from offending and punishes others for offending. It does not make men good.

It is important also to recognize that morals and ethics are not relative; they do not depend on the situation. This may be the hardest principle to follow in working towards achieving goals. The ends, no matter how worthy they appear, cannot justify just any means. Louis Brandeis, who was deeply convinced of the importance of standards said: "One can never be sure of ends-political, social, economic. There must always be doubt and difference of opinion." But Brandeis had no doubt about means. "Fundamentals do not change; centuries of thought have established standards. Lying and sneaking are always bad, no matter what the ends."

I think that is a very enabling statement. Life is not meaningless for the man who considers certain actions wrong simply because they are wrong, whether or not they violate a law. This kind of moral code gives a person a focus, a basis on which to conduct himself. Certainly, there is a temptation to let go of morals in order to do the expedient thing. But there is also a tremendous power in standing by what is right. Principles and accomplishments need not be incompatible.

Mr. MAHON. How do you answer those who point out the inevitable compromises that even moral men must sometimes make?

Admiral RICKOVER. Clearly, Mr. Chairman, as humans we are fallible. But the Japanese have a saying: "A man of high character does not even tie his shoelaces in a melon field, nor does he so much as touch his hat under an apricot tree." By striving to be men of high character, by following the ethical path as closely as possible, the compromises will be rare.

THOUGHTS ON STANDARDIZATION

Mr. MAHON. Admiral, there is much talk these days, particularly in the Defense Department, of requiring uniformity in such things as management, procurement systems, rules and so on. Do you have any thoughts on this subject?

Admiral RICKOVER. Yes, sir, I do.

It has been frequently asserted that there are optimum systems for accomplishing ends, including optimum management systems. But this is not borne out by the experience of mankind.

A popular interpretation of Darwin's theory of evolution has been that, given enough time to evolve, a species will become standardized. The scientific green revolution in agriculture is predicated on growing a single standardized strain of rice or other grain over vast areas. The evolution of chicken farming has been in this same direction toward mass production of a standardized species fed a standardized diet, and treated with standardized medicines.

The growing tendency to trust in scientific solutions to problems might lull us into assuming that the scientists will be quickly able to solve the problem when a new pestilence destroys a particular standardized species of grain. But the harm from lost crops will be large in the meantime. For example, when the high yield fast growing new strains of banana trees turned out to be readily destroyed in high winds and hurricanes because of shallow roots, it took years to replace that strain. It may not be a coincidence that China, which is not importing large

quantities of grain, is achieving its agricultural revolution using variety rather than standardization.

Nature abhors standardization. Fruit fly experiments show that it cherishes rare genetic types. The sickle cell form of red blood cells was propagated in humans in spite of its harmful associated anemia, because of its malaria resistance. Variability is coming to be recognized as the "standard" for the biochemistry of man. Nature often finds that a genetically diverse population is a requirement for long range survival.

This lesson from Nature is applicable to management systems. I have often been told that I have a poor management system; that it does not meet many of the commonly accepted standards. The "scientific" college training in management systems encourages the making of these shallow judgments which are based on book-knowledge and not on experience. Nor have the professors who indoctrinate students in such matters had much real experience in getting things done. You will remember the adage "Those who can, do; those who can't, teach."

My experience has been that there is need for diversity in management, just as there is in humans and plants. The attempt to compel uniformity is self defeating. We should be ever on guard against those who want to force conformity in humans, plants, management, or any other systems. Such attempts are not only contrary to what has been shown biologically in evolution, but also contrary to human personality.

Mr. MAHON. Thank you Admiral. It might be worthwhile for the self-proclaimed management experts to hear your views.

Admiral RICKOVER. Yes, sir, except that I doubt that they will listen. My opinions do not fit with their uniform theories. They listen only to themselves, sir.

THE PURPOSE OF LIFE

Mr. MAHON. Admiral, I have one final question to ask you. In your testimony the last 2 years, you have given the committee some of your thoughts on a purpose to life. We would like to hear your current views on that subject again this year.

Admiral RICKOVER. Mr. Chairman, first let me say that the question of man's purpose in life has been explored by the great writers of history. Most of what I believe can be found in their books, not the least of which is the Bible. Therefore, those who look for some meaning to their modern lives would do well to begin their search with these venerable works of the past three thousand years.

One way to find a purpose to life is through personal achievement. The best achievement is gained through action tempered by intellect and experience-doing, guided by thinking. This means that a person must prepare himself intellectually and professionally, and then use his powers to their fullest extent. This view is well expressed in two extracts from I Ching, the Confucian Book of Changes:

"The superior man learns and accumulates the results of his learning; puts questions, and discriminates among those results; dwells magnamimously and unambitiously in what he has attained to; and carries it into practice with benevolence."

"The superior man nerves himself to ceaseless activity."

It is important to be both a thinker and a doer. A theoretician who has no responsibility is withdrawn from the real world. His recommendations are made in a vacuum; because he is not required to carry them out, they may be irresponsible and do harm. Similarly, those in charge the doers-are too often devoid of any real thought. They tranquilize themselves with the trivial and act without perception. To find a purpose through achievement, a person must put his actions into a perspective broader than the actions themselves represent.

Aristotle believed that happiness was to be found in the use of the intellect. In other words, ignorance is not bliss; it is oblivion. Man cannot find purpose in his life without expanding and using his intellectual qualities and capacities. Liberal learning is a primary source of those qualities. In liberal learning, I refer to discerning taste; wise judgment; informed and critical perspectives that transcend specialized interests and partisan passions; the capacity to understand complexity and to grow in response to it. Having gained some measure of these qualities, each person then is challenged to acquire the trait most possibly in the shortest supply: the will to persist in worthwhile purposes and tasks.

More than expanding the intellect, however, life is action, the use of one's powers. Action is a central value, and one of the highest of human endeavors. It is much more than meaningless toil done to simply sustain life; it implies a dynamic involvement in life with one's peers. Life must be felt, not observed, but to do so means applying oneself to the task daily. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said:

"God offers to every mind its choice between truth and repose. Take which you please-you can never have both."

Achievement is not miraculous. Anything that is done results first from careful preparation, and an enormous amount of detail. Then there is the spark of opportunity. Too few people recognize that spark, because it often comes disguised as hard work. No one can make the most of his talents without constant application. Every change means an effort and a disturbance. It is at this step that so many fall short. Fearing hard work, they value an easy acceptance from their peers more than achievement, and friendliness more than accomplishment. They forget that no one who wants to conquer a tough job is amiable. Moses was not an amiable man; he wanted to conquer sin.

While it is enough for some people to use their intellect and capacities as an end in themselves, I think there is more to life than that. William James said: "The great use of a life is to spend it for something that outlasts it." But if that means the pursuit of private wealth, pleasure and success, then what kind of purpose is that? It is a mistake to think there is satisfaction and joy of life in self-indulgence. More is required of a man than to satisfy his private tastes and wishes.

I believe it is the duty of each of us to act as if the fate of the world depended on him. Admittedly, one man by himself cannot do the job. However, one man can make a difference. It is with this admission that we squarely confront our duty to posterity. We must live for the future of the human race and not for our own comfort or success. Each of us is obligated to bring his individual and independent capacities to bear upon a wide range of human concerns.

That is really our purpose in life. Yet surprisingly, despite the hard work and setbacks and frustrations, that is also the most satisfying kind of life man can lead. It represents the principle of happiness voiced by John Stuart Mill over 100 years ago:

"Those only are happy who have their minds fixed on some object other than their own happiness; on the happiness of others, on the improvement of mankind, even on some art or pursuit, followed not as a means, but as itself an ideal end. Aiming thus at something else, they find happiness by the way."

Mr. MAHON. Thank you, Admiral. We appreciate hearing those thoughts, and I only hope others may read them when the record of the hearing is published.

Unfortunately, we just haven't had time to go into every facet of the problems which confront you and confront us and the country. So I wish you would feel at liberty to provide us with any additional thoughts when you check the transcript.

Admiral RICKOVER. Thank you, sir. I would like to make one further remark. First, I want to express my deep thanks to your entire committee and particularly to you and to your staff. You are as human as any people I know in Congress.

As for myself, I can only paraphrase what Luther said: "This is where I stand and I can say nothing else." I cannot come before this committee or any other committee of Congress and not tell you exactly what I believe. I think I have that responsibility, because of my age, because of the confidence you place in me, and because of the deep personal responsibility I feel for our country.

I know of no one else for whom the United States has done as much as it has for me. Because of that, I try to take to heart the words from Luke 12: 48: "Everyone to whom much is given, of him will much bẹ required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand the more."

I especially value the opportunity I have had to associate with men like you. So I want to thank you again very deeply.

Mr. MAHON. Thank you very much for that high compliment which you pay our staff and the members of our committee. We hold you in the very highest esteem, and we honor you for the services which you have performed for the Nation, and I speak for the entire subcommittee.

Admiral RICKOVER. Thank you, sir.

Mr. MAHON. The committee will stand adjourned.