Well, essentially, that which differentiates the D-Q system,
specifically from all the other systems, is the belief that we are
controlled by a divine being, a divine fixture- creature-being. A
person will say, for example, that in the long run anything that
happens in his world will be in line with the master plan of God. The
person in the D-Q system apparently has this conception of the
universe. An all-powerful figure, variously named, all powerful
something or other, planned the universe, laid down the laws of the
universe and watches second by second as the day and hours go by as to
whether or not the divine plan laid down is being followed. Then he
delivers either reward or punishment on the spot or tacks this
up on a score sheet to ultimately decide whether the person shall be
rewarded or punished. To elicit this kind of information you have to
develop items that state such a thing as: “I believe that to attain
my goals, it is only necessary for me to live as God would have me to
live” or “the dictates of ones’ religion should be followed with
trusting vigilance” or “there are some things which God will never
permit man to know.” These are the kinds of items that will cause
the person centralized in the D-Q system to say it is so. Another way
of looking at it is . . . if the person you ask a question to . . .
is in the D-Q system “What do you believe about religion?”
you will get answers like the above.
Let me just show you data which indicates how differently the
people in the various systems think. Using as a referent here the
concept of sin as a means of seeing into how a person thinks
religiously. You get the picture that in the D-Q system there is the
idea of His power, breaking the commandments of God. Sin is a means of
offending God. It is innate in man because man cannot escape it and
God forgives us if we are sorry. Everyone sins and no ones sin is
greater than another’s. I have tried to put a clear definition on
the word or concept of sin. It isn’t easy to do. There is a great
difference here between the true believer and the atheist. There are
those who believe that sin is not necessary for human behavior. There
is underneath the idea that there isn’t any such thing as sin. . .
but that there are people who do believe in sin. You get a picture
that I mentioned before that in the D-Q system there is the idea of
this power . . .that sin is breaking the commandments of God.
You have that different idea and you pick it up and you ask
them what they think about marriage. The D-Q will tend to talk about
marriage in terms of its having a religious factor in it and you will
tend to see an idealization of marriage. “Marriage is a union for
life.” “It is an important part of making life a success.”
“Marriage is a union of two people who have given themselves
completely to each other in the eyes of God.” “Marriage is a union
based on religious
law and love and understanding and requires a permanency in each
case.”
Question:
Do the E-R and G-T systems tend to idealize marriage in a
religious sense?
Dr.
Graves:
Remember that when we talked about sin there was a negation in
the E-R system of the idea of sin. We should find this negation
manifesting itself in the E-R system when a person talks about
marriage. Marriage is not in any respect a sacred institution. The
rites of marriage are a vestigial barbarism and should not be
required. Marriage is for other people. I could never stand it unless
I could find my ideal woman that I’m sure doesn’t exist. Marriage
is being bound to another person until death and is too artificial,
too much regulated and too constricted. I object to the idea of the
state regulating the marriage code since I conceive that marriage is a
private and personal relationship between two people suited to share
and understand one-another’s life. This should give you a feeling
for how many young people in this world today are not as high up the
levels of existence as they think they are because this is indeed
their concept of marriage. . . a tremendous number of them.
Now you get the same inspiring enthusiasm when G-T is talking
about marriage. A must meaningful relationship that should be valued
so highly that it is not taken for granted and can be a blessing. It
is to be thought, depending on those comprising it, that the idea of
marriage is good but you don’t get the spiritual basis, the
religious basis, of marriage.
In the G-T . . . marriage is really no profession, no heaven . . . .
as the world is, I guess that it has to be. Not a negation of it but a
simple statement of fact is what you get from G-T. Marriage, I guess,
is that biological situation for two people in love in our society as
our class society is today. Marriage – it sure is working hard at it
– it is sharing – it is becoming one as much as possible but it is
never losing site of the other person and it is not the easiest thing
in this world to come by.