the gutter, with a baby in her arms and a couple of boxes of matches in
one hand. We know she is a widow because of her weeds, and we know she
is respectable by her clothes. We know she is not begging because she is
selling matches. The sight of her in the gutter pains our heart. Our
heart weeps and gives the woman a penny in exchange for a halfpenny box
of matches, and the pain of our heart is thereby assuaged. Our heart has
performed a good action. But later on our reason (unfortunately asleep
at the moment) wakes up and says: 'That baby was hired; the weeds and
matches merely a dodge. The whole affair was a spectacle got up to
extract money from a fool like you. It is as mechanical as a penny in
the slot. Instead of relieving distress you have simply helped to
perpetuate an infamous system. You ought to know that you can't do good
in that offhand way.' The heart gives pennies in the street. The brain
runs the Charity Organisation Society. Of course, to give pennies in the
street is much less trouble than to run the C.O.S. As a method of
producing a quick, inexpensive, and pleasing effect on one's egotism the
C.O.S. is simply not in it with this dodge of giving pennies at random,
without inquiry. Only--which of the two devices ought to be accused of
harshness and callousness? Which of them is truly kind? I bring forward
the respectable young widow as a sample case of the Heart _v_. Brain
conflict. All other cases are the same. The brain is always more kind
than the heart; the brain is always more willing than the heart to put
itself to a great deal of trouble for a very little reward; the brain
always does the difficult, unselfish thing, and the heart always does
the facile, showy thing. Naturally the result of the brain's activity on
society is always more advantageous than the result of the heart's
activity.
Another point. I have tried to show that, if the reason is put in
command of the feelings, it is impossible to assume an attitude of blame
towards any person whatsoever for any act whatsoever. The habit of
blaming must depart absolutely. It is no argument against this statement
that it involves anarchy and the demolition of society. Even if it did
(which emphatically it does not), that would not affect its truth. All
great truths have been assailed on the ground that to accept them meant
the end of everything. As if that mattered! As I make no claim to be the
discoverer of this truth I have no hesitation in announcing it to be one
of the most important truths that the world has yet to learn. However,
the real reason why many people object to this truth is not because they
think it involves the utter demolition of society (fear of the utter
demolition of society never stopped any one from doing or believing
anything, and never will), but because they say to themselves that if
they can't blame they can't praise. And they do so like praising! If
they are so desperately fond of praising, it is a pity that they don't
praise a little more! There can be no doubt that the average man blames
much more than he praises. His instinct is to blame. If he is satisfied
he says nothing; if he is not, he most illogically kicks up a row. So
that even if the suppression of blame involved the suppression of praise
the change would certainly be a change for the better. But I can
perceive no reason why the suppression of blame should involve the
suppression of praise. On the contrary, I think that the habit of
praising should be
fostered.
(I do not suggest the occasional use of trowels, but the regular use of
salt-spoons.) Anyhow, the triumph of the brain over the natural
instincts (in an ideally organised man the brain and the natural
instincts will never have even a tiff) always means the ultimate triumph
of kindness.
And, further, the culture of the brain, the constant disciplinary
exercise of the reasoning faculty, means the diminution of misdeeds. (Do
not imagine I am hinting that you are on the verge of murdering your
wife or breaking into your neighbour's house. Although you personally
are guiltless, there is a good deal of sin still committed in your
immediate vicinity.) Said Balzac in _La Cousine Bette_, 'A crime is in
the first instance a defect of reasoning powers.' In the appreciation of
this truth, Marcus Aurelius was, as usual, a bit beforehand with Balzac.
M. Aurelius said, 'No soul wilfully misses truth.' And Epictetus had
come to the same conclusion before M. Aurelius, and Plato before
Epictetus. All wrong-doing is done in the sincere belief that it is the
best thing to do. Whatever sin a man does he does either for his own
benefit or for the benefit of society. At the moment of doing it he is
convinced that it is the only thing to do. He is mistaken. And he is
mistaken because his brain has been unequal to the task of reasoning the
matter out. Passion (the heart) is responsible for all crimes. Indeed,
crime is simply a convenient monosyllable which we apply to what happens
when the brain and the heart come into conflict and the brain is
defeated. That transaction of the matches was a crime, you know.
Lastly, the culture of the brain must result in the habit of originally
examining all the phenomena of life and conduct, to see what they really
are, and to what they lead. The heart hates progress, because the dear
old thing always wants to do as has always been done. The heart is
convinced that custom is a virtue. The heart of the dirty working man
rebels when the State insists that he shall be clean, for no other
reason than that it is his custom to be dirty. Useless to tell his heart
that, clean, he will live longer! He has been dirty and he will be. The
brain alone is the enemy of prejudice and precedent, which alone are the
enemies of progress. And this habit of originally examining phenomena
is perhaps the greatest factor that goes to the making of personal
dignity; for it fosters reliance on one's self and courage to accept the
consequences of the act of reasoning. Reason is the basis of personal
dignity.
I finish. I have said nothing of the modifications which the constant
use of the brain will bring about in the _general value of existence_.
Modifications slow and subtle, but tremendous! The persevering will
discover them. It will happen to the persevering that their whole lives
are changed--texture and colour, too! Naught will happen to those who do
not persevere.
THE END