Tag Archives: personal responsibility

To Act With Integrity

Posted on by

We each have a sense of self, a coherent unity within ourselves, a feeling of integrity that defines our identity in our own minds. This sense of self is challenged by the conflicts and incongruities we are forced to contend with, between the material and the moral, the physical and the metaphysical, and the various unresolved concerns in our lives.

The moral philosopher Mary Midgley describes this experience rather well I think:

“I am suggesting…, that human freedom centers on being a creature able, in some degree, to act as a whole in dealing with… conflicting desires. This may sound odd, because freedom sounds like an advantage, and having conflicting desires certainly does not.

“But it is not a new thought that freedom has a cost. And the conflicting desires themselves are of course not the whole story. They must belong to a being which in some way owns both of them, is aware of both, and can therefore make some attempt to reconcile them.

“…The endeavor must be to act as a whole, rather than as a peculiar, isolated component coming in to control the rest of the person. Though it is only an endeavor – though the wholeness is certainly not given ready-made and can never be fully achieved, yet the integrative struggle to heal conflicts and to reach towards this wholeness is surely the core of what we mean by human freedom.” (1994)

Each of us, consciously or otherwise, adopts a system of morality upon which to base decisions and guide our way in the world, either a formal religious system or one assumed or devised by ourselves.

Whether it is weak or strong, sloppy or consistent, or we even think about it very much, our personal morality serves as the grounding for our sense of identity and our actions. It is impossible to function without it.

It is our integrity as “whole persons” that resists the onslaught of disintegrating forces in our lives. When we lose consciousness of this effort and succumb to the fragmentation imposed by the incoherent impact of advertising and mass media that constantly bombards us, we lose control of our independence as individuals.

This is particularly challenging I think for those who choose to disregard the teachings of the great religious traditions, which supply us with rich and textured guidance. For the reader who is religiously inclined, the way forward is generally well-lit – at least in principle.

If the reader is non-religious, the task will be to ground oneself in common decency, to focus ones’ vision on the highest good, to abide consistently by an ethical code, and to bring healing and encouragement to those around us.

Let’s be clear, however: This is quite difficult, especially when we rely on our own devices.
Each of us is called to step forward to participate in the affairs of the community we have chosen as our home, and to engage with our neighbors respectfully as active listeners and facilitators motivated by a desire to encourage and empower.

We can only ensure the integrity of our purpose by means that are in harmony with our purpose. Mahatma Gandhi said it best:  “They say ‘means are after all means’. I would say ‘means are after all everything’. As the means so the end.” (1937)

This assertion was stated somewhat differently, but just as explicitly by the economist and political philosopher F. A. Hayek, when he wrote: “The principle that the ends justify the means is in individualist ethics regarded as the denial of all morals.” (1944)

These are not theoretical statements. Rather they express a profound truth. The integrity of means must always provide the standard of reference in every endeavor.

If each of us holds our personal integrity clearly in focus, attends to moral responsibility, and respects our neighbor as we ourselves would wish to be respected, we should not find ourselves at odds with justice.

The manner in which we respond to our personal differences will determine who we are and the freedom we are capable of knowing.

Tom

In Two Weeks: Finding a transcendent resilience through inner freedom

Dear readers: I am scheduled for surgery next week. Consequently the blog will be on pause very briefly. I hope to have the next post ready for you on Friday, February 19.

The Freedom Within

Posted on by

Our freedom to make choices, however limited, defines us as human beings. Without freedom of choice there could be no morality and no capacity for personal integrity. Yet many of our choices in life restrict subsequent alternatives.

The choice of career, of a love-mate, and the decisions to have a family, to stand by a friend, or to embrace a religious faith, all limit future choices. And if we are caring human beings, we find our choices further constrained by our sense of responsibility as members of family and community.

Most of us are mature enough to recognize that freedom is impossible if we abandon responsibility. So, where do we find freedom? What is freedom, really?

The integrity of political, economic, and religious freedoms should always be a concern, and particularly so in times of crisis. However, the difficulties confronting the individual are always paramount. We each find ourselves facing our own tests, and each must respond on the basis of our own sense of integrity.

In the coming weeks, I will explore the difficulties we can experience when seeking personal integrity through clear-thinking moral, spiritual, and mindful self-control in the face of civil disorder or repression.

In times of hardship and distrust this is a vital matter.

Each of us could choose to walk away from the human crisis, but even then we would be confronted by the necessities of nature and circumstance.

Any attempt to walk away comes at great cost, limiting our personal opportunity to grow and mature through the challenges and tests of human relationships. Indeed, most of us find meaning in the commitments we make to our families and friends.

In this time of historic social disruption the potential for finding honor and satisfaction is at its’ greatest.

Whatever our decisions, when we think about what is most important to us – in addition to our loved ones – many of us would place value on self-respect and the freedom “to be ourselves”. We prefer to explore opportunities for ourselves without interference, to have autonomy in making our own decisions, and to seek goals that we have chosen for ourselves.

Let us reflect then on what freedom means when we seek it as self-possessed individuals, and on the attitude with which we can best respond to the social fragmentation and dysfunction that confronts us daily.

It is primarily in the context of tests and difficulties that our identity as human beings comes into focus.

Some of you are not committed to a religious tradition. Those who have religious belief will recognize that the guidance we receive from religious teaching, while critical to personal development and our ability to remain steady in the face of crises, also sets clear limits to appropriate behavior and constraints on free choice.

I expect those of you who are principled but not religious, if you value your self-respect, will never-the-less find yourselves constrained by ethical principles, by your personal dignity and sense of justice.

Religious or otherwise, I think it fair to say that our responses are influenced by our attitude toward life: our sense of belonging, our capacity to appreciate others, and our readiness to engage fully in life while attempting to remain balanced and unperturbed amid the confusion and negativity that life often brings our way.

We may care about human suffering; we may wish to avoid negativity and calamity; yet our personal feeling of freedom depends upon an ability to think creatively and function effectively when the going gets tough, even extremely tough.

This is a daunting task. To be free we must seek to be autonomous individuals first, whole and complete in ourselves, and then to actualize our responsibility as people in the real world.

We may not like the reality in which we find ourselves. Indeed, life can occasionally become nightmarish. But, free will necessitates a proactive response with a commitment to be free in oneself and to respond rationally.

Tom

Next week: Moral Integrity, Self-respect and Responsibility

Either life entails courage…

Posted on by

Vista 7-x

“Either life entails courage, or it ceases to be life.”

–E. M. Forster

At the crossroads…

Posted on by

Mountain 12 MendenhallGlacier Alaska

“Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls.”

–Jeremiah 6:16

Renewal of Our Core Values

Posted on by

Answering questions about what has gone wrong is never comfortable. Some truths are not pretty. But, revitalizing core American values and the restoration of a once vibrant civic spirit will require that we recognize what has been lost and why. I believe an honest appraisal is in order.

The current difficulties have developed over a long period of time. The gradual loss of a commitment to integrity in all areas of life has left Americans without the interwoven fabric of community relationships, without a soulful center or shared sense of purpose.

We find ourselves dominated by materialism and immersed in a homogenized culture with little conscious identity. Where is there a meaningful commitment to community, to the dignity of mutual respect, to embracing shared responsibility for local needs?

Most significantly, in my view, Americans have become obsessed with immediacy. We want what we want and we want it now. Reason and foresight have been eclipsed by a fixation on material appearances, and yet we are unabashed about entertaining ourselves with violence and degrading behavior.

Even the once humiliating liabilities of personal debt seem to be of no concern. All possibility of generating real wealth is abandoned in exchange for false appearances bought with future income.

Strange as it may be, we have essentially abandoned the future.

The moral bankruptcy and distortions of logic represented by this posture have influenced almost everything in our national life. An undisciplined attitude has led us to the brink of disaster, and our insistence on freedom from institutional and cultural restraints is fraught with contradictions.

For example, our respect for the individual requires that we honor the independent integrity and privacy of each citizen, and yet we have abandoned this principle out of fear for our own safety.

Similarly, we have failed to see that privacy has been sacrificed when we welcome the obscenity and titillation of mass media into our homes. Personal integrity is lost to a fascination with “the raw stuff of life,” in the words of the conservative American philosopher Richard Weaver:

“The extremes of passion and suffering are served up to enliven the breakfast table or to lighten the boredom of an evening at home. The area of privacy has been abandoned because the definition of person has been lost; there is no longer a standard by which to judge what belongs to the individual man. Behind the offense lies the repudiation of sentiment in favor of immediacy.”

Richard Weaver wrote these words before the advent of television. And he was not the first to make such an observation. A quarter century earlier George Bernard Shaw commented that “an American has no sense of privacy. He does not know what it means. There is no such thing in the country.”

Weaver warned Americans of a self-destructive streak that would ultimately lead to a crisis. He pointed out our fascination with specialization and with the parts of things at the expense of understanding and respecting the whole. He argued that an obsession with fragmentary parts without regard for their function necessarily leads to instability.

Such instability is insidious, penetrating all relationships and institutions. In his words, “It is not to be anticipated that rational self-control will flourish in the presence of fixation upon parts.”

This is not the fault of government – except to the extent that government, managed by people like ourselves, has joined whole-heartedly in the party. In a democracy it is tragically easy for government policy to degenerate until it serves the worst inclinations of a self-interested electorate.

Consequently we have descended into the financial profligacy of the past fifty years and are now the most indebted nation in history by a wide margin. Ours has been a twisted path, but with a clearly visible end. And, the implicate outcome remains ignored.

If we are to recover our balance, it is essential that we recognize the wrong-headed thinking that got us here.

Values and principle are not in question; only wisdom. What we are challenged to do now is to reconsider the way we think.

Tom

Next week: Freedom or paralysis.

Dear readers: I would be grateful for your thoughtful remarks and feedback.

Americans Co-opted by the State?

Posted on by

For more than a hundred years Americans expressed their values and creative energy in numerous organizations and associations. As we saw in the previous post, Americans overcame constraints on their freedom through their own initiative and sense of community.

Generations later, however, action has been replaced by inaction. A once spirited culture of engagement has been replaced by an increasingly self-centered attitude, the loss of community, and the isolating influences of the automobile, television, and the digital age.
Is it these technologies that have isolated us from one another?

Economic historian Niall Ferguson argues no. Rather he suggests that it is “not technology, but the state – with its seductive promise of ‘security from the cradle to the grave’ – [which is] the real enemy of civil society.” He cites the prophetic vision of Tocqueville in 1840, when he imagined a future America in which the spirit of community has been co-opted and neutered by government:

“I see an innumerable crowd of like and equal men who revolve on themselves without repose, procuring the small and vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls. Each of them, withdrawn and apart, is like a stranger to the destiny of all the others: his children and his particular friends form the whole human species for him; as for dwelling with his fellow citizens, he is beside them, but he does not see them; he touches them and does not feel them; he exists only in himself and for himself alone….

“Above these an immense tutelary power is elevated, which alone takes charge of assuring their enjoyments and watching over their fate. It is absolute, detailed, regular, far-seeing, and mild. It would resemble paternal power if, like that, it had for its object to prepare men for manhood; but on the contrary, it seeks only to keep them fixed irrevocably in childhood….

“Thus, …the sovereign extends its arms over society as a whole; it covers its surface with a network of small, complicated, painstaking, uniform rules through which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls cannot clear a way to surpass the crowd; it does not break wills, but it softens them, bends them, and directs them; it rarely forces one to act, but it constantly opposes itself to one’s acting; it does not destroy, it prevents things from being born; it does not tyrannize, it hinders, compromises, enervates, extinguishes, dazes, and finally reduces each nation to being nothing more than a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd.”

Elsewhere Tocqueville added an explicit warning:

“But what political power would ever be in a state to suffice for the innumerable multitude of small undertakings that American citizens execute every day with the aid of association?…

“The morality and intelligence of a democratic people would risk no fewer dangers than its business and industry if government came to take the place of associations everywhere.

“Sentiments and ideas renew themselves, the heart is enlarged, and the human mind is developed only by the reciprocal action of men upon one another.”

I agree that government has had a part in the deadening of the American spirit. But, I do not think we can attribute the present condition solely to government. I believe the degeneration of attitudes and behavior cannot be divorced from the isolating influences of corporate culture, the dispersion of communities by the automobile, or the gradual loss of a moral, metaphysical center.

Telecommunications and commercial airlines have brought the world together on a macro level, but they have also left us disinclined us to engage with our neighbors.

I believe the long slide to isolation is the consequence of social forces that have followed the trajectory of human progress since the founding of the American Republic, and which we can only fault ourselves for accepting.

Our government is, after all, a creature of our own invention, served by people who have been subjected to the same degraded values and demoralized sense of responsibility as the rest of us.

Tom

Next week: The renewal of core American values.

Note to readers: Your comments and feedback would be much appreciated. As a writer I would find this very helpful.

Motion and action…

Posted on by

Background 7

“Never confuse motion with action.”

–Benjamin Franklin

The Wellspring of Individual Will

Posted on by

We find ourselves now at a severe turning point, confronted by the consequences of the past and the anger and confusion of the present. Yet, this is also an opportunity, a rare moment in history that calls us to clarify our purpose and correct the attitudes and behaviors that brought us to this place.

We have lost a sense of ultimate purpose, and thus the conceptual framework upon which rational judgment depends. This has made us vulnerable both to our own vices and to the predatory interests and manipulative power of institutions that know our weaknesses.

To straighten things out will require that we address tough questions with open-minded objectivity. The effort may not be comfortable, but it will be essential if we are to regain our balance and rebuild our resolve.

In his recent book, The Great Degeneration, economic historian Niall Ferguson has provided us with a compelling review of what has come to pass. He considers four areas in which the degeneration of values and loss of social stability in the United States has had devastating consequences.

His four areas of concern are, to use my own words, 1) the loss of personal and social responsibility, 2) the disintegration of the market economy, 3) the role of the rule of law, and 4) the essential qualities of civil society.

Dr. Ferguson reminds us of our past, and in particular the vigorous civil and cultural life of nineteenth century America: “I want to ask,” he writes, “how far it is possible for a truly free nation to flourish in the absence of the kind of vibrant civil society we used to take for granted? I want to suggest that the opposite of civil society is uncivil society, where even the problem of anti-social behavior becomes a problem for the state.”

He goes on to cite Alexis de Tocqueville from the first volume of his famous commentary, Democracy in America, which was published in 1840:

“America is, among the countries of the world, the one where they have taken most advantage of association and where they have applied that powerful mode of action to a greater diversity of objects.

“Independent of the permanent associations created by law under the names of townships, cities and counties, there is a multitude of others that owe their birth and development only to the individual will.

“The inhabitant of the United States learns from birth that he must rely on himself to struggle against the evils and obstacles of life; he has only a defiant and restive regard for social authority and he appeals to its authority only when he cannot do without it….

“In the United States, they associate for the goals of public security, of commerce and industry, of morality and religion. There is nothing the human will despairs of attaining by the free action of the collective power of individuals.”

Dr. Ferguson writes that “Tocqueville saw America’s political associations as an indispensable counterweight to the tyranny of the majority in modern democracy. But it was the non-political associations that really fascinated him.”

“Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fêtes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books…. Finally, if it is a question of bringing to light a truth or developing a sentiment with the support of great example, they associate.”

What happened to American civil society? And what is the consequence of this loss?

As Tocqueville reports, Americans had once succeeded in overcoming constraints to freedom through their own initiative and sense of community.

Unfortunately, action has been replaced by inaction. A once spirited culture of engagement, based on committed interpersonal relationships, has been replaced by a self-centered attitude, the loss of community, and the isolating influences of the automobile, television, and the digital age.

Surely it is time to restore what we once did so well, and to address the great challenges ahead with renewed strength and responsibility.

Tom

Next week: When individual will is co-opted by government.

Grit and Grace

Posted on by

Americans today face a critical moment in time, arguably as profound as any in our history. Freedom of opportunity, social justice, and the preservation of our ability to seek personal goals are all at stake. The character of the nation appears to be in question. Our sense of identity as a people has been shaken.

We are experiencing the present adversity as an American crisis, and it is. But it is taking place in the context of a great turning point in the human story, a period of time when an unprecedented number of monumental crises are converging across the globe.  Our own crisis is inextricably intertwined with the affairs of the world.

Never has there been a greater need for the stability of the American vision.

I have proposed a simple, yet demanding course of constructive action that can lead toward agreement concerning shared values and principles. If we have the will, it can also provide a platform for seeking a shared vision of the future, and drafting a strategy for getting ourselves there.

This will be extremely difficult for Americans to carry off. But, I do not believe we have a choice. Without a willingness to engage with one another in this a way, I do not expect this nation to survive as a democratic republic.

We must find our way with both grit and grace, navigating through complex, interacting crises. We face a transition that can be expected to dominate the course of the 21st century.

The outcome will depend on our character as a people, and our understanding of the fundamental structural change in social, economic, and environmental realities that will confront us each step of the way.

Necessity presents us with stark, uncomfortable choices. We can give free reign to anger and disillusionment, allowing ourselves to be dragged down to a demoralized helplessness. Or we can determine to stand firmly together as a people, rising above our differences to meet the challenges that confront us.

Are we prepared to preserve core values, even as we forge a genuinely American response to the evolving conditions of an unexpected and unprecedented series of crises?

Will we have the vision, courage, and fortitude to commit ourselves to principled means and constructive action?

I will not offer a political philosophy, nor will I speak of ultimate goals. Fundamental values and a shared purpose must be determined by the American people. Rather, I will propose the means for doing this.

Both this blog and the forthcoming book identify principles I consider necessary for undertaking this endeavor, and suggest the qualities of character, attitude, and responsibility that can bring us through a profound turning point in our national experience.

I ask that we turn away from the dishonesty and deceit of partisan politics to address the needs and problems in our local communities.

A practical approach is offered that transcends religious, philosophical, and partisan views. It leverages the strength of local communities willing to foster genuine unity while capitalizing on their diversity.

I leave the ultimate vision of the future to you: the American people.

In addressing the epic challenges confronting us in the coming years, it will be necessary to manage our relationships and responsibilities with honesty and integrity. These virtues must be sought determinedly and without faltering, however dark the prospect.

I ask Americans to rise above our differences in the conviction that however immense the tests we face, however the world changes around us, however diverse our personal circumstances, this nation must not be permitted to abandon its founding vision and ultimate purpose.

Tom

A note to regular readers: If you wish to offer your encouragement, you may do so by clicking on the “Follow” button on the right side of the page. When it comes time to publish, numbers will make a difference.

American Identity, American Heritage

Posted on by

As we look forward from the current state of disorder, dependable local communities will be the only stable condition in which we can prepare for the future.

Community is the seat of civilization, made real because it is personal. It is in local community where we can engage with one another face-to-face, building trust, tending to needs, learning patience and responsibility.

Our strength comes with diversity and depends upon our readiness to rise above our differences to build a welcoming, all-inclusive society. This is the essence of our humanity, our heritage and the source of the nation’s greatness.

These things don’t just happen by coincidence. They are formed in the trials of hardship and necessity. They are given character by our vision and purpose.

Like marriage, a commitment to community forces us to mature as adult people – emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually. Perhaps this is why so many avoid participating fully.

There are, however, other reasons for committing ourselves to local responsibility. Beyond the boundaries of family, community is the place to address the immediate needs we face, to engage in democratic decision-making and to solve problems.

Americans have abdicated personal responsibility for these aspects of civilized life for a long time, and we have done so at our peril.

It was not always this way. Prior to the American Revolution, and for close to 100 years afterward, Americans gravitated easily, even impulsively, toward local governance and an independent frame of mind. We managing our own affairs in cooperation with our neighbors and accepted regional autonomy as a natural condition.

Civil society flourished in nineteenth century America, a vibrant force documented admiringly by Alexis de Tocqueville in his 1840 volume, Democracy in America. Americans created an immense variety of civic organizations to address every conceivable social need and activity. People did this on their own initiative, inspired by their sense of belonging and the spirit of the times.

An American return to community, both in spirit and as a practical matter, is as important today as it has ever been. It can only be through engaging with our neighbors in all spheres of problem-solving that we will learn the skills for living and working productively as fellow citizens.

As Americans, we have been here before and we can do it again.

There are those who argue that the decentralist tradition of the American past represents an ideal to which we should aspire. This is an attractive vision. Yet, I think it should be plain for all to see that there must be a balance struck between a constituency of fully engaged local communities and a competent, benevolent and trustworthy centralized government.

At the present juncture, it is difficult to imagine a limited central government managed by mature adults who are responsible for protecting both our freedoms and our security. But, that is what we need. Without law there can be no freedom.

I believe that a valid and well-reasoned vision of limited government for the American future can only come from local communities. Those who understand trust, moral responsibility, and constructive action – and who recognize the very high stakes involved – will build the foundations for the American renewal with their neighbors.

We can only meet necessity through personal initiative and meaningful dialog. And, the most effective leaders will be those who serve with quiet restraint and minimal drama.

Building unity within communities is a gradual process that depends on each of us to reach out across differences of tradition, politics, and culture to influence the hearts and minds of our neighbors, to form friendships and to truly understand one another.

What is essential is that Americans stand together, making firm our commitment to such values as will guide a free and just nation.

This will take time. By necessity we must refocus our vision of the future in such positive terms that partisan politics will be powerless to resist.

Tom

The Challenge We Must Rise To

Posted on by

Last week I introduced you to James Surowiecki’s observations regarding democratic decision-making in his book, The Wisdom of Crowds. Offering convincing evidence that wisdom can be found in large groups if we know how to look for it, Mr. Surowiecki challenges our understanding of democracy.

None of us would expect the citizens of a democratic republic to make objective decisions when they have individual interests at stake. However, he reports startling results when aggregating the thinking of unrelated groups of strangers.

Importantly, Mr. Surowiecki emphasizes the necessity for both diversity of viewpoints and independence in thinking.

I would suggest that wisdom can also be found more intentionally, and intelligently, when we are fully committed to seeking the greater good. And this is most effective when we are committed to the safety and well-being of our friends and neighbors.

Such commonality of intention has certain basic requirements of course. Local initiatives will always depend on shared purpose, and to a large extent on shared values. And, this can only happen when we rise above our differences to appreciate the diversity of our knowledge, our varied experience and unique ways of seeing things.

Unity cannot exist in a state of sameness. It only comes into being with the embrace of differences. Living with diversity presents us with the necessity for learning how to engage with one another in practical ways. Nothing will be possible otherwise.

In Chapter One, American Crucible, I quote Peggy Noonan’s heartfelt call to the American people in her little book, Patriotic Grace, What It Is and Why We Need It Now. In it she urges us to rise above our differences, however significant they may be, to reaffirm “what it is to be an American.”

Rarely has there been a time in the past of this extraordinary country when it has been more important to consider and to reaffirm what it is to be an American.

Peggy Noonan puts it to us like this:

“Politics is a great fight and must be a fight; that is its purpose. We are a great democratic republic, and we struggle with great questions. One group believes A must be law, the other Z. Each side must battle it through, and the answer will not always be in the middle. The answer is not always M.

“But we can approach things in a new way, see in a new way, speak in a new way. We can fight honorably and in good faith, while—and this is the hard one—both summoning and assuming good faith on the other side.

“To me it is not quite a matter of ‘rising above partisanship,’ though that can be a very good thing. It’s more a matter of remembering our responsibilities and reaffirming what it is to be an American.

“…And so I came to think this: What we need most right now, at this moment, is a kind of patriotic grace—a grace that takes the long view, apprehends the moment we are in, comes up with ways of dealing with it, and eschews the politically cheap and manipulative. That admits affection and respect. That encourages them. That acknowledges the small things that divide us are not worthy of the moment; that agrees that the things that can be done to ease the stresses we feel as a nation should be encouraged, while those that encourage our cohesion as a nation should be supported.

“I’ve come to think that this really is our Normandy Beach, …the key area in which we have to prevail if the whole enterprise is to succeed. The challenge we must rise to.”

Some readers will recoil from the suggestion that “small things… divide us.” Some feel strongly that very substantial thing divide us. I am quite sure that Peggy Noonan would not want to minimize the significance of our concerns.

But, she has a point. We can acknowledge the things that divide us, address them in a respectful manner, and unite to strengthen the nation to protect the civil order that allows us our freedoms. Or, we can let it all come to naught.

I never said it would be easy. I said we have no choice.

Tom

Next week: A Disciplined Freedom

For myself, alone…

Posted on by

Tree 4

“It is not for me to judge another man’s life. I must judge, I must choose, I must spurn, purely for myself. For myself, alone.”

–Hermann Hesse