What Is Man? and Other Essays. Марк Твен

That is all. There is only one.

      Y.M. Well, certainly that is a strange enough doctrine. What is the sole impulse that ever moves a person to do a thing?

      O.M. The impulse to content his own spirit—the necessity of contenting his own spirit and winning its approval.

      Y.M. Oh, come, that won't do!

      O.M. Why won't it?

      Y.M. Because it puts him in the attitude of always looking out for his own comfort and advantage; whereas an unselfish man often does a thing solely for another person's good when it is a positive disadvantage to himself.

      O.M. It is a mistake. The act must do him good, first; otherwise he will not do it. He may think he is doing it solely for the other person's sake, but it is not so; he is contenting his own spirit first—the other's person's benefit has to always take second place.

      Y.M. What a fantastic idea! What becomes of self—sacrifice? Please answer me that.

      O.M. What is self-sacrifice?

      Y.M. The doing good to another person where no shadow nor suggestion of benefit to one's self can result from it.

II

       Table of Contents

      Man's Sole Impulse—the Securing of His Own Approval

      Old Man. There have been instances of it—you think?

      Young Man. Instances? Millions of them!

      O.M. You have not jumped to conclusions? You have examined them—critically?

      Y.M. They don't need it: the acts themselves reveal the golden impulse back of them.

      O.M. For instance?

      Y.M. Well, then, for instance. Take the case in the book here. The man lives three miles up-town. It is bitter cold, snowing hard, midnight. He is about to enter the horse-car when a gray and ragged old woman, a touching picture of misery, puts out her lean hand and begs for rescue from hunger and death. The man finds that he has a quarter in his pocket, but he does not hesitate: he gives it her and trudges home through the storm. There—it is noble, it is beautiful; its grace is marred by no fleck or blemish or suggestion of self-interest.

      O.M. What makes you think that?

      Y.M. Pray what else could I think? Do you imagine that there is some other way of looking at it?

      O.M. Can you put yourself in the man's place and tell me what he felt and what he thought?

      Y.M. Easily. The sight of that suffering old face pierced his generous heart with a sharp pain. He could not bear it. He could endure the three-mile walk in the storm, but he could not endure the tortures his conscience would suffer if he turned his back and left that poor old creature to perish. He would not have been able to sleep, for thinking of it.

      O.M. What was his state of mind on his way home?

      Y.M. It was a state of joy which only the self-sacrificer knows. His heart sang, he was unconscious of the storm.

      O.M. He felt well?

      Y.M. One cannot doubt it.

      O.M. Very well. Now let us add up the details and see how much he got for his twenty-five cents. Let us try to find out the real why of his making the investment. In the first place he couldn't bear the pain which the old suffering face gave him. So he was thinking of his pain—this good man. He must buy a salve for it. If he did not succor the old woman his conscience would torture him all the way home. Thinking of his pain again. He must buy relief for that. If he didn't relieve the old woman he would not get any sleep. He must buy some sleep—still thinking of himself, you see. Thus, to sum up, he bought himself free of a sharp pain in his heart, he bought himself free of the tortures of a waiting conscience, he bought a whole night's sleep—all for twenty-five cents! It should make Wall Street ashamed of itself. On his way home his heart was joyful, and it sang—profit on top of profit! The impulse which moved the man to succor the old woman was—first—to content his own spirit; secondly to relieve her sufferings. Is it your opinion that men's acts proceed from one central and unchanging and inalterable impulse, or from a variety of impulses?

      Y.M. From a variety, of course—some high and fine and noble, others not. What is your opinion?

      O.M. Then there is but one law, one source.

      Y.M. That both the noblest impulses and the basest proceed from that one source?

      O.M. Yes.

      Y.M. Will you put that law into words?

      O.M. Yes. This is the law, keep it in your mind. From his cradle to his grave a man never does a single thing which has any FIRST AND FOREMOST object but one—to secure peace of mind, spiritual comfort, for HIMSELF.

      Y.M. Come! He never does anything for any one else's comfort, spiritual or physical?

      O.M. No. except on those distinct terms—that it shall first secure his own spiritual comfort. Otherwise he will not do it.

      Y.M. It will be easy to expose the falsity of that proposition.

      O.M. For instance?

      Y.M. Take that noble passion, love of country, patriotism. A man who loves peace and dreads pain, leaves his pleasant home and his weeping family and marches out to manfully expose himself to hunger, cold, wounds, and death. Is that seeking spiritual comfort?

      O.M. He loves peace and dreads pain?

      Y.M. Yes.

      O.M. Then perhaps there is something that he loves more than he loves peace—the approval of his neighbors and the public. And perhaps there is something which he dreads more than he dreads pain—the disapproval of his neighbors and the public. If he is sensitive to shame he will go to the field—not because his spirit will be entirely comfortable there, but because it will be more comfortable there than it would be if he remained at home. He will always do the thing which will bring him the most mental comfort—for that is the sole law of his life. He leaves the weeping family behind; he is sorry to make them uncomfortable, but not sorry enough to sacrifice his own comfort to secure theirs.

      Y.M. Do you really believe that mere public opinion could force a timid and peaceful man to—

      O.M. Go to war? Yes—public opinion can force some men to do anything.

      Y.M. Anything?

      O.M. Yes—anything.

      Y.M. I don't believe that. Can it force a right-principled man to do a wrong thing?

      O.M. Yes.

      Y.M. Can it force a kind man to do a cruel thing?

      O.M. Yes.

      Y.M. Give an instance.

      O.M. Alexander Hamilton was a conspicuously high-principled man. He regarded dueling as wrong, and as opposed to the teachings of religion—but in deference to public opinion he fought a duel. He deeply loved his family, but to buy public approval he treacherously deserted them and threw his life away, ungenerously leaving them to lifelong sorrow in order that he might stand well with a foolish world. In the then condition of the public standards of honor he could not have been comfortable with the stigma upon him of having refused to fight. The teachings of religion, his devotion to his family, his kindness of heart, his high principles, all went for nothing when they stood in the way of his spiritual comfort. A man will do anything, no matter what it is, to secure his spiritual comfort; and he can neither be forced nor persuaded to