For example, in the ordinary household the amount of machine horse-power

expended in fighting for the truth is really quite absurd. This pure

zeal for the establishment and general admission of the truth is usually

termed 'contradictoriness.' But, of course, it is not that; it is

something higher. My wife states that the Joneses have gone into a new

flat, of which the rent is £165 a year. Now, Jones has told me

personally that the rent of his new flat is £156 a year. I correct my

wife. Knowing that she is in the right, she corrects me. She cannot bear

that a falsehood should prevail. It is not a question of £9, it is a

question of truth. Her enthusiasm for truth excites my enthusiasm for

truth. Five minutes ago I didn't care twopence whether the rent of the

Joneses' new flat was £165 or £156 or £1056 a year. But now I care

intensely that it is £156. I have formed myself into a select society

for the propagating of the truth about the rent of the Joneses' new

flat, and my wife has done the same. In eloquence, in argumentative

skill, in strict supervision of our tempers, we each of us squander

enormous quantities of that h.-p. which is so precious to us. And the

net effect is naught.

Now, if one of us two had understood the elementary principles of human

engineering, that one would have said (privately): 'Truth is

indestructible. Truth will out. Truth is never in a hurry. If it doesn't

come out to-day it will come out to-morrow or next year. It can take

care of itself. Ultimately my wife (or my husband) will learn the

essential cosmic truth about the rent of the Joneses' new flat. I

already know it, and the moment when she (or he) knows it also will be

the moment of my triumph. She (or he) will not celebrate my triumph

openly, but it will be none the less real. And my reputation for

accuracy and calm restraint will be consolidated. If, by a rare

mischance, I am in error, it will be vastly better for me in the day of

my undoing that I have not been too positive now. Besides, nobody has

appointed me sole custodian of the great truth concerning the rent of

the Joneses' new flat. I was not brought into the world to be a

safe-deposit, and more urgent matters summon me to effort.' If one of us

had meditated thus, much needless friction would have been avoided and

power saved; _amour-propre_ would not have been exposed to risks; the

sacred cause of truth would not in the least have suffered; and the rent

of the Joneses' new flat would anyhow have remained exactly what it is.

In addition to straining the machine by our excessive anxiety for the

spread of truth, we give a very great deal too much attention to the

state of other people's machines. I cannot too strongly, too

sarcastically, deprecate this astonishing habit. It will be found to be

rife in nearly every household and in nearly every office. We are most

of us endeavouring to rearrange the mechanism in other heads than our

own. This is always dangerous and generally futile. Considering the

difficulty we have in our own brains, where our efforts are sure of

being accepted as well-meant, and where we have at any rate a rough

notion of the machine's construction, our intrepidity in adventuring

among the delicate adjustments of other brains is remarkable. We are

cursed by too much of the missionary spirit. We must needs voyage into

the China of our brother's brain, and explain there that things are

seriously wrong in that heathen land, and make ourselves unpleasant in

the hope of getting them put right. We have all our own brain and body

on which to wreak our personality, but this is not enough; we must

extend our personality further, just as though we were a colonising

world-power intoxicated by the idea of the 'white man's burden.'

One of the central secrets of efficient daily living is to leave our

daily companions alone a great deal more than we do, and attend to

ourselves. If a daily companion is conducting his life upon principles

which you know to be false, and with results which you feel to be

unpleasant, the safe rule is to keep your mouth shut. Or if, out of your

singular conceit, you are compelled to open it, open it with all

precautions, and with the formal politeness you would use to a stranger.

Intimacy is no excuse for rough manners, though the majority of us seem

to think it is. You are not in charge of the universe; you are in charge

of yourself. You cannot hope to manage the universe in your spare time,

and if you try you will probably make a mess of such part of the

universe as you touch, while gravely neglecting yourself. In every

family there is generally some one whose meddlesome interest in other

machines leads to serious friction in his own. Criticise less, even in

the secrecy of your chamber. And do not blame at all. Accept your

environment and adapt yourself to it in silence, instead of noisily

attempting to adapt your environment to yourself. Here is true wisdom.

You have no business trespassing beyond the confines of your own

individuality. In so trespassing you are guilty of impertinence. This is

obvious. And yet one of the chief activities of home-life consists in

prancing about at random on other people's private lawns. What I say

applies even to the relation between parents and children. And though my

precept is exaggerated, it is purposely exaggerated in order effectively

to balance the exaggeration in the opposite direction.

All individualities, other than one's own, are part of one's

environment. The evolutionary process is going on all right, and they

are a portion of it. Treat them as inevitable. To assert that they are

inevitable is not to assert that they are unalterable. Only the

alteration of them is not primarily your affair; it is theirs. Your

affair is to use them, as they are, without self-righteousness, blame,

or complaint, for the smooth furtherance of your own ends. There is no

intention here to rob them of responsibility by depriving them of

free-will while saddling _you_ with responsibility as a free agent. As

your environment they must be accepted as inevitable, because they _are_

inevitable. But as centres themselves they have their own

responsibility: which is not yours. The historic question: 'Have we

free-will, or are we the puppets of determinism?' enters now. As a

question it is fascinating and futile. It has never been, and it never

will be, settled. The theory of determinism cannot be demolished by

argument. But in his heart every man, including the most obstinate

supporter of the theory, demolishes it every hour of every day. On the

other hand, the theory of free-will can be demolished by ratiocination!

So much the worse for ratiocination! _If we regard ourselves as free

agents, and the personalities surrounding us as the puppets of

determinism_, we shall have arrived at the working compromise from which

the finest results of living can be obtained. The philosophic experience

of centuries, if it has proved anything, has proved this. And the man

who acts upon it in the common, banal contracts and collisions of the

difficult experiment which we call daily life, will speedily become

convinced of its practical worth.

XI

AN INTERLUDE

For ten chapters you have stood it, but not without protest. I know the

feeling which is in your minds, and which has manifested itself in

numerous criticisms of my ideas. That feeling may be briefly translated,

perhaps, thus: 'This is all very well, but it isn't true, not a bit!

It's only a fairy-tale that you have been telling us. Miracles don't

happen,' etc. I, on my part, have a feeling that unless I take your

feeling in hand at once, and firmly deal with it, I had better put my

shutters up, for you will have got into the way of regarding me simply

as a source of idle amusement. Already I can perceive, from the

expressions of some critics, that, so far as they are concerned, I

might just as well not have written a word. Therefore at this point I

pause, in order to insist once more upon what I began by saying.

The burden of your criticism is: 'Human nature is always the same. I

know my faults. But it is useless to tell me about them. I can't alter

them. I was born like that.' The fatal weakness of this argument is,

first, that it is based on a complete falsity; and second, that it puts

you in an untenable position. Human nature _does_ change. Nothing can be

more unscientific, more hopelessly mediæval, than to imagine that it

does not. It changes like everything else. You can't see it change.

True! But then you can't see the grass growing--not unless you arise

very early.

Is human nature the same now as in the days of Babylonian civilisation,

when the social machine was oiled by drenchings of blood? Is it the same

now as in the days of Greek civilisation, when there was no such thing

as romantic love between the sexes? Is it the same now as it was during

the centuries when constant friction had to provide its own cure in the

shape of constant war? Is it the same now as it was on 2nd March 1819,

when the British Government officially opposed a motion to consider the

severity of the criminal laws (which included capital punishment for

cutting down a tree, and other sensible dodges against friction), and

were defeated by a majority of only nineteen votes? Is it the same now

as in the year 1883, when the first S.P.C.C. was formed in England?

If you consider that human nature is still the same you should instantly

go out and make a bonfire of the works of Spencer, Darwin, and Wallace,

and then return to enjoy the purely jocular side of the present volume.

If you admit that it has changed, let me ask you how it has changed,

unless by the continual infinitesimal efforts, _upon themselves_, of

individual men, like you and me. Did you suppose it was changed by

magic, or by Acts of Parliament, or by the action of groups on persons,

and not of persons on groups? Let me tell you that human nature has

changed since yesterday. Let me tell you that to-day reason has a more

powerful voice in the directing of instinct than it had yesterday. Let

me tell you that to-day the friction of the machines is less screechy

and grinding than it was yesterday.

'You were born like that, and you can't alter yourself, and so it's no

use talking.' If you really believe this, why make any effort at all?

Why not let the whole business beautifully slide and yield to your

instincts? What object can there be in trying to control yourself in any

manner whatever if you are unalterable? Assert yourself to be

unalterable, and you assert yourself a fatalist. Assert yourself a

fatalist, and you free yourself from all moral responsibility--and other

people, too. Well, then, act up to your convictions, if convictions they

are. If you can't alter yourself, I can't alter myself, and supposing

that I come along and bash you on the head and steal your purse, you

can't blame me. You can only, on recovering consciousness,

affectionately grasp my hand and murmur: 'Don't apologise, my dear

fellow; we can't alter ourselves.'

This, you say, is absurd. It is. That is one of my innumerable points.

The truth is, you do not really believe that you cannot alter yourself.

What is the matter with you is just what is the matter with me--sheer

idleness. You hate getting up in the morning, and to excuse your

inexcusable indolence you talk big about Fate. Just as 'patriotism is

the last refuge of a scoundrel,' so fatalism is the last refuge of a

shirker. But you deceive no one, least of all yourself. You have not,

rationally, a leg to stand on. At this juncture, because I have made you

laugh, you consent to say: 'I do try, all I can. But I can only alter

myself a very little. By constitution I am mentally idle. I can't help

that, can I?' Well, so long as you are not the only absolutely

unchangeable thing in a universe of change, I don't mind. It is

something for you to admit that you can alter yourself even a very

little. The difference between our philosophies is now only a question

of degree.

In the application of any system of perfecting the machine, no two

persons will succeed equally. From the disappointed tone of some of your

criticisms it might be fancied that I had advertised a system for making

archangels out of tailors' dummies. Such was not my hope. I have no

belief in miracles. But I know that when a thing is thoroughly well

done it often has the air of being a miracle. My sole aim is to insist

that every man shall perfect his machine to the best of _his_ powers,

not to the best of somebody else's powers. I do not indulge in any hope

that a man can be better than his best self. I am, however, convinced

that every man fails to be his best self a great deal oftener than he

need fail--for the reason that his will-power, be it great or small, is

not directed according to the principles of common sense.

Common sense will surely lead a man to ask the question: 'Why did my

actions yesterday contradict my reason?' The reply to this question will

nearly always be: 'Because at the critical moment I forgot.' The supreme

explanation of the abortive results of so many efforts at

self-alteration, the supreme explanation of our frequent miserable

scurrying into a doctrine of fatalism, is simple forgetfulness. It is

not force that we lack, but the skill to remember exactly what our

reason would have us do or think at the moment itself. How is this skill

to be acquired? It can only be acquired, as skill at games is acquired,

by practice; by the training of the organ involved to such a point that

the organ acts rightly by instinct instead of wrongly by instinct. There

are degrees of success in this procedure, but there is no such

phenomenon as complete failure.

Habits which increase friction can be replaced by habits which lessen

friction. Habits which arrest development can be replaced by habits

which encourage development. And as a habit is formed naturally, so it

can be formed artificially, by imitation of the unconscious process, by

accustoming the brain to the new idea. Let me, as an example, refer

again to the minor subject of daily friction, and, within that subject,

to the influence of tone. A man employs a frictional tone through

habit. The frictional tone is an instinct with him. But if he had a

quarter of an hour to reflect before speaking, and if during that

quarter of an hour he could always listen to arguments against the

frictional tone, his use of the frictional tone would rapidly diminish;

his reason would conquer his instinct. As things are, his instinct

conquers his reason by a surprise attack, by taking it unawares. Regular

daily concentration of the brain, for a certain period, upon the

non-frictional tone, and the immense advantages of its use, will

gradually set up in the brain a new habit of thinking about the

non-frictional tone; until at length the brain, disciplined, turns to

the correct act before the old, silly instinct can capture it; and

ultimately a new sagacious instinct will supplant the old one.

This is the rationale. It applies to all habits. Any person can test its

efficiency in any habit. I care not whether he be of strong or weak

will--he can test it. He will soon see the tremendous difference between

merely 'making a good resolution'--(he has been doing that all his life

without any very brilliant consequences)--and concentrating the brain

for a given time exclusively upon a good resolution. Concentration, the

efficient mastery of the brain--all is there!

XII

AN INTEREST IN LIFE

After a certain period of mental discipline, of deliberate habit-forming

and habit-breaking, such as I have been indicating, a man will begin to

acquire at any rate a superficial knowledge, a nodding acquaintance,

with that wonderful and mysterious affair, his brain, and he will also

begin to perceive how important a factor in daily life is the control of

his brain. He will assuredly be surprised at the miracles which lie

between his collar and his hat, in that queer box that he calls his

head. For the effects that can be accomplished by mere steady,

persistent thinking must appear to be miracles to apprentices in the

practice of thought. When once a man, having passed an unhappy day

because his clumsy, negligent brain forgot to control his instincts at a

critical moment, has said to his brain: 'I will force you, by

concentrating you on that particular point, to act efficiently the next

time similar circumstances arise,' and when he has carried out his

intention, and when the awkward circumstances have recurred, and his

brain, disciplined, has done its work, and so prevented

unhappiness--then that man will regard his brain with a new eye. 'By

Jove!' he will say; 'I've stopped one source of unhappiness, anyway.

There was a time when I should have made a fool of myself in a little

domestic crisis such as to-day's. But I have gone safely through it. I

am all right. She is all right. The atmosphere is not dangerous with

undischarged electricity! And all because my brain, being in proper

condition, watched firmly over my instincts! I must keep this up.' He

will peer into that brain more and more. He will see more and more of

its possibilities. He will have a new and a supreme interest in _life_.

A garden is a fairly interesting thing. But the cultivation of a garden

is as dull as cold mutton compared to the cultivation of a brain; and

wet weather won't interfere with digging, planting, and pruning in the

box.

In due season the man whose hobby is his brain will gradually settle

down into a daily routine, with which routine he will start the day. The

idea at the back of the mind of the ordinary man (by the ordinary man I

mean the man whose brain is not his hobby) is almost always this: 'There

are several things at present hanging over me--worries, unfulfilled

ambitions, unrealised desires. As soon as these things are definitely

settled, then I shall begin to live and enjoy myself.' That is the

ordinary man's usual idea. He has it from his youth to his old age. He

is invariably waiting for something to happen before he really begins to

live. I am sure that if you are an ordinary man (of course, you aren't,

I know) you will admit that this is true of you; you exist in the hope

that one day things will be sufficiently smoothed out for you to begin

to live. That is just where you differ from the man whose brain is his

hobby. His daily routine consists in a meditation in the following vein:

'This day is before me. The circumstances of this day are my

environment; they are the material out of which, by means of my brain, I

have to live and be happy and to refrain from causing unhappiness in

other people. It is the business of my brain to make use of _this_

material. My brain is in its box for that sole purpose. Not to-morrow!

Not next year! Not when I have made my fortune! Not when my sick child

is out of danger! Not when my wife has returned to her senses! Not when

my salary is raised! Not when I have passed that examination! Not when

my indigestion is better! But _now!_ To-day, exactly as to-day is! The

facts of to-day, which in my unregeneracy I regarded primarily as

anxieties, nuisances, impediments, I now regard as so much raw material

from which my brain has to weave a tissue of life that is comely.'

And then he foresees the day as well as he can. His experience teaches

him where he will have difficulty, and he administers to his brain the

lessons of which it will have most need. He carefully looks the machine

over, and arranges it specially for the sort of road which he knows that

it will have to traverse. And especially he readjusts his point of view,

for his point of view is continually getting wrong. He is continually

seeing worries where he ought to see material. He may notice, for

instance, a patch on the back of his head, and he wonders whether it is

the result of age or of disease, or whether it has always been there.

And his wife tells him he must call at the chemist's and satisfy himself

at once. Frightful nuisance! Age! The endless trouble of a capillary

complaint! Calling at the chemist's will make him late at the office!

etc. etc. But then his skilled, efficient brain intervenes: 'What

peculiarly interesting material this mean and petty circumstance yields

for the practice of philosophy and right living!' And again: 'Is _this_

to ruffle you, O my soul? Will it serve any end whatever that I should

buzz nervously round this circumstance instead of attending to my usual

business?'

I give this as an example of the necessity of adjusting the point of

view, and of the manner in which a brain habituated by suitable

concentration to correct thinking will come to the rescue in unexpected

contingencies. Naturally it will work with greater certainty in the

manipulation of difficulties that are expected, that can be 'seen coming

'; and preparation for the expected is, fortunately, preparation for the

unexpected. The man who commences his day by a steady contemplation of

the dangers which the next sixteen hours are likely to furnish, and by

arming himself specially against those dangers, has thereby armed

himself, though to a less extent, against dangers which he did not dream

of. But the routine must be fairly elastic. It may be necessary to

commence several days in succession--for a week or for months,

even--with disciplining the brain in one particular detail, to the

temporary neglect of other matters. It is astonishing how you can weed

every inch of a garden path and keep it in the most meticulous order,

and then one morning find in the very middle of it a lusty, full-grown

plant whose roots are positively mortised in granite! All gardeners are

familiar with such discoveries.

But a similar discovery, though it entails hard labour on him, will not

disgust the man whose hobby is his brain. For the discovery in itself is

part of the material out of which he has to live. If a man is to turn

everything whatsoever into his own calm, dignity, and happiness, he must

make this use even of his own failures. He must look at them as

phenomena of the brain in that box, and cheerfully set about taking

measures to prevent their repetition. All that happens to him, success

or check, will but serve to increase his interest in the contents of

that box. I seem to hear you saying: 'And a fine egotist he'll be!'

Well, he'll be the right sort of egotist. The average man is not half

enough of an egotist. If egotism means a terrific interest in one's

self, egotism is absolutely essential to efficient living. There is no

getting away from that. But if egotism means selfishness, the serious

student of the craft of daily living will not be an egotist for more

than about a year. In a year he will have proved the ineptitude of

egotism.

XIII

SUCCESS AND FAILURE

I am sadly aware that these brief chapters will be apt to convey,

especially to the trustful and enthusiastic reader, a false impression;

the impression of simplicity; and that when experience has roughly

corrected this impression, the said reader, unless he is most solemnly

warned, may abandon the entire enterprise in a fit of disgust, and for

ever afterwards maintain a cynical and impolite attitude towards all

theories of controlling the human machine. Now, the enterprise is not a

simple one. It is based on one simple principle--the conscious

discipline of the brain by selected habits of thought--but it is just

about as complicated as anything well could be. Advanced golf is child's

play compared to it. The man who briefly says to himself: 'I will get

up at 8, and from 8.30 to 9 I will examine and control my brain, and so

my life will at once be instantly improved out of recognition'--that man

is destined to unpleasant surprises. Progress will be slow. Progress may

appear to be quite rapid at first, and then a period of futility may set

in, and the would-be vanquisher of his brain may suffer a series of the

most deadly defeats. And in his pessimism he may imagine that all his

pains have gone for nothing, and that the unserious loungers in

exhibition gardens and readers of novels in parlours are in the right of

it after all. He may even feel rather ashamed of himself for having

been, as he thinks, taken in by specious promises, like the purchaser of

a quack medicine.

The conviction that great effort has been made and no progress achieved

is the chief of the dangers that affront the beginner in

machine-tending. It is, I will assert positively, in every case a

conviction unjustified by the facts, and usually it is the mere result

of reaction after fatigue, encouraged by the instinct for laziness. I do

not think it will survive an impartial examination; but I know that a

man, in order to find an excuse for abandoning further effort, is

capable of convincing himself that past effort has yielded no fruit at

all. So curious is the human machine. I beg every student of himself to

consider this remark with all the intellectual honesty at his disposal.

It is a grave warning.

The Human Machine · 第 3 / 5 段