that a whole is only the sum of its partsn(a nation: juxtaposed individuals; man:na combination of physico-chemical elements).nIn other words, he pointed tonthe danger of scientism as an ideology.nHowever, in other books, and in hisnnew Janus: A Summing Up, he tacklesnthe next favorite theme, the alleged disharmonynbetween our “old” and “new”nbrain, and the alarming result, the preponderancenof faith over reason, of thenirrational over the rational. Koestlernconcludes that this dangerous unbalancenlimits the chances of the humannrace for survival, and he recommendsnthat we “reorient our emotions so asnto bring them in line with reason.”nIf this is not reductionism, I do notnknow what the term means. The oldnstory: having found a flawed world, Foucaultnand Koestler set out to create annew one. Hence their critique is onlyndeceptively directed at reasoned changes,nit is projected at an idiosyncratic versionnof reality, a fantasy image. When,nfor example, Foucault attacks our toonnarrow notion of folly, he has no intentionnof bringing more therapeuticnlight on genuine mental disease, henlabels all of us mad. When Koestlernshows dismay at the disequilibrium ofnthe “two brains,” he in fact abolishesnthe specificity of emotions in favor of ancrude rationalism. (He enjoys a highnreputation among race researchers andnbiological manipulators.) Koestler’s andnFoucault’s world would be peopled bynrobots and golems.nN ow back to Roszak. His title, antypical sensation-chaser, is supposed toncontain a thesis-message: the personnhas now a unique chance to disengagenhimself from encapsulation in rigid institutionsnand social mores: family,nschool, work, church, attitudes—becausenmankind has become aware of ansimilar encapsulation of the planet also,nthrough pollution and other destructivendevices. Roszak’s smartness (flair fornbusiness) consists of turning planetnEarth itself into an oppressed minority,nnext to gays, women and blacks. Oncen121nChronicles of Culturenthe success-formula is given the rest isneasy: recite cases of victimization, andnidentify the culprit. The victims: personnand planet; the culprit: society andnvaguely assorted auxiliaries.nIt would be pointless to mount a systematicncritique of Roszak’s book which,nas said before, takes its place among thenpernicious culture-ideological works ofnthe mid-century, like Marcuse’s on erosnand revolution, Reich’s on orgasm,nSartre’s encomia of Jean Genfit, etc. Itnis better to pick a few points Roszaknmakes—and misses. The chief amongnthem is naturally the concept of person.nSince Roszak, turned for his thesis’ sakenexistentialist, rejects any civilizationalncategory (he calls them “prefabricatednslots”) into which the amorphous humannbeing must fit in order to become a per­nson, personhood for him becomes everythingnand nothing, a bundle of indeterminatenaspirations, drives, and impulses.nIt is an adolescent’s vague nostalgia fornsuperman. At once, the other favoritenterm, culture, assumes also capriciousnand blurred contours as the “outlets”nand “self-expressions” of the shapelessnand drifting person. It is an indicationnof Roszak’s snobbishness that after existentialism,nhe now calls in Mounier’snpersonalism as an honorable figleaf.nSince he works with a defective notionnof personhood, Roszak finds that nobodynis a person, everybody “plays a role” assignednby society. It does not occur tonhim that role playing is exactly whatncivilization and culture are about, andnthat his daughter, too, wished to “playna role” when, instead of sloppy (natural ?)nIn the forthcoming issue of Chronicles of Culture:nNormalcy—Our Sixth Sensen”Who needs anothei btxik on Watem.uc-‘ lInforrunatei.nwi> ail do and this is the book Watcri^atf in a sfiisi’ \ asna liloodli’ss (.oup dVtat. in wliiih thi nili’T was the iiitdia hcioisnoi tlio coup Woise still IS till Llaim ol csiaMishnu ntnaiadetniLians and pundits tliat VVaiiMnati is a vatcished innthe histon oi piihhi moialiU. thai iVixon s menncomnulted uiv.impUd tiimes and that iht attaii mustnk’ad us to a niw and hi^hi t nioi.ilit^nfrom “Stans’ Stand” bv Charles L. Ricenalso:nOpinions & Views—Comniendabli’S—In T’otusnWaste of lMone—The A.merican Scene—ScreennMusic —Liberal Culture—JournalismnPolemics &. I’xchangesnnn