And if great reasoners are often maniacal, it is equally true that maniacs are commonly great reasoners.  When I was engaged in a controversy with the Clarion on the matter of free will, that able writer Mr. R.B.Suthers said that free will was lunacy, because it meant causeless actions, and the actions of a lunatic would be causeless.  I do not dwell here upon the disastrous lapse in determinist logic.  Obviously if any actions, even a lunatic’s, can be causeless, determinism is done for.  If the chain of causation can be broken for a madman, it can be broken for a man.  But my purpose is to point out something more practical.  It was natural, perhaps, that a modern Marxian Socialist should not know anything about free will.  But it was certainly remarkable that a modern Marxian Socialist should not know anything about lunatics.  Mr. Suthers evidently did not know anything about lunatics.  The last thing that can be said of a lunatic is that his actions are causeless.  If any human acts may loosely be called causeless, they are the minor acts of a healthy man; whistling as he walks; slashing the grass with a stick; kicking his heels or rubbing his hands.  It is the happy man who does the useless things; the sick man is not strong enough to be idle.  It is exactly such careless and causeless actions that the madman could never understand; for the madman (like the determinist) generally sees too much cause in everything.  The madman would read a conspiratorial significance into those empty activities.  He would think that the lopping of the grass was an attack on private property.  He would think that the kicking of the heels was a signal to an accomplice.  If the madman could for an instant become careless, he would become sane.  Every one who has had the misfortune to talk with people in the heart or on the edge of mental disorder, knows that their most sinister quality is a horrible clarity of detail; a connecting of one thing with another in a map more elaborate than a maze.  If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.  He is not hampered by a sense of humour or by charity, or by the dumb certainties of experience.  He is the more logical for losing certain sane affections.  Indeed, the common phrase for insanity is in this respect a misleading one.  The madman is not the man who has lost his reason.  The madman is the man who has lost everything except his reason.

The madman’s explanation of a thing is always complete, and often in a purely rational sense satisfactory.  Or, to speak more strictly, the insane explanation, if not conclusive, is at least unanswerable; this may be observed specially in the two or three commonest kinds of madness.  If a man says (for instance) that men have a conspiracy against him, you cannot dispute it except by saying that all the men deny that they are conspirators;