My Life

My Life - Oswald Mosleyhome certainly did not result in my becoming a mother's boy, deep as was mydevotion to her. The wiseacres of psychological science may ascribe to thisbackground some political tendencies in my later life which they dislike, but after aconsiderable study of the subject I am convinced they are talking nonsense.There are certain things which at this stage may be noted about the study ofpsychology: it is in its infancy, and its protagonists are acutely divided. It is still in theperiod of research, with much more work to be done. Yet every sob-sister in thepopular press feels she is competent in a breathless little article of slipshod appraisaland spiteful disapprobation to analyse the alleged complexes of every giant or dwarfwho traverses the world scene. Far more serious people were long ago rightly taken totask by Jung in his Psychologie der Unbewussten Prozessen for their pretentiousimpertinence in analysing great figures of religion and philosophy, but lesser clownsin smaller circuses still do not hesitate to show the same effrontery to all and sundry.There is more nonsense, often ridiculous nonsense, written on this subject than onalmost any other.Part of the trouble is that even the serious practitioners have few opportunities tostudy anything but disease. Those who find their way to the psychiatrist's couch arenot always good subjects for studying the daily problems of abounding health andvitality. Everyone in childhood or youth must invariably suffer again and again theshocks and disabilities which in later life lead some to the psychiatrists' couch, just aseveryone experiences the cuts and bruises which later in life lead some to thesurgeon's operating theatre. The healthy psyche throws off the injury which in theweak becomes a complex, just as easily as the healthy body throws off the bruisewhich in the weak becomes a tumour. It is possible to go even further, and to say thatadditional strength can come from early injury. I have seen extraordinary experimentsin botany where trees seriously injured early in their growth develop a protectiveresistance which later results in far greater strength than a more sheltered environmentproduces. 'What fails to destroy us makes us stronger' is a proverb of a people withsome experience of such tests of fate. 'Having seen the little world, let us now see thegreat.' Toynbee's theory of challenge and response illustrates in the great spheres ofnations the working of the same nature principle which stimulates and develops theinjured tree. Jung must have had something of the same truth in mind when he wrotethat possibly we 'owe all to our neuroses'; although again it seems that the quality ofstrong natures - the power to resist adversity - should be regarded not as a neurosis butas a gift of character. In short, the whole subject is not quite so simple as someamateurs think. Much more serious work should be done before the potential of thisinfant science can be realised, and before it can with confidence be transferred fromthe laboratory to the clinic.I write this criticism of certain current tendencies in science while claiming to have amore consistent record in support of science than anyone who has spent his life inpolitics. In theory and in the practice of government I have battled for science, toprovide it with means, to encourage and to honour its work. Years ago I wrote thatmodern statesmen should live and work with scientists as the Medici lived andworked with artists. The glories of the Renaissance were made possible by statesmenreally given to art, and the redeeming wonders of modern science and technology willbe realised by statesmen really given to science. Yet if they love science andappreciate its vast possibilities they will never allow any branch of it to be prostituted21 of 424