and ... and ... do you

know that that, too, is profitable, sometimes even praiseworthy? Gentlemen,

let us suppose that man is not stupid. (Indeed one cannot refuse to

suppose that, if only from the one consideration, that, if man is stupid,

then who is wise?) But if he is not stupid, he is monstrously ungrateful!

Phenomenally ungrateful. In fact, I believe that the best definition of

man is the ungrateful biped. But that is not all, that is not his worst

defect; his worst defect is his perpetual moral obliquity, perpetual--from

the days of the Flood to the Schleswig-Holstein period. Moral obliquity

and consequently lack of good sense; for it has long been accepted that

lack of good sense is due to no other cause than moral obliquity. Put it to

the test and cast your eyes upon the history of mankind. What will you

see? Is it a grand spectacle? Grand, if you like. Take the Colossus of

Rhodes, for instance, that's worth something. With good reason Mr.

Anaevsky testifies of it that some say that it is the work of man's hands,

while others maintain that it has been created by nature herself. Is it

many-coloured? May be it is many-coloured, too: if one takes the dress

uniforms, military and civilian, of all peoples in all ages--that alone is

worth something, and if you take the undress uniforms you will never get

to the end of it; no historian would be equal to the job. Is it monotonous?

May be it's monotonous too: it's fighting and fighting; they are fighting

now, they fought first and they fought last--you will admit, that it is

almost too monotonous. In short, one may say anything about the history

of the world--anything that might enter the most disordered imagination.

The only thing one can't say is that it's rational. The very word sticks

in one's throat. And, indeed, this is the odd thing that is continually

happening: there are continually turning up in life moral and rational

persons, sages and lovers of humanity who make it their object to live all

their lives as morally and rationally as possible, to be, so to speak, a light

to their neighbours simply in order to show them that it is possible to live

morally and rationally in this world. And yet we all know that those very

people sooner or later have been false to themselves, playing some queer

trick, often a most unseemly one. Now I ask you: what can be expected of

man since he is a being endowed with strange qualities? Shower upon

him every earthly blessing, drown him in a sea of happiness, so that

nothing but bubbles of bliss can be seen on the surface; give him

economic prosperity, such that he should have nothing else to do but

sleep, eat cakes and busy himself with the continuation of his species, and

even then out of sheer ingratitude, sheer spite, man would play you some

nasty trick. He would even risk his cakes and would deliberately desire

the most fatal rubbish, the most uneconomical absurdity, simply to

introduce into all this positive good sense his fatal fantastic element. It is

just his fantastic dreams, his vulgar folly that he will desire to retain,

simply in order to prove to himself--as though that were so necessary--

that men still are men and not the keys of a piano, which the laws of

nature threaten to control so completely that soon one will be able to

desire nothing but by the calendar. And that is not all: even if man really

were nothing but a piano-key, even if this were proved to him by natural

science and mathematics, even then he would not become reasonable,

but would purposely do something perverse out of simple ingratitude,

simply to gain his point. And if he does not find means he will contrive

destruction and chaos, will contrive sufferings of all sorts, only to gain his

point! He will launch a curse upon the world, and as only man can curse

(it is his privilege, the primary distinction between him and other animals),

may be by his curse alone he will attain his object--that is,

convince himself that he is a man and not a piano-key! If you say that all

this, too, can be calculated and tabulated--chaos and darkness and

curses, so that the mere possibility of calculating it all beforehand would

stop it all, and reason would reassert itself, then man would purposely go

mad in order to be rid of reason and gain his point! I believe in it, I

answer for it, for the whole work of man really seems to consist in nothing

but proving to himself every minute that he is a man and not a piano-key!

It may be at the cost of his skin, it may be by cannibalism! And this being

so, can one help being tempted to rejoice that it has not yet come off, and

that desire still depends on something we don't know?

You will scream at me (that is, if you condescend to do so) that no one

is touching my free will, that all they are concerned with is that my will

should of itself, of its own free will, coincide with my own normal

interests, with the laws of nature and arithmetic.

Good heavens, gentlemen, what sort of free will is left when we

come to tabulation and arithmetic, when it will all be a case of twice

two make four? Twice two makes four without my will. As if free will

meant that!

IX

Gentlemen, I am joking, and I know myself that my jokes are not

brilliant,but you know one can take everything as a joke. I am, perhaps,

jesting against the grain. Gentlemen, I am tormented by questions;

answer them for me. You, for instance, want to cure men of their old

habits and reform their will in accordance with science and good sense.

But how do you know, not only that it is possible, but also that it is

DESIRABLE to reform man in that way? And what leads you to the conclusion

that man's inclinations NEED reforming? In short, how do you know

that such a reformation will be a benefit to man? And to go to the root of

the matter, why are you so positively convinced that not to act against his

real normal interests guaranteed by the conclusions of reason and arithmetic

is certainly always advantageous for man and must always be a law

for mankind? So far, you know, this is only your supposition.