•Vol. 67, No. 2 FEBRUARY 1962 Sixpence

Editorial

Scientific Humanism and Education Mrs. Margaret Knight, M.A.

Modern Man and the Animal Kingdom Dr. Maurice Burton

The Humanist Frame Richard Clements, O.B.E.

Morality: Relative and Absolute Reginald Sorensen, M.P.

An Unbeliever Looks at Death Professor Hyman Levy, M.A.

Abraham Lincoln—II a I. Bennett

Conway Discussion Correspondence

South Place News Society's Other Activities

SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY

- SUNDAY MORNING MEETINGS AT. ELEVEN O'CLOCK

February 4—J. B. COATES, M.A.A Challenge to Humanism

Soprano Solos by VALERIE KITCHEN

February 11—MRS. MARY STOCKS, B.Sc., LL.D., D.Litt.The Habit of Reticence

Flute Solos by JOHN M. TIPPER

Feburary 18—F. II. A. MICKLEWRIGHT, M.A., F.R.11ist.S.Morals and the Political Constitution

Bass Solos by G. C. DOWMAN

February 25—R. STEPHEN SCHENK, B.Sc.(Econ.)Tradition and Social Change

Piano Solos by FIONA CAMERON

SOUTH PLACE SUNDAY EVENING CONCERTS, 71st Season, 1961-62 Concerts at 6.30 p.m. (Doors open 6 p.m.) Admission 2s. 6d.

February 4—ILSE WOLF, MARTIN ISEPP. THEA KING,CECIL ARONOWITZ, LELIA ARIELI

Lieder, Schubert "Der Hirt Auf Dem Felsen".Mozart Trio for Clarinet, Viola and Piano;Brahms Sonata in E flat, op. 120, No. 2 for Clarinet and Piano

February 18—MACGIBBON STRING QUARTETHaydn in D, op. 20, No. 4; Mozart in B flat, K 589;Beethoven in B flat, op. 130

February 25—LONDON STRING QUARTETBeethoven in E minor, op. 59, No. 2; Sibelius "Voces Intimae" in D minor,op. 56; Brahms in C minor, op. 51, No. I

March 4—VIRTUOSO ENSEMBLEBeethoven Septet; Schubert Octet

The Objects of the Society are the study and dissemination of ethical principles andthe cultivation of a rational religious sentiment.

Any member in sympathy with these objects is cordially invited to become a Member(minimum annual subscription is 12s. 6d.), or Associate (minimum annual subscription7s. 6d.). Life membership £13 2s. 6d. Associates are not eligible to vote orhold office.Enquiries should be made to the Registrar to whom subscriptions should be paid.

The Monthly Record is posted free to members and Associates. The Annualcharge to subscribers is 8s. Matter for publication in the March issue shouldreach the Editor, G. C. Dowman, Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, W.C.1, by

' February 6. .

OfficersSecretary: I. HurroN LimnHon. Treasurer: A. FENTONHon. Registrar: Mrs. T. C. LINDSAY Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, W.C.IAsst. Hon. Registrar: Miss W. L. GEORGEExecutive Secretary: Miss E. PALMER

TheMONTHLYRECORD

Vol. 67, No. 2 FEBRUARY 1962 Sixpence

CONTENTS

EDITORIAL .. 3SCIENTIFIC HUMANISM AND EDUCATION, by Margaret Knight, M.A. 4MODERN MAN AND THE ANIMAL KINGDCM, by Maurice Burton 7THE HUMANIST FRAME, by Richard Clements, OBE. .. 9MORALITY : RELATIVE AND ABSOLUTE, by R. W. Sorensen, M.P. .. IIAN UNBELIEVER LOOKS AT DEATH, by Professor Hyman Levy, MA. 13ABRAHAM LINCOLN-11, by G. I. Bennett .. 14CONWAY DISCUSSIONS 17CORRESPONDENCE .. 18SOUTH PLACE NEWS 19SOCIETY'S OTHER ACTIVITIES 19

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

EDITORIALA FEW PARAGRAPHS taken from The Universe have been sent to us by Mr. FrankThurgood. He has replied to them setting their minds at rest.

"Nobody, of course, can hear of the testing of megaton bombs or read ofthe breakdown of talks between statesmen without feeling great anxiety.

"Those who have no belief in God, and think that death is the end of all,are naturally stricken with panic.

"These are terrifying days for the agnostics. Christians can remain calm."The frenzy of recent demonstrations has its roots in unbelief."Apparently for Christians, although they have feelings of deep anxiety,

these are not terrifying days.The inference, of course, is that man having put his trust in man alone is

now stricken with panic. We, however, must assume that the Christian is notstricken with panic although he is still stricken with the fear of hell-fire.

We are of the opinion that as man has brought about the grievous dangerswhich beset us, it is only man who can deal with the problem, and expect andhope that in 1962, he will do just that.

3

Charles DickensFebruary 7 will be the 150th anniversary of the birth of Charles Dickens and

it will not be thought surprising that this Society should make a feature of thisoccasion.

On February 6, in the Library, Richard Clements will open a discussion on"The World and Work of Charles Dickens- with illustrative readings from hisworks.

Many of our members will have noticed on the walls of the Library an en-graving which has been donated by Mrs. F. M. Hawkins, showing Dickensgiving a reading of The Chimes to a few of his friends, among whom is WilliamJohnson Fox, who was a minister at South Place Chapel at that time. Thismakes a link between us at Conway Hall and the great novelist.

G.B.S.We understand that Shaw's lecture on "Modern Religion" to which we

referred in our last issue, was reprinted for the first time since 1912 and thatcopies are still available at 3s. 6d. and may be obtained from Barbara Smoker,The Shaw Society, 86 Dalmain Road, S.E.23.

Professor Cunelli -A member of this Society for some twelve years, Georges Cunclli is a distin-

guished professor of singing, technician of voice development and expert incases of vocal disorder. His forty-five years' experience in this field, compriseseight years in Rome, twelve years in Paris and twenty-five years in London.

A pioneer of the scientific approach to vocai problems, he was one of thefirst to use clinical questioning, thus collecting very valuable data for advancingvocal education.

Recognised by leading laryngologists as a consultant in serious cases of vocaltrouble in speaking and singing voices, the Professor has been invited manytimes to judge vocal international competitions. And Professor Cunelli hasassisted many leading artists of the "straight" theatre, Sir Laurence Olivier,Vivien Leigh, Alec Dunes and Rex Harrison are among these, also very manystars of musical comedy and television have been greatly benefited by his help.

In his spacious studio at Hampstead, photographs of these and numerous otherstars adorn the walls. His vast experience in the training of the voice will not belost, for he has written three books which were published in Rome in the 1920'sand his autobiography which he hopes will be published this year will containthe fruits of forty-five years' useful labour in the cause of vocalism.

Professor Cunelli recently celebrated his seventy-fifth birthday with a cocktailparty at which he entertained many of his pupils.

Scientific Humanism and Education ,BY

MARGARET KNIGHT, M.A.

[THE SPEAKER BEGAN by defining the term "Scientific Humanism", and continued.]If our educational system were officially Humanist instead of Christian, itmight make little difference to the curriculum and to methods of teaching,except in two subjects—history and religious instruction. History would betaught with less of a Christian slant, and religious instruction (which as nowpractised would be more accurately termed religious indoctrination) wouldcease entirely. At present nearly all children, from the age of five, are presentedwith highly-disputable views as though they were established facts, and are pre-

4

vented as far as possible from hearing the other side. Scientific Humanists mustinevitably disapprove of this, just as they disapprove of political indoctrinationin totalitarian countries.

This does not imply, however, that in a Humanist educational systeM childrenwould not be taught about religion (as distinct from being "taught religion"),or that they would not read the Bible. The Bible is part of our cultural heritage.But it should be presented, as are other forms of folk-literature, aS a mixtureof fact and legend, not as something which it is a duty to try to believe.

Before turning to moral education, it will • be as well to clarify the maindifferences between Christian and Humanist ethics. Christians and Humanistsdiffer in their view about the ultimate sanction of morals, and also, to someextent, in their specific judgments as to what actions are right or wrong.

Christians invoke a supernatural sanction for morals; Humanists do not.To the Christian, to act rightly is to act in accordance with God's will; to theHumanist, to act rightly is to act so as to promote man's well-being and develop-ment. To put the point differently, morality, to the Christian, is somethingimposed on man, from above by a supposed supernatural lawgiver, while,to the Humanist, it is something that has been worked out (and is still beingworked out) by men themselves, in the process of learning to live happilytogether in communities. One can sum up all this by saying that Christianmorality is predominantly authoritarian, and Humanist morality predominantlysocial.

To the Humanist, authoritarian morality is, quite literally, childish; it islike the morality of small children, to whom "right" means "what pleases thegrown-ups- and "wrong" means what makes them angry. To borrow anexample from Professor Nowell-Smith: to the small boy, the reason why hemust not pull his sister's hair is that mummy will be angry, or that mummywill punish him; he has made a great step forWard towards moral maturitywhen he sees that the real reason for not pulling his sister's hair is that it hurtsher. There is a similar step forward in the morality of societies when they passbeyond the view that virtue consists in blind obedience to the arbitrary com-mands of some inscrutable power, to the realisation that, fundamentally, toact rightly is to act for the common good—in short, when they pass fromauthoritarian to social morality.

But the Christian may ask what motive we have to act for the common good,if we do not believe in God. The Humanist answer is that the motive lies inour innate altruistic tendencies: tendencies that have been built into us in thecourse of our evolutionary history, and without which the human race couldnot have survived. The Christian (whose view of human nature is in essencedeeply pessimistic) may regard this as a starry-eyed view, but there is amplesupport for it in biology, psychology and anthropology. Men, after all, aresocial animals, just as apes, deer and elephants are social animals; and .nosocial animal lives for itself alone. To quote Dalrwin in The Descent of Man,"The social instincts—the prime principle of man's moral constitution—withthe aid of active intellectual powers and the effects of habit, lead naturallyto the Golden Rule, 'as you would that men should do unto ye, do ye alsounto them': and this lies at the foundation of morality."

It is sometimes suggested that though Christians and Humanists differ aboutthe necessity of a supernatural sanction for morals, this difference is importantonly at the theoretical, philosophical level; in practice, both groups agree inregarding the ethical teaching of Jesus as the highest the world has known.But this is not altogether true.

The Christian ethic, of course, contains much that is admirable; in particular,its emphasis on love and human brotherhood, and on the Golden Rule "dounto others as you would that they should do unto you". But there is nothingspecifically Christian about these ideals; they are common to all the greatworld religions, as well as to Humanism. And Jesus was by no means the first

5

to proclaim them; they were taught, for example, by Confucius in the fifthcentury B.C., and by the Stoics before and during the Christian era.

What were specifically Christian were some less admirable doctrines. Forexample, the appalling doctrine of hell, which Protestants now try to explainaway as "symbolic", but which is still taught as literal truth by the RonianCatholic Church. Then there is the view that this life is mainly important as apreparation for the next—a view that has led the Church, throughout Most ofits history, to be hostile, or at best indifferent, to social progress and socialreform. There is the repeated emphasis in Christian teaching on doing good inthe hope of reward—a respect in which Christian morality compares unfavour-ably with Stoicism. And there is the passive, negative, somewhat masochisticcharacter of Christian ethics, which results, probably, from the fact that Jesuswas preaching in an occupied country, living under Roman rule; it was naturalthat he should extol the "underdog" virtues such as humility and long-suffering,rather than the more aristocratic qualities of magnanimity, justice and tolerance,which the Jew of the Roman empire had little opportunity to practise.

The fact must be faced that there is much in Christian ethics that is repulsiveto a healthy child—pronouncements like "blessed are the poor in spirit" andinjunctions to resist not evil and to turn the other cheek. Indeed, it is probablytrue to say that, to most of us who were brought up in the Christian tradition,words like "virtue", "morality", "duty" and the like are vaguely embarrassing;a feeling that would have seemed astonishing to an ancient Greek or Roman.

To come now to Humanist moral training. It will be clear from what has beensaid that the chief aim of this training is to encourage "socialised" behaviour ;to induce people to act for the common good rather than purely selfishly.There are two complementary ways of attaining this end. First, by fosteringwhat Darwin called the "social instincts", and so encouraging the develop-ment of warm-hearted, generous natures that will spontaneously want to dothe altruistic thing: and second, by instilling moral principles and habits ofco-operation that will reinforce the social instincts, and make us behave kindlyand justly even when a good many of our spontaneous impulses are pulling usthe other way.

There is considerable evidence that the most effective way of promoting thefirst objective is by providing a warm, secure, affectionate home backgroundin early childhood. The second objective—that of forming habits and moralprinciples—is the one to which the schools and the teachers have most to con-tribute. In the give-and-take of the social life of the school, in games, and inother communal activities, spontaneous or organised, the child learns the all-important lesson that it is necessary, at times, to behave co-operatively evenwhen he does not feel like it.

But what of moral teaching in the class-room? Dewey and others havesuggested that the principle of "learning by doing" applies even more stronglyto moral than to intellectual education, and that to try to teach morality byverbal instruction is like trying to teach a person to swim on dry land. But this,surely, is a half-truth. Wc must not underrate the extent to which human beings,even children, are affected by what they hear and read, as well as by what theydo. It is true that children's moral attitudes are formed largely by interactionwith their contemporaries. But they are also greatly influenced by imitation of(or, to use the psychological term, by "identification with") older people whothey love and admire. Moreover, when children are old enough to read (or toenjoy being read to), they "identify", not only with parents and others aroundthem, but with admired characters in history or fiction.

Thus, an important part of Humanist character-training is to provide worthyobjects for identification; to present children with stirring stories about menand women of attractive and colourful personality, who have done great serviceto humanity and are held up to admiration on that account. I would suggestthat few people in this generation have done more for the moral education of

6

children than the Rev. Marcus Morris, the founder of "Eagle".The Rev. Marcus Morris, of course, is not a Humanist, and it may be felt

that there is nothing specifically Humanist in what I have just been saying. Butwhat is specifically Humanist (to end where I began) is the rejection of the viewthat moral training can be effective only when it is backed by supernaturalsanctions. If a child has human parents that he loves and trusts, he has noneed for a supernatural father-figure; and if he has worthy human models foradmiration and imitation, there is no need to tell him that he ought to try tomodel himself on a mysterious demigod, who is unlikely to be wholly attractiveto him, and who in any case is not a practicable object for imitation, becausehe is allegedly superhuman.

In the words of that great Humanist, Einstein,."In their struggle for the ethicalgood, teachers of morality must have the stature to give up the doctrine of apersonal God. The ethical behaviour of man is better based on sympathy,education and personal relationships, and requires no help from religion."

(Summary of a lecture delivered on November 26,1961.)

Modern Man and the Animal KingdomBY

MAURICE BURTON, D.Sc.

DURING THR MONTH of October last, three meetings took place in London.Apart from the fact that I attended all three (and was probably the only personto have this distinction) they had much in common. Each was concerned withthe welfare of the higher animals, and it is of interest to compare and contrastthem.

The first, to mark World Day for Animals, was held in the Friends' MeetingHouse and was attended, I would judge, by people with very diverse interestsbut all united in the one aim, to combat cruelty and the wanton treatment ofanimals. I happened to be one of three speakers, and my one lasting memoryis of the intense sincerity of that audience. Sitting on the platform that sinceritycame over to me almost in a tangible form.

This was no more than I would have expected, for there is considerableevidence that, in spite of the fact that cruelty and the hooliganism so oftenassociated with it tends to usurp the headlines, there is a growing appreciationthat animal life is part of creation and deserves our respect if no more.

The second meeting was that at which the Wild Life Foundation Fund waslaunched. The aim, expressed in the various manifestoes read to the meeting,was the saving of big game, and other wildlife throughout the world. Thesincerity was doubtless there, but it did not manifest itself in such a vivid way,perhaps because those who organised it were more intent on the practicalities.The dominant note was the appeal for money, as might be expected, althoughprecisely how this was to be used did not emerge.

The third meeting was a symposium held under the auspices of the instituteof Biology. Lasting two days, it consisted of talks by some score of experts onhow to equate the growing human population and its need for food with theneed to save the wildlife of the world. The emphasis here was on making useof wildlife for food, at the same time so harvesting it that those parts of it nowthreatened with extinction should be saved.

To attempt to deal adequately with the many points brought out during thesethree meetings—and some of them are violently in conflict—would take moretime than is available here. The effect of the meetings can, however, be sum-marised: there is the desire to lessen man's impact on wildlife generally, themoney is being sought to do this, and the knowledge of how to do it is availableif it can be co-ordinated and acted upon.

7

If I were asked to state briefly two of the outstanding features, or better, theAwl) features that have become most firmly fixed in my memory, I would choosethe following. Leaving aside any question of the treatment of domestic animalsfor the wider, but no less urgent, problem of our treatment of the wild animals,my first point would be that much cruelty and suffering, with consequent gainto humanity on every score, could be mitigated if not eliminated by long-termresearch and planning, of the right kind. My second point would be that theoverall shortage of food which, we are told, threatens the human race, is moreapparent than real, and that the idea that any onc race or community is com-pelled to indulge in wasteful slaughter for animal protein is something of amyth.

Under the first heading we have the example that will stand for all time asan ideal in wildlife conservation. The Pribiloff fur seals were reduced from theirmillions almost to vanishing point by wasteful slaughter by sealers. Americanbiologists then found that when these seals are hauled out on the beaches forbreeding there is a high mortality, especially among the pups. The beaches arcoccupied by numerous harems, each consisting of a number of cows and an oldbull. Inland from these are the batchelor beaches where the young males ofthree years or less congregate. There is a constant challenge from the youngmales just reaching maturity. These result in fights in the course of which thepups, and to some extent the cows sustain injury, often fatal, from the old bullscharging over them. From this knowledge emerged the principle that if thebachelor males were thinned out there would be fewer deaths "from naturalcauses" and a survival among the pups that would outweigh the young maleskilled. By the application of the principle the situation has been reached where

• he fur seals have now been restored 4o their former millions (and are still in-creasing) and at the same time a crop of skins can be gathered for the worldmarket—by humane killing.

In the U.S.S.R. the saiga antelope, once on the verge of extinction, has nowbeen restored to something like its former millions, by precisely, the samemethod: the killing of only young males. Thus, the species has been saved andthe need for flesh and hides met.

Killing cannot be avoided. If in every species there was no mortality exceptfrom old age the world would soon be overcrowded to the point where nothingcould survive. Killing humanely and at the same time satisfying the needs ofhuman markets is about as near as one can get to having one's cake and eatingit. The logical extension of this control using biological knowledge could resultin many more instances, in obviating wanton slaughter.

The second outstanding thing that impressed me arose during the Instituteof Biology's symposium. It was that plant protein is as valuable for humanfeeding as animal protein. It was, however, admitted that people as a wholeseemed to prefer animal protein—and even some vegetarians partake of foodsin the guise of meat (e.g. nut cutlets). Plant proteins have the advantages thatthey are more abundant, acre for acre, often more nourishing (an examplewas the high nutritive value of the Brazil nut), their marketing presents fewerproblems, and plant foods usually contain no pathogens.

Correlated with this was the undoubted fact that the nutritive values offoods when placed on the table were much reduced as compared with theirpotential nutritive values in the initial stage. (This is where tables of food valuescan be delusory.) In the harvesting, transporting, packaging, preserving, pro-cessing and cooking there is a cumulative loss in nutritional value. The advocatesof unfired foods score here since their meals have the maximum nutritionalvalue. Aside from this, however, there must be a tremendous wastage in potentialvalues, not only from foods thrown out as garbage, but in the ordinary pro-cesses they go through from harvesting to actual consumption. If this couldbe eliminated, and the distribution of food on a world scale put on a rationalbasis, there would be far leas malnutrition, and less fear of world shortages.

8

There would also be less threat to the wildlife of the world from over-grazingand from the other evils inevitably associated with the idea that more animalprotein is a necessity. -

In such a summary as this the author can only claim E. & O.E. All is too brieffor giving a clear and unassailable picture, or to do justice.to the finer detailsof the story. But very clearly, on a rational basis, apart from emotional issues,cruelty and suffering to animals, wild and domestic, is nowhere necessary-tohuman survival or comfort. .

(Summary of a lecture delivered on November 19, 1961.)•

The Humanist FrameBY

RICHARD CLEMENTS, O.B.E.

IT WAS HEGEL who said that the condemnation a great man lays upon the worldis to force it to explain him. The remark may well be applied to the upsurgesof thought and feeling that, from time to time, arise in society, bringing withthem a sense of liberation from ancient creeds, worn-out ways of life andirrational forms of behaviour. Or, put in a More positive manner, they openup path-ways for new adventures in living, rededication to enduring values,and a new birth of freedom. Humanism is an example of such a movement;and- whether the critics like it or not, the word has come to stay. The intellectualtask of today is to explain Humanism in terms that clearly reject•belief insupernaturalism Of any kind and reaffirm belief in the brotherhood of man. AHumanist programme of action then becomes possible.

Thus, we believe that Humanism, which gave values to three of the greatclassical civilisations—China, Greece and Rome, is again becoming a powerfulidea in the thought, literature and art of the modern world. So, like otherprecursors of human enlightenment and progress, present-day advocates ofHumanism have to answer three basic questions. These are: What can I know?What ought I to do? What in-life may I hope for? Sir Julian Huxley, who editsthis book*, and his twenty-five collaborators, have essayed the.task of show-ing how man, considered as a natural phenomenon and the creator of his owndestiny, can achieve personal fulfilment within the frontiers of free and demo-cratic societies striving for the summutn bonum for all men. These essaYs embracea wide variety of subjects and provide the reader with a feast of good things onthe soul-searching issues of our time.

In his Preface Sir Julian says that the idea of evolution had kindled hisimagination while he was still at school. Then, as an undergraduate, he becamea convinced Darwinist; and recalls that the first lecture he gave was on "theevolutionary relativism of the senses", and the second on "the critical pointor discontinuity between biological and human evolution". Later, in thetwenties, he became concerned with "the idea of progress, as an evolutionarymovement in a certain definable direction". He thinks that man is now em-barked on the psychosocial stage of evolution.

His travels and work during the thirties brought him an insight into, and anunderstanding of, human ecology and the need for overall planning. Then,after the war, he was appointed as Secretary-General of the Preparatory Com-mission for UNESCO, and, in consequence, came face to face with the harshrealities of the divergent ideologies at work in the international community.In the belief that the organisation would work more effectively if it acted onthe basis of an agreed set of ideas and principle, he wrote his pamphlet, entitled

The Humanist Frame. George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London, 1961. 37s. 6d.

9

A Philosophy for UNESCO. But he tells us, "it speedily became apparent thatno single system of ideas could be acceptable to any United Nations Agency inthe world's state of ideological chaos". But something had to be done about it.So, during the time he was Director-General, he came to see "what a vastquantity of knowledge was lying about unused, for lack of any such philosophy;and, indeed, of any agreed system of concepts and ideas to order the disorderlyfacts and to put them to useful work". After leaving UNESCO he got togethera group of friends and colleagues to wrestle with thoproblem. Then came therealisation that the "knowledge-explosion" of the past century was providingman with a new vision of his destiny. He was thus led into the intellectualadventure of constructing an integrated idea-system which he called EvolutionaryHumanism.

It was in the light of his great scientific knowledge, wide travel, and vastexperience of international affairs that he decided to enlist the help of hisfellow humanists in the writing of this book. It is altogether fitting that theintroductory essay is some forty-eight pages long, entitled The Humanist Frame—should have been contributed by Sir Julian: for no man in our day bringssuch rare gifts of human insight, knowledge and sensitivity to the task of build-ing a humanist philosophy of life.

In this brief review it is not possible to touch in detail upon even the mostimportant of this noteworthy collection of essays; much as one would wish todo so. In reading the book, I found myself grouping the essays under the head-ings provided by the three questions mentioned earlier in this article.

First, then, let us consider what the writers have contributed to the problemsof knowing. Most humanists would, perhaps, agree that the world picturethey hold at any given time is that of modern science. There Is no question ofdogma at issue. If new facts and knowledge come to light then the existingscientific picture will be corrected accordingly. Thus, science first seeks know-ledge, which when verified, can be commuted into power and applied practicallyin the life and affairs of the world. This pattern emerged very clearly in theyears between the two wars, when the widely-read exponents of science—writers such as Haldane, Huxley, Waddington, Bernal, Levy and Ritchie Calder—were all stressing the significance of the social function of science.

The essays dealing with science in this volume are, in addition to the editor'sintroduction, contributed by Sir Russell Brain (on Body, Brain, Mind and Soul);Professor C. H. Waddington (The Human Animal); Dr. J. Bronowski (Scienceis Human); and Professor Morris Ginsberg (A Humanist View of Progress).Each of these writings is required reading, so to speak, for those who wish tokeep in touch with the progress of scientific thought.

Further, when we try to consider what ought to be done, there is in thisbook another stimulating group of essays. At the head of this list stands H. J .

Blackham's contribution (The Human Programme). It is a thoughtful andstimulating exercise in constructive thinking. Then there are such essays asMorton M. Hunt's on Love in a Human Frame; E. H. Erikson's The Roots ofVirtue; Francis Huxley (Marginal Lands of the Mind); Robin Morris (HumanistEconomics); H. L. Elvin (An Education for Humanity); Sudhir Sen (New Horizonsfor Under-Developed Peoples); Michael Young (Sociology and Public Policy);Baroness Wootton (Humanism and Social Pathology) and other notable piecesof writing.

Finally, there are the writings on art, which discuss the things of joy andbeauty without which human life is sadly impoverished. In this group I havepicked out Sir William Holford (The Shells of Society); Michael Tippett(Towards the Conditions of Music); and Stephen Spender (Social Purpose andthe Integrity of the Artist). All three of the writers mentioned stress the need toawaken in human beings sympathies, perceptions and feelings, and for societyto provide an environment of living in which people can live free, harmoniousand creative lives. "Bread, education and roses", to use Danton's striking

phrase, are elements that the social innovator must weave into the structureof our society, if we are to achieve for man a satisfying life in the world oftime and space.

(Summary qf a lecture given at Conway Hall. December 3, 1961.)

Morality: Relative and AbsoluteBY

R. W. SORENSEN, M.P.

"ScrENce," WROTE SIR JULIAN HUXLEY recently," has removed the obscuringveil of mystery from many phenomena . . . but it confronts us with a basicand universal mystery—the mystery of existence in general and of the existenceof mind in particular."

Is morality within that mystery of consciousness ? In any case, with my amateurequipment, I venture to consider the highly important realm of morality andmoral values as my contribution to our reflections thereon.

You have not been compelled to attend here, nor are you compelled to listen,for this is a free country and if you so please you can now ponder on your realor imaginary football-pool winnings or simply go to sleep. If, however, youcare to listen to my free speech and exercise temporary forbearance you can thenassist me with your interrogations.

In contrast with this I cite alternative experiences. Firstly, in this hall someyears ago a meeting in which I participated was interrupted by "EmpireLoyalists", one of whom had an amplifier that provoked me into assisting hisexit through the doors into the street. Secondly, there was the House of Commonssession last week when mild disorder culminated in the adjournment of theHouse and the charge that this was unwarrantable because the Mace had notbeen placed on the Table at the appropriate moment. 0 dreadful calamitythat the golden club, scorned by Cromwell as "that bauble" should not havebeen in its rightful place! Evidently the age of magic has not entirely passed.

Thirdly, I recollect once addressing a howling mob whose dissent took theform of knocking me out. Lastly, there was the incident when, as a student, Iwas extracted from the class and, under arrest, taken to Scotland Yard. (Lestthis audience, respectable in quality, if not in quantity), draws erroneous con-clusions I add I was speedily returned to my studies relieved from further legalprocess.

These events I mention in order to emphasise that we need not fear the termina-tion of our gathering because no mace is on the table, for we have neither atable nor even a domestic poker as a substitute for a mace. Nor need we feardisorder or policemen waiting to arrest us. We take for granted, almost as anAbsolute moral principle, that we can assemble for free thought and speech..This is also true of other moral values that have passed beyond questioning,whatever be the problems of their translation and variability. Moreover, weaccept the obligation of transmitting them to the new generation, as surelyas we accept its physical succour. Even in the most advanced schools of "free"education we cannot avoid this, if not by direct exposition then by exampleand influence. Whether for good or ill our moral evaluation will speak for itselfto our heirs.

Anthropological and psychological research has demonstrated how moralityis rooted in social utility, and we know that etymologically the word "morality"is derived from mores or custom. Gregarious homo sapiens similar, though farmore elaborate neuro-psychological mechanism to its higher brute cousins. Intribal life we discern variable patterns of similar texture, whether in divisionsof labour; hygienic measures; control of sexual relationships; acceptance ofchiefs or elders (of which "aldermen" are reminiscent); usage of common

11

lands; punishment of social offences; veneration of certain objects, places orpersons (such as the Chief's stool equivalent to our royal throne, or cudgel akinto sceptre or mace); celebrations of birth, puberty, death, harvest or martialvictory; placations of invisible forces or entities and so on. The customary andtraditional are verily the warp and woof of tribal morality.

Assumed social necessities became emotionally strengthened by intimidation,the impress of the sagacious aged and association with the supernatural. Thislast is illustrated in the records of the Decalogue where it is written: "And Godspake all these words saying .

.." What more august authority for barbaric

peoples can there be than that? It is no mere human sanction, but of Yahvehhimself on the mystic height of Sinai. He tolerates no rivals. "For the Lord thyGod am a jealous God" who can take vengeance on any impudent fellow cockinga rebellious snook behind Yahveh's back, but.fearfully also on his deSeendants.It is the same Mighty One who imposes the discipline not to kill, steal, commitaffithery, bear false witness or covet a neighbour's chattels such as wife, ox orass. (Non-prohibition of feminine covetousness should not be misconstrued,for women then had little more status than oxen or asses or other creaturesless dumb than women.)

The Old Testament is an invaluable archaeological museum.for a representa-tive studi of primitive society and moral evolution. TEe priestly compilationof the Decalogue contains a mixed selection of supernaturally elevated socialrequirements. Beyond such as these we can observe ihe slow.emergence of asense of moral values, as when obedience to the social insistence of not to killa member of one's own community passes later on to a profound reverence forlife in Which both killing and cruelty are emOtionally repulsive.. As an exquisite blossom is organically related to stem and root but is identical

with neither, so is the exfoliation of morality into moral values. Similarly, achild's obedience to—or even defiance of—parental "coinmandments" canbecome sublimated into a more richly sensitive consciousness Of affection.

There has been a wide diversity of moral patterns. Hindu and Moslemdistinctiveness contributed substantially to the territorial partition of Indiaand Pakistan; and Margaret Meade has well described the striking differencesbetween similar ethnic communities in neighbouring islands. In Christendomthe early Christians would not bear arms, but later Christianity endorsed"righteous" wars, and while this still prevails Quakers and other pacifistChristians declare all war to be evil. Slavery, a moral institution for manycenturies, is now deemed un-Christian, and so with feminine subjugation.Contraception was sinful until Anglican bishops reheard the Holy Ghost andnow, apart from Roman Catholicism, it is generally accepted as righteous.Both autocracy and democracy have Christian defenders, but challenging bothis communism with its own morality.

It may appear that diversity itself demonstrates moral relativity. Even s6,this can encourage a nihilistic cynicism and a consequential danger of socialconfusion exploitable by and for dictatorship. Where there is no minimal Moraland ethical consensus there is but slight means of securing social cohesion.savethe unstable balance of fear. Hence, part of the tension between the communistand non:communist worlds is due to the absence of a common moral criterionabove the necessity of sheer survival.

Nevertheless, there is some encouragement in the fact that notwithstandingdifferences of pattern, emphasis and priority, divergent communities do affirmsome basic common virtues, such as fraternity, mercy, integrity, ,honesty,fidelity, "love thy neighbour as thyself" (not a uniquely Christian virtue) andrepaying evil with good. Inconsistency between precept and practice can amountto hypocrisy, and ambiguous generalisation can evaporate. None the less, evennominal subscription to those values establishes a signpost for the humanfuture. Some moral advance has been achieved, and, as I have emphasised, inour own country we take for granted freedom, liberty and other moral values

12

as if they were Absolutes. Indeed, fraternal co-operation is embodied in ou.iNational Health Service and racial interdependence is partially implementedin the United Nations. True, there are paradoxes in which free democracy issuspended, for as in navigation a captain must take charge so art army must havea Commander-in-Chief. Often, however, this is justified only as a temporarynecessity, as in Ghana and, with Communist enthusiasts who predict that ulti-mately the state will wither away.

Our immediate need is for deeper exploration of what may be intrinsic humanlaws for human. fulfilment, corresponding to our appreciation of laws for goodphysical health. In much we shall remain agnostic and provisional, and allow-ances will always be present for appropriate local and temporal variations, butI submit there are certain moral qualities discernible and cherished by mankindthat, as far as we can know, give converging directions towards the consumma-don. of human fulfilment and peace.

(Summary of a lecture delivered on December 10.)

An Unbeliever Looks at DeathBY .

PROFESSOR HYMAN LEVY, M.A.

AIL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE comes to the individual through the medium of hissenses, so that it deals with an objective situation subjectively experienced.Since people do not habitually return to the living after dying to give us adescription of the final process as seen by the victim himself, death is a veryspecial kind of event corresponding to the disappearance of thc subjectiveself. It can be seen only objectively, a very one-sided view. If we set out touncover the process of dying, it is useless submitting ourselves to the experi-ment. The act of dying is unique and final, the experiment cannot be repeated,or even satisfactorily completed, because the experimenter becomes increasinglyincapable of describing the sequence subjectively. Death is subjectively anunobservable event.

This unique situation throws the door wide open to speculation and to un-verifiable philosophising about the "after-life". The existence of this wordalready implies an unwarranted assumption about the continuity after deathof something corresponding to the abstraction "life" (manufactured from theadjectival description—living matter), as if life were known to be a thing initself. Discussion of the after-death is then usually conducted in a languageembodying a one-sided imagery, that of living beings, with no possibility ofverification to justify the relevance of the language. Out of this it is possibleto build a vast hierarchy of imagery of the "after-life" with its implied im-mortality ranging from ineffable and everlasting bliss to the everlasting tortureof the damned, and the imaginary geographical locations of these in heaven andin hell. Religious bodies have never honestly faced up to a modern linguisticand scientific analysis of the terms they use in this connection, and the imagerythis language draws in its train. Nor are they apparently conscious of the educa-tional and emotional impact on youngsters of the concepts of sin in this life and ofpunishment in an "after-life" for these sins. Personally, I used to make bargainswith God—a natural thing in a commercial age—that if he would not allow suchand such terrible things to happen, I would in return pray so many times. Whatreally terrified me, however, was the thought that, without my knowing it, Imight be the chosen Messiah—chosen by God against my will. It was torture.

With this background of illusion emanating from such a socially powerfulinstitution as the Church, it is naturally difficult even for grown-up people tolook the fact of death squarely in the face, as unemotionally as they would adate on the calendar. They tend to think that it will involve a terribly painful

13

parting for them from their loved ones, whereas, of course, the feelings areentirely on one side, that of the survivors.

As against this on the other hand human beings sometimes commit suicideas if the immediate tenors of this life are overwhelmingly greater than thoseconjured up for the after-death. Again, animals unlike human beings, nevercommit suicidc as a deliberate act. They seem unaware of the fact of death.Here lack of imagination corresponds to a greater degree of realism since thereis nothing to imagine or to fear. (Animals and human beings have differentranges of sensory perception. What is the relation of this to their respective powersof imagination? A dog will look unmoved at a cat on a television screen, ap-parently, not interpreting it as a cat at all. We have no difficulty in imaginingdepth in the abstract flat picture. Does the dog remain undeceived because itrelies on its sense of smell to an extent much greater than we humans do ?If this is so, it would mean that this extra range of sense perception restrictsthe imaginative capacity of the animal!)

But deliberate group suicide among human beings has occurred in history.certainly in Jewish history, several times. The most recent was Lhe mass risingin the Warsaw Ghetto against their Nazi oppressors, where it was a foregoneconclusion that their action would lead to certain death. It illustrated, however,one sense in which the death of the individual is not the end. We think and talkof the Ghetto Rising. It is we who, living today, bear the intellectual and emo-tional imprint of that action. It is recorded in history; its influence is stored insociety. In so far as social life is undying—perhaps a doubtful propositiontoday—to that extent are individuals immortal.

What then is the purpose of all this? we are often asked. What is the meaningof this age-long struggle?. We come and we go—whence? whither ? Surelythere must be some intention in it all, some historic purpose to give sense toit. If so is it not the outward and visible manifestation of a divine power ? Itis easy to slip into this kind of talk. Here we are, a part of this changing physicaluniverse, gradually learning how to live, gradually acquiring understandingand control over raw nature, and shaping our knowledge and control to ourexpanding purposes. We and our universe shape us, but we are the consciouspart of it. Meaning is something which we make, which we fashion. It is ourmeaning and it expresses our purpose. Blot us out and all our meaning, purposes,and our sense of beauty vanish with us, for they are of our making. The individualwith a mere three-score-years-and-ten to enrich the social heritage has no timeto waste if his purpose is to contribute thc fullest meaning to life.

(Summary of an address delivered on December 17, 1961.)

Readings:Poents—"Irony", by Louis Untermeyer.

"Heaven", by Rupert Brooke.

Abraham Lincoln — HBY

G. I. BENNETTTfra ELECTION WAS held in November, and Lincoln gained the popular vote.At fifty-two this Springfield lawyer, who a fcw short months before had beenalmost unknown, was to be the new President of the United States! The Southernstates had talked for years about withdrawing from the Union because of therising tide of opinion in the North against the extension, and even existence, ofslavery. The election of Lincoln, whose sentiments on the subject were now wellknown, probably precipitated their decision. South Carolina called a conventionin December, 1860 and voted unanimously for secession. Six weeks later,Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas followed her.14

They elected their own President, Jefferson Davis, and proclaimed themselvesthe Confederate States of America. But before this actually happened, Lincoln,sensing the immcnse danger that now threatened, made it clear in his FirstInaugural that, though he would unsay nothing he had said about slavery, -in a situation in which the Union was at stake, his primary, bounden duty asleader of the nation must be to take every necessary step to save it.

Civil war, which had been simmering for ten years, broke out suddenly withthe Confederates' attack on Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbour. The materialadvantages were with the North; but in Robert E. Lee the South had a generalof surpassing brilliance. A master of strategy and surprise moves, Lee by hisswift, rapier thrusts outwitted the Northern command again and again, andmade the war difficult and long. Fought over the immense distances of Ten-nessee and Virginia, and down the Mississippi, it dragged on for four bitteryears at a cost of more than one-and-a-half million lives. Only gradually,after the appointment of Ulysses S. Grant as commander of an army, andfinally of all the armies of the North, did the tide turn in favour of the UnitedStates.

Those years were the greatest ordeal of Lincoln's life. He found himselfforced to prosecute a war that he had been powerless to prevent against peoplefor whom even in the foul passions of battle he could feel no hate. In the courseof that war Lincoln aged tremendously, and in the last photograph taken ofhim on April 10, 1865 (the day following Lee's surrender), we notice a changein him. There has been a softening in the rugged furrows. But he looks so oldand weary, almost sick. And in his face are the marks of one who has sufferedmore than words can tell in the tragedy of a nation in bloody conflict with itself.

In November of 1864 Abraham Lincoln was re-elected for a further term.Yet he was to live only long enough to see the end of the war, destined to playno part in the restoration of his ravaged country. How valuable would havebeen the counsels of a ruler who, on the very day of Lee's surrender, asked forthe band to play "Dixie- because he thought it one of the best tunes he hadever heard, even though it was the anthem of the defeated South! He made itplain that he would resist all demands for revenge against the Southerners. Evenon the day of his death he declared, "No one need expect me to take any partin hanging or killing [the rebel leaders], even the worst of them. Frighten themout of the country, open the gates, scare them off. Enough lives have beensacrificed. . . . There is too much disposition in certain quarters to hector anddictate to the people of the South, to refuse to recognise them as fellow-citizens. . . . I do not share feelings of that kind."

Yet he who had "malice toward none and charity for all", the most mag-nanimous man of his generation, died from a bullet wound in the head—shoton that fateful night of April 14, 1865, while he sat watching a play in Ford'sTheatre, Washington. And his assassin was a crazed actor who lived in a worldof melodrama, off the stage as on it, and, seeing himself in the role of Brutus,believed that in killing Lincoln he was ridding the Confederate States of theirarch-enemy and oppressor!

Greatness is a curious quality. We are not fully conscious of it in a manwhile he lives. Death, which brings so many things into sharp and poignantfocus, makes the worth and even grandeur of the life of a noble man at lastapparent to all. It was only after Lincoln's tragic end that his true stature as aman and as a statesman was fully appreciated. We see Lincoln today as thegreatest President that America has ever had, and one of the finest nationalfigures in the records of history. I know of no parallel to him in the modernworld. The simplicity and goodness of his life, his unaffected modesty, hisquiet courage in face of adversity and storm, his forbearance with those who werea trial to his spirit, his unimpassioned tolerance—these qualities remind usof a Roman emperor who nearly eighteen centuries ago made his memoryimperishable by noting down his spiritual aspirations and inmost thoughts

15

on life. But Marcus Aurelius, after all, had been a prince, with the.educationof a prince, and his virtues, as Renan recognised, were of the self-consciouskind, the product of long-sustained endeavour that had its origin in the Stoic

. philosophy. There is no similarity here with Lincoln. The only real educationthat this lowly son of a pioneer ever had was what he gave himself through thefew books that came his way—principally Volney's Ruins, Gibbon's Decline andFall, Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, Paine's Age of Reason, Aesop's Fables,Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, and the Bible. But he wasa deep-thinking, deep-feeling man who learnt most from his experiences of therough-and-tumble life he had lived, and from his contacts with human beings.Kindness irradiated his personality. His virtues were natural, like everythingabout him. He never took a mean advantage of anyone in his life. No publicman has ever had a reputation for greater integrity; but there can have beenfew in high office as sad as he. "If Lincoln ever had a happy day in twentyyears, I never knew of it," remarked Herndon, his law-partner. "Melancholydripped from him as he walked."

Yet Lincoln had a sense of humour. He was an inspired teller of funnystories when the mood took him. Hearing an amusing anecdote, he would jotit down in a little notebook he carried for the purpOse, so as to remember itfor retelling later on a suitable occasion. Laughter was a safety-valve to thisgreat, lonely man.. It dispelled for a short time a brooding melancholy thatbecame worse as he grew older. Sad songs and poems had for him a peculiarfascination, and he would often write them down to go over them 'again andagain. Undoubtedly in his nature there was a tendency to introspective sad-ness, but this was intensified by the griefs he had suffered. His mother had diedwhen he was only ten, and, young as he then was, her passing had apparentlyaffected him much. She was an illegitimate daughter of an unknown Southernplanter, from whom Lincoln believed he had inherited some of his best qualities,and he seems to have held her in special regard, once saying briefly but feelinglyto Herndon, "God bless my mother! All I am and ever hope to be I owe toher."

As a young man, of twenty-six, Lincoln had fallen deeply in love with AnnRutledge, a sweet girl to whom as postman he used to deliver letters in thevillage of New Salem. The story of their romance provides, us with the onlyidyllic episode in Lincoln's life. For a few fleeting months he courted her withthe shy tenderness of a man who had had little contact with women. His happi-ness then was such as he had never known before, and was never to know again.Suddenly Ann went down with a fever and died, leaving him heart-broken.Perhaps time salved the poignancy of his grief; but how many times in afteryears did his thoughts go back to the slender, gentle girl of whom death hadcheated him? Certainly his eventual marriage to Mary Todd, with its frequentsqualls and storms, was far from blissful and must have been the cause of muchof his despondency. Yet Mary bore him four sons of whom he was very fond.Here was a consolation. But tragedy seems always to have dogged his steps,and he had the agony of seeing two of his boys carried to a much-too-earlygrave.

He said little about the misfortunes that strewed his life. Only at rare momentsdid he talk about what affected him most, emotionally. "He could joke withfriends or with strangers," writes one biographer, Herbert Agar, -but he couldnot speak his heart: 'everybody knew him, and nobody knew him'.'' Often hewould drop into a mood of sombre, impenetrable abstraction, his long spareform slumped in a chair, his head sunk deep in his chest. What torment ofspirit could have been more apparent! Whcn the news of his father's assassina-tion was broken to Tad, the younger of his surviving sons, the boy was told,"Your father has gone to Heaven". "Then I am glad," exclaimed the youngfellow, "because he was never really happy here, was he ?"

Never is a big word. Lincoln had, long ago, after a hard and joyless youth,

16

known a fleeting happiness with Ann Rutledge. But his elevation to the highestoffice in the land brought him none, for the private sufferings of his own lifewere thenceforth fused with and overwhelmed by the-sufferings of the nation.Many were the people, victims of the war, and the IN ar's heart-breaking cir-cumstances, who called at the White House to see him during that turbulentperiod in the hope that he could help them. To be sure, he helped them if hecould. But how ffielp those whom the war had deprived for ever of a belovedhusband, son, or brother? Some of-the letters he wrote then that were preservedhave become treasures of the nation.

To a woman who had lost her sons on the field of battle he wrote:"I feel how weak and fruitless must be any words of mine which should

attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But Icannot refrain from tendering you the consolation that may be found inthe thanks of the Republic they died to save. I pray that our HeavenlyFather may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you onlythe cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride thatmust be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.—Yours very sincerely and respectfully, A. Lincoln."

And to the parents of a boy whom he had known and esteemed, he pennedthese lines:

"In the untimely loss of your noble son our affliction here is scarcelyless than yours. So much of promised usefulness to one's country, andof bright hopes for oneself and friends, have rarely been so suddenlydashed as in his fall. In size, in years, and in youthful appearance, a boyonly. . . My acquaintance with him began less than two years ago; yetthrough the latter half of this period it was as intimate as the disparity ofour ages and my engrossing engagements would permit. To me he appearedto have no indulgences or pastimes, and I never heard him utter a profaneor an intemperate word.... In the hope that it may be no intrusion uponthe sacredness of your sorrow, I have ventured to address you this tributeto the memory of my young friend and your brave and early fallen child."

What other head of state in the midst of a desperate war has found the timeor taken the trouble to write letters like these? There is in them such delicacyof feeling, and they reveal something of the fine nature of the leader whopiloted the United States through ,the most terrible moments of its existence.Remarkable as a statesman, he was even more remarkable as a man. With mostgreat national figures, it is the other: way round, their political vision or admini-strative ability being their chief and perhaps only claim to remembrance.Lincoln, with his assured grasp of fundamentals, had abundant political vision,and gave expression to it in some of the most memorable language ever used.This alone would have made him great. But he was, as we have seen, a man ofhigh principle, completely without pretence, whose broad, imaginativesympathies and intimate understanding of ordinary folk gave him an inspiredcommon touch and made him the best loved character in American nationalhistory.

It is in this combination of political and human qualities that the greatness ofAbraham Lincoln stands supreme.

Conway DiscussionsSummary of lecture given at Conway Hall on Tuesday, November 21, 1961.

Speaker: Mr. F. A. Ridley, President of the National Secular Society

CHRISTIANITY, ISLAM AND THE CHALLENGE OF COMMUNISMMR. RIDLEY began by indicating what was in his opinion the most impor-

tant phenomenon in the religious world of the present century. This was to be found in the spectacular worldwide spread of Atheism—a phenomenon

17

only evident since the coming of the Industrial Revolution (prior to whichilliteracy and superstition had been universal). The expansion of Atheismhad resulted in the rise of Marxist communism which combined Atheismwith Communism. As a result of the Russian and Chinese revolutions religionwas disappearing within the communist world. Whilst simultaneously Atheismwas spreading rapidly, west of the iron curtain in non-communist forms.

Faced with this entirely novel situation, the Christian Churches tended,more and more, to sink their mutual differences and to adopt the policy ofa "United Front". Outside the Church of Rome this had already been rea-lised in the World Council of Churches to which the Russian OrthodoxChurch had just become affiliated. Even the Vatican, despite its claims tounique infallibility, was making moves in the same direction, viz., PopeJohn's reception of Archbishop Fisher and the projected Ecumenical Councilto be called at the Vatican for the reunion of Christendom.

The lecturer emphasised the opinion that it was Atheism and Materialism,rather than the economic doctrines of Communism, which explained thepresent frenzied hate and fear with which the Vatican et al. regardedCommunism.

The wealth and power enjoyed by the Churches depended, ultimately, ona continuing belief in God, and Atheism was, consequently, their greatestdanger:

Mr. Ridley added that in his opinion Christianity might be compatiblewith non-atheistic forms of communal ownership: in which connection, hecited the very successful, and, entirely collectivist regime, run in the seven-teenth century by the Jesuits in Paraguay.

The lecturer's conclusion was that, just as today we saw the United Frontof the Churches, so, tomorrow, it might become the united front of thegods—in reply to the unseen but ubiquitous "pull" of Atheism. In par-ticular, this tendency was evident in Islam. the most powerful non-Christianreligion, which was now confronted by the Industrial Revolution and theconsequent expansion of scientific criticism. Both at the Catholic shrine ofFatima (named after Muhammed's daughter) and in recent demonstrationsin Egypt ("For Christ and Muhammed against Communism"), the same ten-dency was manifested towards a unity of creeds and of hitherto rival cults.

The United Front of Christian Churches was already in being, the UnitedFront of the Gods was coming—against their common destroyer—Atheism.It was time, concluded the lecturer. that Atheism, also, should close its ranks.

CorrespondenceMarx Memorial Library

To the Editor. The Monthly Record

Dear Sir,The Marx Memorial Library is offering a prize of LS in books for the best

essay on "Marxism and the Individual" to be submitted by March 14, 1962.The essay, which should show some knowledge of Marxist writing on thesubject, should not exceed 800 words, and should be written or typed on oneside of the page only. In judging the entries, the committee will be guided lessby their literary merit than by the understanding and development of Marxistprinciples displayed.

Yours sincerely, -ANDREW ROTHSTEIN, chairman,

Marx Memorial Library,37A Clerkenwell Green, E.C.I.

t8

South Place NewsCountry Dancing

At the last country dance party of the old year, presentations were made tothose who have contributed so much to their success. A book of Osbert Lan-caster's cartoons was given to Eda Collins, our lively instructress, and a home-made cake with coffee icing to Phoebe Snelling-and Edwina Palmer who see tothe refreshments. (The cake was sampled by those present and found delicious.)Our thanks are also due to Ken Dobbie who looks after the musical reproduc-.tion.

Our classes, conducted always in the party spirit, with informality and aminimum of insistence on technicalities, have been attended by an average oftwenty-five to thirty people, with always a number of new faces, yet sufficientexperienced dancers to keep the sets going. A few more S.P.E.S. members andfriends would be welcome since we can take up to forty. No previous experienceis required to find the sessions most enjoyable. The country dance parties ,willcontinue on the third Saturday of every month up to and including April.Sunday Social P. S.

On December 17, a musical was presented entitled "An Hour with the Poets",when Valerie Kitchen, Irene Cements, Fiona Weir, Ted Inglis, William Bowen,Norman Hodgkinson and G. C. Dowman, with Joyce Langley at the piano,provided musical illustrations of British lyrical poetry..The audience fully ap-preciated this tribute to the heritage of British verse.

Society's Other ActivitiesConway Discussions

Tuesdays in the Library, at 7.15 p.m.February 6—Richard Clements, 0.B.E., J.P.: "The World and Work of

Charles Dickens." With illustrative readings from his works.13 Dr. John Lewis, M.A.: Blaise Pascal (died 1662); mathematician

and philosopher of unreason.20—Michael Randle (Secretary, Committee of 100): "The Committee

of 100—its Principle and Policies."27—Mrs. Peggy Crane (Executive officer, Appeal for Amnesty):

"Breaking the Barrier of Silence."March 6—Ian Leslie, M.A.(Cantab.): "The Ethical Basis of Anarchism."The Library, Conway Hall

The Librarian will be in attendance on Sunday mornings and Tuesdayevenings.Sunday Social

February 18 in the Library at 3 p.m. Mr. Frank Thurgood: "About Londob".Members and friends are cordially invited. Tea will he served at 3.45 p.m.Thursday Evening Social

February 8 in the Library at 7 p.m. Whist Drive. Light refreshments.Country Dancing

Saturday, February 17, in the Library, 3-6 p.m., in conjunction with theProgressive League. Instructress: Eda Collins. A charge of 2s. is made. Everyonewelcome.Freedom From Hunger

A series of eight discussion meetings has been arranged in conjunctionwith the Humanist Council and the U.K. Committee of the Campaign.

These will take place on Thursday evenings, February 22 to April 12 andwill be open to anybody interested.

Full details are available from Conway Hall, or from Paul Crellin, 35Stainforth Road, Newbury Park, Ilford, Essex.

19

SOUTH •LACE

Dm South Place Ethical Society is a progressive movement dating frOm 1793 which

today advocates an ethical humanism, the study and dissemination of ethical principles

and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment, and believes that the moral life

may stand independently in its own right.

We invite to membership all those who have abandoned 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

Library is available and all members receive the Society's journal, The Monthly Record,

free. The Sunday Evening Chamber Music Concerts founded in 1887 have achieved

international renown.

The minimum subscriptions are: Members, 12s. 6d. p.a.; Associate Members

(ineligible to vote or hold office), 7s. 6d. pn.; Life Members, £13 2s. 6d.

Services available to Members and Associates include: The Naming Ceremony of

Welcome to Children, the Solemnisation of Marriage, Memorial and Funeral Services.

The Story of South Place, by S. K. Ratcliffe (5s. from Conway Hall). is a history of

the Society and its interesting development within liberal thought.

Secretary: J. Hutton Hynd Hon. Registrar: Mrs. T. C. Lindsay

Hon. Treasurer: A. Fenton Hon. Asst. Registrar: Miss W. L:George

Executive Secretary: Miss E. Palmer Eyitor, "The Monthly Record": G. C. Dowman

Address: Conway Hall, Red Lion Sodare, London, W.C.I. (Tel.: CHAncery 8032)

, MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM -

To THE HON. REGISTRAR,

CONWAY HALL, RED LION SQUARE, LONDON, W.C.I.

I desire to become a •MemberiAssociate Member of South Place Ethical Society

and enclose entitling me (according to the Rules of the Society) to, .

membership for 8ne year from ihe date of enrolment.

NAME (BLOCK LETTERS PLEASE)

ADDRESS

DATE SIGNATURE

*Crnsi out where inapPlicable.

Printed by Farleigh Press Ltd. (T.U.), Aldenham, Herts.