[515] awakened to it, and then the problem arises. This problem is the problem of where the concept of ought-to-be appears. Now he stands before the moment of self-actualization^a: either to actualize himself or not to actualize himself. In both cases anxiety^b is in him---in the first case the anxiety to lose himself when he actualizes himself; in the second, the anxiety that he loses his possibilities, his actualization, if he does NOT actualize it. In both cases it is the anxiety of self-loss. Now human reality is self-actualization.^c All men, in degree and in different forms,

actualize their own potentialities. In all of them, it has happened that out of the dreaming innocence, they have jumped into self-actualization. But in DOING so, they are not only fulfilling what they essentially are, but also they are ESTRANGED^d from what they essentially are, and they live in the ambiguity of both fulfillment and estrangement. Therefore from the point of view of dreaming innocence, of non-actualized innocence, the child is the ideal. From the point of view of ACTUALIZATION, the child is that which has to be left behind. We have both words in the New Testament-^e--which is very interesting. On the one hand the child as ideal of innocent confidence, as Jesus^f says to the Apostles, showing a child in this state. On the other hand, the strong demands of Paul^g to go BEYOND the childish state and to become mature by self-actualization^h. This is not a contradiction, but these two elements are both in childhood and in maturity. The process of maturing is also a process of losing something. But without

the process of maturing, no actualization would take place. As an example, I could refer to what we have discussed in the last hours about the transition from immediate participation in the realm