One
Humans are eroded animals
el humans can'tt bear the idea that we are animals. The thought is
unsettling, it makes us feel squeamish. For many centuries we've
been educated to feel that we've evolved beyond animal status. We
are more sophisticated, enlightened, we are better than animals. Do animals have a
Mozart? Can they laugh? This book will hopefully convince you not simply that
we are animals but eroded ones, and that as eroded animals we have SO completely
lost our natural faculty to harmonise with our habitat that we live, all of us, in
varying states of walking dementia.
What I'm saying in this book, what I'm going to demonstrate, is that we are
frankly insane animals. Not one of us escapes living out some kind oflunacy which
we cannot control, and our habitat, which has extended itself to the entire planet
and all its resources, reflects this collective uncontrollable lunacy. And we are
almost shock-proof where that lunacy manifests itself. We each carry about a
person within ourselves whom we believe to be us. But it is a false person. He can't
fulfil the programmes he sets himself. He doesn't know who he is, only what he is
meant to be, namely a creature responsible for himself.
His turmoils and frenzies provide us with a picture of ourselves as humans.
Iti is a picture of aberration from animal life. This aberration is SO deep that we no
longer compare ourselves with other animals, we deeply believe that our behaviour
has no connection with theirs, it is conducted in a vacuum far from animal life. Our
world takes no account of animals in its daily transactions, we feel no equality with
animals (much of our love for them comes from our sense of them as unequal to us,
helpless). We humans have made each ofus knows it a world in which we find
it desperately difficult to live, yet we're not responsible for it, you and I. Our very
presence in it perpetuates its difficulties. We are born into this ambiguity. So
adjustment to such a world is a long process, it begins in the earliest months of life


and is bitterly difficult, twisting the animal into contortions in order to approximate
it to a fictitious personage called 'human' > just as the Chinese once bound the feet
of newborn girls to make them aesthetically appealing, no longer animal.
This book will show you that if we could surmount our ingrained and
absurd notions about ourselves as heroically evolved creatures, ifwe could own up
to our animality, we would begin to see how we became the poor unbalanced
creature we are, which would lead us to see what real, that is to say animal
heroism was involved in our survival. And from that point we could begin to learn
how to project ourselves differently to the outside habitat, quit destroying ourselves
and everything round us. This learning process, this way back into a tolerable life,
means a completely different approach to ourselves, a realistic one for the first
time, one that places us where we can use our full animal resources, not false
imaginary resources that take us further and further away from ourselves.
Part of us says This man is talking sense' . This is the part that reads the
paper, watches TV, gets scared or angry in the street, maybe over-drinks from time
to time, gets into road rage, sometimes harbours an unwilling hatred SO intense as
to produce the wish to maim or kill. It is the part of us that feels something of a
master, a knower, a doer and achiever. Another more passive part of us is saying
Ofcourse I do these things, I'm human, I get out ofhand, but who wouldn'tin this
nut world?' . This is the part that sees us as a suffering species but the suffering,
we say, is due to our elevated status, other animals don't suffer like us because
they're incapable of such a highly developed mode ofl life, we moved beyond
animality and they didn't! Yet, even though this part of ourselves expresses
unqualified superiority, it recognises, implicitly, that we humans alone made the
world we're in and it is a world that makes us envy our pet cat or dog.
Only in the last ten or fifteen years have we given up the silly notion that
apart from a few aberrations and accidents the human world is orderly, either in its
high places or its low. The word progress' has suffered at last its demise. Not even
the politicians go near it any more. Like development and evolution' it suggested
al human ever striving upward from a primitive base but a steadily increasing


erosion offaculties since the first human is a much more likely tale: not striving up
from a primitive base but falling from it in an ever giddier spiral! Only in this sense
could the present epoch be called, with terrible irony, the climax ofhistory.
We say 'the present epoch' as we say 'the world', quite as ifthey had
nothing to do with us and weren't made by us. But the moment we see them as
animal products arising from an urgent need caused by the loss ofa world, the loss
of our original fixed primate habitat, we are in a position to recognise that the
erosion we see all around us, of oxygen in the air we breathe, of minerals in the
soil, the erosion of the seas and the rays of the sun and the weather belt round the
earth, are an exact reflection of the erosion that grips our ownj faculties.
Everywhere I look, in past centuries and today, I am told I must master
myself, master my emotions, master my environment, master others. In this way,
the millennia-old story goes, I would be happy, I would better myself.
But I live inside myself and I realise, in my secret self, that this self-mastery
business will eat me up before it saves me, will lengthen the already fatally long
distance between me and my habitat, me and my fellow animals, me and my real
self
Regaining my animality (i.e. my full faculties) doesn' 't come by loving
animals or having pets, though this is the first token of a wished-for change.
Devisers of the most fearful pogroms and massacres, the wickedest persecutions,
have kept the best in themselves for other animals. But the experience of being an
animal, the realisation that only in our sanest aspects are we animal, means a
change not of attitude but life.
Like everyone else I've been side by side with animals all my life and from
time to time I've found myselflearning from them rather than teaching them. Most
of my graduate training was in philosophy (thinking about thought) and I couldn't
help noting the vast differences between my own thought and that of other animals.
When I was learning to ride horseback I couldn't help seeing that my ignorance of
equine thought was far greater than their ignorance of my human thought. The fact
that I could train them, with gradual sympathetic persuasion, proved that they could


decipher my codes of word and touch and sign, while I was locked in helpless
hunches and hopes about their codes. As it happened I was never interested in
trying to show how much their intelligences could rise to mine. Ijust didn't accept
that starting-point. I didn'ti feel an animal needed to have to rise to a human level
any more than a humming bird needed to rise to a kangaroo's. It might be that I
needed to rise to theirs, in some way. When I thought of the two twentieth century
'global' wars, comparable to conscious self-eradication by a whole species, I
thought that was possibly the case.
In a book about twenty years ago, published in the fanimal intelligence'
category, I wrote about two dogs who were learning the German alphabet by
tapping a different number for each letter (this tradition of 'tapping' animals began
in Germany at the beginning of the last century). Now animal intelligence' implies
the kind ofintelligence we humans could commend: dumb' animals are trying to
master higher' forms of communication. But I was interested solely in what those
two dogs had to say, ifthey could say anything, about us humans. I was interested
too in finding out what other animals would have done if their vital faculties had
eroded as ours have done. Would they not have been obliged to construct a new
voice-box and tongue language to meet the fact that their previous breath- and eye-
codes had been forgotten? By studying the dogs, watching them tap out letters in
reply to questions I had put to their teacher verbally, I began to think that nothing
the human had done couldn'tl have been done by another animal, i.e. that we have
simply used our animal powers ofadaptation, powers which are required in all
animals every moment of the living day.
Human civilisations and religions began to seem to me pure animal
manifestations, that is to say efforts to imitate the experiences (visionary and
spiritual as well as digestive and procreative) of the whole animal. At the same time
I saw that it was going to be difficult to persuade either the religious or the atheist
human that God was an unnecessary word for other animals because they lived in
recognition, inherited and spontaneous and automatic recognition, of all that the
word God suggests.


It became ever easier for me to see myself as an animal. But there was
another reason for this. It came from my work over the last nineteen years as a
therapist for humans. My therapy treats the human nervous system and it does SO
through the breath, hence its name Oxygenesis' . It introduces proper' breathing
patterns to the breathing muscles, patterns I arrived at through observing babies and
animals in their sleep as well as their waking hours, patterns that have, in a word,
eroded alongside many other faculties. From among the many hundreds of adults
I've treated in more than one country perhaps two have had the natural gift to
breathe like animals. The extraordinary results I sometimes witness as my clients
revert to the proper use of their abdominal and thoracic muscles are due solely to
the fact that the animal (or the human) has, in this one respect of oxygen-
metabolism, been rehabilitated. Nothing short of a complete rehabilitation of the
human can induce lost faculties to revive completely.
Therefore, the first thing I am going to provide in this book is an animal
picture of the human, not a human picture of animals. I am going to dismantle those
of our inherited beliefs that are expendable. I say expendable' because inherited
beliefs can' 't on the whole be touched. For instance, in a period off flourishing
civilisation consensus is fairly absolute. At that time inherited human ideas are
called, simply, reality, which is as impossible to question as to question that an oak
table is hard to the touch. At such times law and order tend not to be imposed but
to reside in the mind as an unquestionable way to behave. Only when human
reality fragmentates as it is doing now, only when the self seems to disintegrate
correspondingly, can we sO much as broach the question of fwho humans think they
are.
I'm also going to show you how you came to think you're an animal only
when you commit a brutality. I'm going to show you how the word 'animal' came
to mean brute' from which decent humans must recoil. I'm going to show you
how animal' in a practical sense equals tranquillity, harmony, balance, even
spirituality, and how human' in a practical sense equals alienation, restlessness,
abstraction and destruction.


And then I'm going to show you how to merge animal' with human' in a
way that leads to an altogether new animated mode ofthought. The word animal'
will be taken back to its original Roman and Indo-European root as meaning
everything that breathes' . The new thought won't be what the word thought'
implies at present, namely abstraction and ideology. In this sense it won'tbe
human thought. It will be animal thought. So here we go.


So deeply, in fact, that it isn't a performance for us at all but reality. Being SO hypnotized by it, SO
surrounded by all its works night and day, deafened and excited and distressed by it (but distress
confirms its power), we have to say This is too huge an edifice for me to question'.
It is as if the madman who claims he is Caesar SO influences his keepers and fellow
inmates and ultimately everybody outside his mental institution that he is acknowledged as
Caesar by all. Soi in truth he becomes Caesar. And the demented origin is entirely hidden.
The peculiar power of dementia---the demonic' energy, as we say---lies in its
transference of the sexual drive into all kinds ofi imaginative and mental forms. This doesn't at all
mean that sex was sublimated' or 'canalized'. There was no loss of sexuality as there was a loss
of vision and nasal power, but a great change did come about, just as it does in ZOO animals. The
murder rampage at the London ZOO which I talked about in my first chapter shows to what extent
mind had entered sexual performance (and therefore male hierarchy) in the captive animal. So it
is the other way round--mind (concentration) invades the sexual drive, rather than the latter
being in any way weakened.
I mention this now because we have SO diluted the word mind' from its original Greek
meaning of spirit', and SO diluted the word spirit' to a sort of spook status, that the vast force of
mind' in the human structure has been lost to view.
In its original Greek form (menos) the word 'mind' meant the vigor or spirit displayed by
al human, not his conscious thought as it does for us (though the Greeks could also mean that).
The word could be applied to the processes of digestion, glandular secretion, response to
sexual stimuli. But we (beginning with Aristotle) have SO elevated the word to a status where it
means non-animal' that it now refers to the act of withdrawing from unconscious processes
rather than expressing them.
This brought the word 'brain' into circulation. Originally, as the Greek word bregma, this
meant just the brow or forehead, i.e. a surface---not at all a force, a spirit. Iftoday we use it more
and more it is because we think of mind' as being exclusively located in the brain area, a
calculating apparatus in detachment from the rest ofthe nervous system.
Of course we know that we can't have a thought without electrochemical events
happening inside us. We know that the brain depends on blood circulation and the whole nexus
of nerves deployed along the spinal column. Yet our perception of the matter is that the brain is
responsible for conscious thought, and that conscious thought is the chief directing force in life.
But consciousness---and this is basically what we mean by mind'---is deployed everywhere in
the organism. There are cells in the brain as there are in the rest of the body and the messages
received within and sent out by the brain would be no messages at all unless an equally
intelligent cell elsewhere received them.
But we have never been very realistic this way. Always, in this civilization, there has
been a great disposition to strike poses, which means to look for the power element in
everything. Many if not all of the heavenly fights between the Greek gods were fights over
power. From the beginning of our civilization a more than acceptable level of grandiosity began
to appear in our thought-processes, which in turn invited uncontrolled hallucination, to the point
where the brain would come offi its moorings.


When we believe (hallucinate) that we conduct our lives with conscious, freely chosen
thoughts we are making an oblique reference to our degree of alienation from the habitat. So
many of the habitat's functions have dried up for us that we understandably get the impression
that we are consciously all life, especially as we operate within a closed man-made 'I am Caesar'
habitat.
Having lifted the mind' out of the human pathological system we start attributing
everything that happens to it. At the end of the last century doctors were keen on attributing their
patients' symptoms to hysterical origins (nerves'). This century mental problems' became
distinct from physical symptoms', and tend to win primacy over the latter. In the Thirties there
was a feeble effort to bridge the two in the form of the psychosomatic' theory, but a bridge
implies two separate banks, SO that this theory (now part of popular lore) left the Mind theology's
mind-body division intact. This theology determined the structure of our medical thinking SO
thoroughly that we are lucky nowadays to escape our family doctor without a crude counseling
lecture based on dimly perceived media hash-ups of psychoanalytical theory.
When Sechenov, Pavlov's teacher, argued that all human activity was in the nature of a
reflex no one knew what he was talking about. We would be ignorant ofhis name were it not that
Pavlov admired him. Sechenov was really saying that cortical or conscious activity is a tiny
portion of the massive electrochemical activity we call life and can neither control the internal
operations on which life depends nor act on any conscious analysis ofit.
In the smallest matter, for instance breathing, we are governed not by conscious thought
but by autonomic action. The moment most of us start thinking about our breath, and receiving
instruction about how to do it, its natural' rhythm ceases, often to the point ofl hyperventilation.
Any genuine breath specialist knows that such a 'natural' rhythm has long ceased in the human,
even-ifit
It is the same with the eyelids. They blink according to laws of their own until we start
talking about their frequency per minute. Only when the new facts have been absorbed by means
of exercises will the breathing or the eye-lids function 'naturally' in the new rhythm. In other
words, function requires the thought to be made unconscious.
This is how a civilization is made. It comes from the act of withdrawing from the habitat
(thinking or concentrating) in order to create a new world but then it must build unconscious
forms which can be inherited. The more successfully it does this the more perfectly will it imitate
the habitat and not be at odds with it as ours is.
In its flourishing moments a civilization is an artistic fling. Everything from painted
plaster ceilings to finely reticulated fish knives conveys a sense of form. The artifacts are later
collected and archived with reverence. At its peak a civilization is blind in the way lovers are
blind. Acts of passion (or folly, i.e. passion gone wrong) abound. Love is more important than
life.
In a period of fall like the present one we look back on civilization with wonder and
misapprehension. Why on earth did Swann throw himself and his fortune and health away on
Odette de Crécy whom he knew to be little better than a whore and not his type anyway? Why
did his feeling that she was foreign to him actually excite his love into self-sacrificial


infatuation? Why did Proust linger SO long over perfumes and the touch of things and a barely
perceived expression of face instead of developing a good straightforward plot and making his
characters do the logical, wide-awake, constructive things which we know the human, and indeed
any animal, to be incapable of?
The technological observer looks back on all this dumbly, searching for his own literal
truths. How was it those people loved and feared and followed and worshipped and denounced
each other SO ardently when they could have sat down and simply talked it out? How could they
bear the dependency ofloving and the disorder of hating?
In civilization we belong SO deeply to it that the subtlest glances can become haunting
ancestral beguilements, arouse unquenchable sexual longings, their language too deep for the
conscious mind. Smells, the touch of hands, the sound of kitchen clatter, laughter in another
room, footsteps on stone steps, the crispness of a morning melt together into an assembly which
is only named as civilization' when threatened.
How to glance at the beloved, how to distinguish a fine walk from a gauche one, how to
eat and drink, how to sit, take the air, laugh or sigh, how to greet a friend as opposed to a relative,
how to give orders or receive them, how to sleep and how to rise from the bed, how to sneeze,
cough, clear the throat, how to dally with the young or dandle a baby, how to listen and how to
talk, how to kiss, embrace, excite, sustain the lover and be sustained in turn---all this was passed
from one generation to the next with no explicit advice. The child observed them in the adult and
yearned to be the same, and in the yearning was already the learning. This is how reflexes work.
I felt that this decline could span centuries, even millennia---that our own civilization was
SO discontinuous and turbulent from the beginning as to suggest that the decline and fall of the
Roman empire simply extended itself through Christianity until, with marvelous glimpses here
and there of a civilization that might have been and sO many times nearly was, this fall reached
its hopefully final low---in this present killer century.


Twenty Four
THE FICTION OF HARD FACTS
In the twentieth century nothing more baffled us than the fact that what should have been
an era of the most advanced civilization, steaming and thumping and roaring away with the spirit
ofi industry, clicking and blinking and humming with electronic subtlety, turned out to be a mass
murder that would have had Attila or Tamberlaine catatonic with terror.
All right, we don't brag any more about being the highest civilization, or even much of a
civilization at all. Just the number and extent of our wars rule that out, quite apart from the
lethality of our weapons---and the sorrows left behind by Hitler's all too Final Solution.
Still, we might feel gingerly about facing a certain proposition which I am now going to
set down: it is that this century has been the climax of a long-laid compulsion to destroy all
living things.
If we look at the way the techniques of war have developed over the past centuries we
shall find that they increased the range rather than the precision of their destructive capacity.
Gunpowder, the single most significant event in that history, was developed not for its ability to
destroy precise targets when aimed from the barrels of small arms but for its destructive spread,
until the final technique of all, this céntury, involved no cordite whatever but could achieve the
disappearance of a city within eight seconds.
Not that the desire to kill all living things was ever a plan. After all, wars are entered into
blindly and escalate helplessly. We look in vain for ideas of terrestrial suicide or even ones that
vaguely suggest it. And because this is SO we are likely to dismiss the suggestion that this is what
we humans were out to do.
I repeat, it is human perceptions we must look into, and these become apparent from
behavior. After uniformly destructive behavior for the last five centuries, and widespread violent
skirmishes for a thousand years before that, we should be able to recognize certain consistent
ideas. But this doesn't make them easy to accept, precisely because the old perception is intact,
with the design to destroy lying immaculate within it.
Of all the words in modern vocabularies one dominates and that is enemy. I am going to
adapt something Freud said about phobia: the wonder isn't that we are enemy-fixated but that we
are ever anything else!
The enemy is the one who always stands in our light. Get him out ofthe way and the light
shines on us. Actually, we invent him. After all, no creature is born with this name. But fiction or
no fiction we must get rid ofhim in order to see the light.
The enemy idea was brought to sophistication in medieval speculations about the devil
(diabolos, from the Greek)---he being the principal one, Satan (from the Hebrew, meaning
enemy) or Beelzebub (Hebrew for the fallen 'god of the flies' but more exactly a fallen angel)
and all kinds of subsidiary demons (daemon, Greek, meaning half-god) and fallen angels who
peeped out of the habitat in animal form and would devour you without SO much as a thank you.
The enemy was the infidel, the heretic, the pagan, the sinner, the witch, even a pot of ripe plums
and your lust for them. Good things could become enemies. Cleverness was a snare of pride.


Charity was changeable for vanity. Ardor in prayer could address itself equally to Old Nick, who
was all too pleased to satisfy self-seeking penitents.
Life was based on the enemy. The enemy kept you from becoming bent. Thus it was that
killing became essential for the uncovering of the light. In crusades, persecutions, witch
burnings, the rasings of heresy-infected villages the enemy was dealt a series of Last Blows
which would secure the true, clean dispensation everyone was waiting for. But the offending
victim always popped up again even from the headless, the charred, the quartered, the
disembowelled, the racked-to-death--just as he does from the radiated, the bombarded, the fire-
bombed today.
If enemy hovers sO ubiquitously in the human mind, is SO much at the edge of every half-
thought it is because it means that which is preventing me from getting forward'. So enmity can't
be switched off. You must be prepared for it not only in the wars that make your cities shudder
and fall and necessitate less formal funerals than are normal (bulldoze them into holes) but when
arms have been laid down and the soldiers gone home. Then the trivial murders begin---the
group rapes, the random atrocities, the domestic outrages. The enemy is now parents, males,
females, lesbians, homosexuals, heterosexuals, whites, blacks, Muslims, Jews, Christians,
children, orientals, westerners, there being no category ofhuman, no thought, beyond the haunted
brain's capacity to demonize. It is a double process. The self which demonizes another into
enemy has already turned itself into that enemy's victim, which adds to the smarting wound, then
the smart adds to the anger, and fist-fights, strangulations, the cutting of throats begin to crowd
the imagination, though the enemy may be a neighbor tranquilly cooking borsch and unaware of
any enmity whatever.
Nearly all cries for freedom are for freedom from brain ghosts, those persistent ones
which can't walk away because they aren't real.
Ifthe Jews and Bolsheviks and gypsies didn't look like fellow humans to the guards ofthe
nazi death camps it was because their perception of them already contained the Final Solution,
namely saw them as the last obstacle. Just a little effort to overcome the first squeamishness was
necessary, in the knowledge that after the clean-up the death chambers would no longer have to
figure in life.
I mention the victims of the Final Solution here not because they have been the only
enemy in history but because the Holocaust was at the very hub ofhuman dementia.
Christopher Marlowe dramatized such things in Doctor Faustus and Tamberlaine four
centuries ago. His stories were old epics from a legendary time. It might be worth adding that in
one performance during the reign of Elizabeth 1 somebody in the audience got the idea that
among the devils onstage was Satan himself. A riot broke out. Was it a preview?


Twenty Five
THE BRAIN REBELLION
Yet at no time even in modern history did ordinary people, those who had to produce the
food and fight in the wars, show obvious signs of madness.
In fact, until this century, we could rely on a firm ballast of sound-nerved laboring
families to compensate for the actions of enlightened people at the top. They made clothing,
houses, vehicles. They groomed and fed and stabled the horses and collected the eggs and milked
the COWS and were sometimes listened to even by the enlightened for their illiterate wisdom.
But after 1945, namely at the end of World War Two, more and more people began to
talk about being depressed. Formerly shrugged off as a personal mood that would quickly pass,
mental depression now became something that doctors had to cope with. Diagnosing mental
distress as just nerves' would no longer do, though in fact it was the best diagnosis of the lot.
The old regime of sound nerves at the bottom of the social scale and a state of hysteria at the top
was clearly gone.
These complaints about depression were most frequent in prosperous countries, and
increased with the prosperity. As new money circulated SO a much larger middle class came into
being, with its vulnerability to enlightenment of every kind. Affluence', the fashionable word,
brought a sense of liberation. The old middle class had taken a beating from the war. Less and
less did it determine tastes and standards. There was abundant upward mobility if only because
the top was much less different from the bottom than it had been in the old' days. Some
Europeans saw this as the Americanization ofthe West but role models take centuries to get into
the perceptions. In fact it was a process that had been going on since medieval times, namely the
fragmentation ofauthority wherever it put its head.
Still, the nineteenth-century promise that once everybody had enough money and the
chance of a university education good taste, good manners and good order would prevail looked
to war-weary and day-dreaming populations in 1945 as if it might at last be fulfilled. The fact
that precisely the opposite happened wasn't noticed for decades. It continued to be said in the
Fifties and even as late as the Seventies that Man had at last reached the top of the arc. Progress
figured SO much in political speeches that it began to sound like overture music to the Last Act.
More books were read, more plays and films were seen, more music was heard and more
discussion went on. But there were increasing signs that this had nothing to do with the
propagation of old middle-class values at all. Most people when they watched a film or read a
book or glanced at a newspaper wanted the crime and the calamity. Man, far from having got to
the top of any arc, was increasingly fascinated with the darkness at the bottom. It was this rather
than the enlightenment promised by Victorians (not, though, by intelligent ones like William
Morris) that got to the top of the arc, and today malevolent behavior previously only written
about and filmed is realized on the street.
Some people argued that this was the fruit of affluence. But affluence in other centuries
had quite opposite effects. Why was the dark side of the brain now SO evident, the bright side
gone? Mental depression took various forms: it could be groundless fear and anxiety, a simple
grey feeling, it could manifest in healthy' or normal' people as a love of (someone else's)


murder, calamity, torture, hostility, resentment, revenge, punishment, subterfuge, plotting and
punishment in every real or dramatized form.
Depressive minds able to supply this were plentiful, and there was no market dearth of
nasty stories both fictional and documented. Apparently humanity had finished two world wars
only to sit down and think up the most ghoulish atrocities in the hope of selling them to a
publisher or film producer, or sit down and watch the result. The massive degree of sitting and
thinking and watching was alone enough to cause depression. It was as if humanity had lost the
use of its hands.
This love of the fearful, the cruel and vindictive was the active side of the brain's
darkness, and as such comfortable. The other passive side---plain mental depression and self-
doubt---was something you needed a doctor for.
But no doctor pointed out that the two sides, the active and the passive, fed on each other
and increased each other.
This was where the chemical industry came forward: it would give doctors something to
administer not as a cure but as a temporary knock-out.
This presented a novel view of medicine but was accepted without a murmur because
short of sending millions of people to psychoanalysts, which most of them couldn't afford, there
seemed nothing else to do. The pharmacies began filling up like Victorian ladies' drawing rooms.
It became imperative to encourage the light side of the brain, which would then
presumably reduce the dark side. So, particularly in the Sixties and Seventies, a kind of therapy
began to circulate that was distinct from both chemical/electrical psychiatry and psychoanalysis.
It sought to improve self-esteem, optimism, confidence, good will and tolerance because these
qualities seemed in abeyance. The personality had to be integrated', illuminated. There were
Yoga classes, Yoga lessons on television. The word guru became accepted English, and Indian
ashrams began to appear in the West. The guru was someone capable of putting the brain into a
state of radiance.
We began to ask if this sense of light in the brain didn't have a chemical component, and
words like endorphins' and melatonin' were put about. The endorphins were secreted naturally
by the body. They promoted a state of optimism and protected the organism against pain (endo-
morphine). They were also essential to the body's immune system (another expression to enter
popular medical language). There was the famous Norman Cousins case---he laughed himself
back to health by dint of running comic videos on his television screen all day. Doctors began to
look into his case and he was invited to join the medical staff at Stanford University.
The brain itself, not simply thoughts, much less behavior, now came under investigation.
At last the human being seemed to be facing the fact that the erosion of certain forces within him
might lead not only to his destruction but the world's.
The increased influence of the gurus and therapists meant that people began to look for
more than medical repair-systems. The word God' began entering the mouths of Christians who
had never entered a church except at a helplessly early age. On the lips of Indians and Buddhists
it had a different ring--released from ethical overtones and the Old Man in the Sky image. A
paradoxical situation arose in which as the Churches lost influence a sense of religion increased.


More and more people began adopting techniques of Californian progeny--Est, rebirthing,
primal or scream therapy, spiritual massage, past-life regression, neurolinguistic programming,
hypnotherapy. The tradition wasn't a new one. Back in the Twenties Los Angeles had teemed
with cabalists, yogis, astrologers, psychics. Now these things became a service industry. The idea
of religion was now connected with health and well-being and a sense of autonomy. If people
didn't wish to say 'I believe in God' they accepted the inner benefits of doing sO. Religion now
had its place as a self-empowerment therapy, as a passport to success. The fundamentalists
began promising health, wealth and happiness as the certain rewards of following the Redeemer
(the Redeemer had quite particularly emphasized that he was not offering these things). Even
Californian masseurs began touting Security, a Good Relationship and Happiness as the fruits of
massages that resembled 'hands-on' healing sessions.
All this, despite being much more effective than most non-Californians cared to know,
tended to overlook the human's inbuilt capacity to recover his sanity and optimism without an
arduous self-development program. There were gurus who said as much. The self, they said, was
the only teacher, and I the guru am only an analogy for yourself. You have the thing inside you
which you foolishly look for outside.' - Socrates had said it and it was still true.
But it was easier said than done. Most people, if statistics were anything to go by, felt
they needed help---from doctors, pharmacists, psychiatrists, family counselors, sects, while
others went to aerobic classes, muscle-development clubs, yoga classes, health spas, dietary
schools, martial arts groups and sexually indiscriminate swinging parties. There were
unmistakable worldwide efforts by the human being to rehabilitate the human being by almost
any means available.
Part of this effort took the form of drug use, whether prescription drugs or narcotics.
Masses of people were clearly dissatisfied with themselves and their lives and were desperate to
take substances that promised to enhance their experiences, their performance and their
personality. Empowerment became one of the key-words of the therapies but it was equally a
goal for those looking for drug-induced trips because they didn't believe that life was as flat and
stale as they found it to be.
With the heavy political stigma against drug-addiction it is difficult for us to see that here
too, even in self-injection with tainted needles, lies a burning quest in the human for the life of
which he feels starved.
Hoaxed into believing that his is a conscious mind within an unconscious body he
naturally gropes for a connection with the habitat by means of mental events, which is exactly the
wrong way round.
Many people who are unforgiving toward drug-addiction are themselves addicts, but of
approved-pharmaceutically forms which have exactly the same goals ofremoving depression and
creating contentment.
Gradually in the last decades chemical or pill psychiatry has taken precedence over
counseling. This was partly because a growing number of people complained of depression,
intractable' pain, suicidal desires. But really it was an attempt to recognize, without seeming to,
the fact that the human wasn't the naturally sane creature he was cracked up to be.


The ever more fashionable word 'biological' as a description of the new psychiatric
approach confirmed this. Talk therapy was out but on the other hand no one wanted to hand the
brain over to the neurologist, who was already beginning to say that serial butchers and sex
mutilators had discernibly different brains from other people. The word biology' suggested
things in the brain which no one could call abnormal and which therefore required round-the-
clock psychiatric surveillance. Whatever else it was, it was good for business.
More and more the psychiatric belief was that aberrant behavior required chemical
adjustment in order (rather vaguely) to 're-establish chemical balance in the brain'. But jiggering
about with the neurotransmitter seratonin' is dangerous if only because less is known about the
brain than any other part ofthe body.
Yet the matter is simple, despite the fancy names given to the chemicals of brain
manipulation or their description as 'elegant' or state of the art'. Each of them in turn is a
'miracle' drug when it appears, and gets a media lift-off, even a front page if lucky. In time (but
this part is rarely given publicity) it is quietly debunked in the profession on the grounds that the
science is moving forward and has left it behind. But in fact the drug was found to be harmful,
which doesn't stop it being re-launched under a different name.
Millions of people take these pills and within weeks are no longer authorities on how they
feel or what they think because their perceptions are now distorted. The organism no longer
communicates its distresses SO readily to the mind. A serious de-pilotization of the nervous
system takes place.
It isn't only the fact that the brain is a bafflingly complicated organ but that it is the cradle
oft those responses which make it possible for the human to function in the habitat. If the human
were just a thinking mind it might be different. Then the so-called neuroleptics or lobotomy'
drugs might have localized effects. But if you interfere with a response or neurotransmitter you
upset the balance on which judgment depends. Anyone who has witnessed a psychiatric patient
laughing with genuine enjoyment at somebody else's tragedy (a terminal cancer, say) will know
what I mean.
It is what the courts call diminished responsibility, which is perhaps why one of the chief
of the miracle drugs of recent years, Prozac, has been cited by defense counsels in a number of
murder trials.
Seeing depression or alcoholism as chemical un-balance in the brain, a neurotransmitter
problem, is a covert acknowledgement of universal dementia but if you chemically lobotomize
the brain you drive the dementia deeper because you further deepen the state of alienation from
which it all started.
This alienation didn't happen because of any damage to the brain but because of the
particular hazards of human-primate existence. Certain situations of terror can drive any animal
mad---i.e. thoughts and impressions alone are enough to derange the brain, without any
structural changes having taken place.
Psychiatry is locked into theology like every other discipline, and as in medicine
generally the inherited perception is that the human's animal' (irrational) side must be tamed or
at least put out of view. Lobotomy, by means of pills or electric shocks, is the realization of a
doctrine which said 'cut the mind from the feelings' as if---again the hidden theology---the mind
was the opposite of biological, i.e. a special non-animal endowment.


life-enhancement increased until hardly anyone liveswithout some form of stimulant, sedative or
hallucinator.
Governments make war on the drug barons. The idea is to limit and finally abolish the
supplies but as fast as the supply of one drug diminishes another one appears on the streets' (we
associate drugs with the streets as ifo drug-ingestion wasn't also a chronic middle-class habit). The
demand in all classes is huge, unquenchable. People will risk imprisonment for experiences that
their usual lives don't give them. They are on a brain rebellion, refusing to take what is supposed
to be real life as either natural or true.
Narcotic' drugs are said to be taken to escape' but far from escaping into another world
drug-takers testify again and again that they discover the real one and that their the normal world
oftheir perceptions doesn't give a true picture of reality at all.
We use the word narcotic' to encourage this escape idea but many drugs, like cocaine,
are non-narcotic in effect. The hallucinations they provoke may unfold startling discoveries about
reality which from that time on, even long after the drug has been dropped, change the very form +
of perception itself. And that was the reason it was taken---to alter perception.
At certain points of collapse in civilization, as dementia sweeps back to control human
behavior, there is a widespread revulsion from the old perceptions and they are seen--yes, the
very sights and sounds---as a prison. Getting out oft the prison, however, has to be done carefully.
But almost no one knows how. So quick-fix methods prevail.
When the American Indians used the peyote cactus (mescaline) and the Liberty Cap
mushroom (psilocybin) in their ceremonies they knew how much to take and how often. The
amount taken was tiny, the ingestion slow. Also the ceremony wasn't a daily occurrence.
Such ceremonies were built on experience. In pygmy ceremonies those who go into
trance are held and cared for by others, just as it is in similar ceremonies in Pakistan and India.
The physiological process is a simple one, whether a person is taking tranquilizers or
heroin or cannabis. We give ourselves an extra supply of endogenous chemicals---i.e. chemicals
the body produces ofits own accord. But this lowers our own production ofthe same chemical.
Every time we take a tranquilizer or smoke pot or sniff cocaine the organism responds by
not producing those elements which the chemical is trying to imitate.
Thus the pain or sleeplessness or anxiety or depression gets worse once the first effects
wear off. So at one and the same time you are augmenting the body's natural supplies and also
depleting them as you go along.
So you are starting off with a certain natural erosion of faculties as a human primate, then
you decide, of all disastrous courses, whether with the help of your psychiatrist or a drug dealer,
to erode your faculties even further.
Since the brain always tries to achieve balance it stops self-production of a chemical SO as
to prevent too great a supply at any given time. Our reflexes are weakened because they depend
on a steady and balanced reproduction of endogenous chemicals. If you take enough of a drug
there is a marked slowing-down of these reflexes, almost always unobserved by the user, whether
the drug is prescriptive or narcotic. The victim may 'forget' how to walk, breathe, mate, eat,


judge, behave with integrity. There are choking sensations as the respiratory muscles lose their
autonomic motion. This is the muscular expression ofa general autonomic collapse.
You will hear that certain character traits' are common to people who fall into drug
dependence. They are often rebellious' types. They tolerate delays in the gratification of their
desires with great difficulty, they are impulsive, sociallyhappy.etc.
But these same traits get soldiers medals. They are the traits of highly intelligent people
too. And they follow habitual chemical use rather than precede it.
Not that drugs are character-building either. But the 'character flaws' are invariably
features of fthe drug, not features ofthe character.
When someone on XTC throws himself off a roof in the expectation of flying he doesn't
fly but he thinks he is going to. No character flaw here. It is simply how he sees things. When he
swims far out to sea in the dead of night and can't judge the distance he has gone, and SO cannot
get back to shore, his mental expectations are due solely to the drug, which has destroyed his
brain's proper habitat-responses.
Moral admonition will have small effect on this state. Analysis of childhood events or
parental shortcomings can no more alter the effects of a drug than flying in a plane can develop
the leg muscles. You have to have a drug-withdrawal program, and this requires special care
because it is much like the death journey or journey to the underworld that the Greek mysteries
induced, and which all 'rebirth' initiations must have in some form. The hand has to be held, the
terrified mind night and day consoled. We must remember that the death journey's effect is to
make the initiate go deeper into the habitat, not away from it. So a great sense of belonging,
arriving home, ensues afterwards.
L Cur I
A lot of doctors urge patients to stop taking tranquilizers, unaware that chemical
ingestion creates its own electrochemical need for further ingestion, and that reducing or
suddenly stopping the drug creates a need for higher doses.
The withdrawal treatment most likely to succeed is the one that approaches the brain
directly, for instance through the use of electrodes emitting high-frequency waves. In a matter of
ten days a tranquilizer- or narcotic-dependent patient can kick the dependency. What has
unbalanced the brain can only be corrected by direct influence on the brain. In other words
certain high-frequency waves can alter the perception 'I must have another pill' to the perception
'I don't need to take a pill'. What the mysteries did was achieve this electronic or acupunctural
effect by sensory-deprivation, fasting or breath techniques, that is by equally physiological
means, never by advice, admonition, verbal exploration or reference to the conscious will. An
addict---the drug can be heroin or alcohol or sedatives--can't connect his feelings to the drug
because the action of the drug is to reduce, never sharpen responses. The mind may be
momentarily sharper, there may be a sense of greater awareness, but it is because the other
(animal") responses are numbed.
Someone who smokes pot regularly will often make a split-second pause when answering
questions. For himself he is answering immediately. We know he isn't. His loss of response is
unknown to him.
In the case of a heroin overdose, alone or mixed with barbiturates and/or alcohol, the
respiratory muscles may cease action altogether. Tranquilizers too may affect these muscles both
by depressing the brain centers on which oxygen metabolism depends and by paralyzing the
respiratory muscles.


Jews. A year later, when I had left Iraq, they were banished from the country. and I heard
that the Baghdadis lined the streets to watch them go, waving good bye, many of them
weeping.
This is how humans can be overtaken by events they neither understand nor
approve of. Yet they may very quickly approve ofit, once hostility generated by
governments or parties has taken hold. But governments and parties consist of humans
like themselves: what is it that lies helpless in us, too deep for us to know, much less
understand? Despite the vast personal etiquette we humans have, during political
conflicts and even bitter' warfare, namely battle costly in deaths and wounds and
screams, this etiquette remains.
Which makes a strange animal of us, one who needs vast courage to face what
apparently lies within, but of which he or she knows utterly nothing.
This book, in its every sentence, is my effort to find out.
And the fact that it is a light-hearted book shouldn't come as a surprise. For
sackcloth and ashes are no way to confront what we must recognise at last are our deepest
absurdities.
Debunking such a species is, after all, a joyful not rueful enterprise.


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
it had demonstrated wisdom and sanity? On the contrary, we would shake our
heads and say it was frankly mad and thoroughly deserved its fate.
Is it not possible that the most intelligent animal is that which leaves its
environment enhanced, while the least intelligent animal is that which wallows
in its own wastes, unable to dispose of them safely?
But having condemned myself, even reformed myself, what exactly do I
do about it? Here lies perhaps the toughest greatest obstacle---me. As what
might be called an obsessive user of electricity I am simply unable to respond
to any request for me to reduce those emissions for which I am personally
responsible, and for the good reason that I would be unable to live, not to say
earn my living ifl didn't constantly, throughout seventeen or SO hours each
day, switch on the light for purposes of work or leisure. Every time I go to the
washing machine or dishwasher or freezer, every time I turn the television on
or use my electronic appliance, I am responsible for by far the biggest portion
ofemissions, namely that caused by electric generation.
And SO it is in the whole world. In the United States long-distance
automobile travel is the essential basis of life for millions of people. It is why
American gasoline must be plentiful and cheap. Carbon emitting becomes a
necessary and unavoidable way of life.


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
At the moment of my writing this some enterprising people are
wrapping part of the Gurschen glacier in the Swiss alps in a huge sheet of
plastic foil nearly the size of a football stadium (this is what the newspapers
say). The water flowing from a nearby lake (the beneficiary of prematurely
melting snow) is being pressured off into snow cannons that will hopefully
keep up the snow level for skiers. The environmentalists, as the anti-Carbon
Age people are called, say this is absurd. And it is. And the people responsible
probably know it. But they are doing to save their jobs. They must have their
skiers. Plastic foil used previously on Austrian slopes were successful' And
all of us, including the environmentalists, are in the same boat. The moment we
step into our cars to return home from work we have joined the throng.
Very clearly, we depend on carbon emissions, that is on our slow
(perhaps not SO slow) death. It is all very well to say that we have had a wake-
up call but what do I do ifl wake up to the meaning oft those all too easy words
"climate change' or global warming"? Even to wake up and take notice I have
to live. I must go about my life in the usual way, which means assuming,
whether we like it or not, that all is well with the world. As long as there are
walls to my bedroom and the taps yield water and friends call round and I talk
to my neighbours sleep takes hold of us. In no other manner could we get
through the day. At home or at an environmental conference my very limbs
declare, and what a wonderful balm it is, that all is well.
It appears that far from being in charge of ourselves, and thus of the life
we live, we are helpless and automatic in our behaviour precisely in the


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALLOF HUMANS
manner we have always said typifies other animals. I am going to show later
that this carbon age we at present live in was planned and looked forward to
since at least the early middle ages. I shall be giving clear documentary
evidence of that. In a word, we walked open-eyed and even joyfully into it.
And blindly. For all those thinkers who, generation by generation, worked for it
were blind to the outcome.
So the time has come to ask ourselves whether we humans have given
less proof of a superior intelligence than of an eroded one? Could our
deficiency of intelligence have been our guide, rather than our over-sufficiency
ofit?
Could it be that the lethal erosion all around us---from the fatally low
oxygen-content of the air to the poisoning of all the seas and soils and sunrays
and weather belts---is an exact reflection ofthe erosion that have always
gripped our human faculties?
Is it possible that we have declared ourselves non-animals for SO long
because this was the beleaguered state we were forced to live in, namely a state
of terrible isolation, far from any brotherhood with other creatures?
Yet we could never have survived had we quivered with fear. On the
contrary, the human has shown a remarkable competence---clear from the
nature ofl his many adaptations, and the mutations that crowned these. Human
survival had behind it a simply tremendous force. It was a competence far the
capacity of any other animal to imitate. Above all it was something other
animals didn't need. They never worked. Building a nest or seeking a lair was


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
without intensity or even intention---'they SOW not neither do they spin'. . Their
inherited know-how saves them the trouble.
But where did human competence come from? How was it that it didn't
spring up in other animals? For the good reason that it wasn't, itself, an animal
manifestation. It was that of an eroded animal, one that had lost its way, which
called for effort and vigilance, all the time.
Let us take a striking example ofhuman competence that derives from
and in turn leads to tragedy. We do not know of one civilisation for which war
was virtually the basis ofits well-being, its very instrument of power and
stability. We do know of civilisations that were pacific (Joseph Campbell
mentions a few of them) but they were all occupied by their neighbours or
allowed to fester in weak isolation.
Now war requires a competence far beyond anything necessary in
peace. No matter whether we are talking of the Assyrians or Greeks or Minoans
the assembling and arming and moving of great bodies of men, and keeping
them on the move while daily supplying them with food and arms and the
means of shelter we are faced a degree of competence that is downright
frightening (as it is meant to be).
Our civilisations have even turned war into an honour and delight
involving a colourful hierarchy of many ranks in which each is personified by
tabs, pips and the special design of'uniforms' that are anything but uniform.
All for the intended and planned killing of fellow human beings.


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
Look back a little to the last century and you face the black tragedy of
two 'world' wars (i.e. wars disrupting all mankind), and what a heap of
unctuous and glorifying words have been poured over them in ceremonies and
remembrances ever since, quite as ifthe decimation of our own species were
the proudest, while most sorrowful, component of our collective memory. It is
what history is all about (in our Western civilisation, that very study started in
ancient times with Herodotus's war saga).
Ifwe consider for a moment that every human baby is born an animal (a
simple physiological fact) we shall see through what forbidding thickets of
bafflement that baby must pass through during his or her enforced transference
into a 'human' - It is why perhaps Otto Rank, the Freudian, described the first
gasp for air as the human' s first taste of tragedy.
He or she, being an animal, naturally expects to be confronted by other
animals, not a creature of enormous height on two legs. Contortions of
behaviour, especially in the use of the voice box, must be painstakingly
learned, just as the feet of newborn Chinese girls had at one time to learn how
to live squeezed to smallness to make them aesthetically appealing.
Yet I cannot regain my animal self (i.e. my full faculties) by living
close to animals. Inventors oft the most fearful pogroms and massacres, the
wickedest persecutions, have kept the best ofthemselves for other animals. It is


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
solely the experience of being an animal, the realisation that only in our sanest
aspects are we animal, that we can dislodge the false personage that falls like a
remorseless shadow on our lives. In my graduate years, when I was trying to
improve my horse riding, I couldn't help seeing that my ignorance of equine
thought was far greater than their ignorance of my human thought. The fact that
I could 'train' them, with gradual sympathetic persuasion, proved that they
could decipher my codes of word and sign and touch without the slightest
difficulty, while I for my part was locked in hunches and hopes about their
codes and signs.
Later I am going to show why many of us call ourselves animals only
when we commit a brutality. The word 'animal' will be taken back to its
original Roman and Indo-European root as meaning everything that breathes'.
The thinking I am about to embark on won't be what the word 'thought'
implies at present, namely an abstract' enquiry suggesting that I can survey the
universe with a special and conclusive understanding. In this sense it will be
animal, not human, thought. It will show that to have no animal awareness is
simply to have no awareness.


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
Two
I think, therefore I'm nervous
O was our adoption of a non-animal identity 'our fault'? A moment's
sympathetic glance at ourselves will show us that, ofall disturbing
contradictions, we were obliged to adopt such an unreal personage
for the simple reason that we could not have survived as a species without it.
Let us picture it this way. An animal is suddenly thrust out of its original
fixed habitat. We cannot know at this distance of time exactly what it was that
plunged the human' (not yet one) into a crisis. Drastic weather changes may
have ruined his original fixed habitat to which his nervous and digestive
systems were attuned. He may have been overcome by predators. Whatever the
cause, he was obliged either to look for a new habitat or adapt himself by slow
degree to the changed one. That is, his nervous and digestive systems, once an
interface that reflected perfectly his environment, became an 'inner habitat' for
him which in turn created a sense of an outer' habitat for the first time.
This is an essentially identifying point in the human---one that no
searching among fossils for the first man' can ever elicit.
He made discoveries. One was fire. He observed it, applied thought to it,
devised how to start it at will. Quickly he turned it to strange uses. He
eventually found it a saviour in that---cut off from the raw food he had
formerly plucked or dug up---he could now, by the process of heating roots and
grains too hard for him now, make palatable the inedible.


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
Thus it is that one aberration leads to a more elaborate one. Heating food
destroys much of its value, proportionately to the heat applied, though it largely
spares protein, which may have caused the human's diversion to a meat diet at
an early stage. Eating animals is a further depletion of any sense of belonging
to or with them.
If our fixed habitat was destroyed by storms or predators or volcano or
earthquake or tidal wave what else could the stranded creature do but move to
new ones and-thus becoming used to new ones? His biologically inherited
faculties failed him not because he wanted them to but because they were thrust
out of service. In this one statement lies the key to 'the human' 2 . He was
required to think everything out for himself. It was thus that thought became of
prime importance to this new animal.
There are a number of Adam and Eve stories from various parts of the
world---accounts of a 'fall' from an earlier grace. And we can only suppose
that these were recollections of an earlier state blest not only for its security but
its beauty, namely the forgotten and regretted animal state. Our very aberration
from animal life forced more and more aberration on us, creating that dread of
abandonment that characterises the human and his domestic animals to this
day, while at the same time the discomfort of it all spurred him to construct a
new human habitat that would seem to have superseded nature.
He has been called the 'naked' ape. That is, his furlessness expresses
exactly his forlorn and isolated status in a habitat that often seems to him an
enemy, even a huge potential predator. Fur is an inherited overcoat for all


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
seasons, and its loss points to a trauma bitter indeed, one that required constant
ever-vigilant repair that culminated in woollen under-shirts, gloves, socks, and
buttons and zips to permit flexible tolerance of changing temperatures. The fur
that was lost had to be thought out, improvised.
In a word, my nervous and digestive systems, my appetites and my
biological tools---the claws and teeth and moving limbs once finely tuned to
the outer habitat---must now develop a pilot brain, formerly a small if essential
part of the animal nervous system.
And this pilot must do all the extra work. The brain's reticular
activating system (our inner alarm bell that wakes us when we smell fire or
hear unusual noises in sleep) must, in the human, alert us even in the apparently
safe hours. It must report on the unusual at all times, to an obsessive degree.
But there is another even more contradictory feature in the long self-
revision programme that adaptation and its long-term reward mutation must
involve: the new animal must at all costs imitate the life of other animals, that
is retrieve his lost animal status as nearly as possible. His inherited powers of
adaptation will do it for him. That is, he must become as automatic in his
behaviour SO that the alert pilot brain could look after emergencies. This is why
we could never drive a car without by thinking out every move of our feet and
hands and eyes. Driving must become as automatic as possible ifit is going to
be safe. We must be able to listen to music or conversation while driving, or be
lost in our own thoughts, while the automated driver in us can stop at red lights
and even take a long route home of which he will not recall a single feature of


MAURICE ROWDON' THE FALL OF HUMANS
when he gets there. Without a full load of automatic reaction we animals
couldn't live for a moment. The swallow has to give neither thought nor
direction to the movement of its wings, which go by themselves and adjust to
the air pressure and wind by themselves.
I shall show again and again how this is the key to all our learning
processes---they must defy our false status as non-animals.
Of course all animals have an extraordinary power to adapt to the
unusual. The Californian scale insect will suspend its breath for as long as half
an hour to avoid insect-repellent sprays, that is until the suspension becomes
automatic. In the same way the human must store as much automatic response
into his system as he possibly can. His speaking of his own language must
become SO deeply unconscious of itself that it may be said to speak for him..
The word we should use in place of 'automatic' is autonomic' All
animal organisms are autonomic in the sense that they work by themselves, i.e.
their glandular and blood and nerve systems, their breathing muscles and their
muscular motion, work without supervision. And this remains as true of the
human as it is for any animal.
So how did the human become such a menace to his environment,
indeed SO determined in his predations that finally he found the means of
destroying the whole planet? We can only get to the truth here by reminding
ourselves that any animal that has lost its fixed habitat will be subject to shocks
too great even for his own nervous system. Ultimately these may become SO
great as to threaten his procreative powers. Just as some female herrings are


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
said to have developed male organs and to fight off the male on his approach,
SO every beleaguered animal, its food-sources once poisoned, will show
aberrations in the form of growing male/female tension which quickly
transmute into enmity now that the biological sources for rapturous procreation
have gone.
Adding blame to such a sorry story is simply to misunderstand it. The
very intensity of thought required of the beleaguered human was the source of
both his survival and his difficulties. And his ingenuity in dealing with what
always promised, in history, to be chaos was remarkable.
Since he never at any point ceased to be an animal he still felt guidance
by something both inside and outside him which he found impossible to doubt
or question-indeed that guidance lay in all his reflex movements that gave
him swift motion and (in the case of the lemur, dance). It made it possible for
him to achieve a human' system which miraculously (but then the miracle was
its source and aim) turned his plight into happiness. And I am going to call this
system the religion/civilisation tandem.
We call it 'religion after the ancient Romans, who used the word to
describe the worship they had inherited from the Greeks. Or rather it described
the effect of religion on the human mind---religio meant 'a binding together', ,
and referred to that inner consensus or shared conscience which collective


MAURICE ROWDON' THE FALL OF HUMANS
worship brought about. The Greeks had no name for what seemed to them to be
in everything. They were as near to a western version of the Hindu (Indian)
sense of the self as God as ever a civilisation came, which however didn't
prevent them from waging war and maintaining slaves (nearly as great in
number as the population) as the very basis, even sport, of daily life. So their
successor civilisations, the ancient Roman one and the Christian, inherited in
full their ability to treat fellow humans as objects of production.
Itis very difficult for us to think clearly on the subject of religion
because we are living in a period where, except as a private' conviction,
religion seems to have died. But religion never leaves human thought for the
very simple reason that it has produced every facet of that thought---its very
form and starting point.
Historically we do not now know of one civilisation which hasn't come
about as the detailed and meticulous creation of the religion which preceded it.
In ever case religion has come forward with the community, shaping it with
rules of comportment--it is why the manifold civilisations ofthe world are SO
deeply different from each other, down to details of personal behaviour. One
will accept a loud belch as a sign of satisfaction after a meal, anther will frown
on it. One will accept kissing on the lips among strangers, another hold it in
contempt.
As I am going to show in more detail later, even atheism, a much prized
stance of today, is a Christian legacy first suggested in the Middle Ages (let us
accept this strange nomenclature for the moment). It was the result of concepts


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
of God as being SO remote from human life that for all practical purposes He
never touched a living chord. And this entered into medieval education, which
strictly divided 'the divine' from the 'carnal' SO that the twain should never
meet. And that remains the frame of our educational system today.
Ofall thinkers in our particular civilisation only Socrates faced up to
the fact that dementia is our downfall and simultaneously our inspiration. The
only modern thinker who seemed to understand this was A.N. Whitehead in the
last century. He described religion as 'world loyalty'.
And Hermann Hesse, also in the previous century, wrote of the horror of
living between two religions, the old one dead and largely scorned, the new one
not yet arrived, and two civilisations, the dead one surviving only as a ghost
within the august buildings it once erected, the future one not yet even in seed.
The natural sympathetic bond between people is the first thing to die
when religion wanes. Not long ago a serial killer under lock and key in
Moscow, having killed fifty people, once asked for the death penalty to be
applied to him on the grounds that he would certainly kill again, for he could
not do otherwise. He said he felt neither sympathy nor hatred for his victims.
He said people weren't individuals for him but a 'mass' . In other words he was
attesting to the fact that the key animal bond of sympathy (within a species)
had eroded in him.


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
When a civilisation and its parent religion die it is the disappearance of
this bond that causes most distress---we say that 'law and order' is now
apparently beyond the powers of law-enforcement personnel to contain.
It is consensus that collapses in a 'decline and fall. When a civilisation
decays, as it must quickly do once its religion dies, society is held together (as
at the present time) solely by the last remnants of the old 'institutions' --those
mental presences that used to inspire awe and are now steadily dismantled as a
genuine bid for liberation. No one is safe any more. Private killings are ever
more gruesome. In a disaster zone, with thousands of people homeless,
difficulties are exacerbated by rape, pillage, kidnapping, as if walking'
dementia had become in some cases madness proper.
And now I am going to make perhaps the most important observation in
this book---that nothing said by humans about other animals has the slightest
meaning or importance except as autobiography. From Darwin to Eugene
Marais all such talk could without loss be trashed.
This is because no animal is capable of going beyond its own inherited
physiology. A lizard, tiger or freshwater pike will see a lizard, tiger or pike
world. They are equipped to navigate only and exclusively that world. The
same with humans---nothing is 'true', > nothing is 'knowledge' that isn't simply
an act ofnavigation. There is a lizard truth, a lizard knowledge, and there is a


MAURICE ROWDON' THE FALLOF HUMANS
human truth and human knowledge, and each has precise reference to a specific
physiology and nothing whatever beyond that.
This isn't to deny the truth of knowledge or the knowledge of truth but
no cross reference of these things between species is possible: each species
knows only its own navigational equipment.
The lizard and tiger and freshwater pike have no need for human music
as they don't for words---or universals. They have lizard, tiger and pike visions
and transports of feeling. IfI am moved by Mahler or Schubert or Chopin or
Verdi or Wagner I cannot (and incidentally do not, even while within that
emotion) exclude other creatures from the same degree ofinner transport for
their own aural forms.
Even abstraction and hypothesis, the pillars of what we have
denominated with great pride 'science' , are modes of all animal thought. The
choice of a twig for building a nest involves the mental abstraction of twigs as
a genus from other forms of wood, and a bird may hypothesise as to the use of
unfamiliar twigs by trying them.
That is, we humans have a specific (as in species' ') intelligence. A
crocodile couldn't use the human physicist's latest view of superconductivity.
Perhaps I would like to move my head in quick infinitesimal jerks while my
body remained immobile but I am not, as the lizard is, on the look-out for
insects or, therefore, for tiny insectual movements.
It is plain and clear to me that ifl am asked to observe another species
equipped with much the same brain structure as my own, the same blood


MAURICE ROWDONT THE FALL OF HUMANS
The natural sympathetic bond between people is the first thing to die
when religion wanes. Not long ago a serial killer under lock and key in
Moscow, having killed fifty people, once asked for the death penalty to be
applied to him on the grounds that he would certainly kill again, for he could
not do otherwise. He said he felt neither sympathy nor hatred for his victims.
He said people weren't individuals for him but a 'mass' - In other words he was
attesting to the fact that the key animal bond of sympathy (within a species)
had eroded in him.
When a civilisation and its parent religion die it is the disappearance of
this bond that causes most distress---we say that 'law and order' is now
apparently beyond the powers of law-enforcement personnel to contain.
Iti is consensus that collapses in a decline and fall'. When a civilisation
decays, as it must quickly do once its religion dies, society is held together (as
at the present time) solely by the last remnants ofthe old "institutions' --those
mental presences that used to inspire awe and are now steadily dismantled as a
genuine bid for liberation. No one is safe any more. Private killings are ever
more gruesome. In a disaster zone, with thousands of people homeless,
difficulties are exacerbated by rape, pillage, kidnapping, as if walking'
dementia had become in some cases madness proper.


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
Two
I think, therefore I'm nervous
was our adoption of a non-animal identity 'our fault?-A-sitty-but
wl cau
- Hul
hins
3as
over a ast Pens 19
- decply hamanrquestion,The evidence of our remarkable adaptàtions,
show/that, of all disturbing contradictions, we were obliged to adopt
olh
huluus
this unreal/personage, literally, for dear life.
Let us picture it this way. An animal is suddenly thrust out ofits original
fixed habitat. We cannot know at this distance of time exactly what it was that
plunged the'human (notyetone) into #/crisis. Drastic weather changes may
have ruined his original fixed habitat to which bis nervous and digestive
systems were finely tuned. He may have been overcome by predators.
Whatever the cause, Ke was obliged either to look for a new habitat or adapt
Whid
hee
phfn - A - h uou cluererd ou A ii hue ersii
himseif by slow degree to the changed one Thatts, his nervous and digestive
tixed
uow (-x a
systems, once an interface that reflected perfectly tis environment,became an
ho u
'inner habitat' for him, which in turn created Fsense of an 'outer' habitat forthe
firsttime. Ule ohall Lee Iu tuai tre hfweali sobe Calne -
This is an essentially identifying point in the human---one that no
searching among fossils for the 'first man' can ever elicit. -
He made discoveries. One was fire. He observed it, applied-thought-tvit;
devised how to start it at will. Quickly he turned it to strange uses He
TLv ya &
tn hii
uhew €
evennugty-foune-tra saviour in-that---cut off from the raw food he had


had
rule u Ke on aphyiy A h ttue food he
mce duy Itua Cort 4 - pluckenk Iue Iree, In.
wated, He Yoiled.
Iual : ha used ltre halitu ly ueant 2 mentel
el : t
1 Ac doe, uok adfin ls C fous hylite be conse he
ho Ingr he to
muere ulel a he uahe i
finslp U alitat n tue cuph
li. Anol tm il
Canhol envey a sli 2 uind.
E ttue >rlion L lam, 2 Jiece bie daw
au Th
ue lihe bi Lo At a uel < est
FOO huis : Jrus wc Lav uaale tr
mmd,
ow Le rp 2 ciwal, at
ttul unli, a ues kiun hoeitil 2 ttu mrd,
lok lihe i alme h Juiie 3 alme beliy
ute we Loun 1 - eal c8r ttul ttua eanh i
H Satett T
n, B Ferve ho weus uu c J
dail puove uol h (


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
made
uo n
dirv. Fie) Las
formerly-plucked-erdugup-he could new,by-the-procéss-ofheating roots and
ho w
grains-too-hard-forhim-now,make palatable thelinedible.
In an anin I
alumiin
Thus it is that one aberration leads to a more elaborate one. Heating food
destroys much ofi its value, proportionately to the heat applied, though it largely
and Itari
spares protein, which may have caused the human's diversion to a meat diet at
Jnd
3 a
an early stage.)Eating animals is a further depletion of any sense ofb belonging
la lam ea n mlan diev ut, 0 h spek,
or with them.
Bwft our fixed habitat was destroyed by storms Ar predators pr volcano ofl
seyunleg
earthquake pr tidal wave what else could: the stranded creature do but movelto
Le no wen) E MT all, he heue ane + hi
new ones and thus becoming used to new ones? His biologically inherited
ripl
faculties failgd hingntecmmehe-wented-dhomtebutecamamne-dicy werelthrust
out of service. In-thisone-statement-liesthe-key-te-the-humary. - He was
required to think everything out for himself. Ihwes-shus-that-hought became of
Pmi-
de CH
prime importance to #is-new-animat LE a ud
a h
There are a number of Adam and Eve stories from various parts ofthe
world---accounts of a 'fall' from,fa earlier grace. And we can only suppose
that these were recollections of an earlier state blest not only for its security but
1 eal
its beauty, namely the forgotten and regretted animal state. Our very aberration
from animal life forced more and more aberration on us, creating that dread of
abandonment that characterises the human and his domestic animals to this
Hai TE
Tla
day, while at the same time the discomfort of it all spurred him to construct a
new human habitat thatwould.seem-to-have-superseded-nature.
umld
D lma - Loeu k
ltre
LYC
L2 X -
populete
leca A 2hft greor
2 St mehs gpecies, -
ln ude
al / aned haltel ttul unce


2 a Cannihl ue LL es atne niticep a reuahalle
d duse neb
do Jer tm te orniae ttue
da aclyilt he L e
nperu.
havup
-Slhighe a highe Stuleru
nve Fore € e
dm Gud kuw Ju -
lse ei
siple adepluie Tool.


MAURICE ROWDONTHE FALLOF HUMANS
hee hou
He has been called the 'naked' ape. That is, his furlessness expresses
wwe even he w)
tet
exactly bis forlorn and isolated status in a habitat that often seems to kim an
enemy, even a huge potential predator. Fur is an inherited overcoat for all
seasons, and ts loss points to a trauma bitter indeed, one that required constant
ley
ever-vigilant repair that culminated in woollen under-shirts, gloves, socks, and
buttons and zips to permit flexible tolerance of changing temperatures. The fur
that was lost had to be thought out, improvised.
In a word, my nervous and digestive systems, my appetites and my
hay
snfpl lal wanrr
biological tools---the claws and teeth andmoving limbslonce finely tuned to
o fricd
theoutér habitat--must now develop a pilot brain,formmerly-a-smallifessential-
partefthe-animatnervous system.
2 us
this pilot must do all the extra work/The brain's reticular
activating system (our inner alarm bell that wakes us when we smell fire or
hear unusual noises in sleep) must,inthehumam,alert us even in the apparently
safe hours. It must report on the unusual at all times, to an obsessive degree.
Butthere-is-anether-even-mere-eentradietery-feature. in the longself-
revision-programmerequired-bytheprocessofadaptation-and(its-long-term
reward)mutation:the-new-animalmustatallcosts-imitate-the-lifeofother
animats,thatisretrievehis-tostanimalstatus-as.nearly.as-pessible.His-
inherited-pewers-ofadaptation-willde-itfor-him.That.is,-he-must-beeome-as-
automatiein-his-behaviour sothattheatertpitotbrain-eouldlook-after
FainsTu ccr
emergeneies-This-is-why we could never drive a car without by thinking out
evèry move of our feet and hands and eyes. Driving must become as automatic


Bue E the lin 2 nw
adeptelai
lils seninh hol I uiuel el all Lu r end
Rue, snice IV doene accnut tn Ae
punm the despere, ad cesaip wn, usefue
aguus huma Lli, hahueg the ar vfan I :
al all tme deeh, l imrle tae uniu l.
lae culdeve day tue
Itre
human's uai (arl uurep ucnr> coc) eudoaln (
t reptiati replical 7tue lon
Lt dunep. Ne hiusv aL al hune la,
lai, behauw
woualie, ltct
fee e renlw
do al ltae
pilok brai ste
unh.


MAURICE ROWDON' THE FALL OF HUMANS
as possible ifit is going to be safe. We must be able to listen to music or
conversation while driving, or be lost in our own thoughts, while the automated
driver in us can stop at red lights and even take a long route home ofwhich he
will not recall a single feature ff when he gets there. Without a full load of
automatic reaction we animals couldn't live for a moment. The swallow has to
lhes al
give neither thought nor direction to the movement of its wings, whichgo by
themselves and adjust to the air pressure and wind by themselves. Gu d
I shall show again and again how this is the key to all our learning
processes---they must defy our false status as non-animals.
MMVAMA
La culou
Of course all animals have an-extraerdinary power to adapt to the
unusual. The Californian scale insect will suspend its breath for as long as half
an hour to avoid insect-repellent sprays, thatistmtthe suspénsion beeomés
qutophatic In the same way the human must store as much automatic response
Sriiac e,
into his system as he possibly can.IHis speaking ofl his own languagemust
lis voice
become SO deeply unconscious ofitself that it may be said tg speakfor him..
vala ta almal lL
realp
The word we should use in-placeof"automatic' is 'autonomic/ A *
le e Lan m al
animal organisms are autonomic in the sense that they work by themselvessi iz
ha R la c lnl lu a"
pheir glandular and blood and nerve systems, their breathing muscles and #reir
kttui Aay
muscular motion, work without supervision. And this remains/as true of the
human as it is for any animal.
So how did the human become such a menace to his environment,
indeed SO determined in his predations that finally he found the means of
destroying the whole planet? We can only get to the truth here by reminding


Gud cen huel a pmivre we reistle #et
thore loxt i haird powen U
> tolmee huchils, wghj wre dalilingp
- af
dails do lan quicap L UA
almalte hoten
le atee IYLE 7
nt. hun te ky i the loch, all k Itre
Ila sltiu
deredin d ttue pil.t
ary
hai CV all. Mon 2 i we ull ub
rtollece. watue lure humaus do, tn
rle
unif a kuilr cud twh K werds
garlen, SEA lhe place Jule we cs
muli Jouchi - els
all auluse,
conne, -
2 Uhiie hed kue paisthmes leaned, Lu n..


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
We call it 'religion' after the ancient Romans, who used the word to
Cii a untely Jashin i deed)
describe the worship they had inherited from the Greeks. Or rather it described
the effect of religion on the human mind---religio meant 'a binding together', 2
je Ite
and referred to that inner consensus or shared conscience which collective
alwe X AIX clf
worshipb brought about. The Greeks had no name for what seemed to them tote
in everything. They were as near to a western version of the Hindu (Indian)
westen
ho V Itl iL
sense ofthe self as God as ever a/civilisation came, which-however-didn't
Allaull
prevent them from waging war and maintaining slaves (nearly as great in
tty ta
A we
number as the-population) as the very basis, even sport, of daily life. So their
successor civilisations, the ancient Roman one and the Christian, inherited in
full their ability to treat fellow humans as objects of production( rte 'l. -
aker)
It is very difficult for us to think clearly on the subject of religion taday.
Wen
beeause We are living in a period where, excépt as a "private' conviction,
religion seems to have died. But religion never leaves human thought_forthe lu fac
puie L
very-simplereason-thatit has produced every facet of that thought--t fits very
hol ls
form and/starting point.
Imfel,
Historically we do not now know of one civilisation which hasn't come
about as the detailed and meticulous creation of the religion which preceded it.
In ever case religion has come forward with the community,)shaping it with
srecilf te Lliua U aes
rules of comportmt@tglhtswhythemmniondckiliatiosof-bewontr are SO
Jeeply-differentferent-from-each-other,down.to.details-ofpersonal-behavieur-One
ai: lzk
L will accept a loud belch as a sign of satisfaction after a meal, anther will frown


) Ius wry Aue
uiliraa,
A be e
deebly
Herre tu Cacl Ohe,
lue
tw A
elmere
liselt
te -
- CL
ttre Mno 4
uol Ttue
Lrezt
clatkAn
35 fe A
Tolee
iil slai Car clu
Slt cend share
Srapa
hay Jeatuee lihe e f f,
ita
can - - - : AAcd
Fadal
1 tr
Mustiic.
it Mmsa
cud Bulyl lmiar
Yel - cl
wll he
ena siyhy refrnicy
Leaprec
I fmeir umd. Tici
u Ire Grehnfm
het
26- Lnech
anous
apht,
t 7 h
straupe


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
on it. One will accept kissing on the lips among strangers, another hold it in
contempt.
As I am going to show in more detail later, even atheism, a much prized
b alled
stance of today, is a Christian legacy first suggested in the'Middle Agegftetus-
A ce - L
acceptthis-strange-nemenelature-forthe-mement) It was-the-result conc
of God as being SO remote-fromi human life that for all practical purposes He
w e
ever
never touched a living chord. And this/entered into medieval education/ which
3 s
a ut
S Th
L strictly dividen'the divine' from the 'carnal'/so that the twain should never
meet. And that remains the frame of our educational system/today.
Of all thinkers in our particular civilisation only Socrates faced up to
/ wa
the fact that dementia K our downfall and simultaneously our inspiration. The
only modern thinker who seemed to understand this was A.N. Whitehead in the
Tet
last century. He described religion as 'world loyalty', Ial i coe
And Hermann Hesse, also in the previous century, wrote of the horror of
living between two religions, the old one dead and largely scorned, the new one
ttur, heluer
not yet arrived, and/two civilisations, the dead one surviving only as aghost
enfomo tirdt ctt
with
within the august buildings K once erected, the future one,not yet even in seed.
An ueuenaid
urlble
Thenatural sympathetic bond between people is the first thing to die
diis
when religion wanes. Not long ago a serial killer under lock and key in
Moscow, having killed fifty people, once asked for the death penalty to be


medi camel,
cm a in
L V tte humar's


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
applied to him on the grounds that he would certainly kill again, for he could
not do otherwise. He said he felt neither sympathy nor hatred for his victims.
He said people weren't individuals for him but a 'mass'. - In other words he was
attesting to the fact that the key animal bond of sympathy (within a species)
had eroded in him.
When.-a.civilisation.anditts-parent-religion-die-itis-the-disappearanee-ef
this-bond-that-causes.most-distress---we-say-that-law-and-orderis-ndorder'is.now
apparentlybeyondthe-powers-oftaw-enforeement-personnetto-contain:
It is consensus that collapses in a 'decline and fall'. When a civilisation
waua
decays, as it must quickly do once its religion dies, society is held together (as
at mhe present tiig) solely by the last remnants ofthe old 'institutions' -those
mental presences that used to inspire awe and are now steadily dismantled a
feeatzr
brec Ln -
genuing bid for liberation. Nooneis-safe-any-mere. Private killings are ever
more gruesome. In a disaster zone, with thousands of people homeless, te
Tragedy is
difficulties-are exacerbated by rape, pillage, kidnapping, as if'walking'
lcnt tumf
dementia had become in some casesimadness proper.
1s Hue Cese
And now I am going to make perhaps the most important observation in
eH te tadan
this book---that nothing said by humans about other animals has the slightest
srgn uifca CA
Su cinak
meaning or. importance except as autobiography. From Darwin to Eugene
Ldl I *
Marais such kicould without-less-betrashed. LL 4 all dm
v,iw Ital dlane, h
an elevardd bo
Itet :
au tiire aED, ovelosny
Itul Shald hev bor clu (
A ttre
Jou
itil Lo an J
Itiex studenc 2 urmel Ll)


MAURICE ROWDON THE FALL OF HUMANS
Thisis-because-no-animalis capable of going beyond its own inherited
physiology. A lizard, tiger or freshwater pike will see a lizard, tiger or pike
world. They are equipped to navigate onlyandexelusively, that world. The
same with humans---nothing is 'true', nothing is 'knowledge' that isn't simply
an act ofnavigation. There is a lizard truth, a lizard knowledge, and there is a
human truth and human knowledge, and each has precise reference to a specific
physiology and nothing whatever beyond that.
This isn'tto deny the truth ofknowledge or the knowledge of truth but
no cross reference of these things between species is possible: each species
maan
knows only its own navigational equipment. d x A
The lizard and tiger and freshwater pike have no need for human music
as they don't for words---or universals. They have lizard, tiger and pike visions
and transports of feeling. IfI am moved by Mahler or Schubert or Chopin or
Verdi or Wagner I cannot (and incidentally do not, even while within that
emotion) exclude other creatures from the same degree of inner transport for
their own aural forms.
Even abstraction and hypothesis, the pillars ofwhat we have
denominated with great pride 'science', are modes of all animal thought. The
choice of a twig for building a nest involves the mental abstraction of twigs as
a genus from other forms ofwood, and a bird may hypothesise as to the use of
unfamiliar twigs by trying them.
That is, we humans have a specific (as in 'species") intelligence. A
crocodile couldn't use the human physicist's latest view of superconductivity.


>'LE pech, s-leg du tu plgnoleg, AL
L rusms B stutt se
Itil
2 (u ud hgh-jicke c it tue cend
A L
kuounekes)


L Lal
madn Sooyen, deni
MAURICE ROWDON THE FALLOF HUMANS
aiie Chott Ite 6 ul a
evg a h cak
pt -
lre nalise 2 the e (
unes, AL L sh
0 leis
ourselves that any animal that has lost its fixed habitat will be subject to shocks
shoclis
nelmilsp
too great even for bis own nervous system. Ultimately Theselmay become SO
great as to threaten his procreative powers. Just as some female herrings are
swecu
said to have developed male organs and to fight off the male on his approach,
SO every beleaguered animal, its food-sources once poisoned, will show
aberrations in the form of growing male/female tension which quickly
transmute into enmity new-thatthe biological sources for rapturous procreation
have gone.
has
Adding blame tosucha sorry story is simply to misunderstand it. The
very intensity of thought required of the beleaguered human/was the source of
ewr
Ite
both bits survival and his difficulties. And his ingenuity in dealing with what
lL -
always-promised,in-history,tobecchaoswasremarkable
Sinceheneverat-anypoint-eeasedto-bean-animat-he-still-felt-guidanee
by-somethingboth-inside-andoutsside-him-which-he-found-impossibletodoubt
orquestion-indeed-that-guidancetay-in-alt-his-reflex-mevements-that-gave
hinrswif-metion-and(in.the-case-ofthe-lemur,dance).Itmade-itpossible-for
him-to-achieve-a"human'system-which.miraculously-(butthen-the-miraele-was
is-source-and-aim)turned-his-plight-into-happiness.Andlam.goingio.calls Lthis
system-theretigion/civitisation-tandem.


ttai
velou :
/ te I
L alr
suhs)
3 lens
SLL 1
hvr
tano
mrper
Mconpatmer
lte He
hephlues I
catai,
n Wextan
ihat
traep.
hbheun
So how - ie The te
lug
Lhpinen,
Jy, an
penids
dot
Atae
tua
cu lslun
leuo
had
a lid
A collewe
ett fnudati 2 Labp I
and
a Cr 3 CA
Itmiy
pumer +
A 1
ci lsile
u - C
en > C A C
rAap
lk .
L P C
RAcef
L - hnslu .
Ata It ea Jel 1
And - e - L C
the
0 lch e
C Le LII
ule
Tue
Teotpon
nalu.
4 laun
en 4S
L tu
Bur Arure
h apotut
uakiy
wilati Unie,
histry
toE
uitto . -
chal.
hele her
lewr
crelul y lyp
Lees
kus
Cerll
luds nn)
Lep