The unsuspected purpose of many day-dreams is to find justification for a course of action which the individual considers improper. This action would not be permitted to appear in conscious thought; it is regarded as base, immoral, not the proper thing. Should it, in some way, obtain recognition in consciousness the individual will repress it; it seems opposed to his better self. If the individual can, however, rob the action of its disagreeable feature he will permit himself to think of it in its true guise. And it is by day-dreams that acts, once considered beneath the individual, become cleansed, and justifiable. The person is not aware that his daydreams are leading him in such a direction: if told the true purpose of his reveries he would deny it vehemently. The denial would be honest, for it is the unconscious mind which prompts the reveries, and unless one is skilled in psychology the many ways in which the unconscious works are not recognized.

An example may make the above plain. A certain individual has been brought up scrupulously in religious matters, in fact so much so that small offences seem heinous. Because of his scrupulousness he is unable to gratify his pleasurable tendencies, which may be strong; his conscience acts as a check. Possibly, by reason of some offence, which may be relatively slight, he is greatly disturbed over the thought of future punishment. He, for apparently no reason, begins to study evolution, the question of Christ's being God, the incompatibility of a merciful God and Hell, etc. One believes usually what he wishes to believe, what is in accord with giving pleasure. Consequently, such things as do not favour previous teachings are coloured, those that uphold them minimized or excluded from thought. Gradually the individual builds up his structure, though unaware of what he is building. Finally he begins to doubt former teachings, then to disbelieve in God, Hell and similar religious matters. Once he arrives at this point, he feels free to act; there is no longer any check to his satisfying his desires; there is no need to fear future punishment. How satisfied, and free to seek pleasure the individual will be depends upon how strong a structure his day-dreams have erected. If he is not really convinced he may seek to bolster himself by associating with unbelievers and by trying to win others to his way of thinking. Many agnostics who go about preaching their views are persons who do not believe in God because that belief is not compatible with their selfish interests; they preach because they have not really convinced themselves and wish the support of those they can convert.

An almost similar example is to be found in a story by Anatole France, analysed by Jung.1 This concerns a pious, conscientious priest named Abbe CEgger. He spent much of his time thinking (day-dreaming), chiefly over the question of whether or not Judas was damned.

1 Psychology of the Unconscious, Translated by B. M. Hinkle, 1916, p. 37 et seq., Moffat, Yard & Co.

CEgger reasoned that since Judas was a necessary instrument for the salvation of the world, God, in His great mercy and justice, would not permit Judas' damnation. Seeking proof of this, he asked for a sign that Judas was saved, and while in church felt a touch on his shoulder ; this touch medical men would call an hallucination. Convinced of Judas' salvation CEgger went out into the world preaching God's goodness.

So far the Abbe's day-dreams appear to be of no moment; they concern themselves with a question which has occupied the minds of many. But when we learn that the Abbe later left his own church and became a Swedenborgian, we find the true reason for his studying the question. Back in his mind was the thought that he might some day leave his church. But before he would allow himself to think of this possibility, he sought to justify the contingency. If told that this thought was responsible for his day-dreams he would deny it; he would consider leaving his church as traitorous. Judas, however, was a traitor, and was forgiven, apparently. When the Abbe convinced himself of God's mercy, feeling that he, too, would be forgiven should he himself prove a traitor, he became like a Judas and left his church.

It is not solely with religious subjects that the daydream we are considering may concern itself; it may relate to domestic, business, and many other problems. For example, a woman may, after some years of married life, spend much time thinking, day-dreaming, of her single days; the suitors she had; the comforts that would be hers had she married So and So. She may think that she is still attractive; she could marry again if she wished to; probably she may fancy a certain person. Her daydreams may, also, concern themselves with the folly of a person's sacrificing his or her life just to satisfy "false" notions of loyalty, etc. The woman may be one of those who has spent much time, when single, building air-castles too lofty for one of her situation to attain; and hence marriage has brought with it disillusionment and disappointment. While her day-dreams may have no improper motive behind them, it is logical to assume that they are seeking justification for her leaving her husband, which she may do. Her husband may not be a great success, judged by some standards, but he may be true, devoted, loyal, which facts are likely to be repressed from the day-dreams, and which, if permitted in clear thought, might have thrown the balance in his favour, and which probably would have saved her from unhappi-ness.

The day-dream frequently concerns itself with things more directly related to morals - namely sex material, Sometimes it does so openly; at other times indirectly. This type of day-dream is more or less common to the idle; as Osier says, "Idleness is the mother of lechery." These day-dreams are certainly detrimental and enslaving, and unless one wishes to court moral disaster thoughts of such nature will be strictly tabooed.

If we indulge in day-dreams, then let us cogitate as to where they may be taking us, the motive behind them. As we have seen, they sometimes work subtly, with the object of justifying a course of action which our better natures believe to be improper. If we allow the justification to be arrived at, possibly we will succumb to the arguments brought forward, and it is very likely that the arguments will be faulty. It is, of course, not always easy to ascertain the underlying reason for various thoughts, since the reason is often hidden. However, if we find ourselves thinking often of the same thing, and in a manner not favourable to that thing, we will do well to try to understand why we are particularly concerned with that question; and when we do so we should not dam back any unpleasant thoughts that come to mind but employ directive or logical thinking when they appear. If we spend much time seeking justification before we undertake a certain action, or if we are inclined to a certain action after a long period of dwelling upon it, we should ponder as to the propriety of this action; this applies chiefly to actions which, at some former period, we would have considered impossible for us. In any case we should bear in mind the fact that day-dreams are not always innocent, that at times they are truly the enemies of our better selves. Self-honesty is, after all, the first requisite for ethical human relations, for as the Bard of Avon reminds us:

This above all - To thine own self be true; And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man.