【１】誰かがいつか、こんなことを言っていた。神経が苛立って眠れない時があるが、これは神経の疲労が肉体の疲労とのバランスを欠いて、独自に進行してしまった結果である。【２】従ってこうした場合は、縄跳びを数回行って、肉体の疲労を神経のそれと同程度になるまで高めればいい。それぞれの疲労のバランスがとれれば、人は眠れるのである。
　【３】いささか論理が明確に過ぎて、その分だけ何となく危うい気がしないでもないが、しかしこの論理の組み立て方には魅力がある。何よりも、神経の疲労それ自体を静めようとするのではなく、肉体の疲労をそれに見合うべく高めようとする点が独特であり、そこに行動的であり、しかも積極的な姿勢がうかがわれるのである。【４】そして事実私は、同様の症状に陥るたびにこの考え方を応用して実行し、もし私の錯覚でなければ、言われている通りの効果をあげることが出来た。
　【５】かつて私は、ホンダの五〇ＣＣのカブ・原動機付自転車を愛用していたが、これに長時間乗った場合、必ずこうした症状に陥った。　【６】原動機付自転車というのは、人間の筋力による走行速度を、ガソリン・エンジンに置き換えて促進するための最も原始的な装置であり、それとこれとの置き換えを実感するためには、最も効果的な道具なのだが、それだけに、こうした症状に陥る事情も、論理的に説明しやすいということがある。
　【７】もちろんこれもまた、論理が明確に過ぎて、自分自身ほとんどはにかまざるを得ないほどであるが、つまりこの場合、私の「肉体」はただ、震動する小さなガソリン・エンジンにしがみついているだけだが、「神経」の方は、その同じ距離と時間を省略することなく体験しつくすのであり、従ってそのそれぞれの疲労のバランスは、大きく喰い違ってくるはずだ、というわけである。【８】「神経」の疲労のみが独自に進行してしまって、私は苛立ち、眠れなくなる。
　そこで私は、長時間原動機付自転車に乗った日は必ず、家に入る∵前にその場で体操をしたり、家の周囲を暫く走ったりして、「肉体」を酷使し、疲労のバランスをとるよう努めた。【９】そうすることによって私は、その夜の「安眠」を、勝ちとってきたのである。【０】（中略）
　私は、私自身が原動機付自転車に乗っていた当時の体験に即して、ここまで考えてみた結果、冒頭に掲げた考え方を、ほぼ「あり得ること」として、認めることにした。「神経」と「肉体」という言い方が、厳密に考えようとするとややあいまいであるが、彼がその言葉で、我々の内なる何を言い当てようとしつつあるかは、容易に想像がつくのである。つまりここでは、そのそれぞれのものが、乖離して世界を体験し、従って乖離したままそれぞれ別レベルの疲労を課せられ、そのバランスが崩れつつある点に、問題があると言っているのだ。（中略）
　私は或（あ）るジャーナリストが、ケネディ暗殺事件を報道するテレビ画像を見て、「ここには何も映し出されていない」と言ったのを覚えている。彼は、彼が実際にその場に居合せたことのある暗殺事件の現場を想起しながら、「そこには確かに、人々を恐怖させ、吐き気を催させる何ものかがあったのだが、ここには何もない」ということを言っているのだ。そしてこのことは、私が或（あ）る距離を、歩いたり走ったりするのでなく原動機付自転車で通り抜けてしまったことにより抱かざるを得なかったことと、同様のものであったような気がする。
　この手応えのない世界への不安が我々の内に潜在し、その焦燥感が、勢い手応えのあるものに向って、やみくもに発散されようとするのだ。

（別役実「イロニーとしての身体性」による）

The Complete Man

After his marriage to Princess Elizabeth and following her accession to the throne as Queen Elizabeth ? in 1952, Prince Philip's many interests and his sympathetic understanding of present-day problems were reflected in the speeches he made on public occasions. The speech quoted here is characteristic of his clear vision and of his ability to combine courtesy and plain speaking.
In the Middle Ages it was the Church and the universities which were primarily responsible for knitting together the nations of Europe in a common culture. This amounted to a system of thought and behaviour, conditioned by a reverence for the classics and restrained by religion and social custom. Two world wars and the advent of science have completely upset those conditions and removed those restraints. So far we have neither returned to them nor put anything in their place. The responsibility of the universities is therefore much greater today if they are to minister to the specialized needs of modern society and to regain their position as the spiritual and moral reservoirs of Europe and the world.
One of the marks of the Middle Ages was the free movement of scholars from university to university across the face of Europe. Since then the world has grown much smaller and that mobility ought in our day to cover the whole world. Teachers in the arts must surely benefit from a wide personal knowledge of the places where those arts flourished most nobly, and the science teacher must surely draw inspiration from working in the universities which were responsible for some of the greatest strides in science. Perhaps even more important, the movement of teachers and students alike between universities must surely help to break down the narrow nationalism which grows up with isolation. A proper respect for the achievements of others may not be easy in this competitive world, but it is after all the first step towards a broad mind.
European culture, thought, and ideas have drifted all over the world, and although they have received some hard knocks in recent years there are many far-away places where people still believe that Europe has something good to offer. We shall have nothing to offer unless our behaviour, our ideals, and our achievements gain universal respect. We can only have something to offer if the universities have clearly before them what they are aiming to do.
With the inevitable growth of specialization I see the universities facing two great dangers. First, it is very easy to get so involved in the technical details of education that the object of education is lost. And secondly, in an effort to condition a university to the needs of its students and to the needs of the State it may lose its power to make or mould those students into reasonable and responsible men, capable of thinking for themselves and capable of expressing the result of their thoughts to others.
A university must do more than merely provide a high-class professional apprenticeship. It does not matter in the least what a student's specialized line happens to be; the fact that he is a specialist cannot excuse him from his responsibilities as a man. Students must emerge as complete human beings capable of taking their proper place in society as a credit to their universities both for their professional knowledge and as men. There is no conflict between the disciplines here. Nobody can be termed a complete man who has no knowledge of what science has to teach, and, equally, human obligations cannot be escaped on the grounds of being a specialized scientist or technologist.
By human obligations I mean the ability to behave in a reasonable way, to observe restraint so that restraints do not have to be imposed, to be able to think clearly and objectively so that false doctrines cannot gain ground. I believe that it also means the ability to see through nonsense, political, economic, scientific, and so on, and the feeling that it is a duty to resist it. This in no way conflicts with the amount of specialized knowledge, whether scientific, classical, or anything else, which the student can absorb and turn to good account for himself and the community at large.
The universities have a special responsibility to send people of that sort out into the world, because by their influence and example in the community at large they can extend the work of the universities to every corner of the world.
However, to produce the complete man with that balanced sense of obligation and understanding we need to know much more about man himself. Our knowledge of science, the classics, or medicine is beautifully documented, indexed, and ordered. We may not know everything about the subject, but what is known is neatly bound. I imagine that is why we sometimes call this an age of reason, but we forget that -- in the midst of all that reasonable knowledge -- man himself remains as unreasonable, irrational, and unpredictable as ever
Everything around us has been found to have laws and order, and there are some who faintly resent the fact that man refuses to be ordered in the same way. But we must take care not to treat man, with his immense variety of prejudices and emotions, as just another statistical unit. There is the conflict; and it is perhaps inclined to become most noticeable in scientists who deal with ordered things and thoughts in their professional lives, but when the problems are human ones it is not altogether surprising that their ideal solutions are not universally accepted. The reverse is, of course, also true. If you spend your life making compromises it is hard to understand why that is not possible in science.
I would like to repeat that the conflict is not between disciplines, between humanism and science. The conflict lies between man and the world he has made for himself. Man has succeeded in changing many things but he has not changed much himself. It is just because we have got such a grip on nature and such a store of knowledge for its own sake that we must remember the central character, man, and his possibilities, limitations, and the depths he can sink to if he relaxes his self-control.

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh: from Selected Speeches (1955).