"By contact with what is eternal, by devoting our life to bringing something of the Divine into this troubled world, we can make our own lives creative even now, even in the midst of the cruelty and strife and hatred that surround us on every hand."--Bertrand Russell's Why Men Fight 

         "Direct impulse is what moves us, and the desires which we think we have are a mere garment for the impulse (Russell 11). This passage from Bertrand Russell's Why Men Fight (1916) supports the author's premise for the underlying motives of human aggression. In an effort to discourage involvement in World War I, the author provides a psychological analysis for the causes of war and calls for a peaceful rather than a hostile solution. In essence, Russell uses the principles of psychotherapy normally applied to subjects individually to explain the political behavior of nations collectively. This unique approach proves the interrelationship of the two disciplines. Much like Freud, Russell speculates that war stems not from desire but from inherent impulses that govern human behavior (Russell 5). These urges vent themselves in both positive and negative outcomes. When directed in a beneficial manner, this body of energy, like Freud's concept of the libido or the Jungian collective unconscious, induces creativity in the form of art, science, and culture; however, when denied or repressed, this same energy source leads to hostility. Alienation and isolation occurs as the result of one's failure to achieve the goal, whether it is loss of contact with the ancient symbols of the unconscious, or one's inability to discern the functions of desire and restraint. Spinoza, on the contrary, says in Ethics, :"For the wise man, in so far  as he is regarded as such, is scarcely at all disturbed in spirit, but being conscious of himself, and of God, and of things, by a certain external necessity, never ceases to be, but always  possesses true acquiescence of his spirit. If the way which I have pointed out as leading to this result seems exceedingly hard, it may nevertheless be discovered. Needs must it be hard, since it is so seldom found. How could it be possible, if salvation were ready to our hand, and could without great labour be found, that it should be by almost all men neglected? But all excellent things are as difficult as they are rare" (Spinoza 1673). In another passage, Spinoza says, "Minds are conquered not by arms, but by love and magnanimity" (Spinoza 1673). 

          Ironically, whenever circumstances preclude the attainment of an impulse, man becomes even more determined to achieve that object, thus creating a vicious cycle. Like Freud's concept of the wish-fulfillment, the gratification of the impulse must be attained, or psychological dysfunction frequently results. Russell argues that all human behavior is motivated by these innate impulses which man selfishly justifies through rationalization. Like Freud's concept of the dream-censor, the mind represses the true motive for the impulse-goal by disguising it in the cloak of reasonability (9-10). Impulses, like acts of passions, often manifest themselves in their unnatural justification of imperialism, nationalism, and even patriotism (14-15). In this respect, the author presents a rationale for aggression in terms of historical determinism. Russell's position here strongly parallels Freud's concept of sublimation in that man's primitive impulses, when properly channeled, produce psychological and cultural awareness (17-18), but when arrested or thwarted, like his theory of privation, result in neurosis or more severe form of psychosis (21). The author acknowledges at one point that neurosis among countries proves far more deleterious and labels it a form of "collective insanity in which all that has been known in time of peace is forgotten" (6). War thus assumes the role as the object of the ungovernable passion or the Id. In essence, Russell's theory applies to Freud's concept of the Ego-Ideal or Jung's notion of Individuation on a national level. The author basically compares man's predisposition for aggression to what Freud would term a "nervous disorder." Ironically, whether Russell chooses to describe hostility as an inherent characteristic, as was popular at the time through Freud's works on abnormal psychology, or his choice proves coincidental, as in the cases of Wallace and Darwin, or Newton and Leibnitz; both alternatives suggest as intellectual trend in that direction which further reinforces the determinist position. In essence, Russell's Why Men Fight presents a new variety of historical dialectic based upon earlier concepts of natural selection and psychoanalysis. In both cases, man must struggle to overcome his natural predisposition in order to transcend his basic instincts. The role of ethics, in the form of the Super-Ego or Individuation, fosters this transition from innocence to awareness. In the absence of this transformation, Russell emphasizes the consequent danger of man's loss of purpose. "Many men," according to Russell, "would wish to serve mankind, but they are perplexed and their power seems infinitesimal. Despair seizes them; those who have the strongest passion suffer most from the sense of impotence, and are most liable to spiritual ruin through lack of hope" (245). The author calls for a type of spiritual transformation which the civilized world must undergo "to be saved from decay." Russell suggests a "change" both in the world's economic structure and in its philosophy of life. People who feel so inclined "must not sit still in dull despair" but must choose to influence the future by encouraging the form of positive change in the "vital beliefs of our time" (266). He emphasizes the need for men to seek a higher order outside human life, or in his words "some end which is impersonal and above mankind, such as God or truth or beauty" (268). Clearly, the author's perspective reflects a tone of loss and redemption, as he optimistically remarks, "It is this happy contemplation of what is eternal that Spinoza calls 'the intellectual love of God'. To those who have once known it, it is the key to wisdom" (269). The sense of a higher order of being, he suggests, sustains man's hope for the survival of the future. This is, in essence, what Viktor Frankl suggests in Recollections: An Autobiography: "The experiential evidence confirms the survival value of 'the will to meaning' and of self-transcendence—the reaching out beyond ourselves for something other than ourselves. Under the same conditions, those who were oriented toward the future, toward a meaning that waited to be fulfilled—these persons were more likely to survive. Nardini and Lifton, two American military psychiatrists, found the same to be the case in the prisoner-of-war camps in Japan and Korea" (Frankl 97).In the final chapter of Why Men Fight, the philosopher says, "By contact with what is eternal, by devoting our live to bringing something of the Divine into this troubled world, we can make our own lives creative even now, even in the midst of the cruelty and strife and hatred that surround us on every hand" (269). Russell believes that courage, patience, and reverence for human life will induce the thoughts and feelings that shall ultimately inspire hope (246). Man must apply these ethical principles individually and collectively "to promote all that is creative, and so to diminish the impulses and desires that center round possession"; for ownership on the private or state level, Russell contends, leads to acts of aggression and hostility (258). Education should focus upon the higher purpose of human life such as man's quest for God, truth, or beauty, not merely the attainment of physical or material wants (268). He maintains that the price of transformation will be costly. According to Russell, "Those who are to begin the regeneration of the world must face loneliness, opposition, poverty, obloquy. They must be able to live by truth and love, with a rational unconquerable hope; they must be honest and wise, fearless, and guided by a constant purpose" (270). Here, the philosopher's optimism shines through, as he expresses his vision for the future, as he says, "For us, too, it is necessary to create a new hope, to build up by our though a better world than the one which is hurling itself into ruin. Because the times are bad, more is required of us than would be required in normal times" (270). Russell's final admonition calls for the older generation to accept the responsibility for sending others to their deaths and to recognize the need for a spiritual transformation. As Russell expresses it, "It is we, the old, who have sinned; we have sent these young men to the battlefield for our evil passions, our spiritual death, our failure to live generously out of the warmth of the heart and out of the living vision of the spirit. Let us come out of this death, for it is we who are dead, not the young men who have died through our fear of life. Their very ghosts have more life than we; they hold us up forever to the shame and obloquy of all the ages to come. Out of their ghost must come life, and it is we whom they must vivify" (272). Russell's religious imagery, in essence, suggests the theme of loss-and-redemption, as well as death-and-rebirth.

          As a moralist, Russell's ethical prescription to mitigate man's warlike tendencies suggests that nations avoid reciprocating the hostility toward injured or imperialist countries. The author contends that understanding and sympathy for the aggressors constitute the only "cure for the evil from which the world is suffering" (4). The author advocates a greater sense of cooperation and humility in order to sustain what he calls the principle of growth. The barriers between traditional morality of institutions and the ethics of the "new champions" espousing the cause of liberty and justice must be broken; otherwise, universal strife will escalate. This increasing conflict between ethics and tradition creates an "intimate disunion" permeating "almost all the relations of life, thus preventing man from breaking "down the wall of the Ego" to "achieve the growth which comes from a real and vital union" (23). A generation later, Albert Einstein and Max Born express a similar sentiment in referring to the disjunction between the scientific community and its moral responsibility concerning use of the atomic bomb.

                                                                   Works Cited for Russell's Why Men Fight

Russell, Bertrand. Why Men Fight. New York: Cosimo Classics, 2004.