The Editor apologises—especially as this item is about definitions! Norman will be giving some further definitions in the March issue. Readers may also have wondered why they hadn't received their copy of the separate Concerts programme—it was unfortunately omitted from all the despatch. It is included with this issue with apologies from those concerned. 13 exists independently of my consciousness". He also says: "matter is a philosophical concept". When these two propositions are put together they constitute a claim that Mr. Bacrac has a concept which exists independently of his conscious- , ness. This seems calculated to increase confusion rather than reduce it; would Mr. Bacrac please clarify? GEORGE WALFORD,London NI

How English Nationalism Was Born Bernard Crick (Ethical Record, January 1984, page 4) seemed to miss the main clue as to the origins of nationalism in England. Its classic expres- sion is in the famous speech by John of Gaunt in Shakespeare's Richard II —"This royal throne of kings, etc. . . ." That was written in .1593, i.e., five years after the Spanish Armada and 12 years before the Gunpowder Plot. It was in the conflict with the Catholic powers, above all with Spain, that English nationalism was born. It was at the same time inseparable from empire because of rival claims in the New World and the East Indies. The East India Company was chartered by Queen Elizabeth in 1600 and there were similar companies in France and Holland. The earlier wars, the Hundred Years War and the Wars of the Roses were pre-national i.e., waged for baronial reasons. Henry VII nationalised the army in 1485 in order to put an end to the private armies of the great lords, and Henry VIII nationalised the Church in order to exclude the Pope and sequester its property; but it was the threat of foreign attack and conspiracy that turned the original royal nationalism into a popular phenomenon. Bernard Crick further suggests that constitutionally we face "central unity or complete breakdown" and I think that is right so far as it goes. But what follows breakdown? Nearly 200 years ago Blake and Shelley suggested that sovereign regionalism was the answer and the Kilbrandon Report of 1973 again yaised this option but turned away from it. Both prin- ciple and sheer necessity, i.e., incipient breakdown, are pointing us in that direction again. PETER CADOGAN,London NW3

About That Conway Hall Image How I do agree with the letter from Diana Young (Ethical Record, January 1984, page 17) that the image of Conway Hall needs to be improved. But I have put forward this proposal many times to many members of the committee, and each time it has been listened to sympa- thetically: but nothing has happened. When I was at University I offered to put up notices at the college and to distribute literature, but again I found no support from the committee. The problem is that all socicties of a certain age were heavily supported by the young of 50-odd years ago. Those people have all grown old and cannot accept the idea of other people coming in to tell them how things should be run. The excuse is that the youth of today simply do not under- stand what we stand for, and they would try to introduce too many unacceptable innovations. And there is the sad fact that the Conway Hall does look like an old- fashioned welfare office inside and welcome is not writ large on the mat. Perhaps a nice sitting room or lounge would help, for myself I have never 14 felt welcome when 1 have even tried to use the library, there is a feeling that the whole thing is private and you must leave as soon as possible. BRIAN W. HAINES,London, NWI

A Meeting Place for London's Heretics What to do with Conway Hall as a building has long been on the agenda at South Place. Juliette Hanson in June warned us of what modern archi- tects are capable of when they get a bee in their bonnets. We have in the library a bas-relief of William Morris, whose 150th anniversary is in 1984, and who lived in Red Lion Square. He worked hard to preserve historic buildings. We must not disgrace him. The chief importance of Conway Hall is as a meeting place for London's heretics and as such it appears in London for Heretics by William Kent (page 89). He says of the present building : "All who have seen the new premises will agree that Rationalism—rational religion some prefer to call it— has at last found a worthy home." • - We agree that the interior needs modernising but Conway Hall is only viable because of its central position and the scarcity of good halls at a reasonable price. So we say: Give a New Year Gift to the Fund. BEITY and SAM BEER A Correction I wish to correct a possible misunderstanding arising from my letter on Population Control (Ethical Record, January 1984, page 16). My remarks about children of immigrants remaining here was in no way meant to imply my disapproval of their rights to live here. My concern is that they are part of a poorly housed, unemployed section and are morally as well as socially deprived people. Also, the alternative to a "two will do" policy is, I suppose, a less consumer-based lifestyle, but women would bear the brunt of such a life! P. Ross, Tunbridge Wells Inheriting Knowledge The National Dividend is merely a recognition of the fact that each generation inherits knowledge accumulated by previous generations. We didn't invent the wheel, the sail, the windmill or the steam engine. Is it wicked to breathe because we don't have to work for fresh air? Are inventors of labour-saving devices criminals? Mr. Warwick (Ethical Record, January 1984, page 16) can be assured I enjoy, with gratitude, the works of Shakespeare, the music of Beethoven and the sculpture of Michael Angelo. I am pleased that the next world war will be won by pressing buttons instead of by the arduous job of thrusting bayonets into people's guts. R. C. PROCTOR Perhaps Mr. Proctor should reconsider his last sentence. In his concern to save trouble or work (? or is it something else) he is ignoring the fact that one button can now kill and mutilate 100's of 1,000's of unseen indivi- duals—an even more urgent ethical and moral question than individuals hand-to-hand murder with bayonets. War can no longer be "won" now, since any nuclear weapon power exchange seems likely to annihilate not only the combatants but the rest of our species as well! —Editor. 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 Chamber Music Concerts founded in 1887 have achieved international renown. Memorial and.Funeral 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 HON. REGISTRAR, SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY CONWAY HALL HUMANIST CENTRE RED LION SQUARE, LONDON WCIR 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 LEITERS PLEASE) ADDRESS

OCCUPATION (disclosure optional) HOW DID YOU HEAR OF THE SOCIETY? DATE 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.

Printed by David Neil & Co.. Dorking, Surrey