The 24 Inch Gauge

A measuring rod without any divisions could only represent infinity. There is no such thing as this measure. Infinity is something which we humans beings have always dreamt of grasping; however, it is no criterion for our actions. It is much rather necessary that we should recognize our limitations in the finite world, and this is the stipulation of the inscriptions on the Delphic Temples.

Above all, there is this "know yourself" (gnothi seauton), that is know that you are mortal man, for you posses a mortal nature. Furthermore , we find that "not too much," that "the right measure is the best" (metron ariston), and that "be moderate" (sophronei). At long last and spelled out most clearly, we find that which is already contained in "know yourself," namely "remember mortality" (thneta phronein). This could be translated more fully as "Let the knowledge of your mortal nature act as a regulating power upon all your thinking, feeling, and doing."

If we see it as our task to classify magnitudes properly, them we must ask ourselves what is to be our guideline. Is it right and permissible to lay down a measure of one's own, to become the creator of a measuring instrument, a yardstick, figuratively speaking? Can we find a measure for our behavior; can we see things in relation to each other? Indeed we can. Because we are people, who are responsible to themselves for their actions, and who are able to see themselves. Incidentally, we can see that these reflections are implicit in our Masonic symbols.

The symbol of the 24 inch gauge provides much food for thought. In it, we see our measuring-rod mirrored. It also marks our magnitudinal measure. So therefore, our measuring-rod is a human one!

It is our task to look into, to examine, and obtain the necessary certitude before we can gain the right perception and knowledge of that magnitudinal measure, which is truth, when we read and hear of manipulated extravagance and progress, which knows no bounds. However, we also find a process of re-thinking and back-tracking with the object of returning to a human measuring unit. Here we may quote the words of the English economist Schumacher, "small is beautiful." We see that the questions, which have cropped up, prove that our 24 inch gauge is not a scientific measuring instrument as one might assume. Besides, we note that the mechanistic standard measures have undergone a change, with the result that they are now removed from the human sphere.

The measures, which our ancestors employed were feet, paces, and ells, further, they used the rod and measured a day's work. Today, we reckon in light years and mach, and we note, that the tiniest of measuring units is said to have been found.

What I have mentioned up to now are simple facts. But, if you pursue this line of thought, you soon begin to ask at what point the human measure is departed from. Here we are no longer in the field of natural science. We find for a fact, that a symbol, namely the 24 inch gauge, is more comprehensive than we imagine. Without a doubt, the 24 inch gauge is there not only to teach us to divide up our time properly, but also, as already mentioned, to find the truth.

Our moral measuring-rod, or yard stick, is essentially determined by terrestrial magnitudes. As a rule, according to ERICH FROMM, patterns of behavior stem from the desire to have, or to possess an object. They express themselves in envy, grudges, which are nurtured against others, and egotistical assertion. On the other hand, there is a conscious effort to find our location in relation to another, our brothers. It entails taking care of our existence and that of others in a selfless (altruistic) manner. It also means acting responsibly, brotherly, and in a positive way.

If we oppose the two concepts of discipline and moderation on the one hand and unrestrained boundlessness on the other, if we try to find a measurement, a middle line, we eventually come to a point where two basic philosophical (ethical) lines of though must clash.

On the one hand, there is the well-known "homo mensura" statement of PROTAGORAS, "Man is the measure of all things, that which is for its existence, and that, which is not for its non-existence." It is the sophistic concept of a subjective truth, the immoderate, presumptive claim, respectively which, in the last instance, put all human values in question. On the other hand, there is the prevalence of the platonic attitude "Not Man, but God is the measure of all things." In the basis of this concept, ARISTOTLE, in his Nikomachian Ethics, developed a comprehensive definition of measurement. According to this, the right measure is "a habit of making a choice, which follows the measured middle of the line, and is marked by judicious good sense." The quest for the right measure, respectively the middle, which lies between the too much and too little, is that which, in the long run, leads to virtuousness, This view remained in force for over two thousand years, until the time, when the findings of KOPERNIKUS and GALILEI laid the foundations for changes in philosophy.

For the English philosopher FRANCIS BACON (beginning of the 17th century) ad for the Sophists, cognition of the world is necessary in order that it (the world) can be dominated. He therefore postulated "knowledge is power." This immeasurably egotistic attitude brought problems with regard to human co-existence, and eventually lead to the search of a moral law, in which, not the will and self assessment of the individual is decisive, but the rule and authoritative standard which is binding for all. The well-known result of this search is the teaching of IMMANUEL KANT about the unconditional (categoric) imperative of the moral law: "Act in such a way, that your principle or measure of conduct can at the same time always serve as the principle of common law."

Basically, the opposites of limitlessness and moderation, of too much and too little, show the ever present discord in the nature of Man. We may paraphrase this torn condition as follows and name it: here and beyond, worldliness and other-worldliness, finite and infinite, the likeliness of the human and the likeliness of God, the transitoriness and the eternity.

All people at all times have speculated above all about that which is foreign and remote in us and in our surroundings. They begin to measure—our human measure, mind you—of the yonder and even the beyond. The search for cognitive knowledge, for the stone of wisdom, for the infinity, and the omnipotence of God has occupied many philosophers to the present day.

In this context we need to ask ourselves whether philosophy has followed the spirit of the age, and has, to some extent, pave its way, or whether the sensitivity of philosophers has not in the past, and is not in the present, greater and can sense a change in basic human attitudes at a far earlier stage? Although we are no philosophers, who are professionally concerned with this matter, as human beings and more especially as members of our brotherhood bond, we are obligated to strive for truth and, above all else, to know ourselves. To know or recognize ourselves means not to be an immoderate boundless measure, but, as is correctly said, "to attain the right knowledge of magnitudes," which also means to grasp the limited and finite, to find our place or to step into order, or else, to understand, that we are a part of the universe.

JOSEF PIEPER says, "the substance of temperantia, of discipline and moderation, is the inner order of a human being, from which alone the tranquillity of the spirit flows ("quies animi," as THOMAS AQUINAS says). Discipline means to realize order in oneself." This is how we must understand ourselves, when it is said, "In order, my brothers!"

"The office of the wise is order," says THOMAS AQUINAS, and, "discipline conveys the following: Man should look himself in the eye, so that his regard and will-power may be fixed upon himself."

It is both arduous and burdensome to be that which, according to our nature, we should be, i.e., people in possession of themselves, and of a free and virtuous being. Wisdom and strength are necessary to achieve discipline and moderation. And, when the inner order comes to fruition in a person, then he is graced with beauty. Or, as PIEPER puts it, "the lustre of the true and good that breaks forth from everything that in its own order lives, is beauty in a primeval sense."

I would put it in a simpler way:

ORDER IS THE BEAUTY OF DISCIPLINE AND MODERATION

Original Document