t>o
X
THE GIFT OF
MAY TREAT MORRISON
IN MFMORY OF
ALEXANDER F MORRISON
INTRODUCTION
TO
THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY
By J. H. W. STUCKENBERa.
Introduction to the Study of Philosophy.
With ail Appendix and Index. Gtli edition.
Crown Svo, cloth, net, Sl-.W.
The volume U inlendeJ to be (in Introduction
to tilt' Stint// of J'/iilosoplii/, and eieri/l/iixri
fiii.1 heen (iilnpted to t/iis spri-ifii- aim. It is not an
eniyilojiiidia, nor is it iutt-nded as an iutruibiction
to any particular philosophical system — or to the
liialory of the various systems — but to the study of
Philosophy itself.
The author holds that philosophy is not taiiyht,
but thought; that Ihouijht is never appropriated
errept by mental elaboration, and that the best
preparation fur philosophii consists in clear, pro-
found, and independent thinking.
Introduction to the Study of Sociology.
With <i.niph-ti- Index. Crown ^vo, clotli, m t,
For sale by all booksellers, or sent by mail, post-
paid, on receipt of price, by the publishers,
A. C. ARMSTRONG & SON,
51 Kaat Tenth Street (.near Broadway), New York.
INTRODUCTION
TO THE
STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY
BY
J. H. W. STUCKENBERG
^finbtr of tf)e }3f)iIoBopf)icaI Socictn of Brrlin
AUTHOR OF " INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY"
"the life of IMMANUEL KANT," "TENDENCIES
IN GERMAN THOUGHT," ETC.
SECOND EDITION
A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON
51 East 10"" Street, near Bkuadway
1898
Copyright, 1897,
Br J. H. W. Stuckenbero.
Wnibrrsitu ^Brrsa :
John WiijjoN AM) Sun, Ca.miihiduk, U.S.A.
ISIS
DEDICATED
TO
W. D. MILLER, M.D.
K. ^rofrssor \\\ tf)t Knibersitg of Bfrltn.
oc
2 PROMOTEK OF SCIENCE.
FKIEND OF HUMANITY.
«:
u.
O
t
4S3045
PREFACE.
THE title gives the exact aim of the vohime.
An elaborated system of Sociology is not
attempted ; but the purpose is to lay the basis for
sociological study, to designate the problems in-
volved, and to aid the begmner in the solution of
these problems. This purpose has determined the
character of the volume and furnishes the criterion
by which its contents must be judged.
Special attention has been devoted to the inter-
pretation of society, particularly to the idea found
under the head of Sociation ; to the division of
Sociology ; and to the removal of the confusion
caused by burdening the subject with materials
which are not sociological, but belong to meta-
physics, to speculative philosophy, or to natural
science.
Three classes of inquirers were prominently
before my mind, and the book was prepared chiefly
to meet their needs.
viii PREFACE.
First, that large class of professional men and
other persons of culture who have had no instruc-
tion in Sociology, but are desirous of obtaining an
idea of its nature and materials, and of pursuing its
study privately. Even if they cannot become spe-
cialists, they want such a conception of the subject
as will enable them to judge of its sphere and prin-
ciples, and to get a knowledge of its trend and
literature. The practical value of the volume will
consist in bringing society definitely before their
minds, and in furnishing the means for fruitful
sociological investigations.
Second, students who have no Sociology in their
collegiate course, but realize that without it their
education and their preparation for life are incom-
plete. This Introduction will, it is hoped, prevent
the waste of time and the fruitless efforts which
are almost unavoidable if the study is taken up
without some help to its definition, its division, its
relation to other subjects, its method, and its
literature.
Third, teachers of social science who desire a
compend as the basis of their instruction, or who,
while lecturing on Sociology, want a manual in the
hands of their students. Such a volume as is here
offered ought to make more easy the introduction
of tliis study into institutions where it is now
omitted. I expect to make the book the basis of
PREFACE. ix
my introductory lectures to sociological students,
and have had this purpose in view in writing the
volume.
Teachers and students who use the book are of
course expected to exercise the same independence
respecting its contents as I claim for myself. It
wants to lead to inquiry, not to imitation ; and its
purpose will best be accomplished by promoting
investigation, however nmch the conclusions may
differ from those here presented. Sociology needs
thinkers, not echoes.
The problem to be solved is stated at the begin-
ning of each chapter. By thus presenting the
theme definitely to the mind of the student, the
discussion is likely to be clearer and more profit-
able.
The smaller print is intended to explain and
amplify the larger which it follows. Tlie fact
that smaller type is used does not imply inferior
importance. The Reflections are for review and
aids to original research.
During a residence of fourteen years in Berlin I
found in the Royal Library many works of value
to the sociologist whose contents are missed by
such as study only French and English writers.
Since my return to America I have been greatly
indebted to Harvard Library and the Boston Public
Library for the use of their rich treasures. The
PREFACE.
books mentioned in the volume will suffice to intro-
duce the beginner to the principal works and also
serve, thi'ough their references and bibliography,
to open the way to the extensive sociological litera-
ture in various languages.
Cambridge, Mass.
January 1, 1898.
J. H. W. STUCKENBERG.
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER PAGE
I. The Genesis of the Idea of Society .... 1
II. Definition and Scope of Sociology .... 44
A. Definition 44
B. Scope 53
III. The Relation of Sociology to Other Social
Disciplines 72
The General Distinction between Soci-
ology AND the Specific Social Sciences 75
Political Science 78
Political Economy 84
History 88
Other Disciplines 93
Is Sociology a Grouping of Other Dis-
ciplines, OR A New Discipline? ... 97
IV. Division of Sociology 102
V. The Principles of Society /jcr se 115
A. Society 116
The Individual and Society . . . . 116
sociation 126
B. The Principles 143
VI. The Historical Evolution of the Principles
OF Society 161
VII. Sociological Ethics, or the Progress of Society 201
1. The Ethical Ideal 216
2. The Ethical Actuality 220
3. The Means for Realizing the Ideal
of Progress 221
Completeness of the Division of Soci-
ology 233
Xll CONTENTS.
CHAPTER PAGE
Vlll. The Method in the Study of Sociology . . 238
Method for Independent Sociological
Research 263
IX. Is Sociology a Science ? 272
X. The Sociological Study of the Age .... 295
Plan for the Study of a Community . . 323
Index 331
INTRODUCTIO]^ TO THE STUDY OF
SOCIOLOGY.
CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTION.
The Genesis of the Idea op Society.
The Problem. — It is our purpose to trace hriefiy the
idea of society as developed in the individual and in
humanity. Not the interpretation of society is our aim,
that comes later; hut a general conception of society.
Even persons of culture rarely apprehend the social
totality.
Antiquity and the Middle Ages lacked the hroad outlook
and the intellectual conditions for comprehending the total
social organism. The world was too little known, and
national and religious life severely limited the conception
of the nature and the relations of society. Greek philos-
ophy and Christianity enlarged the social thought ; hut it
was reserved for modern times to make humanity its scope.
Geographical progress, facility of communication, travel,
commerce and the comprehension of the world as a mai^ket,
the growing intimacy in national relationship^ and the
general enlargement of thought., have given prominence to
human society as extending heyond church and state, and
hrought the different races into close contact. The mv.lti-
1
\-2{\' IINTRO-DUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
plication and poiver of associations also gave prominence
to social thought and movement. Society hecame too im-
portant for thinkers longer to neglect its interpretation.
With the enlarged conception of society Sociology was horn.
The prohlem prese7ited in this chapter is introductory;
it leads to, but not into, Sociology. We distinguish be-
tween the genesis and the interpretation of society ; but the
genesis of society itself is the condition for developing the
idea of society in the individual and humanity , and for
constructing a complete social system.
In the history of human thought the conception of
society in its most comprehensive sense has not received
due attention. The conception is difficult and presup-
poses various preparatory stages ; it also seems remote
from our immediate interests and ordinary inquiries. It
is significant that the idea of society is not more fre-
quently grasped in our era of advanced thought and en-
larged views, when altruism awakens enthusiasm and
peculiar prominence is given to social studies.
The development required by the individual in order
to comprehend society is an interesting study. It is a
process similar to that through which humanity has
passed in its social development. The evolution of man-
kind has frequently been compared with that of an indi-
vidual through childhood, youth, and manhood, the
genesis of thought in the individual being similar to that
in the race. The analogy may sometimes be strained,
but we are warranted in saying that as the individual
unfolds, his processes bear a likeness to those through
which the human family passed on its way to civilization.
Each man is the centre of his universe ; from that
centre he draws the circumference of his vision, his in-
terests, and his activities. Not only does he start with
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 3
himself wherever his thought, feeling, and volition
wander, but he never gets away from himself. How to
get out of himself is no more a problem for him than
liow to step on his shoulders ; the problem is how to en-
large himself to the comprehension of society and the
universe, and how to relate himself consciously as he is
actually but unconsciously related. He believes a false-
hood if he imagines himself isolated ; but how shall he
grasp that social realism in which he is involved ?
Absolute social dependence is no more characteristic
of childhood than is the total unconsciousness of this
dependence. The life is mainly vegetative, a period of
potentiality and prophecy, not of achievement. The
individual himself has not been differentiated, and so he
cannot differentiate society from himself. In the true
sense will, reason, character, are mere possibilities ; the
reality has yet to be achieved. The child's circumfer-
ence is limited to immediate needs and their supply.
The horizon of youth is enlarged ; a dim social con-
sciousness arises, social attachments are formed ; but an
imagined independence, wilfulness, even license are more
dominant traits than the recognition of the existing
social relation and social dependence. The attention is
engaged by the immediate surroundings, by passion and
pleasure, by ambition undisciplined by experience, by
iiright hopes, large plans, and tentative efforts. Youth
lacks the conditions for a broad outlook into humanity,
except perhaps in the form of visions and aspirations.
Unless enthusiasm inspires the heart with patriotic and
luimanitarian sentiments, the family, the school, a narrow
social circle, a few playmates and bosom companions
limit the sphere of the social interests. Life and thought
are too circumscribed for an intelligent conception of the
meaning of human society.
4 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
For the growth beyond a self-centred and self-con-
tained life, we look to the years of maturity. Yet when
manhood and womanhood are reached personal matters
usually become so absorbing through the struggle for
existence and for advancement as to shut out the consid-
eration of society, except so far as in our immediate
environment and as a necessity or pleasure. When
business is entered, the intensity of competition and the
daily cares of life preclude the study of society itself and
any considerable interest in its general welfare. Tlirough
the press, through religious, political, and economic
considerations, the world now and then comes into view
and receives passing notice ; but aside from private in-
terests, the sphere of life is found in the concerns of the
community, the state, the nation, and of the church and
the other associations to which the individual belongs.
There are indeed some with enlarged social views and
with ardent aspirations for humanity ; they are, however,
exceptions, and mainly confined to religious and philan-
thropic efforts. Modern business methods afford little
opportunity for making a specialty of the study of
society.^
We naturally look to the educated, and to such as
devote their lives to intellectual pursuits, for that com-
prehensive and intelligent consideration of society of
which we speak. It is society itself as an object of in-
terest and study, in order that it may be thoroughly
understood, which we are contemplating. So many
things are involved in it which must be mastered in order
that social affairs may be comprehended, that a high
^ An intelligent business man was asked what he meant by society, of
which he was speaking. lie answered : " All my life have I been talking
about society, and it seemed perfectly clear tome what was meant; but
now that you ask me I cannot tell what society ia." His experience is so
common as to be nearly universal.
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 5
degree of scholarship aud abstract thinking are required
for a successful investigation of the complexities of
association.
With rare exceptions, however, the educated classes
are devoted to a profession or calling which limits the
attention to a particular class of objects, and does not
lead directly to a contemplation of human society. The
preacher, the teacher, the lawyer, the doctor, are, as a
rule, too exclusive as specialists to take a deep and broad
view of humanity ; if they do make it an object of special
inquiry, it is apt to be wholly from their professional
standpoint. The few teachers and specialists in Soci-
ology necessarily concentrate their studies on social
affairs. There are others also who transcend the limits
of their profession and study society as society and for
the sake of society. Their interest is theoretical as well
as practical ; they seek to interpret society and to pro-
mote social progress. The number of those making a
specialty of social studies is on the increase, yet even in
scholarly circles the percentage is small ; but the con-
viction that the future is theirs inspires them with
enthusiasm.
The above becomes more evident when we emphasize
the oft-overlooked distinction between society and soci-
eties. The latter may receive much attention while the
former is neglected. Every thoughtful man considers
the societies of which he is a conscious part ; but the
social organism to which all societies belong and which
is the social totality has a very different meaning. Much
that characterizes our age as social in distinction from
what is individualistic means that societies rather than
individuals are considered ; but it by no means implies
that the age itself has grasped the idea of society as a
totality.
6 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
Each one contemplates the individual when he thinks
of himself ; so each one considers societies when he
thinks of his own immediate associations ; but the notion
of society per se is more abstract. Further discussion,
in later chapters, will add to its clearness. It is enough
now to say that the notion does not refer to society
here or there, of this kind or that kind, but to the essence
of society itself, what constitutes it, and what is found
in all societies after what is peculiar to them as particular
societies has been eliminated. The difficulty of the idea
helps us to understand why so few individuals progress
to it, and why it is so rare in the literature of humanity.
Whoever has passed through the egoistic to the altru-
istic view and attained the idea of society itself, can
appreciate the struggles through which men as they now
are, and as they were in past ages, must pass before
attaining the same. The forces which control individuals
and humanity in their contemplations can be inferred
from the account given of childhood, youth, and man-
hood. The determining factors are pressing needs,
personal affairs, self-interest, what satisfies the appetite
and gratifies the taste, what is adapted to the particular
stage of culture reached, the natural and social environ-
ment, the profession or calling in life. The vast majority
consider only what is forced on their attention or imme-
diately concerns them ; curiosity may lead them beyond
this, but hardly for serious contemplation. Social move-
ments are exciting great interest and societies are rising
into prominence ; but there arc few who for its own sake
study society in its deepest and largest sense.
In general terms we can indicate the process of such
as grasp the idea of society.
It requires but little reflection for any one to recognize
the society in which he moves as but a component part of
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 7
a larger social totality. The family to which he belongs
is connected with other families ; the organizations he
joins touch, influence, and are influenced by, other
organizations ; the state of which he is a citizen sustains
international relations ; and economic organizations are
striving to make the world itself their market. Thus far
beyond the individual's immediate social environment
unions and organizations are recognized ; it is found that
men are not isolated but exist in associations ; and it
becomes evident that individuals can be understood only
when studied in their associated capacity.
Men as associated furnish the most general notion of
society. How they are associated and what the results
of the association, are subjects for further reflection.
At first the individuals in the association are the most
conspicuous, and many are so absorbed by the individuals
as not to be able to do justice to society. This difficulty
can in part be overcome by considering that society exists
when the individual is born ; that he is born into it and
is constantly subject to its influence. Heretofore the
tendency has been to pass from the individual to the
study of society ; but the time seems to be at hand when
the individual will be studied in the society of which he
is an integral part, and which so largely determines his
character and career.
The individual who apprehends society, and himself as
one of its factors, simply apprehends the human reality
in which he moves and of which he is a part. His atten-
tion is naturally first arrested by what is nearest him
and most striking. The family, the church, the state,
social groups in which he lives, great voluntary organi-
zations, particularly of an economic character, and
popular movements which carry along large masses, are
proofs of the reality and power of society. But aside
8 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
from striking social phenomena and organized bodies,
there is a deeper and subtler meaning of society which is
apt to escape notice. Men are united by invisible ties
and controlled by unrecognized social forces ; they move
in a social mechanism and are subject to social influence
even when alone. They breathe the social air, they
imbibe the social spirit, they live in a social environment.
This must be appreciated if the individual himself and
his relations are to be understood. Later we shall see
that the most enlarged view of society is attained only
by one who recognizes himself as an integral part of
mankind as a totality.
Since the process in the individual is typical of that
in the race, the development described helps us to
interpret the evolution of the conception of society in
humanity, which we now consider.
The social actuality is not to be confounded with the
full consciousness of that actuality ; in other words, the
origin and growth of human association are different
from reflection on them and from the interpretation of
the association. We must remember that men are usu-
ally unconscious or but semi-conscious of what concerns
them, that facts absorb the attention long before their
explanation is thought of, that chronologically practice
precedes theory and events history, and that thought
must be matured before pliilosophy and science become
possible. Social processes for countless ages were re-
quired before society became conscious of itself. Indeed,
though we are growing into this consciousness, we can-
not yet boast of its full attainment.
The evolution of society was the condition for reflec-
tion on this evolution. Some social theory is of course
involved even in the earliest social forms, and some oc-
cult notion of the social relations is implied in all social
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 9
action. But blind impulse and unreflecting instinct pre-
cede full consciousness and rational purpose. Intellec-
tual progress consists largely in developing into clear
consciousness the actually existing but unconscious social
elements ; what is implicit is gradually made explicit.
There is thus a twofold process of evolution, — the con-
sciousness of men respecting what exists is evolved, and
society itself is evolved so that new elements are intro-
duced into consciousness.
It is evident that a long process of development was
required before human society could become an object
of special inquiry. How long no one can tell, for the
records are wanting ; and for the same reason it is im-
possible to give an accurate account of the actual social
evolution. From the traces which have come to us from
prehistoric times, from the references to uncultured peo-
ples in ancient authors, and from barbarians of the pres-
ent we infer that the state of nature which preceded
civilization was far removed from the ideal condition
which Rousseau imagined. The individual and nature
stood face to face, without any human development, and
without any products or treasures of culture. As noth-
ing had been done, everything had to be done from the
first beginning. Appetite and passion ruled ; the course
of life was determined by the necessity of wresting a
livelihood from nature and warding off foes. Associa-
tion was of the rudest kind, — often an aggregation of
brute force rather than association, — with the exercise
of such forces as are designated savage and barbarian.
Institutions in the sense of definite and permanent social
factors did not exist ; the family, which in its present
form is itself a growth, was still in a formative stage,
and the nucleus of all organization and association. At
no period can we imagine man as a solitary being ; he
10 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
must have been a member of a family at least. Neither
the natural nor the social conditions were such as to
make large groups possible among primitive peoples.
But as a family grew it developed into the gens and
tribe, with some patriarch or chief at the head, to whom
all were subject.^
Even within a sphere so limited and a life extremely
mouonotous various associations were possible, — as for
hunting and fishing, for grazing and agricultural pur-
poses, for games and war. It was association in an
embryonic stage, and mainly within the limits of con-
sanguinity. There must have been affection, maternal
at least, or the family could not have been reared. Curi-
osity and wonder were excited by the objects of nature.
That the fancy was active is proved by numerous sym-
bols and superstitions. There was generalization, at-
tributing to many objects what was beheld in one, but
a generalization which was instinctive rather than reflec-
tive or discriminative. These and similar conclusions
are reached by the researches of ethnology and from the
study of barbarians of our own times.
It is not easy to conceive in the crude forms of the
earliest hordes or associations the seed whence the
1 Such a solidarity exists in certain lower stages of civilization that the
notion of the community seems to be much more prominent than that of
the individual. The individual is simply a member of his family ; his in-
terests are identified with it ; he is responsible for it, as it is for him. As
one of a mass, he does not stand out as a distinct individuality. Lazarus,
" Zeitschrift fuer Voclkerpsycliologie und Sprachwissenschaft," vol. ii.,
p. 421, calls attention to the fact that a Tamul clan designates itself by the
pronoun "We," — a striking evidence of their consciousness of unity.
When the property became private instead of belonging to the family or
community, the notion of individuality received more distinct recognition
in the general consciousness, as well as in legal enactments.
The article of Lazarus referred to above is a valuable one on " The
Relation of the Individual to Society." Articles by the same in vol. iii.
are also important. The social student will liud all the volumes helpfuL
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 11
state as we know it has grown. The family, the gens,
the tribe of early times, constituted the primitive state.
Whether the tribe grew into the state, or whether a num-
ber of tribes, forced by enemies, formed a state, it might
be impossible to distinguish sharply between a chief and
a king, a tribe and the first state. Numbers of people, a
definite territory, and an improved form of organization
are involved in the idea of a state ; but all could be pro-
duced by a gradual process of development from the
family.
With the establishment of the state we connect the
idea of a more settled social condition. Thus one of the
most potent factors for social development was given.
Before that time the wandering life, whether from choice
or necessity, and the unsettled condition of authority,
prevented the permanent accumulation of the means and
products of culture. Then the rule of a patriarch, a chief,
a priest, or medicine-man, whoever had authority, must
have been through age or strength, — a rule arbitrary or
determined by tradition and precedent, or by customs and
traditions. The ruler of a state might be a despot ; but
the number of his subjects and the relation to outsiders
imposed restraints. It became necessary to define the
nature of the authority ; laws had to be enacted, and the
more settled condition made a cumulative process of
development possible.
A higher development may absorb a lower form and
at the same time make room for a greater variety of
social groups. When the tribe or tribes became a state,
many lower forms of association might continue and
new societies be added. The family continued ; so there
was room for spontaneous gatherings and voluntary as-
sociations of various kinds. What belongs to humanity
does not vanish in the process of evolution, but
12 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
changes its forms. Not respecting what is lowest do
men differ ; it is alike ,the common ^basis on which all
stand ; the differentiation takes place respecting what is
higher, — such as intellect and character. Certain asso-
ciations may be deemed natural, belonging to all stages
of culture ; others can arise only in an advanced stage.
Civilization has much in common with savages and bar-
barians, but it likewise has much which is impossible for
them. After the state was formed, there was as much
necessity as before for sustaining life and propagathig
the species. Not so much in what it eliminates as in
what it refines and creates, does the process of civiliza-
tion consist.
With the firm establishment of the state, humanity
enters on a new process of evolution, in which we are
still involved. When laws were made and recorded,
they became a factor of first importance in connection
with the traditions and customs which had prevailed
till that time. The laws were in fact a culmination
and crystallization of what had been regarded as becom-
ing, sacred, and obligatory. By attributing them to
some divinity their authority, as well as their perma-
nence and unchangeableness, was enhanced. As changes
were demanded, they could be made by means of inter-
pretation, by some fiction, or by actual additions. What
existed naturally became the nucleus around wliicli other
laws were gathered.
Probably no remains of the past, certainly none of
the earliest historic times, are more important than the
national will as embodied in the law. Otlier registers
were soon added to those containing the legal enact-
ments. A record of the most important events of the
state soon became necessary. It was not history as
we understand it; that came much later. A bare fact
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 13
was recorded or a mere outline of events given ; per-
haps it was in the form of picture or symbol, some
hieroglyphic in which fact and fancy are indistinguish-
able. The monarch and those associated with him
were the usual subjects : diplomacy, generals, wars, and
conquests, national glorification, religious ceremonies,
names, dates, deeds, afterwards annals and chronicles.
Such meagre records culminated in history in a crude
form long before society became an object of specific
inquiry. Much of antiquity is compressed in the saying
attributed to Caligula : •' Kings are gods ; the people,
cattle." The records were confined to persons of special
prominence and to deeds deemed by them significant.
The people were no more thought worthy of historic
remembrance than of pyramids for their remains.
Glimpses of their lives are at times caught, but they
are incidental rather than intentional. The conditions
for appreciating the social organism were lacking.
In the record of what was regarded important we see
also the limit of serious reflection. The prominence
and importance of the state made it an object of special
inquiry. In all antiquity we look to Greece for rational
investigation into the nature of objects. In their polit-
ical and ethical writings Plato and Aristotle discuss the
state, the former from the ideal and visionary, the latter
from the realistic, point of view. The omnipotence of
the state may be inferred from the conduct of Socrates
when he refuses to flee from an unjust sentence and
cheerfully drinks the hemlock to vindicate the majesty
of the law. Political science still strikes its roots in
that era of Greek thought and statesmanship. The
eminent Greek writers refer to social conditions ; but
no systematic treatment was attempted. The state was
society in so dominant a sense as to exclude all social
disciplines except politics.
14 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
The character of Greek thought, especially from the
time of the Sophists and Socrates, was pre-eminently con-
cerned with human affairs. This is evident from
the art and literature, as well as from politics and phi-
losophy. The revival of the study of Greek letters
always means a revival of humanism. But the con-
cerns of the thinkers were human nature in the abstract,
individuals as involved in social relations or entangled
in social meshes, and the state, in which the individual
was largely absorbed. Society as distinct from the state
had not come sufficiently forward to attract special
attention. Other subjects were more attractive and
more urgently required development ; the world was too
little known for a comprehensive view of society ; the
particularism which prevailed in the nations interfered
with the study of other peoples ; and the exclusiveness
of the prevailing religions also limited inquiry. The
Greek states were usually so divided as to make even
the idea of nationality very contracted, while other
peoples were treated as barbarians.
Hebraism was dominated by national and religious
particularism, which is sometimes broken through by
the universalism of some prophetic utterance. In the
psalms and prophets germs of a large conception of
humanity are found. The social thought of Hebraism
was, however, devoted chiefly to Israel and the neigh-
boring nations. The purity of the Hebrew theocracy
demanded a sharp separation from the Gentiles, thus
making a large social synthesis impossible.
We know not what social thought may have been
buried with ancient Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia,
and other nations ; what is known of them, however,
leaves no doubt that they were far behind Greece in
that respect. The speculative mysticism of India was
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 15
too much lost in the gods and the universe and eter-
nity to attach its philosophemes to human society as
such. Buddhism had the humane spirit for such reflec-
tions, but it was too intent on saving the individual into
Nirvana to stop to consider his social relations for
their own sake during the process of salvation. Neither
religion nor individualism in China interfered with a
study of the social realism; but the broad outlook
beyond the state was wanting for an enlarged view,
reverence for ancestors made traditionalism rather than
progress into new ideas the law, and the precepts of
morality applied to political welfare rather than to
society in general. The entire Orient presented con-
ditions for reflection on society which were far less
favorable than those in Greece.
As we approach the time of Christ we find that the
progress both of events and of thought broke through
the prevalent national and religious particularism. The
conquests of Alexander enlarged the views of men by
bringing many and remote peoples into contact with one
another. More impressive and more permanent, how-
ever, was the enlarged conception of humanity made by
Rome as a world-power. At the same time Greek phil-
osophers, particularly the Stoics, discoursed on human-
ity, on the brotherhood of man, and on sympathy for all,
regardless of nationality. These sentiments were echoed
by Roman moralists and statesmen, many of them fol-
lowers of the Stoics. Then came Christianity with its
doctrine of the brotherhood of man under the father-
hood of God, with the demand that the neighbor be
loved as self, the gospel wiping out the ordinary social
distinctions of heathendom, exalting humanity by its
close alliance with divinity, giving new principles and
greater unity to society, enforcing its social laws with
16 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
divine authority, and spreading its new social teachings
throughout the Roman empire and even beyond.
The enlarged conception of mankind included such
a wealth of special objects that their appropriation
rather than society per se absorbed the studies of men.
The advance in social study was, however, marked. The
immediate environment, family, race, and nationality no
longer constituted the limits of thought. Yet so far
as deeper inquiry was concerned, the national and relig-
ious points of view long prevailed. The Middle Ages
were by no means as dark as is usually supposed ; they
had intellectual giants not a few ; but the objects of
special interest were the church and the state, theology,
ecclesiasticism, asceticism ; many regarded this world as
so exclusively a preparatory stage for heaven that for
its own sake it was not deemed worthy of investigation.
Not so much for itself was humanity considered, but as
lost or as an object of redemption. Not society |jer se
was studied, but three institutions received constant
recognition : the family, the church, and the state.
It is only in modern times that we find the external
and internal conditions for the study of society in the
most comprehensive sense. The revival of learning, the
invention of printing, and the discovery of America were
forerunners of the new era. The fetters of a severe
ecclesiasticism were broken ; theology was not relegated
to the past, but it was obliged to share its dominion with
philosophy and science ; politics and economics gained
prominence, and put into the foreground the state and
tlie industries ; the introduction of the factory and
steam, especially in connection with the development of
the mighty resources of the New World, gave an un-
paralleled impulse to secularism ; and the advance of
thought developed what are known as the modern ideas
TUE*GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 17
of human rights. These rights found explosive expres-
sion in the American and French revolutions, and then
became the main current in the stream of human prog-
ress. The people came to the front as distinct from tlie
court, the nobility, and the aristocracy. Public opinion
was formed and became a power as against the state
hovering over the people, as represented in a Louis XIY.,
who said : " I am the state." The society of the people
attracted attention, and thus a new object of social
interest was created. The very sufferings of the people
in contrast with the few privileged ones made them
objects of inquiry as well as of sympathy ; and the
efforts at relief led to various communistic and social-
istic schemes, particularly in France. It was the ear-
nest practical interest in society at the close of the
eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth
which became the occasion for new theories of society.
This growing prominence of the people made an epoch
in human thought and history. Modern history teems
with crises for the transfer of authority from the one to
the many. From two centuries of social ferment the
social thought now so dominant has emerged. The
common people, their place in the social organism, their
relation to church and state, their claims on the select
few deemed superior to them, their needs and rights,
now became objects of absorbing study. The removal
of artificial distinctions gave a new meaning to society,
no longer confining it to courts and the nobility, but
including all members of the community, the state, and
even of humanity. The importance gained by society
made social investigations a necessity. Justice to it
could not be done by merely discussing the church and
the state. It became manifest that these were largely
dependent on popular movements and voluntary organi-
2
18 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
zations. Society gained more and more prominence as
an object of thought and life, and that alone was suffi-
cient to direct intelligent consideration to its interpre-
tation.
It is in the progress of humanity itself that we see
the conditions for making society a study, not merely
societies. Certain currents of thought tended in the
same direction and promoted the same end. A number
of thinkers reflected on humanity, on history, on law in
human events, on progress, all bearing on society.
While in the Middle Ages society in a general sense
had not attained sufficient prominence to make it an
object of special inquiry, and while thought was ab-
sorbed by other objects, it is a mistake to suppose that
the religious view is in itself in the way of social in-
vestigation. The character of Greek thought was more
favorable to such investigation than that of the Middle
Ages, yet Greece has no Sociology. Human develop-
ment is not a modern idea ; in the Middle Ages evolu-
tion was, however, viewed chiefly as a divine process,
from God, in God, through God, to God. Even from
this point of view society might have been an object of
specialization. The teleological conception of the times
no more interferes with social study than docs the fact
that man acts teleologically, choosing an end and mov-
ing toward it. If God is believed to act on man, and if
freedom of will is held, that need not prevent the study
of society per se. Divine and voluntary human action
enter the existing process of nature, conforming to es-
tablished laws. The most absurd notion and the most
insane view do not interrupt the course of nature ; they
come to naught, but they conform to the established
order. Whatever choices man makes, so far as an
effort to realize them is concerned the action must be
THE GENESIS OF TUE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 19
adapted to the working of existing laws. The fact is
that tlie source of action, divine or human, does not
interfere with the operation of law in humanity. It
could interfere only if the problem were given us to
solve : to determine all human action as caused by an
unalterable law of nature. But that is not the problem ;
the exact cause of every human action is not within
reach. Whether that action is caused by nature, whether
free, or whether traced to a divine initiative, it is all
the same so far as prevision is concerned. Hence it
was not necessary to break the force of Christian
thought, unless onesidedly supermundane, in order to
recognize law in humanity. When the occasion for the
scientific study of society was given, Christian thinkers,
as well as others, could make a specialty of the subject.^
Much as the supernatural view dominated the thought
of the Middle Ages, the natural was not wholly ex-
cluded. Frequent mention is made of nature, and by
1 It is not our purpose to discuss determinism or freedom of the will ;
but the error that freedom would overturn nature and its laws ought to
be exposed. Human freedom is not held as an omnipotent power; its
limits are circumscribed. If the initiative is free, that does not mean that
the results of the freedom must be what one chooses. A free choice
would operate on nature exactly as would a necessitated will. The laws
of nature are not in the slightest degree affected by the fact that they are
used on the principles of determinism or of freedom. Hence the ab-
surdity of Dr. A. Riehl's statement ("Introduction to the Theory of
Science and Metaphysics," p. 231): "From the power to do apparently
unimportant actions with absolute freedom, would proceed the power to
reverse the course of nature in constantly widening circles. A single
element of irrationality, an exceptional event that is uncaused, must in its
results make all nature irrational, as a very little leaven may set a whole
mass of organic matter in fermentation." A will free in the use of the
laws of nature does not imply the slightest interference with the regu-
larity of nature's laws. When Kiehl adds: "Nature could not exist with
a freedom not subject to law," the only answer is that freedom cannot act
on nature at all except according to the laws of nature. It is a perversion
to identify freedom in the use of nature's laws with lawlessness.
20 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
no means always as the antithesis or enemy of God. A
number of thinkers treat nature as God's handmaid, as
the agency through which He works, so that natural
law is not excluded from human affairs, but regarded
as the law of God. TertuUian and others held that in
nature we have a witness and manifestation of God.
Sometimes, as in the case of Duns Scotus, the natural
and supernatural were not only held to be in perfect
harmony, but the former was supposed to include the
latter. Then, again, the two were sharply separated.
Scholasticism had its rationalism and agnosticism, as
well as a severe orthodoxy, and these affected the
theories of social development.
It Avas with the expiration of feudalism that modern
society was born, and at the same time new modes of
scholarly investigation were adopted. Instead of solv-
ing the great problems of being by a priori decisions,
the heavens and earth were now examined directly, in
order that they might tell their own story, and Bacon
formulated the laws which the leading scientists were
already following.
Among the more influential impulses in modern times
toward a philosophy of society we must look to students
of law. From the law that prevailed in the state they
passed to the consideration of law as governing hu-
manity.i Vico (1668-1743) wondered why there should
be a science of nature and not of history. His view that
God rules in nature and in nations did not keep him
from going to the study of man and his history for a
knowledge of society and its evolution. As is usual in
1 It has been claimed that the notiou of the prevalence of law in
nature had its origin in the idea of law prevailing in the state. In that
case tlie idea of law in society preceded the idea of law in nature. This
slionld be considered by those who seek to make natural law the norm for
society.
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 21
such tentative efforts, there were many fantastic ele-
ments ; but man as an earthly being and in an earthly
environment comes into the foreground ; he is studied in
his surroundings and in his history, in order to under-
stand his evolution and the progress of civilization.
Montesquieu (1689-1755) published his " Esprit dcs
Lois " in 1748, a work combining the excellencies of
philosophic thought with learned research. He does not
develop the influence of climate and soil on man, but
distinctly recognizes it ; he rejects the interpretation of
human affairs by means of dogmatic presuppositions,
and goes to nations and their history for a knowledge of
their laws, and searches for comprehensive principles
under which to put the endless variety of social phe-
nomena.
It would be an endless task to hunt and publish the
numerous hints, often isolated and merely tentative sug-
gestions, found in writers since the sixteentli century,
which are preparatory to Sociology. Materialism, deism,
and rationalism concentrated the attention on man as
the determiner of his own destiny and subject to earthly
influences. As nature, government, and history received
especial prominence in the studies of scholars, we find
man in his associated capacity, according to his environ-
ment, development, political and economic relations,
brought more and more into prominence. The relation
of the individual to society ; social motives, whether in-
terested or disinterested ; social maxims and laws ; the
ethical principles of society ; the economic basis of so-
ciety and the nations, — these are among the subjects
which meet us in the writers on law, on history, on
ethics, and on philosophy. In France we have Bossuet,
Voltaire, Quesnay, Turgot, Rousseau, of whom Turgot
deserves especial attention for his views on human prog-
22 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ress, some of which anticipated important features in
Comte's Sociology ; in Germany we have Leibnitz, whose
universal genius quickened science, philosophy, and the
human disciplines ; and in England we have a long list
of political, ethical, and philosophical thinkers, from
Hobbes to Bentham, who discussed society, tlie social
affections, and social progress. The student who enters
into particulars must also consider the influence of men
like Grotius, who sought to bring nations as well as in-
dividuals under the dominion of ethics, by the establish-
ment of international law.
The writers named and many others, prove that the
characteristic ideas of Sociology are not new, but the re-
sult of a long process of evolution, during which they
became more distinct, were more fully developed, and so
correlated as to approach a system. The definite ad-
vance made in social thinking during the eighteenth
and the beginning of the nineteenth century consists in
this : society itself is apprehended and made a specific
object of thought ; its study is treated as a separate dis-
cipline, just as politics or economics ; consequently the
social thoughts, formerly scattered, are now concen-
trated ; they are developed, are augmented by the study
of history, of ethnology, of institutions, of the actual
societies of the present in their various stages of culture;
and the result of the total inquiry is used to find the
principles, the laws, and the system of society.
There is one writer whose thoughts on our theme de-
serve notice, yet they have heretofore been too much
overlooked. In the eminence of Schiller as a poet it is
forgotten that he was professor of history in Jena. His
inaugural address, in 1789, was on the subject, " What
is Universal History and Why is it Studied?" In his
comprehensive grasp as here revealed, as well as in his
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 23
ethical and gesthetic views, we see the disciple of Kant.
He argues in favor of principles as the rational product
of details. Man's relation to nature is recognized as
affecting his progress ; among the advantages of the
present is the fact that he has subdued nature so that it
ministers to his highest interests, instead of being his
lord. Tlie discourse is, however, historical, and shows
that we are the product of the entire past and debtors to
all by-gone ages. " A long chain of events reaches
from the present moment to the beginning of the human
race, which events are interwoven as cause and effect."
The historian of universal history seizes from the totality
of past occurrences those which have most deeply
affected the present. The individual must regard him-
self as connected with the unalterable laws of nature,
with the entire past, and as a member of the whole hu-
man race. " All preceding ages, without knowing or in-
tending it, have striven to usher in our human century.
Ours are all the treasures which industry and genius,
reason and experience, have at last brought home in the
long ages of the world." As we are under such great
obligations to the past, whose product we are, we ought
to pay to future generations that debt which we cannot
possibly pay to the past.
Far more important, however, is a work whose first
part appeared in 1784, the fourth in 1791, while the fifth,
which was to have completed the whole, was never fin-
ished. This is the work of the theologian, preacher,
poet, philosopher, and historian Herder, entitled : " Ideas
on the Philosophy of the History of Humanity." For
its own sake and on account of its influence it is worthy
of much more attention than it can receive here. Herder
may well be called " an apostle of humanity," and as
such he is a representative of a strong trend at the close
24 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
of the eighteenth century. In that agitated era of social
fermentation, of human rights, of liberty, equality, fra-
ternity, of American Independence and French Revolu-
tion, of communism and socialism, there was a strong
tendency on the part of scholars to comprehend the
whole of humanity, man as extended over space and
moving through time, within the sphere of scientific in-
quiry. Schiller declared that to the philosophic mind
even the most important nation is but a fragment, and
that in such a mind its affairs can arouse enthusiasm
only if in them conditions for the progress of the entire
race are seen.
Herder rises above his contemporaries in the effort to
enlarge the conception of man so as to include the whole
of mankind. He had a passion for humanity, using
" humanity " both in the sense of the human family and
of a humane spirit. Other books of the period also
aimed at the interpretation of the entire race, but
Herder's is the most important and was much the most
influential. It was mainly due to the impulse given by
Herder that the study of humanity has been developed
independently in Germany. The philosopher Lotze
bears witness to the influence of the work of Herder.
In the preface, he claims for his " Microcosm " that it
repeats, " with the changed views which our age has
gained, the undertaking which had its brilliant beginning
in Herder's Ideas on the History of Humanity."
Herder states, in the preface, that early in life the
thought often came to him " whether, since everything
in the world has its philosophy and science, that which
most of all concerns us, the history of man in its general
features, does not also have a philosophy and a science."
This early problem of his mind he now attempts to solve.
His recognition of God neither interferes with the uni-
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIErY. 25
versal prevalence of law, nor does it relieve him, through
a priori presuppositions, of the most thorough empirical
investigation. The beginning of the work is significant,
and shows the comprehensiveness of his view. The first
chapters of the first book are astronomical, the aim being
to fix the place of the earth among the heavenly bodies.
" The earth is a planet among planets ; it is a planet of
medium size ; it passed through many revolutions before
it became what it is now." These are the first subjects.
Then the preparation of our globe for the various kinds
of organizations is considered, man being viewed in his
relation to the earth and plants and animals. His de-
pendence is shown ; his evolution depends on imitation
and exercise ; culture is developed by means of human
necessities and the conflicts with nature ; the most skil-
ful become the leaders, a law that prevails among men
and animal herds. The effect produced on man by his
relation to the earth, to the animals, and to his fellow-
men, is a common theme. Man would have to be differ-
ent if other metals were as much diffused as iron is ;
put among animals, he becomes wild like his companions ;
he is a man among men, but like his fellows ; " accord-
ing to the hands in which he falls, so is he moulded."
Our form and culture are the product of eternal laws,
" which no arbitrariness of man can change." Amid the
endless variety of life on earth a certain uniformity of
structure, a cardinal (typical) form seems to prevail.
The similarity in the anatomy of land animals is striking.
The inner structure of the rude form of animals is very
similar to that of man. We cannot penetrate the mys-
teries of nature ; but the transitions from one form to
another make it not improbable that in the creatures
dwelling in water, in plants, and that even in inorganic
substances, there is one and the same capacity for organ-
26 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ization according to one definite plan. " We find that
the nearer they approach man, all creatures have, so far
as the main form is concerned, more or less likeness to
him, and that nature, with that infinite variety which slie
loves, seems to have constructed all life on our earth
according to one fundamental plasm of organization "
(naeh einem Haiiptplasma der Organization').
The manifold powers in beings make it possible for
them to pass through transitions and to assume many
divergent forms. Plants that grow wild in nature can
be made objects of culture. " The same is true of animals
and men ; for every race of men organizes itself, in its
peculiar zone, according to the manner that is most
natural." On mountains, on rocks, in heat and cold, the
same plants vary greatly. Can it be different with men ?
The diversity of earth and air produces varieties (^Spiel-
arten') in plants as in animals and men. According to
its locality, whether it be in the sea or in a marsh, in a
cold or hot climate, so is the form and development of
the plant ; " does not all this prepare us to expect of the
organic structure of men, so far as we are plants, the
same variations ? " So much stress does he lay on the
influence of the plants and animals amid which man is
placed that he regards the history of man's culture as
largely zoological and geographical, and he expresses the
wish that a general botanical geograi)hy may be written
for the history of humanity. So variable is man that he
becomes a different being with nearly every change of
climate. Among animals variations are constantly
occurring ; and according to the analogy of nature, it
would be a miracle if man himself did not change with
the climates.
Many of the details which illustrate the above make it
still more evident how familiar certain ideas were over a
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 27
century ago wliich we are apt to regard as a discovery of
our own times. To the relation of man to the earth and
climate, to plants and animals in general, Herder adds
his relation to the ape. "Within and without, the
orang-outang is similar to man. Its brain has the same
form as ours ; it has a broad chest, Hat shoulders, a face
resembling ours, a skull like our own ; heart, lungs, liver,
spleen, stomach, intestines, are like those in man. Tyson
has mentioned forty-eight points in respect to which it
resembles our race more than it docs the different kinds
of apes ; the deeds related of it, even its follies and vices,
make it similar to man."
So much space has been given to these fundamental
views of the work that we cannot trace his ideas of the
processes of man's development. This development is
followed through all climes and all stages of culture. It
is one and the same humanity, but its course is trans-
formation, its history is a ceaseless metamorphosis.
Nation after nation passes in review, each with its
peculiarities, its degrees of culture, its institutions, its
contributions to human progress. What is antiquated in
one period may have been a blessing at another, so that
adaptation to their times is the standard for judging
objects. The fourth part brings the evolution to the
close of the Middle Ages ; the fifth was to have treated
of modern times, with a discussion of the spirit of
humanity as revealed in various social products, a con-
sideration of the treasures of the human mind, and of
man's work everywhere and on everything, and with an
outlook into the future. But only a meagre outline of
this fifth part is given, nothing is developed.
The conception of the work is grand, and for that
time such a book is remarkable. Its originality the re-
search it involves, its historic data, and its generaliza-
28 jyTEODUCTlON TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
tions reveal the diligent investigator and philosophic
thinker. Herder was too much of a poet not to give
play to his imagination in determining man's place in the
universe, and in making all science and philosophy and
history minister to his welfare. Kant after reading the
first part criticised the soaring imagination of the author,
and hoped he would restrain his lively genius in the parts
that were to follow. Kant gave a general idea of a plan
for the same subject. He regards human development
as a process of the unfolding of the powers of man
under the guidance of his reason. The process takes
place amid the conflicts of society, which are the condi-
tion for eventually attaining order. The greatest prob-
lem for the race, whose solution is forced on it by nature,
is the attainment of a general civic society governed by
laws. The history of humanity can be viewed as the
accomplishment of a hidden plan of nature in order to
realize a perfect political state as the only condition for
the complete evolution of all the capacities of humanity.
The philosophic attempt to construct a history of the
Avorld according to a plan of nature, which attempt aims
at the perfect civil union of the human family, must be
possible, he thought.
The movement which began in 1784 might be traced
down to our own time through numerous German works
of eminent authors. Especially do we see the results of
this movement in the works on what is known as the
" history of culture." We must, however, come to the
man who is most intimately associated with the name
and subject of Sociology, — Auguste Comte.
The prominence of Comte and Ilerbei't Spencer in
sociological inquiries entitles them to especial considera-
tion in a history of the subject. But their works are too
voluminous for adequate treatment in an introductory
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 29
volume ; besides, they are better known than their fore-
runners, their books and expositions of them are easily
accessible, and every student who wants to specialize on
social subjects must go to their writings. Here we can-
not hope to attempt more than call attention to some
prominent features in the works of Comte, and make a
few suggestions on the study of this author.
The beginner is not prepared to form an estimate of
the place of Comte in philosophic thought ; it is doubt-
ful whether in our age students are prepared to do him
justice. He must be judged by his times and in the light
of the work of his contemporaries and predecessors.
Thus viewed, there can be no question that ardent ad-
mirers have given him credit for what belongs equally
or more to others. He sees in history a process and
progress from the theological to the metaphysical, and
finally to the positive stage of thought. In the first
stage, the explanation of things is found in gods, in the
second, in entities, forces, causes, which are imagined ;
in the third or final stage, the positive or scientific, men
reject the theological and metaphysical explanations, and
go directly to the phenomena. This might be called the
empirical method, the deeper meaning and ultimate
source of things being beyond our reach.
The succession of the metaphysical to the theological
method, and then of the positive or scientific to both,
has been regarded as a discovery of Comte and the reve-
lation of an important historic law. It is, however, not
a law of history. Sometimes one method is dominant,
then another ; but all may prevail at the same time.
The theological and metaphysical methods do not ex-
clude each other ; throughout the Middle Ages, and also
since, Christian theology is largely metaphysics, the doc-
trine of God and the soul being no less ontolosical than
30 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
theological. Instead of treating one method as wholly
false and therefore to be rejected, it seems to be a more
rational conception of history, in passing from one stage
of evolution to another, to conserve in each succeeding
one the truth of the old and developing it, while reject-
ing the error. If the first stage is wholly false, hoAv can
it lead to the second as a higher stage ; and how can the
second, if likewise wholly false, lead to the absolute trntli
of the third ? May not the main eri-or of the methods
consist in their exclusiveness, each claiming to be abso-
lute ? Perhaps the positive method is as faulty as the
others in claiming absoluteness and universality, and the
truth will be promoted by limiting it to its proper sphere.
If the stages have any merit, they ought to be reduced to
two, since the conception of theology that a divine being
works is metaphysical ; but it has not been shown that
each method has not some truth, that each has not its
place, and that they are exclusive but not complemental.
Wild speculation at the beginning of the century led to
a reaction ; after speculation professed to be able to do
everything, the reaction declared it could do nothing. An
extreme produced an extreme, and the phenomenalism
which resulted is, by itself, as faulty as the metaphysical
speculation had been.
The supposed law of progress from the theological
through the metaphysical to the positive stage is, how-
ever, not a discovery of Comte. Turgot (1727-1781)
gives it so explicitly that it is unmistakable. He says,
that before the connection between ])hysical effects was
recognized, nothing was more natural than to ascribe
them to intelligent and invisible beings resembling our-
selves. Various events had their gods, and to them they
were attributed. " When the philosophers recognized
the absurdity of these fables, without, however, having
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 31
acquired the true view of natural history, they imagined
that they were explaining the causes of phenomena by
means of abstractions, such as substances and powers,
which explained nothing, but with which they reasoned
as if they were primary beings, new divinities substi-
tuted for the old ones. It was not until later, after
observing the mechanical action of bodies on one another,
that other hypotheses were drawn from mechanics, as
mathematics was developed and experience verified."
Here we have the supposed law, the succession of the
stages, the theological, metaphysical, positive, the very
conceptions given by Comte, though somewhat elaborated
by him. In the fourth volume of his " Positive Philos-
ophy " he refers to Turgot, but does not attribute the
law to him. It is not likely that Comte was guilty of
plagiarism ; but that, with his much reading, he should
unconsciously appropriate such a law is very probable.
It is, however, evident that its first statement belongs
not to Comte, but to the Minister of Finance of
Louis XYI.i
In his " Biographical History of Philosophy " G. H.
Lewes says : " The foundation of a comprehensive method
is the great achievement of Comte, as it was of Bacon,
and the influence he has exercised, and must continue to
exercise, will be almost exclusively in that direction."
This method Comte calls the positive, in distinction from
the theological and metaphysical. Applied to Sociology,
1 For the facts here given, for the original of the quotation from Tur-
got, and for a discussion of tlie whole matter, see " Auguste Comte und
seine Bedeutung fiir die Entwickelung der 8ocialwissenschaft," von Dr.
Ileinrich Wantig, Leipzig, 1894. He states (p. 350) that among the fore-
runners of Comte respecting tlie three stages of development, Twesten
jiuts the Scotch pliilosophers and likewi.^e St. Simon. The law of the.^e
stages is found, aliout tlie same time as in Comte, in Quetelet and Sophie
(Jermain,
32 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
it simpl}' means that the science of society is to be treated
like physics, that the aim is to investigate it just as tlie
other natural sciences, and to give it the same positive-
ness. Comte recognizes the peculiar complexity and
difficulty of social phenomena. In his hierarchy of the
sciences he puts Sociology last, the order being : mathe-
matics, astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, social
physics or Sociology. He thinks the perfection of the
positive system would be attained if all phenomena could
be represented as particular aspects of a single general
fact, as gravitation, for instance. This mathematical
unity he seeks everywhere, and he frequently becomes
the slave of his own rigid system. The sciences are
arranged according to their abstract and general charac-
ter ; what is most universal and also most simple is appli-
cable to all that follows, and therefore comes first ; then
follow the more specific and more complex sciences, the
culmination being reached in Sociology. The principle
of Comte's classification gives a conception of the rela-
tion of the sciences, and of the natural order of their
development from the simple and general to the complex
and specific. His own discussion of these sciences aims
at principles ; in distinction from the specialist, he seeks
their bonds of union, a philosophy of the sciences. It
is not strange that, with such a general view as his,
specialists surpassed him in knowledge in their specific
departments. Much that he wrote has now only historic
interest. Our main concern is with the scheme as a
whole. The lack of psychology in the hierarchy has
fi-cquently been observed. He made it a part of biology,
and even treated it from the standjjoint of phrenology,
though he did not go to the extreme of some of Dr.
Gall's followers.
IJut the main difficulty in his hierarchy of the seioncea
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 83
is that it has no foundation ; it hangs in the air. Facts
are to be observed, theories are to be drawn from them,
and the laws in the sequence of events are to be discov-
ered ; but the basis for these operations, their interpreta-
tion and justification, are wanting. Introspection, the
direct observation of intellectual processes, and the ordi-
nary method of psychologists, are discouraged. It looks
as if Comte had a notion that somehow^ the mind can get
out of itself, and in this way study what is going on within-
He has no critical theory of knowledge ; to this, much of
the confusion in his works may be attributed. At one
time he wants to subject all human affairs to natural
law ; then he finds peculiarities in man which require
especial emphasis. Now everything is to be strictly
scientific ; then he lays great stress on morals and
rehgion, making humanity or its great heroes the object
of faith and worship, and modelling the hierarchy of his
church after that of Catholicism. The claims of the heart
are not met by what he terms positive ; and when he es-
tablishes institutions which are to satisfy the heart there
is a direct conflict with the positive elements. What-
ever the logic of his sensationalism may be, there are
parts of his system which demonstrate practically that
he recognized the need of faith, and that he gave the
rein to imagination and poetry. But this is in spite of
his positivism. He seems to have been helpless in the
matter. But aside from this yielding to the impulses
of his heart, taking his theoretical views, we regard liim
as a type of that school which usqs, without criticism, the
mental faculties, which substitutes supposed objective
knowledge for what is really sulijective, which subordi-
nates reason to sensation, which claims for science what
is mere opinion, which denounces theology and meta-
physics, and then (unconsciously perhaps) puts its own
3
34 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
theology and metaphjsic iu their place. Things arc
eliminated, and phenomena alone are left; yet the phe-
nomena are treated as if they were entities. We are
expected to experiment with nature ; but we cannot ex-
periment with mere phenomena. This school, by means
of this experiment, wants to get nature to tell us all it
can, that we may learn its secrets ; why not treat the
mind in the same way, imagination, reason, aspiration,
faith being regarded -as but so many revelations of its
character ? But this is disparaged as a departure from
reality! Sensation is the supreme test; yet a Kepler
needed imagination to discover his laws, Newton may
have found it as serviceable as Milton, and it is involved
in every scientific thcor}' . Reason seems to be feared
as metaphysical. We find that even culture is depre-
ciated ; it is a departure from nature. The study of
thought by thought is also a departure from reality.
Many members of this school surpass Comte in sensa-
tional consistency. They want nature to dominate
mind. Sense is exalted as if it could pick up science
without an appeal to thought ; faith is ridiculed, but only
because it is not known that all our science depends on
faith, — namely, on the belief that our faculties do not
deceive us. It is easy to make the objective world the
law of our minds so long as it is not known that what
we call the objective world is simply our mental conce])-
tion of it. Our views are ours because they are in our
minds ; all terms that we use, no matter what the ob-
jects to which they refer, are mental, and never can be
anything else.
Comte occupies essentially the position of that dog-
matism which Kant tried to anniliilate. Kant rejected
the theological method of research as completely as
Comte ; he regarded the noumona as beyond our scien-
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 35
tific apprehension, and thought that we are limited to
phenomena ; so that the old basis is taken away from
metaphysics. What is lauded as Comtc's method is as "^
much Kant's ; but Kant respected the reason he criticised,
he left room for faith where science could not tread, and
(because he recognized our limitation to phenomena) he
refused to assert that man is to be interpreted just as the
plant and the animal. Kant's scheme for the study of
humanity as emphatically as Comte's rejects theological
and metaphysical theories ; but while it wants man to be
studied as he is, strictly according to the scientific method,
he does not profess to be able to determine that all of
man can be made absolutely scientific in the technical
sense, and that the science of society is to be reduced to
a physical science. Kant was the stanchest advocate
of the freedom of will ; but that did not interfere with
his insistence on law in human affairs.
By attributing to Comte excellencies without discrim-
ination, students are misled ; it is a recommendation of
his faults with his real deserts. The neglect to which
he was suliject in France cannot be ascribed solely to
the fact that he was in advance of his age ; in respect to
the criticism of the mind he was far behind the true dis-
ciples of Kant. Whatever extreme Catholics of France
may have claimed inspecting society, the Encyclopedists
certainly had no theological prepossessions, the sensa-
tional French philosophy was not metaphysical, and in
Protestant countries human affairs generally were inves-
tigated in the scientific spirit by eminent thinkers.
We do not dwell here on the strange views scattered
throughout liis works, palpable errors being mixed with
profound truths. The latter part of his life looks like
mental aberration. Lewes says : " Over his subsequent
efforts to found a social doctrine, and to become the
36 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
founder of a new religion, let us draw the veil." Even
his earlier works abound in vagaries.
While it is a duty to guard against Comte's errors, it
is equally a duty to give him credit where due. This is
great, though we cannot find it in his stages of human
[ progress or in originality of method. But he developed
I the method of social inquiry and applied it more fully
than his predecessors. Never before did a thinker so
concentrate all his energies on the interpretation of
society. The term " social science " was in common
f use. The invention of the term " Sociology," however,
I is to his credit, as Avell as the word " altruism."
Comte is by no means always a profound and consistent
thinker, but he is suggestive and comprehensive, intent
on working in new mines of thought, and his place is
unique and prominent. He made Sociology a distinct
object of human thought, tried to establish its place
among the other disciplines and to correlate it to them,
concentrated the light, from whatever quarter tlie rays
might emanate, on its nature and method, and gave a
strong impulse toward those social studies which have
now become so absorbing. Whether many or any of his
conclusions shall abide, his relation to Sociology is, and
always will be, a peculiar one. Even though others
share with him the credit of having given the start to
this discipline, his place is one of special eminence. We
can almost speak of the dominance he gave to the social
point of view as epoch-making.
Nothing was completed by Comte, but Sociology was
fairly started. Even down to the present we can hardly
speak of more than tentative efforts to fix the subject, to
determine its method, to collect the materials it includes,
and to form them into a valid and consistent system.
We cannot here follow the history of our subject any
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 37
further ; nor is it necessary, since its data are within
easy reach of the student. Eminent sociological special-
ists since Comte are still living ; in some instances their
works are not yet completed, and in all cases it is doubt-
ful whether we have the perspective for a fair estimate
of their labors.
The genesis of Comte's Sociology must not be con-
founded with the genesis of Sociology itself. Tiiat would
be making Comte the norm for sociological thinking.
The same rule applies to Spencer and later sociologists.
Just as the history of society does not construct the
system of society, so the history of Sociology does not
give the final Sociology. But this history gives valuable
hints for future methods, conclusions to be tested, mate-
rials to be sifted, germs to be developed. There have
been numerous sociological architects. They have reared
no enduring structure ; it is doubtful even how far they
have laid an abiding foundation and drawn a plan avail-
able for future builders. We can hardly claim that more
than a scaffolding has been erected; and even on this
scaffolding the workers cannot agree to stand together
and labor co-operatively on the same structure.
The evolution of the idea of society and tlien of Sociology, in the
individual mind and in humanity, is an interesting and important
theme. In the process of this evolution three objects come defi-
nitely before the mind : the individual ; the various societies, such
as social gi'oups, organizations, tlie church, the state; and society as
inclusive of all societies. Those who miss the last, the idea o'f
society per se, fail to complete the evolution and cannot construct
a comprehensive social system.
The individual cannot be understood if considered ])y himself.
He sustains social relations and in these must be studied. Neither
can an association be understood if isolated ; it must be studied in
connection with all the other associations to which it is related and
whose influence it experiences. This is merely saying that indi-
433G45
38 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
viduals and associations must be taken as tliey really are ; fictitious
separations give fictitious results. Societies ought to be considered ,
in the totality of their interrelations and interactions. This means
that societies must be ap^jrehended as forming a totality, and that
they must be studied in this totality.
Societies themselves may be organized selfishness, intent on their
own concerns to the exclusion of other interests. Societies may
therefore be a barrier in the way of the apprehension of society as
a totality. Concentrated around narrow self-interest, formed for
competition or antagonism, they fail to recognize the organism of
which they are but a part, and so limit their vision as to miss the
view of humanity. A society is called a parly because it is but a
part of the whole ; yet it is in constant danger of usurping the place
of the totality, of which it may be an insignificant fraction. Family
affectiou and patriotism are often synonymes of narrowness. Is
not the history of states a revelation of self-seeking, of diplomacy
guided by selfish cunning, of Machiavellian principles in practice?
Even international law is not the fruit of national generosity. But
if a people limits its appreciation to its selfish interests, not even
including other existing nations as objects of impartial study, how
can it be expected to concern itself about humanity in all ages of
the world ?
The difficulty of the individual and of societies in attaining the
largest social view will enable lis to appreciate the long struggle
necessary in humanity before the idea of society conld be grasped
and made a permanent possession of mankind. Until recently the
conditions and interests were such that the idea of society could
not be seized ; because individuals and societies were everything,
society per se was not thought of. But since the revival of human-
ism, the dissolution of feudalism, the discovery of a new continent,
the travels and commerce among all peoples, the increase of free-
dom in church and state, and the growth of voluntary associations,
both thought and society would have to be checked not to evolve
the notion of the social totality.
All history bears testimony to the limited social interests, and
therefore also to the limit of social studies, in the past. The dom-
inant ideas have been individualistic, or of the family, the tribe,
the state and nation, religion, economic affairs ; the dominance of
the social idea as inclusive of all societies is beginning, but its
complete and general victory still belongs to the future. The social
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 39
study of history is a study of the limitation to which social thought
has been subject.
However much the Greek intellect rose above the orientalism
which preceded it, its standpoint for contemplating humanity re-
mained Greek. The Roman standpoint was jm-idical and political
rather than social. The larger view of a few philosophers and moral-
ists both in Greece and Home led to no study of society itself. The
Christian view of Immauity was religious and was intended to be
so. The Middle Ages, middle because a bridge or transition from
ancient to modern times, have been studied too exclusively
from the religious and political points of view to bring out their
social thoughts. Not only the Christian doctrine, but likewise
Greek philosophy, especially that of Plato and Aristotle, was used
to transform the old views of man and nature, often with results
confusing and contradictory. The only society for depraved man
which was deemed worthy of special inquiry was the kingdom of
God, which was interpreted to mean the church, and the state as
intimately connected with the church. Nature was regarded as a
manifestation of God, natural law as divine law ; but at times the
world was represented as antagonistic to God. Sometimes matter
itself seemed to be the embodiment of evil, at others the world
meant sinful men. Near the days of the apostles, we find in the
First Epistle of Clement a chapter on the peace and harmony of
the universe, the working of nature being regarded as but a manifes-
tation of divine power and goodness ; but in the Second Epistle one
chapter teaches that this world is to be despised, and another that
the present and future worlds are at enmity. There is, however,
a universalism in medifcval Christianity which fi-ees the individual
from the ordinary limitations of family, occupation, nation, and
race, and promotes the idea of the unity of humanity.
For the development of the ideas which have prepared the way
for Sociology works on the philosophy of history are valuable. See
especially R. Flint, " Philosophy of History," France and Germany ;
and a later volume, with the same title, on France alone, with a
long general introduction. The impulse given to the study of
history and literature from the social point of view is bringing to
light many references to society heretofore overlooked.
The modern evolution which has made the idea of society
possible, we might almost say inevitable, has aLso added to its diffi-
culty. Originally the mass was far more distinct than the indi-
40 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
vidual ; he was merged in the family, the horde, or the tribe, even
property being common. Progress meant individualization ; the
individual became more himself, less an indistinguishable part of
the aggregate. Property became private and the possessor of it an
object of legal enactments. Modern culture, with the results of
thousands of years of differentiation, presents individual and
social diversity in place of the primitive monotony. In the dis-
tinctness of the individuals, in the variety of their interests, in the
endless diversity of societies, in the richness and distraction of
modern life, it is difficult to apprehend the underlying unity. The
social wealth of the present promises to inaugurate the new social
era ; but this very wealth requires a larger view than in the past
for the comprehension of society.
The last three or fou.r centuries are especially important for the
development of the sociological idea, the evolution being cumula-
tive until Sociology itself is clearly enunciated. A few more hints
are given respecting some modern writers, together with references
to sociological literature.
Of Grotius (1583-164.5) the " Encyclopaedia Britannica " says
he held " that the law of nature is unalterable ; God Himself can-
not alter it, any more than lie can alter a mathematical axiom. '
This law has its source in man as a social being ; it would be valid
even if there were no God, or if God did not interfere in the
government of the world. These positions, though Grotius' reli-
gious temper did not allow him to rely unreservedly upon them,
yet, even in the partial application they find in his book, entitle
him to the honor of being held the founder of the modern science
of the law of nature and of nations."
The views of Vice appeared in 1725, in a volume entitled
" Principi d' una scienza nuova d' interno alia commune natura delle
nazioni." For his views see " Vico," by R. Flint.
In Montescpiieu's " Spirit of Laws," the beginning and books
XIV.-XVIII. are most valuable. He regards laws as indicating
the relations which arise from the nature of things. In this gen-
eral sense all beings ai-e subject to law. Man is formed for society.
By means of civil laws legislators have sought to remind him of
his duties to his fellow-men. These laws are to take into account
not merely the people who are to be governed, but also tlie cli-
mate, the soil, the location and extent of the country. IVIontes-
quieu distinctly recognizes in man's relation to nature an essential
element of social phenomena.
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 41
The original title of Schiller's inaugural address is : " Was heisst
und zu welchem Ende studirt man Universalgeschichte ? "
Kant's discussion of society is contained in a tractate entitled :
" Ideen zu einer allgemeiuen Geschichte in weltbiirgerlieher
Absicht."
To the numerous views in Herder's work, which we are apt to
regard as of recent origin, belongs the fact that he goes back to the
rudest forms of culture, and traces the development of humanity
through Greece and Rome and the Middle Ages. Thus he exam-
ines the condition of the peoples near the north pole in America
and Asia, and gives an account of the Africans, lamenting that
more is not known of them, and describes the Indians of North
and South America. The title in German is " Ideen zur Philoso-
phic der Geschichte der IMenschheit."
The English reader will find the views of Comtc accessible
through the translation and condensation of his " Cours de Philo-
sophic Positive," six volumes, 1830-42, by Harriet Martineau, —
in a volume entitled " The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte."
It omits repetitions and material of little concern. The use of
this volume can be the more conscientiously recommended because
Comte himself was so pleased with it that he gave it the stamp of
his authority by having it translated into French. On the history
of the idea of society, see the book on " Social Physics," the last in
the volume.
In monographs, in works on philosophy, and in encyclopaedias,
the student will find numerous discussions of Comte's system. In
Ward's " Dynamic Sociology " the first chapter is devoted to this
subject. J. S. Mill's volume on " A. Comte and Positivism " dis-
cusses both the eax-lier and the later views of Comte. E. Caird's
" Tlie Social Philosophy and Religion of Comte " is a condensed
exposition and criticism, especially strong in testing the Positive
Philosophy by the systems of German philosophers.
The author of this Introduction has found the work of Wantig,
already mentioned, the ablest critical account of Comte. Besides
an exposition and critique of Comte, it contains a brief account of
his predecessors and successors. Among the numerous French
writers on Comte are Littre : " Aug. Comte et la Philosophic Posi-
tive," and Rig : " La Philosophic Positive par Aug. Comtc,
r^sum^e."
All of Herbert Spencer's works bear on Sociology, not merely
42 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
those with that title. For the whole system of his Synthetic
Philosophy, the iii-st volume, " First Principles," is fundamental.
Wiintig's book contains a bibliography of Sociology. "What
to Head," by the Fabian Society, Loudon, contains a long list of
books on social subjects, such as socialism, the history and condi-
tion of labor, and how to elevate the masses.
In " The Social Problem " the author of this Introduction gives
numerous social works, particularly such as bear on the burning
social questions.
Besides the works mentioned in the following chapters, a brief
list of French, German, and English books is here added.
Dui'kheim : " De la division du travail social."
Fouillde : " La science sociale contemporaine."
Novicow : " Les luttes entre societes humaines."
Roberty : " La sociologie."
De Greef : " Introduction h la sociologie."
Ratzenhofer : " Die Sociologische Erkenntniss. Positive Phi-
losophie des socialen Lebens."
Schiiffle: "Bau und Leben des socialen Korpers," 4 vols.
Professor L. Gumplowicz, who occupies an exclusively naturalis-
tic standpoint, has four books on Sociology : " Der Rossenkampf,"
" Grundriss der Sociologie," " Sociologie und Politik," " Die Socio-
logische Staatsidee." The third contains a sketch of recent socio-
logical literature in France, Belgium, Italy, Germany and Austria,
and America.
Simmel : " Ueber Sociale DifEerenzierung."
Mackenzie : " Introduction to Social Philosophy." A suggestive
philosophical rather than scientific discussion.
Two reviews are devoted wholly to Sociology, Rente Internationale
cJe Sociologie, edited by Rend Worms, Paris, and The American
Journal of Sociology, by Albion W. Small, Chicago.
In numerous other journals, especially the political and eco-
nomic ones, sociological subjects are frequently discussed. The
same is true of works on the state, on poliiical economj^, on com-
munism and socialism, on culture and history. IMany of the
German works in these departments are of especial value.
Sociology is becoming a favorite study in America. Besides the
work of Ward on " Dynamic Sociology," there are two volumes by
J. Bascom, " Sociology " and " Social Theory." The " Introduc-
tion to the Study of Society," by Small and Vincent, is for
THE GENESIS OF THE IDEA OF SOCIETY. 43
beginners. "Introduction to Sociology," by Artluir Fairbanks,
contains a valuable bibliography. A complete system is aimed at
by Professor Giddings in " Principles of Sociology."
This list is only preliminary. At the close of the chapter on
" Method " the student will find directions for tlie use of sociologi-
cal literature with a view to farther research without the aid of a
teacher.
REFLECTIONS.
Genesis of the Idea cf Society in Individuals. Difficul-
ties. Development of the Idea in Humanity. Unconscious
Basis of much Social Action. Social Conceptions in early
Stages of Humanity. Early Social Life. Reasons for the
late Development of Sociology. Social Notions of Ancient
Oriental Nations. Why Greece and Rome were not pre-
pared for the Science of Society. Preparation for Sociology
in Judaism and Christianity. Ideas and Institutions of the
Middle Ages favorable and unfavorable for Social Science.
Social Development by means of Humanism and the Ref-
ormation. Changes ia Modern Thought and Society favor-
able to Sociology. Enlarged Conception of the World.
Political and Economic Internationalism. Preparatory Ideas
of Vico, Montesquieu, Grotius, Schiller, Herder, Eant. Comte's
Work. His Method. Hierarchy of the Sciences. The Three
Stages of Development. The Positive Stage. Comte's Place
in Sociology. Other Writers on Sociology. Sociological
Literature. The Needs of Sociology. How can they be
met ? Review the entire Chapter, giving a Summary of its
Contents.
44 INTRuJjL'CnuN TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
CHAPTER II.
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY.
The Problem. What is Sociology ? What the exact
aphcre of its investigations ? The definition gives the
subject in cpitouic, condensing to the utmost the materials
involved. It outlines the subject- matter as the nucleus of
all disciissions. By defining Sociology ive get a guide
for sociological research. If the investigation is to be
rational, it must have a definite end toioard the attain-
ment of lohieh tire energies are directed.
The definition is the centre from which the circumfer-
ence is draivn rnarlcing the limit of the inquiry. Sociol-
ogy deals with human society; this gives the focus of
thought and the scope of sociological research. Compara-
tive Sociology is another subject. The discovery of Sociol-
ogy is the condition for its comparison. After it has
been constructed many questions may be relevant which
woidd only be confusing so long as the sociological material
is in a chaotic state. To the student of Sociology every-
thing is valuable in proportion as it leads him into tJix
essence of his subject-matter, human society.
A. Definition.
ruopKULY s})oakinii:, the development of a subject is
lis (Icfinilion, the entire system being merely an expla-
nation of lh(j theme i I self. So, too, the contents of a
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 45
volume are but an exposition of its title. In the begin-
ning, however, we can start with a general idea which
iixes and limits a theme sufficiently to make the aim
definite and the study rational. The definition itself is
but a seed whose richness of content can only be dis-
covered by the process of its unfolding. As a plant
springs from a seed and culminates in fruit which is
the same as the seed whence it sprang, but in richer
measure ; so with the unfolding of a subject : it begins
with a definition, expands that definition, and in the
end is still true to the definition, but contains it in a
fuller and more developed form than at the start.
The term Sociology has often been denounced as a
barbarism because composed of a Latin and a Greek
word. This, however, has nothing to do with the sense
and applicability of the term. It stands for a definite
and most important department of thought, has gained
general recognition, is well adapted to its purpose, and
has secured a permanent place in literature. Sociology
designates the science of society. It thus contains two
ideas which require elucidation, namely, society and
science. The latter can best be considered in a separate
chapter, when the idea of society is more definitely
before us. With the aim of learning all that is know-
able respecting society ever kept in view, it may even
be a hindrance to determine at the start, before the
materials to be shaped are known, just what form the
final results shall take ; better leave that, it seems, to
the development itself. Here at least we are solely
concerned with the general sense in which society, the
subject-matter of all our inquiries, is taken by Soci-
ology. After tracing the genesis of the idea of society,
we now concentrate our thought on that idea as the
object of sociological investigation.
46 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
Society (socio, socius, societas) means association,
some kind of combination or union; it involves the
notion of partnership, of mutuality, of co-operation, of
holding something in common. Inanimate objects are
a2;"'reo;ated ; but of living beings, at least of such as are
of a high order, we speak as associated. Association
involves vital, organic relations, a union of inner,
psychical factors, not merely external contact. So
essential is the psychical element in association that
society is perfect in proportion to the culture attained.
In human society, the object of our inquiry, the highest
association is attainable.
Sometimes human beings are regarded as forming an
aggregation as distinct from association, as when they
move along the street or travel in the same train or
boat without intercourse. The same locality and
external contact are taken as means of aggregation, not
of association. Strictly speaking, this is correct; but
it is not the whole truth. A more complete view
shows that the aggregation of human beings contains a
potential association which is not possible for lower
organisms. Social unity exists independent of our
consciousness of it; I belong to society whether I am
aware of it or not. Every deeper view reveals the fact
that those Avho do not know one another, yet have a
common humanity, have essentially the same faculties
and tendencies, and share a multitude of things which
pertain equally to all and give all human beings an
ideal unity. These associative elements really exist,
and every a})prchcnsion of the actuality recognizes
them. Thus ideally and actually, though not always
consciously, human beings arc associated, as brutes and
trees and stones cannot be. The man whose conscious-
ness of the social reality is most complete, can claim
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 47
ties which associate him with every member of the
human family.^
This gives the comprehensive view involved in Soci-
ology. We want a discipline which includes the whole
of humanity in its associated capacity. Comte speaks
of society as " comprehending, in a scientific sense, the
whole of the human species, and chiefly the whole of
the white race." While some in their sociological
inquiries may consider chiefly one race, others another,
that does not now concern us, the essential point being
that our discipline includes the whole human family. ^
Humanity is thus apprehended as a society, as con-
sisting of units which are somehow bound together by
elements they have in common. Some things the units
1 Under this most compreheusive view of society many others of a
more specific nature are embraced, and it is the business of Sociology to
bring out their distinctive marks. Some societies are so large and so
scattered that the members cannot know one another, as in the case of
churches and labor organizations ; others are small and local, so that the
members come in contact. The tie of humanity is common to all associa-
tions ; but the specific bond of union and particular purpose of a society
determine its peculiarity and distinctness. Thus we have human society
(associated humanity) and human societies (the various associations in
humanity). Especially important is it to distinguish between societies
dependent on what they have in common and societies which actively
share and promote certain objects. What human beings have in common
may be a passive possession ; but in the ordinary, more specific sense, so-
cieties involve a union of active energies. Between society as a commun-
ity involving common possessions, and society as an active association of
different wills, the German language makes a distinction, using for the
former Gemeinschnft, for the latter Gesellschaft. (" Gemeiuschaft uud
Gesellschaft," by Ferdinand Tonnies.)
2 I am temj)ted to define Sociology as the science of associated human-
ity, that is, of humanity so far as it is united, so far as it is associated. If
Sociology does not include every form of human association, it will be in-
complete, and another discipline will l)e required in order to embrace
the social forms which Sociology ignores. While making Sociology the
science of associated humanity, we of course do not need to place equal
emphasis on all forms of society.
48 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
share, and these are the bonds of association. There
are elements which men share with the brute creation,
and a strong tendency has been manifested to involve
in the discussions of Sociology the analogies to human
society found in the inferior creation. This may be
intended to elucidate the subject, and sometimes does,
but often confuses it. Mere analogies must not be
taken for identity. Whatever biology and anthropology
may have to say about the origin of man and his rela-
tion to the animal creation, Sociology deals with human
association ; and can leave the question of man's rela-
tion to the rest of the organic world to other disci-
plines, or else consider that question after it has fully
explained human society. If Sociology must first
evolve man from the brute, it is in danger of never
reaching that human association whose interpretation
is its sole business.
The total and most comprehensive conception of
Sociology involves humanity as it is, has been, and will
be. This is the grand ideal; as we cannot isolate a
part of humanity from the rest, so we cannot abstract
the human family as existing at any particular time ;
but in order to think it in its completeness, must con-
sider it in its organic connection with the past and the
future. Thought docs not stop here, but seeks to relate
man to all living beings, to inorganic matter, and to
the entire universe. But the scheme is too great for
perfect realization. Not only are we obliged to con-
fine ourselves to human society, but even that presents
severe limits to our investigations. Humanity as it is
to-day is so vast and complicated that only a part of it
can be understood by the most diligent specialist; of
the past but few records were made, and many of those
are lost; respecting the future, our limitations arc
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 49
painfully evident. With a full consciousness of our
limitations, we aim at the interpretation of human
society so far as knowable.
Nevertheless, the comprehensive idea of society as
not limited by locality and time is essential, because
the only true idea. What do we understand by a
nation ? Surely not a people as existing merely at this
moment. By a nation we mean a people with a con-
tinuous existence, with a past, a present, and a future,
a totality of association regardless of time. As an
individual recognizes his connection with his anccstoi's,
not merely with the family as it now exists, so it is
with the consciousness of a peo[)le. The same is true
respecting humanity; it is a qualitative totality,
regardless of time.
The same process must be adopted respecting every
social form; it can be completely thought only in con-
nection with its historical origin and development,
and, if truly alive, as an energy pushing onward into
the future. If humanity is really a unity, no individual
in it can be fully considered without being viewed in
his relation to the totality. One who grasps this idea
realizes that he is so related to humanity that no part
of it can be foreign to him.
Society as including humanity as a totality embraces
the largest possible number of individuals; but aside
from this, the contents of this abstract idea are the
emptiest possible. Humanity, so far as a society,
involves only such elements as belong to every human
being in his association v i(h others. You cannot say
that human society is enlightened, or refined, or Chris-
tian, for it may include savages or barbarians. A
modern scientific or literary association is not only a
human society, but contains many other elements than
4
60 lyTliODUVTlON TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
such as belong to humanity at large; its contents are
richer. While we need the idea of humanity in Soci-
ology, we must not imagine that this general conception
is the sole object oi" sociological inquiry. Usually the
term "society " is taken in a more limited sense, apply-
ing to individuals more intimately associated than
merely as members of the same human family. From
the few loose bonds we proceed to the numerous and in-
timate ones. Thus besides the common ties of human-
ity, men are connected by local bonds ; they constitute a
distinct community with well-defined interests; their
associative elements are educational, legal, political,
national. But aside from these extensive associative
bonds which are inevitable, not dependent on the choice
or consciousness of the individuals, there are numerous
other societies which can be put under the head of
voluntary association or organization. Thus men com-
bine for })articular ends; they organize. These volun-
tary associations are constituted for intellectual,
literary, aesthetic, ethical, religions, political, indus-
trial, recreative purposes, and serve to bring the mem-
bers into peculiarly intimate relations.
Sociology as dealing with human association per se,
not limited to a particular kind of association, must
take into account all the associative elements, whether
they be the most general and most empty, or specific
and rich in content. Sociology will be incomplete in
proportion as its interpretations leave any ])rinciples of
human association unexplained. This settles the atti-
tude of our subject to the family and the state, which
some want to exclude from tlic donuxin of human
society. They claim that the family is not a society,
but the social unit from which society is formed; and
es])ecially in Germany has there been disimte as to
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 51
whether the state is to be considered as a society or as
an institution apart from society.^
The family differs from all other institutions, but
it is un(}uestionably a form of human association. The
fact that its grounds of association are peculiar does
not destroy its character as a society ; that only makes
it a distinct kind of society. Indeed, as involving the
most intimate bonds of union, the family constitutes
society in the most perfect sense. Whether we study
society historically or as a system of association, Ave
are obliged to lay particular stress on the family. ^
1 So eminent a writer on political science as Robert von Mohl uses
"society" in a very limited sense. (" Eucyclopaedie der Staatswisseu-
schaften," 27.) He excludes from it tlie family, tlie gens, the community,
and the state. He includes in society only sucli unions as are formed by
distinctions of birth (nobility), or by means of superior conditions (as
aristocracy of talent or position), or by similarity of occupation, or
through economic conditions (the wealthy, the middle, and the poorer
classes), or through religion. Rut by thus limiting society it is evident
that Sociology is not the science of human association, but of only a
limited part of that association. Vv'hat Von Mohl includes in society
cannot be understood properly unless it is correlated to the forms of associ-
ation which he excludes. It is much better to include all human association
in Sociology ; then special kinds of association, as peculiarly valuable,
can be treated more fully than the rest.
^ The family as the original social unit deserves special study. It is
prominent as the generic social type. The Jews were viewed as a family,
"the children of Israel." "The household of faith" designates Chris-
tians as a family. It is common in the Old Testament to designate all
descendants of a common ancestor as children, thus for all generations re-
taining the conception of the family. The " human family " shows to
what an extent the idea lias been carried. Indeed, the family is not only
the primitive association, but also typical of association in general. It
stands for unity, for intimacy, for close relationship, for community of
possessions, thoughts, feelings, and actions ; and associations are perfect
in proportion as they approach the family type. In some degree every
society partakes of the nature of family ties. Affection and friendship
have their origin in the family ; there play and recreation have their full
exercise; the family is the first school; it trains in moral and social
affairs as well as the intellect ; it has a common altar as well as a common
52 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
For similar reasons we reject the theory that the
state is not inchicled in society. It is not a society like
the family, nor is it a voluntary organization; never-
theless it is a form of human association of peculiar
importance.
The family and the state heing peculiar and specially
important forms of society, can receive separate treat-
ment. This may be advantageous because they will
thus secure more attention and better development.
That, however, cannot take them out of Sociology.
They can be understood only in their relation to
humanity at large and as connected with all its other
social forms.
The subject-matter of Sociology is thus made definite,
— every kind of human association. We are chiefly
concerned about the associative essences, their infinite
mnnifostations interesting us only so far as revelations
of the social substance.
The notion of society as inclusive of the ^vhole of humanity is
essential, since all human beings have elements in common and are
somehow associated. Even if some men were isolated now from
the rest of humanity, there are indissoluble ties which connect
them with it, and they can never be abstracted from the family to
which they belong, whose organic connection with the human family
is indisputable. Leslie Stephen (" Science of Ethics," 120) says :
" \Ve may thus consider the race as forming what is called a social
organism." Crabbe (" Synonymes ") defines society, "when ex-
pressing the abstract notion of associating," as indicating "that
which is common to mankind." When we speak of the nature
and laws of society, we use " society " as inclusive of humanity. The
unity involved in the expression " human family" is significant.
In " Principles of Sociology " (i. 436) Mr. Sjiencer limits the idea
hearth, and is the primitive cliurch ; it is an economic unit and the origi-
nal industrial society, — a real co-o])crative association ; in its order, its au-
thority, its obedience, we liave a type of the state. It is astonishing how
a study of the family gives a revelation of society in epitgnio.
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 53
of society to later stages of luuiiau development, not including the
associations of primitive man. Of society he says : "Withholding
the name from an ever-changing cluster such as primitive men
form, we apply it only where some constancy in the distribution of
parts has resulted from settled life." This accounts for the fact
that he treats society as consisting of certain instiUitioJis which he
discusses. Thus, however, some of the most important social
factors are missed. The associations of primitive man, however
fleeting, were beginnings of social evolution, without which the
later stages of social development cannot be understood. We shall
also see the importance of other social groups than such as are
organized or institutional.
REFLECTIONS.
Aim of Definition. Relation of the Definition to the De-
velopment of the Subject. Individualistic and Socieil Point
of Vie-w. Contiguous Association (Space), Successive (Time).
Effect of Association. Limit of Changes by means of Animal
Association. Capacity for Social Progress through Human
Association. "What does Human Society as viewed by
Sociology include ? Reasons for not limiting Society to
Organizations and Institutions. Why are the Family and
the State included ? Importance of the Family as a Social
Type. Why defer the Discussion of the Scientific Character
of Sociology ?
B. The Scope of Sociology.
The above places before us human society as the
subject-matter of our discipline. It is, however, as
we have seen, difficult to grasp the idea of society.
Much may be said about society, just as about the uni-
verse, humanity, philosophy, science, while tlie object
itself remains obscure. The following considerations
may make the idea more clear.
1. The most evident objects in every gathering are
the individuals; and these are usually taken as the
54 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ultimate units in social analysis. ^ The individual
himself is indeed a compound of great complexity; and
if we M^anted to analyze him completely, we should not
be able to stop until we reached the primitive elements
of which he is composed. But the individual is treated
as the ultimate factor because he acts as a unit. Even
if considered as composed of billions of particles, still
he is an organism, a complex system forming a unity
and controlled by a single power,
2. We cannot consider the individuals as forming
society by merely adding them together as so many
units. They are living beings, and as such act on
each other. Thus the meml)ers of a family do not
merely live in the same place and at the same time, but
they also influence one another. It is like hydrogen
and oxygen, which not merely exist side by side, but
coalesce and produce a new substance, water. In order
therefore to ai)j)rehcnd society, we must regard the
individual members as so many forces which act and
react on one another. This interaction of forces is the
essential idea in association and socialization. It is
the purpose of our study to determine how men act on
one another, what the social forces are, and what
results they produce. Society thus appears as a system
of endless energies ever active and ever promoting
changes.
3. Difficult as it may be to form a clear conception
of this constant interaction of the social forces, it is
easy to apprehend the definite jiroducts I'csulting from
the interaction. The ])r()ducts of association and so-
cialization are the numerous social grou])S, such as
families, communities, and associations of all kinds.
As individuals form social grou])s, so these groups
^ How far this is correct will be shown later.
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 55
may be luiitt'd to form larger groups, as Avhcn labor
associations unite to form one great combination of
laborers. It is the province of Sociology to interpret
social groups, to explain their relation to one another
and the combinations they form, extending to states
and nations and humanity itself.
4. In its largest sense Sociology as the science of
society aims at the laws for all kinds of human associa-
tion. Thus it ought to explain processes of socializa-
tion which are only casual or temporary, as when men
associate in travel or meet in a company which remains
together for a few hours and never meets again. But
society may become perfect in proportion as the asso-
ciation is abiding, when it becomes an institution and
takes an organized form, as the family, the church, the
state, guilds, the various literary and labor organiza-
tions, and the like. This gives definite objects of
sociological study, and on these permanent social
forms especial stress has been placed by sociological
writers.
5. In order fully to understand the results of the
interaction of the social forces we shall have to do
more than consider the social groups formed. All
human products are involved in socialization, the
private ones of the individual alone excluded. Yet
the individual himself is a social product; he could
not be what he is without society. Therefore inven-
tions, ideas, and systems, of individuals, are in a
measure social results. Among clearly defined social
products we place language, literature, politics, eco-
nomics, science, art, and history.
We do not use force here in its physical sense as that
which causes or changes motion. It is employed to
designate all the human energies, whether physical,
66 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
intellectual, or moral. The social forces therefore
include all the powers that work in society.
The five points specified will aid the beginner to
form a general conception of the scope of Sociology.
Our subject is not limited to definite social organiza-
tions; often the social atmosphere in which we live
and from which we draw the breath of life is more
important.
In scientific study the individual object or fact is
valued for the sake of the law it involves. The phe-
nomena of nature are endless, but millions of them are
mere repetitions. In order to gain the mastery over
nature, we seek to discover the laws in which the phe-
nomena are included. Likewise in Sociology it is this
condensed knowledge at which we aim. The myriad
social forms with endless repetitions confuse the mind.
In this chaotic mass Sociology aims to introduce order
by the discovery of principles, essences, laws, and
system.
The subject-matter of Sociology is the scope of soci-
ological inquiry. This subject-matter consists of the
associative energies, what associates men, what creates
society, and what results from the action of the asso-
ciative forces. We want in Sociology whatever is
essential for understanding human society and for put-
ting the knowledge gained in a rational social system.
When the scojie of Sociology has been determined,
the investigation should be strictly limited to the
sphere designated. lutormiuable confusion is occa-
sioned by continually passing into neighboring or
foreign regions, devoting to side-issues that attention
Avhich should Ite confined to sociological inquiry.
This erratic wandering is due in part to the fact that
Sociology has not been sharply severed from other dis-
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 57
ciplines, and therefore docs not stand out distinctly as
a separate science.
Society itself should be brought into bold relief and
all discussion concentrated on its interpretation. If
the whole cosmos is to be drawn into the investigation,
where is the limit of sociological inquiry? If we must
first evolve the universe from the atoms as its seeds,
we are in danger of being involved in such perplexities
as never to reach man ; and the way from the star-dust
to society is so long and bewildering that we are afraid
of being lost in some nebulous region before we come
to Sociology. These endless wanderings may be })ar-
donable so long as the idea of society itself is in cun-
fusion and men do not know what they are investigating
in the study of Sociology. Were the subject-matter
itself fully outlined, then the relation of society to the
universe might be attempted, but until that is done we
must insist that in Sociology the attention be concen-
trated on society itself.
The limitation here urged is especially essential for
an introductory volume. In it much must be omitted
which demands discussion in a work on Sociology itself.
Nor can the beginner be expected to take up subjects of
great complexity which one who has spent his life in
developing them as a specialist can discuss with ease.
Still other considerations lead us to omit discussions
which have become common in larger sociological
works. Certain studies must be considered as prelimi-
nary to Sociology, and it is taken for granted that they
have been pursued before the science of society is
studied. Sociology cannot be expected to discuss prob-
lems which are fundamental for all scientific inquiry,
and therefore not peculiar to Sociology. These prob-
lems should be left to the specific departments where
58 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
they belong, and can be most thoroughly investigated,
just as the sociologist demands that what is peculiar
to Sociology shall be treated as a sociological specialty.
It is of course necessary to show the relation of Soci-
ology to other disciplines; sometimes the sociologist
may have to develop elements in these disciplines to
get the proper sociological material and a firm soci-
ological basis. But the science of society is never to
wander into other departments so as to lose sight of its
specialty, the explanation of human society.
The following are among the problems which the
beginner has no right to expect Sociology to solve for
him, nor need he postpone his sociological investiga-
tions till they have been solved.
1. The problem of materialism and spiritualism.
This should be relegated to metaphysics, where it
belongs. The problem remains a problem after the
proposed solutions of the profoundcst philosophers.
Those sociologists who imagine that a few empirical
platitudes suffice to give them a warrant for their
materialistic or spiritualistic basis, should be left to
their imagination. The usual outcome is a shallow
dogmatism which dominates all the inquiries. Careful
thinkers have learned to treat the ultimate problems
with great reserve, taking what is distinct and peculiar
as distinct and peculiar, without pretending to explain
connections and causes which are inexplical)lc. Thus
mental phenomena are readily distinguished from the
physical ones. Their relation to the body, particularly
the nerves, is not fully understood, and this is to be
admitted. To treat mental processes as products of
purely material processes is unwarranted and at best a
mere hypothesis. Scientific students of the actual
world take i)henomena as they are, and leave to meta-
physics the mctai)hysical questions involved.
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 59
2. Our subject is Sociology, nut biology; and as
biology has its distinct sphere, so has Sociology. Much
that is biological can be used with advantage in socio-
logical interpretation; but Sociology is not to be lost
in biology. Biology teems with unsettled problems.
Besides, human phenomena may be different from those
of animals below man. There is danger of taking
similarity or analogy for identity. It is a mistake to
suppose that human association, of which we are con-
scious, can be better understood by constant reference
to animal associations, of which we are not equally
conscious. The perversion seems complete when early
human associations are ignored, while those of inferior
animals are emphasized. Then, there is danger of
keeping human society on a low level by continually
seeking for analogies in the brute creation. .Human
society can be understood only by the study of human
society, just as nature must be interpreted by the
study of nature. Analogies may furnish helpful data
without giving sociological laws.^
3, The theory of evolution is among the most power-
ful factors in modern thought. The truth embodied in
it has wrought a revolution in thinking, particularly
1 Some aiialugies may be specially valuable, as iu the case of ants and
bees. Their remarkable ori^aiiizatioii, the peculiarities in structure and
function, and their division of labor, are illustrative of various forms
and processes of human association. We naturally expect some laws
to be of such general application as to prevail in all departments of
organic life. But association which depends on rollexive or instincti\e
action can never bo made tlie type of societies in which reason and con-
science, in their highest forms and with their multifarious products, are
essential factors. The higher development can interpret the lower much
lietter than the lower the higher ; and human association is the condition
for interpreting animal association far more completely than animal
asfsociation is the condition for determining human association. In either
case, however, there is danger of attributing to the lower animals what
is peculiar to man.
CO INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ill tlie domain of natural science. Its very compre-
hensiveness makes evolution fascinating, and it is not
surprising that some of its enthusiasiic discijjlcs have
))een far less reserved in their claims llian the modest
Darwin. In applying it to Sociology, it must he treated
as a theory, which it really is, not as scientific demon-
stration. Besides, it professes only to be a process, a
method of working, a law of development; it does not
propose to settle the question of the origin of things.
Even if the exact nature of evolution in biological
processes were determined, which is not the case, that
would not give the law of its operation in human
affairs.
The logic of science teaches us that wc must go
directly to human society if -we want to learn the pro-
cesses at work in it. The short cut of a jyriori assump-
tions may save labor, but it also i)re vents accuracy and
scientific finality.
In the ap])lication of the theory to social affairs the
exact sense of evolution should be determined. The
variety of meanings in which the term is used has
made it vague. Sometimes it is treated as if it ex-
plained the nature and process of the universe, whether
inorganic or organic; special a})plications of it are also
made to liiology; it is even employed to promote ma-
terialism. Among scientists themselves there has been
much dispute respecting the nature of evolution; and
since the exact nature of the process is still in question,
extreme caution is required in its use as a sociological
law. Especially must we guard against making a
single factor in evolution, as the struggle for existence,
or the survival of the fittest, the sole element when
others ought likewise to be considered. A suj)erricial
process in evolution should not 1)C taken as a philoso-
DEFINiriOX AXD SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 61
phy of the whole ; a similarity in the process in different
departments need not be identity. It should be con-
sidered that evolution involves something that is
evolved, and that on this, not merely on the environ-
ment, the result depends. No environment can evolve
an oak from a mushroom.
Evolution accounts for much which was formerly
attributed to design; but this is different from the
problem whether it dispenses with design altogether,
or is itself the product and manifestation of design.
If at the end of a certain process of evolution, in man,
we have mind which works teleologically, then the
conditions for producing that mind must exist in the
universe. No matter what process is adopted, we can
get from an object only what is in it in some form.
One of the ul'iimate of the fundamental questions not
settled by evolution is this; Is there involved in the
process mind in the beginning as well as at the end? ^
1 Haeckel, "Evolution of Man," i. 95 : "The gist of Darwin's theory,
properly so called, is this simple idea : that the struggle for existence in
Nature evolves new Species without Design, just as the Will of ^fan produces
new Varieties in Cultivation irith Design." Darwin discusses the subject in
" The Origin of Species," cliapters iii. and iv. On the present limita-
tions of the theory of selection, Riehl (" The Principles of the Critical
Philosophy," 322) says : " It is too easy to forget that tlie tlieory of selec-
tion does not attempt to explain t!ie origin of life, but the descent of
species, the existence of which presupposes life. And when the statement
is added that up to date the principle of transition from the one-celled
being to the organism composed of several cells has not yet been dis-
covered, the limits of present biological investigation have been given; it
is not, however, justifiable to treat these as limits for the future progress
of the science." On p. 324 he says : " At most, natural science could only
approve of teleology as a mode of thought which has reference to the ori-
gin of things. But inasmuch as it does not occupy itself with the fiual
reasons of things, but rather witli the relative beginnings and the develop-
ment of phenomena, it leaves to metaphysics the question whether exist-
ence in general involves design, whether tlie woi-ld taken as a whole is to
be thought of as teleological,"
62 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
But the extensive sociological application of evo-
lution as formulated bj Darwin is evident. It is
significant that Darwin was indebted to the reading of
a work on human society for a clear conception of the
theory, — namely, Malthus' " Principles of Population."
It is beyond question that in the struggle for exist-
ence great modifications take place in human society.
The struggle itself promotes development and modifies
individuals and their associations; the fittest survive
and transmit their qualities to their descendants. It
is not, however, the only law in social evolution, nor
docs it in men with reason and design work in the same
way as in the lower animals. Darwin by no means
claims to explain everything by natural selection,
acknowledging "plainly our ignorance of the cause of
each particular variation. " ^
4. The part taken by psychology in Sociology requires
consideration. Just what is meant by the statement
that Sociology is a psychological discipline or is based
on psychology, should be explained. It needs no proof
that all science and all knowledge are mental, depend
on the laws of the mind, and therefore arc based on
psychology. Our biological conceptions are no less
dependent on psychological laws than our logic. All
departments of thought are therefore equal in that they
are mental products.
If by the statement that Sociology rests on psychology
is meant that the mind is the one object of sociological
inquiry, then we demur. In Sociology we consider the
mind and the body, and even the natural environment
so far as it affects society. Thus psycho-])hysics rather
than psychology is the object of sociological inquiry.
Still more objectionable is psychology as the object of
1 Origin of Species, 106,
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 63
Sociology if mind is taken in the sense of intellect
merely. We must include in mind the emotions and
the will likewise. It may be well at times to empha-
size the intellect, the emotions, or the will, as specially
involved in certain sociological processes. Here thought
and foresight may be especially concerned ; there feel-
ing with its impulses; yonder will with its activities.
Analysis has prevailed in psychology to such an extent
as to divide the mind into numerous faculties, each of
which was then discussed as if it had a separate exist-
ence. The result was false abstractions; the connec-
tion of the faculties was lost sight of, as well as the
unity of the mind. Chiefly through the influence of
Herbart was the tendency promoted to overcome this
false abstraction and treat the mind as a unit. It is
the same mind that is involved, whatever faculty may
be exercised. Intellect, feeling, and will are organi-
cally united and never can be absolutely severed from
one another. There may be a question of dominance ;
thei-e can be none of complete separation or of the
isolated action of one without the other.
In another aspect the relation of psychology to Soci-
ology is important. If a psychology has to be adapted
to a theory of evolution, it is in danger of losing its
independence; the resuUs of the inquiry are apt to be
a foregone conclusion. The mind ought to be examined
thoroughly as it is, not what it must be if certain evo-
lutionary hypotheses are true. Least of all is psychol-
ojiy to be prepared with a view to determine Sociology.
The sociologist can leave to psychology its peculiar
province, the mental phenomena and laws. Psychology
starts with a prejudice if limited to mental changes
as affected by the environment. The mind enslaved by
its environment loses sight of its inherent energies.
64 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
The conviction that it is thus tethered robs it of its
spontaneity and freedom of exercise. A Sociology
based on a psychology which depends on the natural
environment is in danger of limiting society to natural
forces. Whether this tethering of the mind be due to
materialism, to the view that mental processes are
physical, or to some other monistic hypothesis, it is
surely not wise for a beginner to adopt it as a dogma.
From the mind the mind mnst be learned. The saying
of Leibnitz should be remembered. When confronted
by a shallow sensationalism with the old dictum, that
nothing is in the mind which was not before in the
senses, he added, "Except the mind itself. "^ That is,
the mind itself must be taken into account, its energy,
its laws, not merely what impressions it receives
through the senses. The severe limitation of mind to
its environment and sense-impressions has indeed been
lauded as pre-eminently scientific. It has also been
claimed that this dominance of the sensational element
has gained victory on victory in recent times. This
boast is likely to be short-lived. There has, for some
decades, been an unusual emphasis on the environment,
partly due to past neglect of this important feature,
partly to the depreciation of philosophy and to the
predominance of natural science. But a strong re-
action has already set in. The mind has claims which
cannot be permanently suppressed. It elaborates,
analyzes, and synthesizes, according to its inherent
laws, the impressions received from the surroundings.
The mind itself is the immediate environment of
thought. General izntions. abstractions, the drawing
of laws from phenomena, the formation of ideals, such
as beauty, truth, goodness, and the construction of
^ " Nisi intellectus."
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 60
systems, all reveal mind as not tethered to the environ-
ment or to phenomena. Some may value mental prod-
ucts only if they are proved natural products and serve
to adjust the mind to its environment; but there are
others who study the mind itself in its mental products,
for the purpose of understanding the mind, just as they
study natural phenomena for the purpose of understand-
ing nature.
Among the greatest and most perplexing of psycho-
logical problems is that of the freedom of the will.
The beginner cannot be expected to delay his sociologi-
cal investigations till the problem is solved. He can
leave it safely to the discipline to which it belongs,
without interfering seriously with his sociological
studies.
5. Theological questions can be left to theology.
The fact that they have been so largely drawn into
Sociology has greatly interfered with the free and full
development of this subject. Not on Sociology itself
do the atheistic, agnostic, or theistic conceptions
depend, but on its presuppositions. Those who come
to Sociology with materialism, or with a certain theory
of evolution, or with theism, naturally make their pre-
suppositions the laws according to which social phe-
nomena are shajied. If Sociolotjy has thus far been
tainted with materialism and agnosticism, it is due to
the fact that its development has been left to mate-
rialists and agnostics. Religion and ethics should be
considered as social elements or forces, without bias,
exactly as all other phenomena.
In thus trying to fix its scope, the purpose is to give
Sociology its own place, and separate it from entangle-
ment with other subjects, to which it is now so liable.
In the beginning of a now discipline chaos may be
5
66 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
inevitable; the discipline itself has yet to be found and
correlated. The confusion becomes still greater when
Sociology is so vague and comprehensive that men can
make it the repository of all their hypotheses and
theories of chance and fatalism, of matter and spirit,
of biological and cosmical evolution. The profound
and systematic thinker will at least make an effort to
differentiate Sociology from the other disciplines, and
to give to each its special scope and problems.
This is written for the sociological beginner, not for
sociological specialists. He should be encouraged to
inquire into the ultimate problems, but in their proper
place. He is not to confound Sociology with natural
science, with metaphysics, with general philosophy, or
with theology. His study of Sociology is to be for the
sake of mastering society, not for the sake of any theory
of the universe, of design, of volition, or anything else
than society. Perhaps after he has grasped society
itself he can form a better conception of problems
related to society but not directly involved in it.
It need not be emphasized that the above does not
interfere with the recognition of laws in humanity
and in the uniformity of their operations. How far
these laws are within our reach is another matter, and
has to be determined by the actual investigation. But
every honest inquirer must refuse to postulate certain
laws where their existence has not been established,
and to transfer laws from a department where their
prevalence is evident to departments where their opera-
tion is not proved and their application doubtful.
The study of Sociology presupposes luucli preparatory training.
When it comes in a university course, it is preceded by a liberal
education. In that case there is no need of repeating in sociologi-
cal inquiry what has already been learned in the study of the
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 67
natural sciences, psychology, and philosophy. The very fact that
Sociology is then taken up implies that to the other subjects soci-
ological studies are now to be added, and that the attention is to
be concentrated on human society. Sociology will be more strictly
limited to its scope when its place in a collegiate or university
course has been definitely fixed and its relation to other studies
determined.
The sociologist no leas than other specialists should have the
benefits of the division of labor. Indeed he is specially in need of
them, because his department is so new and undeveloped. Other
investigators likely surpass him in their specialties, just as he is
supposed to surpass them in his own. In the spirit of co-operation
they should work for him, and he for them. So extensive have
the different departments of thought become that specialization is
necessary for the most successful M'ork. With a thorough liberal
education as his general basis, the specialist looks to investigators
in other departments for facts, laws, and principles, which he needs
but cannot himself make a specialty of. If some of his requu'e-
ments are not met in this way, he may himself be obliged to make
special investigations in the specialties of others. It has been said
that since the day of A. von Humboldt no scientist has been able
to master all departments of science ; they have become too vast
for that. Even when Humboldt gave his " Cosmos " to the world
specialists were advanced beyond some of its teachings, just as
specialists had passed beyond certain doctrines of Comte's " Posi-
tive Philosophy " before it was completed. There may now be
generalizations on the basis of all the sciences, because the prin-
ciples are taken from the investigations of different specialists ;
but no scholar can be a successful specialist in all the sciences.
Recognizing this division of labor, the sociologist is expected to
devote himself to his specialty, just as others devote themselves to
their particular departments. He may be a specialist in some other
sphere before he becomes a sociologist, — in natural science, in
psychology, ethics, economics, politics, law, philosophy, or theology,
— in which case he will bring to Sociology the advantages, perhaps
also disadvantages, of his former specialty. It may under such
circumstances be impossible for him to resist the temptation to give
his Sociology the peculiar coloring of his past specialization. This
will be overcome when the various social studies lead up to, and
become the basis of, Sociology.
68 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
At present, using Lis own studies as a basis, the sociological
specialist must look to other scholars as co-operators. Not only
does he regard specialists in natural science, particularly in biology,
as co-laborers, but also such as work in the various humanistic
studies. He gratefully accepts the rich contributions to his spe-
cialty by ethnologists, anthropologists, psychologists, philosophers,
historians, economists, political writers, moralists, and theologians.
While the sociologist sustains relations to specialists in all dej^art-
ments and looks to them for help, nothing in the human sciences
is to be foreign to him. Whatever of hunianity is accessible
should be concentrated on his specialty for the development of
Sociology.
Even in his own department he is obliged to specialize ; all social
affairs do not equally concern him. The significant is most valu-
able; what is principiant, tyi^ical, essential, interpretive, causative.
Unless there is this si^ecialization, lie will find his sphere too large
and the materials beyond his comprehension. Under great social
characteristics the sociologist groups all that is social.
Perhaps Sociology requires time in order that it may be suffi-
ciently differentiated fi'om other disciplines to sharply outline its
particular sphere and confine it to the same. The confusion in
Sociology seems now similar to that which formerly prevailed in
philosophy, to which at different times all deeper and systematic
knowledge was assigned ; the result at last being that the term
stood for so much in general that it had no definite meaning.
The student who clearly apprehends the subject-matter of Soci-
ology will discover that it requires the concentration of all his
energies. So profound and so vast is the theme that he will be able
to account for wandering into forl)idden paths only on the supposi-
tion that the subject-matter has been missed and with it the scope
of Sociology, or that through some mistaken notion sociological
inquiries are used to promote pet theories lugged in from other
specialties.
When sweeping generalizations threaten to make an indiscrimi-
nate mass of heterogeneous elements, it is time to insist that
humanity be studied in man, not in the brute. Particularly are
we limited to human consciousness for all that is purely subjective,
such as ethical considerations. Tt is admitted to be extremely
difFiciilt for one human mind to interpret the motives of another.
We cannot enter another mind, but judge it only by outward ex-
DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 69
pressions, which may be defective. We judge other minds only
through our own experiences. AVhoever considers this fact will
hesitate to treat animal conduct as the key to human ethics. Two
men may do the same things which must be differently interpreted
if their motives are taken into account. The action of animals
may look like that of men and yet be totally different. Until we
can put ourselves in place of monkeys, dogs, and horses, we are
justified in questioning the ethical characteristics ascribed to them.
It is astonishing that in data of ethics claiming to be scientific,
facts loosely gathered and without scientific method are confi-
dently interpreted according to preconceived notions.
The failure to sei:)arate Sociology sharply from other disciplines
has led to such confusion as to interfere with its recognition ami
development. So clear a thinker as Lorenz von Stein declared
that it had always been impossible for him to form a conception of
Sociology, " since, according to the French and English confusion
of words, nothing any longer exists which is not in some sense
Sociology, electricity and bacteria included." ^
This tendency to wander about creation, to follow cosmical pro-
cesses, to trace biological laws, to transmute physical into intellec-
tual and moral forces, and to interpret man by the lower animals,
would be more excusable if the legitimate materials of Sociology
had been exhausted. So far, however, is this from being the case
that hardly a beginning has been made to collect and systematize
them. Not only are these materials so definite that they can easily
be distinguished from others, but they are so important as to
deserve the undivided energies of specialists. Hardly any other
demand is more urgent than that the attention be concentrated on
phenomena known to be sociological, in order that they may be
tlioroughly mastered.
Our very speech shows that the common consciousness does not
limit society to organizations and institutions. When we speak of
a question as a social problem, we mean that it is a question not
of any particular organization, but of society at large. We say that
society makes criminals, and mean society itself, not a particular
kind of society. We take society as a totality when we declare
society responsible for slums, for saloons, for gambling, and for
other evils. By the social condition of a people we mean all that
pertains to the people as forming a community, including their
1 Quoted by Gumplowicz in "Sociolopcie und Politik."
70 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
organizations and institutions. When in England and on the
Continent men emphasize the need of social politics, they mean
that political action should be based on the actual situation of the
people. That society is not limited to organizations and institu-
tions, but is an organism which includes these and much more, is
an achievement of modern thought and one of the strongest
impulses to sociological inquiries.
The student naturally approaches society in the largest sense
through the study of social groups. Every such group contains all
the elements which are essential to society. The social groups,
their relations to one another, and the grand social totality they
form, are all within the scope of Sociology.
The direct social action of an individual is on the groups to
which he belongs, the family, the neighborhood, the community,
and the various organizations of which he is a member. The action
is apt to be intensive in proportion to the smallness of the group.
Much of the social influence of the day consists in the actions
of groups on one another. In religion we have the churches and
numerous religious organizations ; in politics, parties and factions ;
in the industries, combinations of capitalists and of laborers ; like-
wise associations for literary, scientific, artistic, and other purposes.
Whatever cause enlists the symjjathies of men leads to organiza-
tion, without which there is little hope of success even for the most
commendable objects. Thus, besides individual action, we behold
that of groups and combinations of groups in all departments of
life.
This interaction of groups affords an interesting study and exerts
a powerful effect on social development. Men are apt, as we say,
to lose themselves in groups, to partake of their characteristics
and prejudices, and to sacrifice individuality. They must belong
to parties to accomplish their purposes, and therefore give them-
selves to the parties. Where the majority rules, independent
inquii'y and individual conviction may have little weight. When
men move in herds, we have "voting cattle." Public opinion,
however worthless, subjects citizens of republics to abject slavery.
" One might as well be out of the world as out of fashion."
Shrewd men who appreciate the power of groups and associate
action seek so to use them as to gain control of pai'ties and con-
ventions. Hence bosses in politics, and the methods of political
machinery even in religious conventions.
DEFINITION AND 6CUPE OF SOCIOLOGY. 71
lu the study of social activity it is important to distinguish
between the influence of persons and of things. Men personally
weak and even contemptible may be socially powerful on account
of rank and position (monarchs, the nobility, politicians), or on
account of wealth. Title, place, and money may have power
where scholarship and character count for little. With vast multi-
tudes display gains the victory over solid worth. It is consequently
of great significance in social study to determine what forces con-
trol communities. Later we shall see that it is essentially the social
forces which constitute the scope of sociological inquiry.
REFLECTIONS.
Exact Aim and Scope of Sociology. Society as com-
posed of Individuals, Social Groups, and Humanity. Why
include the Primitive Social Groups in Sociology ? Or-
ganized and Unorganized Society. Analysis of a Social
Group. Synthesis of Social Groups. Pcwrer of Social
Groups. Social Groups and Individuality. Subject-Matter
of Sociology. Why Sociologists have not confined to this
their Discussions. Reasons for strictly confining the Scope
of Sociology to its Subject-Matter. Relation of Sociology
to the Metaphysical Questions of Materialism and Spiritual-
ism. Relation to Biology ; to Evolution ; to Psychology ;
to Theology and Religion.
72 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
CHAPTER III.
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY TO OTHER
SOCIAL DISCIPLINES.
The Problem. We now have the Definition and Scope
of Socioloyy. On human society as the subject-matter of
our study the inquiries are to he concentrated. But there
were social studies long before Sociology was thought of,
and there noiv exist specific social sciences ivhich treat of
jjarticidar phases of society. In order to determine the
peculiarity of Sociology it is necessary to consider its rela-
tion to other social disciplines.
Sociology has not only been declared unnecessary, hut
has also been regarded as an intruder. Is there unoccupied
territory for it, or do other studies already possess the
land? In order to ansiver this question 7ve are obliged to
examine the standpoints from which the specific social dis-
ciplines contemplate society. Most of all tvill it be neces-
sary to inquire into the social character of the science of
politics, of eco7iomics, and of history, the subjects most
emphasized as sufficient for social study by those who think
710 peculiar sphere left for Sociology.
Coidd we perhaps by adding or grouping the various
social sciences already established secure the advantages
sought by Sociology ? If not, and if Sociology is really a
neio science, ivhat differentiates it from the specific social
sciences ?
The questions involved in this chapter have not received
sufficient attention. Much of the confusion in Sociology is
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 73
due to the fact that they have not been definitely ansivered.
In order to determine relations, that discrimination which
discerns both likeness and difference is required, and then
due importance is to be given to each. We relate Sociology
to the social sciences for the purpose of differentiating it
from them.
May not the social science be related to the social sciences
as society is related to societies ?
In viewing from a short distance a row of three white
houses exactly alike, the middle one may be seen
clearly, hut not distinctly. You cannot tell just where it
ends and they begin ; it is not seen distinctly, because
it cannot be sharply distinguished from the other two.
It would be distinct as well as clear if the two houses
were black while it remains white. An object is made
distinct by separating it from that with which it is
most closely allied.
There is special reason for distinguishing Sociology
from the other human disciplines and determining
its exact place among them. Questions have been
raised whether it has a distinct place, whether its
sphere is not already occupied, or whether all it has to
say is not now discussed by other disciplines. Soci-
ology must prove that it is not an intruder, but has a
valid claim to existence.
Even if all that belongs properly to Sociology had
heretofore been included in another subject or in
several, that would be no conclusive objection to its
separation and its development as a distinct discipline.
By this means it will receive greater prominence, more
attention Avill be concentrated on it, and it will be
more fully developed. ]\rathematics and the natural
sciences were long included in philosophy ; but in the
74 IXTRODUCTIOX TO STL'DY OF SOCIOLOGT.
process of evolution thev became independent, and this
"vras to their advantage. Sociology is surelv important
and extensive enough for separate treatment ; only as a
distinct department of thought can the evolution it
deserves be expected.
But has anv other discipline included Sociology, so
that now we need but take it from that department of
thought and give it a separate existence? There never
has been another discipline which included the science
of society. But that the need of making human asso-
ciation an object of especial inquiry was felt is evident
from the fact that various disciplines made an attempt
so to enlarge themselves as to include society. This
is true of political economy and likewise of the science
of politics. But it is evident that in this way a com-
plete interpretation of society was impossible. In one
case society is reduced to industrialism and material
interests ; in the other to a political institution. Soci-
ology is needed in order that every interest of humanity
may receive its proper place and due emphasis in the
social system. Heretofore we have had social sciences,
but no social science; that is. various disciplines have
discussed specific social themes, but no one considered
society pi?r 8e and all the social forces in their organic
connection. Analogies are seen in the natural sciences.
Thus there was a time when groups of stars were
observed, but there was no astronomy; when certain
flowers and animals were classified, but there was
neither botany nor zoology ; and the minerals were used
and the earth was studied long before mineralogy or
geology was developed.
Essentially the same process of evolation has taken place in all
the sciences : a few facts were observed, rude classifications were
made, things really distinct were put together either because there
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 75
was a lack of differentiation in the objects themselves or a lack of
discrimination, and only after a long time did the science itself
become jKJSsible. Hasty generalization is one of the most fruitful
sources of error. Growth in knowledge is largely a development
of discrimination. As thought advances, differences are discovered
where formerly none were observed. Knowledge is twofold : analy-
sis and synthesis : a recognition of distinct features and of the unity
tmderlying the differences. Natural science is at one time an
undiscriminated totality; then it branches into physics, chemistry,
biology, etc. Shall this analytical process be followed by a syn-
thesis of all the sciences so as to give us a system of the cosmos ?
This is conceived by some as the aim of philosophy in our day.
We have specific social sciences which involve most important
social factors, such as political science and economics ; but if
society itself is to receive adequate treatment, it must be made a
distinct object of inquiry.
eeflectl:>xs.
Difference between Clearness and Distinctness. Distinct-
ness — disttneuisMng between similar objects. Advantages
of making Society an Especial Object of Inquiry. Aim of
Analysis and Synthesis in Scientific Research. Importance
of Discrimination.
The General Disttn'ction between Sociology and
THE Specific Social Sciences.
Sociology as the science of society confines itself
strictly to human association. It aims to show what
is meant by association, how it is brought about, to
what process of development it i.s subject, and what
results it produces. Tliree questions respecting human
society are supreme : What ? Whv ? How ? Since
human association itself is our aim. it is evident that
the stress is not to be placed on any particular kind of
association. The subject is so large that we shall be
76 ISTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
obliged to confine ourselves to the general principles of
society and to their general application.
In thus aiming at what marks human association as
characteristic, we also aim at what marks every par-
ticular form of human society. If personal forces are
the constituent elements of association, then these
forces must constitute every kind of society formed.
The forces may differ in kind, in number, in intensity,
and in degree of development ; but no society can exist
otherwise than by virtue of these forces. The personal
forces exist only in individuals; therefore the idea of
society includes that of individuals as possessors of the
social forces. In a society for physical culture, for
mental culture, for political ends, and for any purpose
imaginable, the prime question pertains to the char-
acter of the personal forces involved. Just as being
includes all being, but only in the most general sense
as being, so association includes every society, but
only in its most general sense.
Here then is the broad difference between social
science itself and the specific social sciences : the
former discusses whatever belongs to society as society
and applies the general ideas obtained to the different
associations; but each special social science confines
itself to a particular phase of society. While Sociology
deals with the great principles or essences of associa-
tion, and shows how they apply to all society, the
specific social sciences specialize certain forms of asso-
ciation and give an account of their specific character-
istics. More details are therefore to be expected in
the limited social sciences than in the general social
science.
Let us suppose that Sociology gives a principiant
account of the nature and working of the social forces;
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 77
that would be a general interpretation of society.
Among them are found industrial forces; they are
consigned to economics for special treatment; there
are also political forces; they arc consigned to political
science; there arc ethical forces, which are consigned
to ethics; and so with all the other social forces.
Sociology is therefore the general social science of
which the special social sciences are differentiations;
it is the genus of which they are the species, the trunk
on which they are the branches. While each social
science has its specific sphere (the operation of specific
social forces), it is not within the province of any one
of them to determine what association itself is and how
the various forms of society are related to it; that is
the mission of the more general science, Sociology.
After indicating the general relation of Sociology to
the special social disciplines, we now proceed to con-
sider the relation of some of the latter to our subject.
Minds disciplined in philosophy are not likely to find difficulty in
distinguishing between what is general and what is particular, the
very distinction here made. If aesthetics is the science of beauty,
then it seeks to formulate the general laws of beauty ; these laws
apply to every beautiful object wherever found. Yet besides a
work on these general laws, there may be others on specific de-
partments of beauty, as on architecture, painting, sculpture, and
literature. Were the sphere of ?psthetics so small that all its
objects could be treated by a single discipline, then specialization
might not be necessary. But as subjects develop, a division into
general and specific departments becomes necessary. Thus in
botany and zoology we have the general principles of plants and
animals, and, besides these, numerous works on special families
and classes of plants and animals. We have a history of the world,
and distinct from it the history of the various nations. So in
Sociology we have an interpretation of association, and in the
special social sciences discussions of the family, economic organiza-
tions, the church, the state.
78 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
REFLECTIONS.
"Why not discuss in Sociology all Social Forms both in
Principle and Detail ? "What pertains to the General Science
of Society -which is not found in the Special Social Sciences?
What do the Special Social Sciences contain that is not
found in the General Science ? The Need of General and
Specific Disciplines illustrated by Philosophy, Science, and
History.
Political Science.
Various limited societies have tried to absorb society
itself and put themselves in its place. In the gens or
the tribe, as an enlarged family, it is the family which
embodies the social idea. Perhaps the members knew
no other association. In Judaism and the Middle AgPij
the theocracy, the Kingdom of God, or the church is
viewed as the essence of society. We can understand
why Aristotle defines man as a political animal, when
we remember how the individual was thought to exist
for the state.
A part is put for the whole. It is a common mis-
take to concentrate the attention on a dominant or
specially prized feature and lose sight of the rest.
Thus a fixed idea is made the sole idea.
We have seen that the development of society beyond
the political sphere was the condition for a larger
conception of society. For us the state is but an arc
in the social circle. Such an exclusive prominence
may, however, still be given to the state as to make it
difficult for independent or voluntary associations to
receive recognition, or to be deemed of sufficient impor-
tance to justify social science as distinct from politics.
"What is left for Sociology in such cases when the state
al)sorbs fhe church, regulates the family, and deter-
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 79
mines the limits of associative action ? By making
the state everything, other societies become nothing.
Governments have at times been disposed to suppress
voluntary associations, for fear they might interfere
with the prerogatives of the state, threaten its suprem-
acy, or endanger its very existence. A governmental
paternalism which aims so to control the affairs of
the people that there may be no occasion for inde-
pendent associative action, hinders the organization of
voluntary societies. Thus associations distinct from
the state require a certain degree of prominence and
importance in order to receive recognition and to
deserve special treatment. In the very condition of
society a reason is found for those historians who have
made history consist chiefly of the state, its monarchs
and officials, its diplomacy and its wars.
While we thus understand the exclusive attention to
the state as the most perfect organization, yet through-
out history, and particularly in modern times, we find
numerous open and secret associations which are not
included in political science. This is the more evident
now since the conception of society has been enlarged
to include all kinds of association, not merely formal
organizations. Even in its largest sense the state can-
not embrace all societies as constituent parts of the
body politic. From the political forces numerous other
social energies must be differentiated. The action of
some of these the state may sanction by its laws ; the
action of others may be left free, neither requiring nor
receiving recognition.
Society existed before the state was formed ; in what
sense would that society be included in political
science ? Then, we have not one state ])ut many states,
and the inclusion of all requires a science of interna-
80 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
tional politics. But would such a comprehensive
science include all non-political associations and the
whole of humanity ? Some organizations, as churches,
Masonic and other lodges, industrial societies, extend
beyond the limits of a state or even of all states, reach-
ing out to individuals and tribes not in a state. How
can these be made a part of political science ?
The science of politics needs differentiation from
Sociology and the other social sciences, in order that
its own peculiar sphere may be made more distinct.
The function of the state is among the most momentous
problems of the times; but this function can be dis-
tinctly brought out only when contrasted with the other
social forces. In Russia the government aims to make
society ; in the United States society makes the govern-
ment; in Russia the progress of voluntary association
is a menace to the government; in the United States
independent organizations may ignore the very exist-
ence of the government. Neither theoretically nor
practically is there agreement respecting the limits of
the state and its relation to voluntary associations.
The science of politics confines itself to the state,
explaining its structure and functions, marking the
peculiarity of its organization as distinguished from
other societies, treating of the relations of the citizens
to one another and to the state, and of the government
to the governed, the constitution and laws, and all that
belongs to the domain of national life. Some have
questioned, as intimated above, whether the state
ought to be included in Sociology or treated separately
as outside of society. It is unquestionably a form of
association, and therefore within the scope of Sociology;
])ut it is only one of many social forms, and therefore
j)olitical science cannot take the place of the science of
THE RELATION OE SOCIOLOGY. 81
society. The distinctive elements in the state, the
peculiar authority it exercises, and the vast impor-
tance of the subject must receive full recognition. Its
sphere is that of collective authority and coercion; the
sphere of other societies is that of co-operation. Owing
to the importance and extent of politics, it has become
a special science. It is, however, a social science,
which indicates its intimate relation to Sociology. The
state of the people is society in a truer sense than
when the state is treated as an abstraction, or as a
power hovering over the people, to which unconditional
submission is required. We can indeed distinguish
between social and political, referring the latter to all
that pertains to the state, and the former to society as
distinct from the state; but reflection shows that
political action is social action as organized in the
form of collective authority. The state, whatever its
particular form and whoever exercises the authority, is
sovereignty. The functions and limits of the sover-
eignty are among the most important questions of the
day.
The state is the authority of the collecti\'ity, whether that
authority be seated in one man as a despot, in a chosen few as
noblemen or aristocrats, in the male citizens, or in all the inhabi-
tants of a given age. Since the state is the authority of the col-
lectivity, all within that collectivity are subject to the authority
within the sphere of politics. Many other spheres of individual
or social life may of course lie outside of the limits of the political
sphere.
Political action is always personal, that is, it is the personal
action of (or for) the collectivity so far as political. The making
and adoption of the constitution, the election of the legislative and
executive officers in a republic, and all acts of the state are personal.
The personal factor appears no less in a monarchy than in a repub-
lic. "Where the power is not concentrated in one person, but dif-
fused throughout the collectivity, the conception of it is less easily
6
82 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
apprehended. Then the notion is one of great complexity, as in
the case of seventy million inhabitants. Yet the purely politi-
cal sphere can be grasped, likewise the pm-ely political power of
the collectivity. The essence of the matter consists in the fact
that in the individuals of a nation we abstract the political social
factor from all other social factors. It thus becomes evident what
the relation of Sociology to political science must be. It regards
the state as social, and as therefore a part of the general social
organism, determines its place and functions in that organism
(correlates the state to the other social factors) , but does not take
the state by itself and develop the science of politics. This work,
and all particulars about the state, it leaves to political science.
When the brightness of the sun hides the stars by day, that
does not prove their non-existence. When the state becomes so
great in the estimation of thinkers as to absorb the attention, what
wonder that other social forms dwindle into insignificance ? Still,
other forms may exist which are important. But they are ignored,
and that explains why Sociology is absorbed by political science.
Particularly among statesmen is there a tendency to do this.
When, however, social groups and voluntary organizations become
so powerful and prominent as in our day, a broader social discipline
than that of political science is required. The strong tendency of
social specialists to make their sjiecialty the test of Sociology will
be overcome in exact proiiortion as sociologists are developed and
approach all social subjects from the broad basis of the science of
society.
Sociology recognizes the great importance of the state, its
uniqueness of character and functions, and its influence on all
social forms and relations within its borders. Even if we
specialize in the study of the state or some other social form, the
living connection of all associations so as to constitute a great
organism must be recognized.
The theory of the state deserves and receives marked attention
in our day from scholars. Sociological studies will give still greater
prominence to the subject. They must consider the social relation
of the state to the societies within its domain and also to other
states (international law and politics). Various movements of the
day emphasize the significance of the state in social affairs, and it
is not surprising that a new impulse has been given to the study of
political science. Conservative scholars admit that the theory of
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 83
the state ought to be reinvestigated and further developed, and
powerful socialistic, revolutionary, anarchistic, and nihilistic ten-
dencies insist on the complete transformation or even destruction
of the state. In various places the social crisis is predominantly
political. Among the questions of special importance to the student
ai'e the following : What was the origin of the state? What is its
natiu'e ; that is, what are the distinctive social forces whose inter-
action constitutes the state ? What are its functions ? How is it
related to the other social forces at home and abroad ? What is
its best form ? What is its history ? For the comprehensive view
of the sociologist international law, international politics, including
arbitration, and the civilizing influence of states on humanity, have
peculiar attractions. So far as the collectivity is really expressed
in political action, the government furnishes an excellent test of the
character and intelligence of the people.
On the science of politics the works of Bluntschli, Mohl, Wool-
sey, Woodrow Wilson, Burgess, and Sidgwick are recommended.
" Handworterbuch der Staatswisseuschaften," six large volumes
and supplement, edited by Professors Conrad, Elster, Lexis, and
Loening, assisted by hundreds of scholars from different countries,
is the most valuable repository of materials on all departments of
political science.
In the first haK of this century German writers like Riehl found
it necessary to show that all society is not absorbed by political
society. Professor von Treitschke has advocated the absorption of
Sociology by political science. On Sociology as an independent
science valuable discussions are found in the work of Gumplowicz:
"Sociologie und Politik." This volume also discusses the relation
of Sociology to other sciences. Schmidt- Warneck, in " Die Soci-
ologie," views Sociology cliiefly in the light of politics.
It is an interesting and instructive fact that each class and pro-
fession is strongly inclined to make its particular view normative
for society. The statesman emphasizes the state ; the lawyer the
law ; the theologian the church ; the economist political economy ;
the capitalist capital ; the laborer labor ; the aristocracy and
nobility the circle they constitute. Hence the inability of each to
pnt himself in the place of another or to take a comprehensive
view. What an argument in favor of the sociological standpoint,
which views society as a totality, and gives each particular class
and its peculiar view the right place in the social organism!
84 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
REFLECTIONS.
Origin of the State. Rousseau's Social Contract. What
does the State include? Different Forms of the State.
State, Nation, Empire. Relation betw^een Constitution, La-ws,
Politics. Eistinction bet-wreen State and Government. Legis-
lative, Judiciary, Executive Functions, -why separated and
how united ? The work of each. Reasons for recent De-
velopment of the Idea of the State. Relation of the State to
other Societies. Source of Authority in the State. The
Laissez-faire, the Paternal, the Social Democratic, and the
Anarchical Theory of the State. Grounds of Modern Attacks
on the State. Arbitration ; International Law ; Federation
of Nations. Ranke : There must be international natures in
order to transplant the culture of one land into another.
Patriotism and International Justice. Value of the Senti-
ment: My Country, right or w^rong. The Meaning of Social
Politics.
Political Economy.
The effort to make a social science the social science
has been especially strong in political economy. So
long as social science did not exist, but its need was
deeply felt, it was not strange that a social study
deemed of supreme importance should be treated as the
missing discipline. Particularly is this exaltation of
economics natural at a time when material interests
are absorbing. Then political economy is apt to be
regarded as not only furnishing the basis of social
being, but as also determining those interests which
pertain to social well-being. At such times agricul-
tural, industrial, and financial affairs are treated as
the chief concerns of the state, as if, when they are
attended to, all other things will take care of them-
selves. It is hardly an exaggeration to affirm that
during the nineteenth century political economy has
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 85
lieen the gospel of the leading industrial nations, the
determining factor in individual and social life. Men
have made wealth their divinity and its pursuit their
religion. Political economy is to our age what politics
was to Greece and Rome, and theology to the Middle
Ages. And when society passes from the dominant
political and theological to the economic stage, what
wonder that political economy is made the social
science ?
Carl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and the social democ-
racy give such an exclusive pre-eminence to political
economy as to absorb in it the state and the whole of
society. It is not strange that laborers whose exist-
ence is an unceasing struggle for the necessaries of
life regard their industrial redemption as involving
their entire social salvation. It must also be remem-
bered that many students come from political economy
as their specialty to Sociology, so that their sociological
theories are naturally affected by their economics.
Other factors have co-operated to reduce Aristotle's
"political animal" to an industrial animal, and to
transform the science of economics into the science of
society. The marvellous progress of natural science has
given prominence to material interests and wonderfully
stimulated invention ; this, together with the industrial
development since the middle of the eighteenth century,
has made ours the era of political economy.
One reason for creating social science is found in
the necessity of showing that man is more than a beast
of burden and has other than material interests. The
new science will relegate political economy to its proper
place. That is at the bottom, the foundation. Society,
in order to live and accom]dish life's purpose, must
have bread. We cannot build without a foundation,
86 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
yet the foundation is not the house. But the impor-
tance of the foundation is heightened by increasing the
value of the superstructure. Political economy is not
degraded by putting it at the base instead of the top of
society.
Wheji political economy is treated as an abstract discipline, as
merely the working of certain natural laws of utility for the pro-
duction of wealth, it can hardly claim to be a social science. Dur-
ing the last half-century this abstract method has continually lost
in pre-eminence. The historic and psychological methods have
gained power, and thus the human and social factors have received
gi-eater prominence. The result is that now it is regarded as not
only a social science, but also, as intimated, an effort has been
made to treat it as the social science.
A true social analj'sis, which gives all the social forces in society,
overcomes the tendency to absorb man in a single interest. It
teaches us that there is truth, but not the whole truth, in the
attempt of Aristotle to make man a political animal, of Marx to
make him an industrial animal, of others to reduce him to a fight-
ing, a tool-making, or sporting animal, and of Augustine to regard
him as a spiritual being. That man is not one of these, but all,
is not disproved by the fact that in some eras a particular social
force has prevailed to the neglect or subordination of the rest.
Man is a unit as well as multiplicity ; some one force can receive
an exclusive emphasis and one-sided development. Its very exer-
cise strengthens it and increases its supremacy. But if whole ages
are absorbed by an eifort to recover the holy grave from the in-
fidel, is that crusade to be deemed an interpretation of humanity
itself, or only of a particular phase of humanity?
Sociology recognizes the economic as among the most powerful
of the social forces. We can imagine Robinson Crusoe as eco-
nomic in his isolation ; but as men live in society we consider the
social effects of economics. Man has too many other interests to
be absorbed by political economy ; but neither can Sociology take
the place of economic science. It determines the place of eco-
nomics in the great social system, but leaves to economics the
development of the specific economic system.
Respecting economics. Sociology has important functions in our
day. Tiie historic fact tliat at a particular time political economy
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 87
is supreme does not fix its place in the social system any more
than the dominance of political science and of ecclesiasticisni at
other times determined their eternal supremacy. The historic
prevalence of a social force does not prove that it ought to prevail.
Just now there is urgent need of determining the exact relation of
economics to politics, to education, to religion, to ethics, and to
social reform. The abstract isolation, and consequent one-sided
development, of economics, help to explain the practical mate-
rialism of the age. A large part of the philosophy of our times is
interpreted by the effort to make political economy the essence of
Sociology. "While Sociology refuses to make industrialism the
apex instead of the base of the social pyramid, it does not favor
the idealists and visionaries vrho depreciate material interests, as
if there could be an apex without a base. However the body may
be prized for the sake of the spirit, we know that in this world
spirits without bodies are ghosts. It is difficult to maintain the
golden mean of the Greeks between under-emphasis on material
interests and over-emphasis ; but it is as important as difficult.
Political economy is of more than ordinary interest to socio-
logical students. It must be studied in order to understand the
life and history of nations, the labor movement and the social
problem of the day, and the dominant political concerns of legis-
lative bodies. But it should be studied in connection with aU
the other social sciences or as an integral part of Sociology. Since
the middle of the nineteenth century its progress has been great,
out of the selfish into the social elements, passing fi-om egoism
toward altruism, enlarging its sphere from the economy of a house-
hold and a nation to that of the world, and rising from the fate of
natural law to the voluntary agency of the personality, thus relat-
ing the subject to ethical purpose, and showing that in economics
we have an art as well as a science. This trend beyond Adam
Smith and Ricardo and the entire old or orthodox economic school
is evident in the thinkers among the economists of continental
Europe, of England, and of America.
As a repository of the best thought of eminent thinkers on po-
litical economy see : " Handbuch der Politischen Oekonomie,"
edited by G. Schoenberg, third edition, three large volumes. An
excellent discussion of the economic function of the state is given
at the close of A. Wagner's " Grundlagen der Volkswirthschaft."
i\Iany economists, particularly the Germans, discuss the relation
of their discipline to other social subjects. J. S. Mill gives his
88 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
work the title, '• Principles of Political Economy, with some of
their Applications to Social Philosophy." In Keynes' " Scope and
^Method of Political Economy," the fom'th chapter is " On the Rela-
tion of Political Economy to General Sociology." The recent
works on economics by Marshall, Walker, Hadley, Ely, and many
others are well known to students.
REFLECTIONS.
Exact Sphere of Political Economy. Its Doctrine of
Utility, of Value, of Wealth. Gro^wth of Economics from
that of the Household, to that of a Nation, and no-w to
that of the World. The Place of Political Economy in Busi-
ness ; in the State ; in International Relations. The Ortho-
dox and the Modern School. Are the Industries entirely
controlled by Natural Law? Selfishness and Self-Interest
and Altruism. Individualistic and Social Elements in Eco-
nomics. Relation of Political Economy to Political Science.
To Ethics. Fundamental Character of Economics for Society.
Trend of Political Economy to become the Science of So-
ciety. Some want to relate Economics closely to Ethics ;
others introduce Ethical Elements into Political Economy ;
others claim that this is a Perversion of Economics : Will
not the dispute be settled by giving Economic Science its
proper place in Sociology and thus relating it to Ethics and
all the Social Disciplines? Political Economy as a Science
and an Art (A. 'Wagner). The Personal Element in Political
Economy. Roscher : " Man is the beginning and the end of
our Science."
History.
It has been claimed that history covers essentially
the same ground which Sociology proposes to occupy.
History, it is said, deals with all that is significant in
society and has left its impress on the development of
humanity, seeking to discover the social forces, follow-
ing the process of social evolution, and describing the
achievements of society, while the individual is consid-
ered only so far as he leaves a permanent effect on
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 89
human thought and life. History inchides social
action, the establishment and development of institu-
tions, the course of polities, the theories of political
economy prevalent at different times, and social phe-
nomena in general. A specialty can be made of the
organization and evolution of society among a particular
people or in the world. But indispensable as history is
for the student of Sociology, it cannot construct for him
a social science. Some writers on Sociology have
devoted so much attention to the description and
history of society that the impression may be made
that there is little else in the subject. The student will
obtain the right point of view by discriminating between
the aim of the historian and that of the sociologist.
The former does not propose to construct, but to
describe, systems. So long as no social science exists,
the historian cannot determine the relation which
events sustain to it. He does not invent mathematics
or science or philosophy; only as they exist and exert
an influence is it his province to give an account of
them. But the sociologist docs not merely describe
society and seek the causes of its phenomena ; he wants
to construct a social system such as has as yet no his-
torical existence. His work is that of a scientist or
philosopher; from the material furnished by the his-
torian and by observation he draws the principles of
society and infers the social laws, a process entirely
different from that whose end is historical inquiry.
The historian may give an account of the philosophies
of Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and Hegel ; but it would be
as reasonable to expect him to construct them as to
become the founder of Sociology. As the science of
society lies nowhere in history, we cannot look to the
historian to discover it there.
90 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
That historic discipline which comes nearest cover-
ing the same ground as Sociology is what the Germans
call Culturgeschichte, a history of culture or of civili-
zation. This has been developed independently by
German scholars and dates back farther than Sociology.
It aims to give a history of social evolution, tracing
the various stages of culture through which humanity
passed until the present degree of civilization was
attained. If by this method historic laws of develop-
ment are discovered, much that certain sociologists
have particularly emphasized will be accomplished.
Why cannot this "culture-history," as some have
claimed, take the place of Sociology ?
The reason given above, that Sociology is not an
historical discipline, furnishes the answer. The ten-
dency to reduce it to that is, however, significant and
reveals a dominant characteristic of our times. A
large class of persons may be designated as mere
observers and empiric investigators, in distinction from
rational inquirers and philosophic thinkers. Facts are
gathered and classified, and statistics accumulated till
we know not what to do with them; this they regard
as all that is required. Their work is essential, but
only a beginning. Laws and principles and systems
are not picked up from the surface of facts; they are
intellectual constructions, a philosophy of the facts.
The student must be a thinker in order to become a
sociologist. Those who cannot distinguish between a
history of culture and a system of culture, between
a history and a science of society, arc as rational as the
empiric who takes a history of human conduct for a
system of ethics. The sociologist is not merely intent
on discovering what the social facts are ; he also insists
on knowing what they imply; he listens to what things
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 91
say, and from this lie tries to learn what they mean.
Underlying the superficial trend, now so common, is
the false supposition that the history of an object is its
exhaustive interpretation. Many do not study philoso-
phy per se, but its history, and then imagine that they
understand philosophy, a conceit which would vanish if
they truly became philosophers. An intelligent study
of the history of science, of theology, of law, and of
other disciplines, implies a knowledge of these sub-
jects. This is true of disciplines which have a long
history; but Sociology is yet to be constructed, and
therefore can be still less completely studied in its
history than the older disciplines.
The difference between the genesis of a subject and
its critical interpretation is important. Scarcely any
discrimination is more essential than that between his-
tory and observation, on the one hand, and the philo-
sophic effort which, on the other, constructs a rational
system. This will become more evident in the dis-
cussion of Method. Fortunately, there are evidences
that the day is waning when sensation was taken for
thinking, and when men feared that by an intellectual
mastery of things they were in danger of losing the
grip of their reality. The rational element in philoso-
phy, science, and in any system of thought adheres
strictly to fact, but interprets the fact, relates it, goes
to its source and results, and thus, by its explanation,
brings out the true reality in place of what only seems
to be the reality. It is the science of society which
makes ns truly the possessors of society, intellectually
its masters. What has been said will not, therefore,
be taken as an indication that we can evolve, specula-
tively, from our brains systems without facts. History
receives its proper place, and this cannot be the means
of depreciating its importance.
92 lyTRODUCTioy to study of sociology.
History deals with society, giving an account of social genesis
and social transformations. It is concerned about continuous fac-
tors. The individual passes away ; but certain forces in him may
affect society and become a permanent factor in social progress.
Historic charactei-s are such as have thus helped to make history ;
that is, their personal force has become a social force. Human
history is an account of men so far as associated and acting on one
another. It is therefore evident how it comes that history, which
treats of society, has been thought to take the place of Sociology.
This of com'se is only possible on the part of men who take the
genesis of a thing for its scientific intei-pretation. The same mis-
take is made by those who describe a process of evolution and then
imagine that they have explained the nature of the universe.
For the sociologist history is of inestimable importance.
E. B. Tylor (" Researches into the Early History of Mankind")
says : " The explanation of the state of things in which we live has
often to be sovight in the condition of rude and early tribes ; and
without a knowledge of this to guide us, we may miss the meaning
even of familiar thoughts and practices. ... It is indeed hardly
too much to say that civilization, being a process of long and
complex growth, can only be thoroughly understood when studied
through its entire range ; that the past is continually needed to
explain the present, and the whole to explain the past."
On the history of culture as a totality or on particular phases of
it numerous works have appeared. These include such works as
Mr. Spencer classifies as "Descriptive Sociology." See also
" Primitive Culture : Researches into the Development of INIythol-
ogy. Philosophy, Religion, Language, Art, and Custom," by E. B.
Tylor, — first chapter, " The Science of Culture ; " second, " The
Development of Culture ; " third and fourth, " Survival of Culture."
" A History of the INIental Growth of INIankind in Ancient Times,"
by John S. Ilittell. " Social History of the Races of Mankind," by
Feathernian.
Ethnology has become a favorite theme wnth investigators, and
numerous valuable works have appeared in the English, German,
French, and other languages.
A philosophy of history, if ever realized, cannot take the place of
Sociology. It aims at the rational interpretation of what lias
transpired, and thus furnishes valuable material for the science of
society, which it, however, does not construct.
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 93
On historiography, "Lehrbuch der Historischen Methode," by
Bernheim, is excellent.
Kidd's " Social Evolution " is so well known as hardly \/o require
special mention.
REFLECTIONS.
Difference between History, Historiography, and Philoso-
phy of History. The Genetic and the Rational Interpreta-
tion of an Object. The History of Society and the Philosophy
of Society. Does History invent, construct, or only record ?
Value of History to the Sociologist as a Repository of Human
Thought, Action, and Institutions. Psychology in History.
Meaning of Culture and Civilization. Does Evolution always
involve Progress ? History as a mere Succession of Phe-
nomena and as giving the Genesis of Things. Evolution as
a Method of Procedure and as an Ontological Interpretation
of the Universe. Difference between the Description of
Society and a History of Society,
Other Disciplines.
In the above we have the principles according to
which the relation of Sociology to other systems of
thought must be decided ; it is consequently not neces-
sary to give details respecting the rest of the allied
subjects. Some German scholars have attempted to
develop a "Psychology of Nations," concentrating atten-
tion on what is called the mind of a people, its mani-
festations and products, just as the ordinary psychology
is devoted to the interpretation of the individual mind.
This effort to get the G-eht or spirit of the peoples as
it objectifies itself in myths, arts, religion, literature,
government, institutions, is exceedingly interesting
and of great value to the sociologist. Professors Lazarus
and Steinthal, the chief promoters of this study, have
brought to light many important social facts. By taking
the spirit found in the different nations it may be pos-
94 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
sible to determine the dominant characteristics of the
Zeitgeist. But the psychology of nations does not
furnish the philosophy of society ; it must rather be
regarded as a department of the more general subject,
and a preparation for it, than its substitute. Not the
mind of a people is the subject-matter of the sociologist,
but society or human association, thus making a differ-
ence in the centre of attention.^
In a department so extensive as Sociology, and era-
bracing so many subjects, it is natural that some social
phases should have received especial attention and
development. There are persons with a dominant
practical tendency who look on Sociology as concerned
mainly with human welfare. For such its essence is
found in social ethics, a subject which has been treated
in works on general ethics. We shall, however, see
that this is but one phase of Sociology, its practical
culmination, it is true, but presupposing a knowledge
of what society is, in order to learn what it ought to
be. In social ethics we have a practical application of
sociological theory to reform and to human progress;
and so far as it gives the most general principles for
such application, it is itself a department of social
science.
Jurisprudence belongs properly to the science of the
state. It gives the legal aspects of society, and its
history enables us to interpret many social views and
forms. The law usually expresses in a condensed and
authoritative form the social theories dominant at a
1 Mauy of the discussions in the journal published by tlie professors
are valuable for the consideration of society at large. The need of a
discipline larger than that which considers only a state or nation was rec-
ognized by Professor Lazarus ; but he regarded tiie national life as
particularly important and therefore worthy of special treatment. (" Zeit-
Bciirift fur Volkerpsychologie und Spraclnvissenschaft," iii. 420, note.)
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 95
particular time, or at least those of the ruling classes
which control the legal enactments. Yet the law
expresses but one aspect of society, namely, the legis-
lation required for social well-being. So closely is the
subject related to political ethics, that it may be classi-
fied under that head.
Among the humanistic studies which are important
both as social products and social forces, we place
linguistics. Language is a deposit of the history of
the race, being of humanity a record similar to that of
nature as written in its rocks. Peoples put themselves
into their language, body themselves forth in it, and,
though dead, speak through it. The language into
which a man is born is one of his greatest inheritances
from the generations of the past. We call it his
"mother tongue," but it is more than that; it is the
mother of a man's intellect and of the products of that
intellect. Another form of expression is art, and
some peoples of the past are known to us only through
the relics of their art which have descended to us.
Literature we might include in language, and philoso-
phy also, as the highest expression of the wisdom of
the ages. In all these we behold social and not mere
individual productions. Psychology as the interpreta-
tion of the individual mind, psycho-physics and anthro-
pology, treating of mind and body in their relation and
interaction, furnish indispensable material for our
study ; but they are not in danger of being confounded
with Sociology.
This brief survey suffices to show how intimately all
human disciplines are related to our subject. Anatomy,
physiology, biology, and all the natural sciences, as we
have seen, also have significance for it, since it must
take into account a man's body and his natural environ-
96 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
raent. But in the study of humanity we lay especial
stress on the distinctively human disciplines.
The psychology of nations, like the history of culture, is evi-
dence that society, instead of the individual, is becoming the focus
of thought. In language, in ethics, in laws, in all institutions, we
are learning to discover and emphasize the social factors. We are
born into social conditions by means of which we become the heirs
of all i3ast ages ; and our inheritance from society imposes on us a
debt of which we can repay to society hardly an appreciable frac-
tion. Through any social deposit of the ages we can approach the
subject of Sociology and discover its essentials. Montesquieu in
discussing the Spirit of Laws continually touches fundamental
principles of Sociology. In harmony with the general trend, ethics
is passing rapidly from the individual to the social stage. Instead
of the individualistic ethics of the past, the time may not be dis-
tant when social ethics will be the chief subject and individual
ethics merely a subdivision. A true sociological ethics will, how-
ever, enhance the importance of the ethics of individuals.
Not only is there a tendency to make disciplines social which
were heretofore treated as individualistic (psychology, ethics), but
even so far as they remain individualistic more emphasis is placed
on social influence. Thus in the psychology, ethics, and education
of the individual mind more attention is given to the influence of
the social environment. There is marked growth in the conception
of organic connection in thought, relating more intimately the
various disciplines and systems, and also between persons, so relat-
ing them as to overcome their isolation and form society.
Each particular social discipline takes a social force and reduces
its working to a system. Thus the political and economic forces
give us politics and economics ; so we have associations which are
the products of recreative, ethical, religious, and other forces. Each
social discipline deals with some particular dominant social force,
treating as subordinate any other forces connected with this domi-
nant one. But Sociology takes society as a totality, making all the
social forces its suljject-matter, considering their interaction, their
development, and their products.
REFLECTIONS.
What do we mean by the Spirit of a People ? "What a
Psychology of Nations involves. What Factors determine
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 97
the National Spirit ? Characteristics of different Nations.
Psychology of different Organizations and Stages of Culture.
Ethics, Jurisprudence, Language, Literature, Institutions, how
far Individual, how far Social, Products.
Is Sociology a Grouping op other Disciplines, or a
New Discipline ?
Could we not by merely grouping the various human
disciplines which have been developed construct Soci-
ology ? If those that exist meet all requirements, why
not rather develop them than spend our effort in add-
ing a new one ? By grouping the various disciplines
which pertain to humanity, we at best get only separate
sciences of certain human factors, as economics and
politics ; but this leaves society itself without a science.
No one of these makes the interpretation of human
association as such its aim. Each discipline attends
to its own special department; but it is not the busi-
ness of any to show how all are related to one another
and constitute a totality. We do not get a complete
idea of the human body by merely describing each
member separately; it must also be shown how the
members are organically connected, form a totality,
and act as a unit. However much the separate social
disciplines may help us to construct a social science,
they cannot do it themselves. Biology, anthropology,
psychology, linguistics, history, political economy, the
science of politics, give data indispensable for Soci-
ology; but not one of them has society itself as its
subject-matter, neither do all together make the inter-
})retation of society per se their aim.
Sociology is needed to make society the one object
of inquiry. Sociology is that comprehensive general
98 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
science to which the other human disciplines are tribu-
tary, in which they cuhninate and find their comple-
tion. In nature no special science, as chemistry, or
geology, can claim to be an interpretation of the mate-
rial universe ; but from all the natural sciences certain
inferences can be drawn which are general in character
and have an application to the universe as a totality.
This is the work of philosophy, whose business it is
to search for the ultimate principles. Philosophy is
the apex of the intellectual pyramid ; all objects belong
to its basis, and it is itself the highest possible ascent
of rational thouglit. Sociology is a construction of
scientific and philosophic thinking on the basis of all
other human disciplines. It rises above the rest. The
special social disciplines culminate in it; and in Soci-
ology their relation to one another becomes manifest.
All their rays are concentrated in a focus, yet have a
definite relation of position and intensity. If one ray
claims to be the focus, it ignores the others and its
own relation to them. This is the very thing which
has happened with respect to the human disciplines.
Thus, as stated above, in Greece politics took the place
of Sociology; the individual and society were essen-
tially absorbed by the state. In the Middle Ages the
church and its theology were the culmination of human
thought and association, and they determined the point
of view from which all objects were observed. In more
recent times economic science has not only been called
the social science, but it has actually striven to com-
prehend society, as if it could interpret all social
phenomena and meet all social demands. Recent his-
tory has had its ei-a of individualism, which depreciated
society and made the individual the focus of attention.
Now we have a conflict between individualism and
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 99
socialism, because the proper sphere of each is not
recognized. Opposed to government as despotism, or
as an abstraction hovering over nations, we have anar-
chism. Human thought and life have suffered enough
from these one-sided attempts to interpret humanity
and determine its course. It is equal to the attempt
to make chemistry the interpreter of the universe.
Politics, theology, economics, are all important; but
neither can absorb the rest without injury to itself and
them. They and much besides belong to society, and in
the science of society each finds its proper place and
its right relation to the other special human sciences.
We need the general, culminating, all-comprehending
science, Sociology, in order that we may overcome the
pernicious error of making now one special science,
and then another, the totality, which it is not, and the
interpreter of the whole, which it cannot be. Not
from the first, the second, or the tenth step of the
pyramid can the whole structure itself and the sur-
rounding country be seen, but only from the apex.
The service rendered by the special sciences to Sociology
is great ; but its service to them is not less. The arm
is of great use to the body ; but of what use is the arm
without the body ? We want to grasp the meaning of
society in order to determine the relation of the organs
to the total social organism and to one another.
The nature of Sociology is misunderstood by the writer who
claims that " it depends more or less upon all other sciences, but it
cannot be shown that any other science is in the least dependent
upon it." Bernheim regards Sociology as an aid to history,
Hul/xwissenxcJiaft der Geschiclite ; but it is much more.
The social sciences can of course exist without Sociology ; they
were in process of development before it was constructed ; but for
their perfection Sociology is necessary. They culminate in it, and
by means of it receive their proper place in the social organism.
100 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
When political science or political economy seeks to become the
social science, Sociology interferes and puts it where it belongs in
the system of humanity. Not only is the tendency of the mind to
unity thus satisfied, but the one-sidedness resulting from the ab-
stract, isolated development of a subject is overcome. The various
disciplines are likewise made more fruitful by being put into
organic relation with one another. Political economy becomes a
new discipline when related to all the higher interests of society ;
and there is a renewal of political science when it passes from the
abstract to the social stage, defining its relation to other social dis-
ciplines, and making the social actuality the basis of political
activity. When the science of the state takes its place in Sociology,
finds itself an organ in the organism, patriotism will cease to be a
synonyme of national selfishness and injustice.
Not by adding or grouping the various social sciences do we get
Sociology. The family -\- economic and other voluntary organiza-
tions -\- institutions -\- the church -\- the state do not constitute
social science. They are manifestations and forms of society, and
it is the society revealed through them which we want to appre-
hend. Not as isolated do we seek to understand these various
social forms, but as connected, as forming an organic whole. The
science of society considers each social science and each social
gi'oup from the standpoint of the totality. It does not lose the
individual in society, but it views him in humanity as we view a
drop in the sea ; it views societies in their distinctness, yet as but
so many currents in the same ocean. We can consider a drop as
the essential thing (individualism) ; or we can trace one current
after another (the special social sciences) ; or we can consider the
drops and the currents as they form the ocean (the view of Sociol-
ogy). Take the drop from the sea, still it is of the sea and retains
its flavor ; so if an individual is the last of his family and outside
of the limits of church and state and all organization, still he is a
product of society and a member of society. This view of the indi-
vidual as related to the whole of humanity, and of each particular
society as related to aU other societies and as a manifestation of
society per se, is given by no special social science, and by no other
discipline than Sociology. The student can therefore study .societies
and yet miss the idea of society ; he can study social sciences and
have no conception of the social science. Sociology, as the social sys-
tem, treats individuals, societies, social phenomena and institutions,
THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY. 101
never for their owu sake, however important that may be in itself,
but solely for the sake of determining their organic connection as
constituent parts of the social system.
If I ask a man what language is, and he begins to teach me
French, I object and say that I want to know what language itself
is, not a particular language. Then he takes up the ancient lan-
guages, and English, German, Russian, and others ; still 1 object
and demand what language is, not what the ancient and modern
languages are. Language is in all the languages, yet no language
is language per se. Language itself is the means of communicating
ideas by sound or writing ; each language communicates ideas in
a particular way, but it is only one of many ways. At first it may
seem as if the answer to the question, What is language ? must be
so empty as to be almost meaningless ; yet the answer involves
that rich and important field designated by linguistics or philology.
Sociology, the science of society, is similar to linguistics, the
science of language. Every language involves the science of lan-
guage, but also many concrete elemeiits which cannot be considered
in linguistics ; so every social science involves the science of society,
but also many concrete facts which Sociology must leave to the
special social sciences.
REFLECTIONS.
DiflFerence betTveen the Collection and Classification of
Facts, and Science. Between the Grouping of the Social
Sciences (encyclopaedia) and Sociology. "What the Social
Sciences do for Sociology, and ■what Sociology does for the
Social Sciences. Different Point of View of Sociology and
of the Social Sciences Can any Special Social Discipline
take the Place of Sociology ? Can all the Social Disciplines ?
Illustration from Philology. Review of the whole Chapter.
102 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
CHAPTER IV.
DIVISION OF SOCIOLOGY.
The Problem. Sociology, the science of society, is iioio
distinctly before us. So vast, however, is its material that
for ijrofitahle study classification is necessary. The clas-
sificatio7h must he on the principle that things which are
alike are to he united and that they are to he separated
from things which are different.
Sociology is one., hut a unity in diversity. We ayialyze
it according to its diversity ; hut this analysis is for the
sake of hetter interpreting the totality. Tlic analysis in
anatomy and physiology is for the study of the various
parts as forming the undivided body. Social synthesis is
always the ultimate aim of social analysis.
Numerous divisions of Sociology arc iwssihle, and each
may have cogerit reasons. The best is that which most
naturally groups the diverse materials and presents the
greatest advantages for systematic study. Each division
is in itself a system, and the synthesis of the divisions con-
stitutes the larger system., the science of society.
Society is to he interpreted. The problem now is how so
to classify the objects of investigation as to make the inter-
pretation most perfect.
Sociology is unity, yet multiplicity ; it can be rightly
apprehended only as one in many, and as many in one.
Thus nature is a unit ; yet for the purpose of the most
thorough study we form various natural sciences, each
DIVISION OF SOCIOLOGY. 103
distinct, but all united. So in the same landscape we
distinguish between mountain, valley, and stream.
A nugget of gold may be divided, yet each division
will be gold and as such complete iu itself. It will be a
specimen by which gold everywhere may be judged. It
may be added to other gold; but this quantitative in-
crease adds nothing to its quality.
In sociological study we find both qualitative and
quantitative differences. A fact may be repeated a
million times, yet it need be mastered but once in order
to understand all its repetitions. Thus a fact in nature
is a type in which all like facts can be studied. The
case is different, however, when quality is considered.
A knowledge of gold does not teach me what silver is.
Each quality must be studied by itself.
Quantitative differences play a prominent part in
Sociology, as in the division of labor, in numbers which
constitute an army, and in the amount of wealth. The
division of our subject, however, depends on qualitative
differences.
Mentally we may separate into different parts an
object which in itself cannot be divided. In the study
of man we can consider the body by itself and the mind
by itself ; but in the real man we cannot take the body
from the mind or the mind from the body. The
body can be dissected only after the life has been de-
stroyed.
Evidently, then, divisions in the case of organic sub-
jects are mental abstractions ; parts organically united
are mentally separated. The mind is considered apart
from the body in order that it may be the more thor-
oughly studied according to its inherent nature. By
thus isolating a subject for the more perfect concentra-
tion of attention it is sure of the fullest development.
104 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
We know tliat the chemical elements are scattered
throughout the universe and enter into various combina-
tions ; yet we try to take each element by itself, to learn
what it is and what can be done with it. So in psy-
chology we isolate intellect, susceptibility, and will, and
discuss each separately ; but the real mind cannot be
separated into three unconnected chambers, and in the
actual mental processes we can never claim to have any
faculty in absolute isolation.
Important as such isolation is for clearness and thor-
oughness, it may likewise be misleading. Mental divi-
sions are sometimes taken for actual separation. The
psychological isolation of the intellect and exclusive
emphasis on it liave made the impression that psy-
chology treats of mind merely as intellect. One of the
greatest perversions of modern times results from the
isolation of the economic force, as is the case in political
economy. Tliis has actually resulted in treating eco-
nomic laws as if thoy acted independently of ethical,
religious, and social considerations. We have also seen
how a false abstraction has led to a process in politics
and economics whicli tended to make a social science
the social science. The partial truth found by means of
isolation must not be mistaken for the whole truth,
which can be discovered only by studying an organ as
j)art of the organism which it lielps to form.
These considerations are essential in connection with
the division of Sociology. The science of society deals
with life in its most complex forms; all the social
forces arc organically related, they interact, and con-
stitute a totality ; and while we are obliged to isolate
these forces for intellectual reasons, we must not for-
get that in society itself the social forces arc indisso-
lubly united.
DIVISION OF SOCIOLOGY. 105
Not for the sake of society, then, but for the sake
of our conception of society are divisions made in Sociol-
ogy. From the total unity we abstract a part, in order
to concentrate our attention on it and fathom its mean-
ing. Division is thus a form of mental specialization,
just as from the human body we take a hand and make
it an object of special investigation. Our inability to
follow more than one process of thought at a time makes
divisions a mental convenience and even necessity.
The division is an analysis of the subject. This anal-
ysis is not arbitrary ; it will help us to understand a
subject only in case there is some basis for it in the
subject itself. The aim of the analysis is to bring out
actual differences ; it must present to the mind ideas
which can be abstracted from the rest, and which offer
special advantages to the mind by means of this separa-
tion. There is thus a reason for the division in the
nature of things. The division ought also to be logical,
no two divisions overlapping each other or covering
the same ground, yet all together including the whole
subject.
The division, like the definition, can deal only with
the most general characteristics ; it draws lines, but
does not give all the contents between the lines. It is
evident that a subject cannot be divided unless there is
some knowledge of its contents ; one must know what
is involved in mathematics before he can divide it into
its different departments. The same is true of Sociol-
ogy ; a general idea of its contents is the condition
for a division of those contents. This, however, does
not imply that all the details of a subject must be mas-
tered in order that the division may be made. Since
it is so general in character, the student can make it
who has a general survey of the contents ; indeed, it
106 INTRODUCriON TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
is possible that the very defiuitiou may involve the
division.
Some may be deterred from an effort at division
because the subject is so vast and complicated,* and
embraces so large a variety of objects. But whatever
the multiplicity involved, some classification, and there-
fore division, must be possible. The student cannot
expect the best results by wandering hither and thither
in Sociology, picking up what fragments he can, without
systematic classification, or with a classification too par-
tial to contain the whole subject. The vastness of the
subject makes division the more necessary, so that the
separate parts may be distinctly apprehended.
The division of Sociology into Statics and Dynamics
has been common since Comte's day. The explanation
of social phenomena by physical terms has not proved
satisfactory. Bodies may be at rest in relation to the
objects around them ; but only by means of violent
abstraction can we imagine society at rest or in a state
of equilibrium through the forces affecting it. Dynam-
ics, as the science of matter in motion, when applied
to Sociology is used for the movement or evolution
of society. If with Comte we use Static Sociology for
society in a state of order, and Dynamic Sociology for
society in a state of progress, we are apt to get a false
notion of society, a notion which Comte himself, how-
ever, rejects. By distinguishing between society in a
state of order and in i)rogi-ess it looks as if the two
were irreconcilable. Does order mean stability as dis-
tinct from progress? May not progress or progressive
movement be the highest order ? Nor are we better
reconciled to this division when we examine Mr. Spen-
cer's book on " Social Statics," whose complete title is,
" Social Statics, or the Conditions essential to Human
DIVISION OF SOCIOLOGY. 107
Happiness specified, and the First of them developed."
Is, then, social movement not a condition of human
happiness ? Even if the division were adopted, another
would have to be added to make it complete. In
mechanics we have matter at rest or in motion, and
an explanation of matter is necessary ; so society must
be explained before its order or progress can be intelli-
gently considered. On account of its great complexity
and difficulty this is far more necessary in the case of
human society than in the case of matter. Some vio-
lence will be required to make the discussion of society
at rest an interpretation of the nature of society,
whether at rest or in motion, and this interpretation is
what is now most needed in Sociology. Therefore we
reject the division of Sociology into Statics and Dynam-
ics, just as we reject Comte's view of Sociology as Social
Physics. Aside from the theoretical reasons, the stu-
dent will find the inadequacy of the division confirmed
by the works which have adopted it.
As a preliminary to the above division Mr. Spencer
has " Descriptive Sociology," whose purpose it is " to
furnish materials for a Comparative Sociology, and for
the subsequent determination of the ultimate laws to
which social phenomena conform."
This affords fresh proof that a thorough, critical revi-
sion of the subject is required. Descriptive Sociology
involves an absurdity. The term implies a description
of Sociology, but what is meant and actually given is a
description of society. How can there be a descriptive
Sociology before Sociology itself is constructed ? What
Sociology is there to be described ? If Sociology is the
science of society, the general definition, then descriptive
Sociology is a descriptive science of society. But it can-
not be that, for its mission is simply " to furnish ma-
108 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
terials " for the construction of Sociology. As well call
natural history a descriptive science of nature. Mr.
Spencer, by making the collection of materials in order
to form the science a description of the science itself,
has increased the confusion in Sociology. Just as we
distinguish between society and its science, so we dis-
tinguish between social and sociological ; but this dis-
tinction is wiped out by making social description a
description of sociological science.
So essential is the division for the clear apprehension
and successful development of the subject that on it the
progress of the student will largely depend. The old
one must be rejected ; but how get the new division re-
quired ? Let the mind be fixed intently on the subject
that is to be divided. This is the science of society or
such a knowledge of society as can properly be desig-
nated a science. The supreme question to be answered
is : What is society ? Not what societies are is the ques-
tion, but what society per se is. How can we speak in-
telligently of society in different localities and times
unless we know what we mean by society ? We want
to avoid that confusion which is inevitable if the student
is tlirown into the midst of social descriptions and dis-
cussions, while all the time it is not clear what is meant
by social.
Society per se must therefore be our first aim. We
must find it before we attempt to discuss it. Society
itself or the idea of society must be distinguished from
the peculiar manifestations of society in a particular
time or place. Our subject thus deals exclusively with
society and its manifestations. The manifestations of so-
ciety can be viewed in two aspects : we can inquire
what society is here and there, now and then, and thus
get an actual history of society ; or we can ask : What
DIVISION OF SOCIOLOGY. 109
ought society to be ? How far does the actuality corres-
pond with the ideal? We thus have three divisions:
what society is ; what society becomes in the process of
historical development ; and what society ought to be.
The same can be stated in this way : The Principles of
Society ; The Application of these Principles in the Pro-
cess of Historical Development ; and The Application of
these Principles to the Future Progress of Society. This
gives the principles and their application as the basis of
the division. If the principles are complete and tlieir
application is correct, then all that pertains to society is
included.
Sociology is therefore divided as follows: I. The
Principles of Society. II. The Historical Evolution of
these Principles. III. Sociological Ethics, or the Con-
ditions of Social Progress.
Other divisions are possible ; and if in the develop-
ment of the subject a better one is proposed, every
student will welcome it. But the above is the result of
a natural analysis of the subject-matter, and gives a
complete and clear conception of all involved in the vast
subject of Sociology.
Our division is an analysis of the definition and gives three new
definitions, each at the head of a distinct department. What society
is (its Idea), what it becomes (its History), what it ought to be
(Ethics), exhaust the discussion of society and give sharp outlines
with definite contents.
This division has been made in spite of the conviction that it
will meet with determined oj^position. It is not based on any
dogmatic decision as to what Sociology ought to be, but on the
query : How can we obtain the most thorough knowledge of society
for the construction of the most perfect social system ? If any one
of the divisions is omitted, the knowledge of society will be frag-
mentary.
Those who are afraid of ideas will object especially to the first
division. They want the phenomena of society; but society itself
110 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
or society per se seems to them vague, incomprehensible, if not fic-
titious. Their objections will lose their validity so soon as the
division itself is clearly apprehended.
In the following pages reference will frequently be made to
society, the generic term, as distinguished from societies, and it is
important for the student to fix in his mind the exact meaning of
the term. When in " Principles of Sociology " (I. 435) JMi'. Spencer
heads a chapter, "What is a Society? " the form is concrete, but
the meaning is abstract. By " a society " he does not mean a par-
ticular society, but any society, those qualities which must exist in
order to constitute a society. He therefore means by " a society "
society in the abstract, what pertains to all societies ; this is the
very sense in which we use society without further qualification, or
society itself, or society per se. To define a tree is to indicate what
we mean by tree ; to define an animal gives what is common to all
animals ; to define a human being is to give a definition of every
human being.
It may seem more scientific to emphasize the facts of society as
the aim of Sociology, rather than society itself.^ But it only seems
so. Those who think that in facts they have something tangible
and objective, while the idea of society is subjective, are mistaken.
The facts they consider are mental possessions as much as the idea
of society. They cannot step out of their minds into objective
facts ; but the facts are phenomena of then' own minds, whatever
their source may be.
The first division is fundamental, and therefore indispensable.
What sense is there in speaking of the phenomena of society, if it
cannot be determined what society is? If the idea of society
cannot be grasped, how can any fact be pronounced a phenomenon
of society ? If we cannot fix the meaning of society, is not the
science of society a misnomer ? The terms " society " and " social "
constantly occur in Sociology, and one of the main difficulties
1 G. Ratzenhofer begins his work on " Wesen und Zwccl< der I'olitik" with
tliis statement: "Sociology deals with facts; its sphere is tlie development of
the social life of man in so far as known tliroiigh tradition and investigation. In
these facts it seeks the social laws, and only in so far allows speculative views as
they are the rational inferences from the facts and the laws."
In "Social Theory, a Grouping of Social Facts and Principles," by John
IJascom (p. 8) this definition is given : " Sociology is a knowledge of the facts of
society, the order in which they follow one another, and their causes and
reasons."
DIVISION OF SOCIOLOGY. Ill
heretofore has been that they did not stand for clearly defined
objects ; and as they themselves were obscure, the entire subject,
whose essence they express, was likewise obscure. By placing first
what logically comes first we aim at an explanation which shall
illumine the whole subject.
The objection to the first division might be valid if the idea of
society were based on speculation or metaphysics. But it is noth-
ing of the kind. We get that idea from society itself ; the idea is
the result of, or inference from, empirical investigation. We behold
society in what are called social phenomena, and we simply attempt
to describe what we behold. In thus seeking for such an idea as
will make'society definite, so that we can intelligently use the term,
we do not imagine that we have a metaphysical substance or any-
thing else that can be called ontological. Our intellectual concep-
tion of society has therefore nothing to do with a metaphysical
entity.
This primary emphasis might not be necessary if Sociology were
an old discipline in which the sense of society and social is uni-
versally known. But there is no consensus respecting the use of
these terms. Just because the subject-matter of our discipline is
so much in dispute, all intelligent progress will depend on its
meaning. One reason why various sociological works are so un-
satisfactory is the fact that after their study the student knows
much about society, but cannot define society itself, the very object
for which the whole research was made.
For the same reason we reject the notion that Sociology treats
merely of domestic, ecclesiastical, industrial, political, and other
institutions, or of customs, economics, civics, ethics, and religion.
Sociology as the science of society includes these institutions ; but
they are creations of society, not society itself. Sociology is not an
encyclopedia of these creations, nor does it absorb them. Each
remains a discipline by itself ; but Sociology apprehends them as
involved in its principles, and determines their relation to one
another and to society. A philosophy or science of civil law does
not enumerate every law that was ever passed, neither does it take
the place of jurisprudence ; it aims at the principle and reason
involved in law. So Sociology deals only with the essential elements
of the various social sciences as involved in the science of society.
It must confine its investigations to principles ; these must be
strictly sociological, that is, they must be an expression and inter-
112 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
pretation of essential elements in human association. We might
call Sociology the science of the social essences so far as they con-
stitute a totality ; this leaves to each social science its specific
department, and keeps the sociologist from the futile attempt to
make his specialty the repository of everything human. As in logic
we have the laws of thought, but not a statement of aU thoughts,
so in Sociology we have the laws of association, but not special
sciences of the different associations.
Society as a totality is our aim ; we want the interpretative
essences of this totality. Many difficulties will vanish with the
clear apprehension of this aim. We can illustrate the sociological
point of view by comparing it with that of a special social science.
Political economy seizes an economic principle as economic; Soci-
ology seizes it as sociological ; political economy views it in its
abstract or isolated economical working ; Sociology views it as not
abstract or isolated, but as correlated to all other social factors ;
the political economist studies economies for the sake of economic
science ; the sociologist for the sake of social science ; the economist
sees in economics utility, thrift, wealth ; the sociologist beholds
society in economics ; the economist wants to master a phase of
society in economics ; the sociologist wants to find in political
economy conditions for constructing the social science.
The same rule applies to all the other social disciplines. The
sociologist values them for the extraction of sociological essences.
lie does not rest in economics and political science, as the economic
and political specialists ; but he passes through them to the general
social science.
In order to make clear the distinction between the first division
and the second, the principles of society and the historic evolution
of these principles, we again refer to the science of language.
In Professor W. D. Whitney's article on Philology in the En-
cyclop?edia Britannica a distinction is made between language
itself and the development of the different languages. The power
of speech and the relation of speech to ideas is a different subject
from that of the evolution of language, though we go to this evolu-
tion for our knowledge of the power of speech. In considering
language per se Professor Whitney discusses the nature of lan-
guage, the cause of language, the voice, imitation, brute speech
and human speech, language and culture, and many similar sub-
jects, revealing a large and important sphere of thought. Now
DIVISION OF SOCIOLOGY. 113
just as in philology there is an important realm for language per se,
so in Sociology there is for society per se ; but language is only one
of the social factors and far less rich in content than society itself.
This win enable the beginner to see that our first division is not
only rich, but also of primary importance. Just as in philology
we discuss language itself, and then proceed to discuss the evolu-
tion of language, so we adopt the same procedure in Sociology
respecting society.
It would not be necessary to place this primary emphasis on
society if the conception were simple ; but it is extremely compli-
cated and therefore requires thorough investigation.
Another lesson is taught by the science of language. After
language itself has been explained, philology considers the evolu-
tion of language. This is an application of the principles dis-
covered, showing the relation of the different families of language
to the power of speech. Thus F. Miiller (see " Brockhaus'
Konversadons-Lexikun," article Sprachwissenschaft) classifies all the
languages into eighteen groups. These grouj^s are investigated
according to their relation to one another ; but the complete devel-
opment of any group is not the province of the science of language.
Just so in the science of society we distinguish between the evolu-
tion of society as a part of Sociology, and the history and particu-
lar form of societies, which latter are left to other disciplines.
Incidentally another parallel between philology and Sociology
may be noted. The article just referred to says that formerly
philology was placed among the natural sciences (by Schleicher
and Max IMiiller), but that this is properly abandoned now by all
linguists.
The distinction between social and sociological, mentioned
above, is important. Social is the more comprehensive term ; all
that is sociological being social, but not all that is social being
sociological. Sociology is the social science ; but a special social
science is not sociological. We designate as social whatever per-
tains to society ; but as sociological only that which pertains to
the science of society. Whoever investigates social phenomena is
a social student; he becomes a sociologist only when he relates
all the social phenomena so as to form the social system or the
science of society. Sociological always implies that the point of
view is that of society as an organism ; that every social phenome-
non is viewed in its relation to society as a totality; and that
114 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
each social factor is appreciated as au integral part in the social
system.
A man may study French and not be a philologist; he may
likewise study social subjects and not be a sociologist.
Charity taken by itself ; isolated social reforms ; movements in
society considered as severed from their connection with society as
a totality, are not sociological. This term should be used in the
comprehensive, organic, and scientific sense involved in Sociology,
whence it is derived.
REFLECTIONS.
Mental Reasons for Division. Its Basis in the Nature of
Things. Its Logical Requirements. Division and Analysis.
Relation of Division of Contents to the Details of those Con-
tents. Common Neglect of Principles on •which Divisions
depend. The Definition and the Division. Description of
Society and Descriptive Sociology. Distinction bet'ween
Social and Sociological. Ho-w get the Division of our
Subject? "What is Society p^^ se or in itself? Distinc-
tion bet-ween the Idea of Society and Social Phenomena.
The Sociological View of the Social Sciences. What must
be - — involving Necessity and Universality ; what is — the
Actuality ; -what ought to be — expressive of Value, "Worth,
Object of Aspiration, Appeal to the Will. Our Division in
physiological and medical terms : Social Structure and
Functions ; Development of Structure and Exercise of Func-
tions ; Social Therapeutics.
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 115
CHAPTER y.
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE.
The Problem. After tracing the genesis of the concep-
tion of society we determined the comprehensive sense in
which society is the subject-matter of Sociology. How shall
we treat this subject-matter? The answer of the first
division^ discussed in this chapter^ is : determine the
principles of society.
This requires a deeper study of society, to which all that
has preceded is but of a preparatory character. Is the
usual interpretation of society as an association of indi-
viduals correct and final ? Society is a union ; but is it
really individuals that are united ? Can we even conceive
of individuals, consisting of body and soul, as permanently
united so as to form society? One man in Ungland,
another in Australia, a third in the United States, belong
to the Society of Friends. Tliey have never seen, or heard
of, one another. Does the fact that they belong to the same
society mean that they are united as individuals, the totality
of their personalities being absorbed, or only that certain
qualities or energies in them attach them to the same society
and constitute them its members?
The real problem is the differentiation of the individual
from society ; such an analysis of him as will discriminate
the individual as social and as extra-social (not necessarily
anti-social). Each one can solve the problem by deter-
mining his relation to the associations he enters. Let him
answer the question, What of me belongs to myself as an
116 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
individual^ and ivhat of me belongs to the societies of which
I am a member ?
Sociology deals with principles. By principles of society
we mean all that must be in order that society may be.
Our first division considers what is involved in society per
se ; that is, in society itself, in the very idea of society, as
distinct from the historic evolution of societies and social
ethics.
The problem of this Chapter therefore is : such a mas-
tery of society itself as will make its idea definite, and
give us a basis of social evolution and of what society ought
to be.
What would require elaborate discussion in Sociology
proper can, of course, be given only in outline in this
Introduction.
A. Society.
What has thus far been said is preparatory to the
discussion of the subject-matter of Sociology. It is
hardly more than the substitution of one word for
another to say that human society is human associa-
tion. The very thing wc want to know is what
associates, and what takes place in the process of
association.
The Individual and Society.
Every effort to interpret society as composed of indi-
viduals has proved a signal failure. Yet that is the
universal conception of society.^ If personalities them-
^ Worcester defines it: "A union of many in one general interest. A
numlier of [)orsons united togetlier by mutual consent, in order to deliberate,
determine, and act jointly for some common purpose." Standard Diction-
ary: " The collective body of persous composing a community. . . . Any
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 117
selves are taken as constituting society, then an asso-
ciation is supposed to be expressed by the persons
belonging to it. This is the root of many errors and
of interminable confusion.
Strictly speaking, individuals are aggregated, never
associated. We can speak, as is usually done, of men
and women as associated, but it must not be taken liter-
ally; the expression requires explanation.
Individuals consist of body and soul. In this sense
individuals may assemble and form a congregation or
aggregation. But how individuals as a union of body
and soul can associate or coalesce does not appear.
The presence of individuals is necessary for certain
kinds of society; but the aggregation of individuals as
the condition of association must be distinguished from
the association itself.
Twenty persons in a town agree to organize a liter-
ary society. Then it is decided to organize another
society to study the archaeology of the region, and only
the same persons join. By naming the persons sepa-
rately no hint is given that a literary society exists.
The fact that there is a literary society does not show
that there is an archceological association. The same
persons may form a dozen other societies, showing that
no one society absorbs the individuals. Perhaps no
organizations are formed ; in that case certain interests
of the individuals that might be made social remain
individual.
Consider the literary society more closely. Is it a
body of persons connected by acquaintance, friendship, or neighborhood."
This is a fair sample of what is common in all dictionaries and in all lan-
guages. Thus the attention is concentrated on individuals as the consti-
tuent factors of society. The Bible Societ\', the Sunday School Society,
and other organizations are given as illustrations that society is composed
of persons organized or associated for a common end.
118 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
society of the twenty men ? Even in literature each
has his favorite authors and holds numerous views
which the others do not share and he does not mention.
Besides, he has many other interests and peculiarities
which lie wholly outside of the sphere of the society.
Manifestly, then, it is a mistake to say that, in a
literal sense, the members constitute the literary
society; the truth is that what the members have in
common, what they express and share, and what be-
comes an object of united pursuit (the purpose of the
organization), constitute the association ; the purely
private affairs of the Individual are not associative
factors. Perhaps a small fraction of the personality
enters the literary society.
In some kinds of association the distinction between
the associative and non-associative factors is marked.
Men form industrial organizations for the purpose of
promoting certain interests which they have in com-
mon. But the industries are pursued for the sake of
personal advantages; hence the same men may co-
operate to secure a tariff or other legislation, or to get
cheaper transportation, while each competes with the
others to sell the most goods and reap the largest
profits. So far is the organization from absorbing the
individual in this case that he may antagonize all the
other members in every sphere except where their
interests harmonize. Indeed, industrial combinations
are, as a rule, valued by each for the sake of the
private benefit to be derived from them. Disintegra-
tion takes place so soon as members find that they can
accomplish their own purposes better by withdrawal.
The same differentiation applies essentially to every
possible association. In no instance is it composed of
individuals 1+1+1+1 and so on indefinitely, but only
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 119
of SO much of each individual as actually enters the
society. What unites the members of a labor organi-
zation who never see one another ? Their common
interest as laborers ; as private individuals, in religion,
in politics, and in many other spheres, their views may
diverge and be wholly foreign to the labor organization.
The members form the organization ; but the organiza-
tion does not absorb the members.
The individual, therefore, is more than what goes out
into any society he joins ; indeed, he is something
besides all the societies to which he belongs. The
thought which is not communicated, the feeling which
is not expressed to another, the purpose which no one
shares, the invention which dies with the inventor, are
individual and private, but not social.
The individual always acts as a unit, no matter
whether in private or social affairs, whether alone or
in society. This, however, does not imply that when
he acts as a unit he includes in one act all he is and
all his interests. The one line along which a particu-
lar act moves must not be mistaken for the circle of a
man's thoughts, interests, and purposes.
Our analysis of the individual which differentiates
between him as private and as social, is confirmed by
the consciousness of each person. To the statement
that he is a member of society a plus must be added:
he is something besides. The entire individuality can-
not go out into society; his selfhood makes this impos-
sible. A great difference exists in individuals, some
yielding more of themselves to society than others.
But all have a large sphere of action which remains
private. Men can be socialized ; that is, certain ele-
ments in them which are still private may be made
social.
120 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
This differentiation we emphasize because both essen-
tial and fundamental for a correct apprehension of
society. Men may keep to themselves some things
because they are egoistic, selfish ; others they refuse to
share because solely private affairs. The altruist who
shares most may distinguish more sharply between
private and social affairs than the egoist. His right
to his own is made more clear by the fact that he gives
to society all it can claim. The distinction between
Avhat is private and social in the same person becomes
manifest when we observe how money, land, business,
pleasures, can be treated as purely individual, or can
be socialized by sharing them with others.
Our analysis does not take the individual out of society, but de-
termines his exact relation to it. Society does not absorb the
individual, but only so much of him as is social. Sociology, there-
fore, does not include the individual as an individual, hut considers
him solely so far as he is a social factor. For the psychology and
ethics of the individual a distinct sphere is thus left by Sociology,
just as vi'as the case before this discipline was thought of.
Hydrogen and oxygen coalesce and form water; individuals
never can thus coalesce and form society. A drop of water falls
into a stream, forms part of it, is absorbed by it, and is nothing else
than what it is in the stream ; but no human individual is thus ab-
sorbed by, or lost in, society. The hand is part of the bodily or-
ganism and cannot live when its organic connection with the rest
of the body is severed ; but an individual may be cast on a lonely
island and live. As an individual he may exist for years though
there be not another human being to draw out his social powers.
We cannot therefore agree with Mr. L. Stephen when (" Science
of Ethics," 110) he says: "It is as true that man is dependent on
his fellows as that a limb is dependent upon the body." Without
society (the family of which he is a member) he could not have
been born, and in this sense he is as dependent as is the limb upon
the body. But a man who withdraws from the actual social or-
ganism may live, while it is impossible for the limb to live when
severed from the l)odv.
TUE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 121
We imist likewise distinguish between humanity and hvinian
society. Human society is coextensive, but not synonymous, with
luimanity. In mankind we include every individual and all of
liim ; but in human society we include every individual only so
far as he has associative elements. What is not associated with
others is not a social factor. Thei'efore Sociology does not indis-
criminately discuss humanity, but only so far as associated and
therefore a society.
Lamartine somewhere says, that " history is neither more nor
less than biography on a large scale." Another uudiscriminating
generalization, and therefore only in part true. Biography may
be called the history of an individual ; but never can biography,
however enlai'ged, be the synonyme of history in the usual sense.
Biography treats of the individual; human history, of society.
The former considers what is personal, no matter what its social
lelation ; but to history an individual belongs only so far as he
sustains relations to his fellow-men. In history we have a record
of what has entered into tlie social organism as an influential and
aljiding factor. There is biography which is not history, because
there are individual elements which are not tributary to the cui--
rents of history. There is an individual culture which is not
social culture ; the individual may have personal excellences
which do not enter the social organism and therefore do not pro-
mote the elevation of society.
Since there are individual elements which are not social, it is
clear that the individual is not absorbed by society. In the one
hundred individuals of an organization there remains much that
does not enter the organization. But is there not also something
in the oi'ganization which is not found in the one hundred indi-
viduals as isolated? If there is, then that constitutes the social
element; that is, if we can discover what distinguishes the one
hundred associated persons from what they are when isolated, it
will give us the associative element and the essence of society.
What, then, have we in the society formed by one hundred men
which did not exist in the one hundred before the organization ?
We call the new product society, something that did not
exist in the isolated individuals. The new factor is association ;
the individuals, we say, leave their isolation, iniite for some pur-
pose; something which each was interested in before, but merely
as an indi-\ndual, is now made the common interest of all, so that
122 lyriiODUCTioN to study of sociology.
they share the same aim with one another, commvinicate their
sentiments, plan and work together. The supreme idea of the
organization may have been in eacli mind before ; but now it be-
comes a bond of union between them ; what was formerly a private
possession now becomes common property. The central thought
of the individuals receives prominence by the very fact that it is
made the nucleus of an organization. Let us suppose that the
one hundi'ed unite to ward off an enemy. Each while he remained
alone might want the enemy defeated ; the union of each with the
other ninety-nine is the new element. Now a common purpose
unites them ; it leads to action and reaction on one another — to
interaction — to planning for protection, to offence and defence,
may lead to war, and perhaps it is the first step in forming an
army and a state.
This makes it evident that in the society there is something dis-
tinct from the sum of the one hundred individuals, just as in the
sum of the individuals there is something which is not in the
society. You do not see the society when you see the individuals ;
all you see is the aggregation of the individuals ; society is not an
entity. Some would say that society is a relation of individuals.
But this is not true ; it is only a relation of certain elements i n
individuals, not of the individualities as total personalities. Be-
sides, the notion of a relation of individuals is too general, too
vague, too empty, so shadowy that we cannot grasp it. To make
it definite we must show ivhat the relation consists of, giving its
substance. Society is a reality ; it is an actual, working force, and
must be apprehended as such. This force is personal ; that is, it
consists of so much of the personality as is given to society. The
one hundred persons really act on one another ; this is the new
force not exerted in their isolation. The new relation constituted
when the society is formed is one of interaction. The force is
definite and in the best sense real. Each learns from the others
what their motive is, how they expect to realize it ; there is an ex-
change of ideas, schemes are proposed and discussed, plans are laid
and executed. The intellect, heart, and will are involved, likewise
the body, property, and the use of various natural means for the
purpose of the association. So far as the members agree, they en-
courage one another and co-operate ; so far as they differ in opinion,
they may learn from one another, inciting to discussion and devel-
opment, perhaps also to conflict.
TUE PRINCIPLES OE SOCIETY PER SE. 1:^3
Society, then, is not a vague relation, nor is it a relation of indi-
viduals, but of certain elements which individuals possess, of per-
sonal energies which act on one another. Society as an organism
of individuals is inconceivable ; but as an organism of personal
forces which become social, which act and react between individ-
uals, and make what is the private possession of one the common
possession of others, association becomes definite.
Sociology therefore deals with the energies of the individual
which become social by acting on other individuals. In all social
inquiry, therefore, the investigation pertains to the social forces
involved, and to individuals only so far as possessors of these forces.
Men can be known in society, but only by the characteristics they
exercise. We study organizations according to the social energies
concentrated in them. In a political society the political bonds
are the objects of inquiry ; in an economic society the economic
bonds ; in a church the religious ties ; always what men have in
common as members of society, not what remains private and
unshared.
By ignoring this distinction errors of judgment become com-
mon. A man who gives a large sum to a charitable association re-
ceives credit for liberality ; yet his essence may be covetousness.
What he gives is for selfish ends, to get more customers, perhaps.
His public act is social ; his motive is private. The knowledge of
it may die with him, though some effects of it are likely to appear
in his conduct.
In the case of a Catholic priest, we have a sharp distinction
between his social and his private function. His very position
gives him a place before the public ; yet his vow of secrecy obliges
him to keep sacredly from others what is confided to him in the
confessional.
Such illustrations could be multiplied indefinitely. Each one
can, however, find in his own conduct abundant evidence that
social action is distinguished from that which is purely individual
or private. Much in every life is exclusively personal, not being
shared even with the most intimate fiiend. The variety of social
action may depend on density of population ; thus an individual's
social relations in a city are likely to be more varied than in the
country. But individual and anti-social action in a city can also
be greater than in the country. The man in a sparsely settled
community may be almost limited to family association ; but he
124 IXTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
may share liis views and purposes and labors in that more fidly
than the man in the city shares his views and purposes and labors
with all his varied associates.
The working of the social energies or of the associative factors
involves a history. Their interaction results in a process. It is
this process which is meant when we speak of social development.
Sociology deals with the associative and socializing forces, with the
society they form, and with the development of this society. The
history of society is a history of the interaction of the social
forces. By social forces we simply mean personal forces which act
socially, together with the social effects produced by the personal
' forces acting socially. Money, a product of society, is called a
social force.
"While society is never to be confounded with the individuals in
it, they contain the essential foi'ces of society. The society depends
largely on the character and aims of individuals. Those intent
only on food will organize to obtain food ; those intent on science
will organize for scientific purposes. But the society also influ-
ences individuals, not only its members, but likewise outsiders.
It is thus clear that individual progress and social progress are inti-
mately related, though not identical.
The first sociological problem is chiefly this : the associative
elements in human aggregation ; that is, if men are thrown together
(aggregated), what tends to socialize them ? Each comes as an
individual, but his total personality does not enter any organiza-
tion that may be formed ; what, however, is there in the individuals
that can be shared and made an interactive force ?
Thoughts, feelings, aims, an endless variety, can be communi-
cated. Perhaps we might speak of thought as the bones, feelings
as the nerves, and volitions as the muscles of the social organism ;
or we could speak of all as the tissues of society. From these
social factors we then distinguish those parts of the individual
which do not enter the social organism. A treasure buried in the
soul differs from a treasure in circulation.
This does not iiiterfei-e with the fact that the individual must
in his origin be considered as wholly a social product, and largely
so likewise in his training and development. Being absolutely
dependent on the environment in early life, and born into such
social achievements as language, literature, economic conditions,
schools, the cliurch, the state, it can almost be said that he is nuide
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 125
by society. His very constitution as the result of heredity is a
social product. But this does not eliminate the individual as dis-
tinct from society. He may do something for himself, educate
himself, choose his own course, and thus exercise his selfhood, and
prove that he is not absolutely dependent on social influence. He
can even oppose society or lead a hermit life. Unquestionably
Kant's *' Kritik of Pure Keason " could not have been produced
unless others had thought before its author ; but whatever social
element might be discovered in the work, much of it is singularly
Kantian and became a social factor only after he had produced
the book.
Some social movements absorb individuals more than others.
In the great migratory hordes which came into Europe from Asia
at the beginning of our era, the individual had to move with the
mass or be lost. The organic connection of each soldier iu the
German army with the total organism is very marked ; and yet
when thoroughly disciplined he is also expected to be prepared
for individual action in an emergency, which individual action is,
however, in harmony with the army itself. But many associations
absorb only a small fraction of the forces of their members.
Thus ten societies to which a man belongs may absorb one-tenth of
his forces; another tenth may be absorbed by social relations in an
unorganized form (such as company, social gatherings) ; two tenths
of his forces may be given to the community, the church, and the
state ; this would leave six tenths for his family and for private
(individual) affairs. By thus analyzing the forces which an indi-
vidual exercises we see with what limitations the statement must
be taken that an individual belongs to a society ; perhaps one hun-
dredth of him belongs. Even organizations so absorbing as the
Catholic Church and the social democracy leave a large sphere for
individual as distinct from social activity.
It is a common opinion that society is as its units (individuals),
and on this theory social systems are founded. Yet taken literally
the statement is misleading. A dozen savants form an association
for recreation. They eat, drink, smoke, have games, and sedulously
avoid learned subjects. Can you by knowing the individual savants
determine what society they have organized ? That society can only
be interpreted by its aim, by the associative forces which enter and
constitute it. Therefore it is not like the individuals, but only
like the energies of the individuals united in the recreative
association.
126 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
Only, tlien, if individuals were wholly absorbed by an association
would that association be as the individuals. But no association
can absolutely absorb the membei's ; therefore in every instance the
above rule applies, that the character of an association is not deter-
mined by the members, but solely by the social forces of the mem-
bers, and these social forces constitute the association. The social
energies thus furnish the scope of sociological inquiry.
REFLECTIONS.
Why does Social Analysis usually stop vrith the Indi-
vidual ? What are the Social Forces ? The Individual
and the Social Personality. What is there in Isolated Indi-
viduals that is not in Society ? What in Society that is
not in Isolated Individuals ? Difference bet^veen Biography
and History. Individuals no sure Test of the Association
they form. Ho"w can Associations be tested by the Forces
that enter them ? The exact Sociological Problem : not
one of Individuals, but of the Interaction of Social Forces.
Different Parts of Individuals absorbed by different Asso-
ciations (economic, political, literary, etc.). Difference in
respect to the Amount of the Individual ■wrhich Associations
absorb.
SOCIATION.
Men are not, and cannot be, literally united in
society; we say they are, but then we must define
exactly what we mean. Their bodies are not united ;
their minds do not coalesce; they remain distinct as
personalities. The individual personality in the same
man remains distinct from his social personality; the
strong man may at the same time grow in individuality
and in sociality. In his private life (in all that per-
tains to him solely as an individual), the individual
personality of a man acts; in society, the social per-
sonality. After what has l)ocn said, we shall not be
misunderstood in stating that society consists of social
THE PPJNCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 127
personalities as distinguished from individual or private
Itersonalitics. This is only another way of saying what
was said before, that society does not consist, strictly
speaking, of individuals, but only of so much of them
as is associated. Social we use here in the sense of all
personal powers which act on others, whether co-opera-
tively or antagonistically.
In order to make clear the notion that society con-
sists not of (undiscriminated) personalities, but of
social personalities, a new word is needed, a word to
designate what men share, what associates them, what
interacts as a social force. Association refers to the
associative factor, and would designate what we aim to
mark as distinct, were that word confined to the asso-
ciative element as the essence of society. Association
is, however, used for a union of men, thus promoting
the old error that men are united. But we seek a term
which rejects the old error, which gives the idea of
association, but confines this association to what is
actually associated. Now it happens that sociate is
used in the same sense as associate ; but sociation is not
in use. This noun we now form. We use it to desig-
nate those personal forces which interact between men ;
to indicate what men share, what associates. It
stands for all that makes society as distinguished from
the sum of individuals. Sociation thus gives the
essence of society (that which makes society society),
and differentiates it from all other objects. So far as
the personality is concerned, this new term distin-
guishes between the private and the social factors in
men. Sociation deals exclusively with the social per-
sonality. Regarding a man as social plus private, it
has nothing to do with the latter but to eliminate it
from the sphere of its inquiries. When we say that
128 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
certain elements in men are extra-social, we do not
mean that they are necessarily anti-social, but only
that they do not belong to the social energies which
constitute society. Sociation expresses the associative
energies as distinct from what is not associative. In
association men are conceived as the dominant factors;
but in sociation the forces in men which become social
are dominant. The opposite of association is men in
isolation; the opposite of sociation is individual powers
unassociated. Thus sociation always considers indi-
viduals only so far as they have associative, inter-
active factors, leaving a large realm of the individual
unconsidered.
Suppose I have a dozen steel horse-shoe magnets
lying on my table, for the purpose of studying magnet-
ism. How do I contemplate them ? Simply so far as
they are magnets, so far as their poles have attractive
and repulsive forces. The fact that the magnets are
steel concerns me only so far as steel is related to the
magnetic forces. I might consider the steel by itself,
its composition, its origin, its quality, its weight, its
relation to other metals, etc. ; but then I should have
to enter other departments than that of magnetism.
The steel in one horse-shoe docs not pass over to the
steel in another horse-shoe ; it is only the magnetic
force that interacts ; this T a])stract from the steel itself
and make the object of inquiry.
Let the twelve horse-shoes represent twelve indi-
viduals. Sociation does not consider them as indi-
viduals, but only that in them which interacts between
them; it drops the individuals as individuals, for the
purpose of concentrating the attention on the attractive
and repulsive forces of their magnetism which consti-
tute society.
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 129
Sociation therefore deals with social energy, and
with individuals only as repositories of this energy. ^
In some cases the bond of union is so definite and
simple as to be at once apparent. In a society for
vocal culture or in a choir, in an art society or scien-
tific association, in an economic combination or labor
union, the specific and limited character of the aim and
of the force exercised is unmistakable. In every such
instance, especially in a choir, it is striking that the
association is of individuals only as the possessors of
the particular force used.
By thus making society consist of what is actually
social, really interactive, and of nothing else, we get
the fundamental knowledge respecting the relation of
individuals to society. Those who say that society
consists of individuals, and mean what they say, can-
not discriminate between what is individual and what
social in the same personality. If society is truly an
organism of individuals, the totality of the individuals
must be absorbed by the organism. Others, however,
emphasize the individual to the neglect of the organ-
ism, as if he had no essential social relations. The
conflict ceases so soon as society is discovered to con-
sist only of so much of individuals as is socially inter-
active. Only that part of me which is literary belongs
to the literary society which I help to form ; all in me
that is not literary is not absorl^ed by the society, but
belongs to another sphere. Since there is an indi-
vidual (private) personality distinct from the social
1 If we regard physics, the science of energy, as inclusive of the mental
powers, we might adapt to our purpose Comte's definition of Sociology
as " social physics," though not in his sense. The science of social
energies is a good definition of Sociology ; but social physics seems to
imply only physical force, and is tlierefore objectionable.
9
130 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
personality, a man cannot properly be called an organ
of society, because he is something besides such an
organ; he has elements which are not social. The
individual is an organ of society in the same sense that
the Capitol in Washington is a Senate Chamber. It is
a Senate Chamber, but also much more.
Our view of sociation as distinct from association is
proved correct by applying it to various social forms
and controversies. Not only docs it give new interpre-
tations of what is otherwise obscure, but it also settles
certain disputes otherwise interminable.
Let us apply the explanation here given to the old
dispute between individualism and socialism,^ The
point is whether the individual or society shall be
regarded as supreme. Special prominence is given to
the subject in economics in connection with the laissez-
faire theory. So long as the individual is considered
in his totality as a personality, the controversy cannot
be settled ; because as such he is independent of society
and also dependent.
But analyze the personality ; recognize certain ele-
ments in the man which he shares with others, and
which thus become social, while other elements remain
individual and private; then the question is settled.
It is at once seen that in that case individualism and
socialism are no longer antagonistic, but each has a
sphere in which it is supreme. There is a realm which
belongs to a man as an individual : his intellect, his
conscience, his feelings, his private affairs. This realm
as the sphere of individual freedom and individual
rights is to be guarded sacredly against intrusion and
interference. He may be instructed and persuaded ;
but in these sacredly personal affairs he cannot be
1 Socialism is here used in the general sense of social control.
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 131
coerced. This every just law recognizes. Here indi-
vidualism reigns and must maintain its dominion.
The same individual, however, has a definite relation
to society, and the social elements in him are as dis-
tinctly marked as the private. As a social personality,
he moves in the realm where socialism reigns ; that is,
social laws prevail here, just as personal or private
laws in the other realm. If he wants to speak with his
fellows, he must use their language ; he must adapt
himself to them or them to himself (both processes are
social), in order to associate with them. In other
words, he must adapt himself to social laws in the
social sphere. He may go as he pleases while alone,
but in a crowd he must go with the crowd, or as it sees
fit to let him go. If he takes the left side of the bridge
at Dresden to cross the Elbe, he is jostled by the crowd
coming the other way. Every few steps he is greeted
with " Rechts gehen ! " and if he does not go to the right,
on the other side of the bridge, a policeman may take
him there, in order that he may move with and not
against the multitude. This is but an illustration of
the proverb, that in Rome one must do as the
Romans do.
Since therefore individualism and socialism are
both justified, having distinct spheres instead of being
antagonistic, the old controversy as to which shall
prevail is settled. Both are to prevail, but each in its
specific sphere. As a principle, each becomes false and
unjust only when it encroaches on the sphere of the
other. The new problem which confronts us in place
of the old controversy is this: how much in the per-
sonality is purely individual, a private matter and
therefore a man's own affair, which society may in-
fluence but cannot control ? And how much is social.
132 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
belongs to society and therefore subject to social
control ?
We now have a law of universal application to the
individual and to society. The individual (so far as
social) acts on society, and society acts on the indi-
vidual; but the line between individual and social con-
trol is distinctly marked. Henceforth the aim should
be to individualize all that is individual, and to social-
ize all that is social. Light is thus thrown likewise
on education. The individual is to be developed to
the utmost for his own sake; education is to aim at
the best personality. He has value in himself, and
this value is to be unfolded to the greatest worthiness.
But he is also a member of society, and therefore to be
educated for social ends. His individual perfection
and his social perfection are to be organically united,
so that his individual perfection makes him the more
perfect socially, and that his social perfection exalts
him as an individual.
The law established applies to politics, to business,
and to all social affairs. In every department we must
distinguish between what is private and what social, in
the personality. It is one and the same personality,
but viewed in different aspects, now self-centred, then
going out into society. The demand is equally impera-
tive that there be the greatest individuality, and the
most perfect sociality. Where the private and the
social elements are properly hai-monized, the strongest
individuality is likewise the strongest social power.
Our analysis of the individual into private and social
functions removes another common error. The state-
ment is constantly made that by entering society the
individual sacrifices some of his liberty. Only if
society is false will it demand that personal liberty be
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 133
sacrificed. If it is meant that in society an individual
cannot act as if he were isolated, the statement simply
means that he cannot act contrary to the nature of
things. In society a man cannot act as if he were out
of society, for the reason that he is in it and not out of
it. No true society interferes with the freedom inhe-
rent in man, but recognizes and encourages that free-
dom. By passing from isolation into social relations,
the individual changes his conditions, but does not lose
his freedom. Personally, in his private affairs, he is
as free as ever he was. But while he retains all the
real freedom he had in isolation, his life is augmented
by entering society. Besides the real freedom he
retains, he now sustains social relations and enters
upon social action. Indeed, we may well question
whether freedom applies to men isolated. Freedom
from what ? It is in society, where men can maintain
their views in the face of false restraints, that freedom
manifests itself.
Another error has been promoted by the theory that
the individual is absorbed by society. It has been
claimed that individuality will disappear as socializa-
tion advances. Hardly a more serious objection could
be urged against socialization. Some claim that to
associate is to stoop; but in many cases association
means exaltation. Emerson says, that in society " the
virtue in most request is conformity ; " but by resisting
foolish conformity independence is developed. Tauler
said, "I never mingled with men but I came home
less of a man than I went out. " All, however, are not
Taulers; his standard was that of a mystic and ho
naturally favored solitude ; and the society accessible
may not have been of the best.
The o])jcction that with socialization individuality
134 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
vanishes is overthrown when the error on which it
rests is exposed. The large sphere of individual free-
dom is also the sphere of individuality. To rob a man
of this freedom by society would make society the
means of slavery. The perfection of society is enhanced
by social forces backed by individuality, forces which
prevent a dead monotony by promoting diversity in
unity. The true society, which distinguishes between
the private and the social elements in the personality,
encourages individuality.
The view given of sociation throws important light
on communism, socialism, and all forms of society. If
society is composed of individuals, how can society
absorb the individuals ? What is it, then, that absorbs
the individuals ? There is nothing but individuals ;
therefore they must absorb one another. The neces-
sary limit of communism is what men have in common.
Our explanation of society also interprets another
phenomenon otherwise unaccountable. If society de-
pends on individuals (instead of the social factors of
individuals), how docs it happen that often persons of
superior personal excellence and unusual development
make but poor society ? They meet rarely, are little
communicative when they do meet, further no great
social interest, arc perhaps indifferent even to their
own community and state. The answer is that society
is not literally constituted of men, but only of their
social elements, whose exercise maybe sadly neglected.
The excellent men under consideration have been
developed individually, but not socially; each is im-
prisoned in his particular sphere and cannot enter that
of his fellows. Perhaps abstract scholarship so absorbs
the attention that the social organism receives none.
Even institutions of learning may aggregate rather
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 135
than associate the professors. Thus personal superior-
ity does not involve social superiority. What men are
determines their individual character ; what they share
determines their social character. The sociation of
personal forces is not identical with the association of
men.
This distinction also throws light on history. The
sociation of an era is not an absolute test of the char-
acter of that era. The men may personally be of a high
grade, while the sociation is very imperfect. Thus a
generation may be rich in biography and have little
history. Another generation may be rich in history
and poor in biography. A thousand strong men iso-
lated receive no attention in history, while much atten-
tion may be given to a thousand men less strong, but
organized. A million laborers in a country may be
passed without mention by the historian; organized,
they may form the dominant historic current. In order
to compare one generation with another we must inquire
into the progress made by sociation in them. A thou-
sand separate wires may be invisible at a short distance,
or so scattered that only one is seen at a time; but
wrought into a single coil, it is distinctly visible and
of immense power; yet each wire taken by itself is no
stronger than before. There are degrees of isolation
and sociation in different ages, and they are important
tests of the ages themselves. There is an age of Louis
XIV. because sociation in general was so imperfect;
hence by a single name that age is characterized in
France. Then the sociation of revolutionary forces
took place, and the French Revolution stands not for a
name, but for the volcanic energies of an infuriated
people.
The view given of sociation shows why all attempts
136 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
to apprehend society as an entity or a discrete object
have failed. Society is not an organism like a plant
or an animal. It is something very real, but not an
indissoluble unit. It consists of forces which change
constantly. Individuals come and go, their social
energies vary, and thus society itself is subject to
change. Sometimes the social mechanism is so fixed
that there is a certain continuity even amid great
changes of individuals, as in certain churches, states,
and institutions. When we speak of the Catholic
Church, we mean a system of theoretical and practical
energies (doctrines, institutions, practices) ; and of the
millions who belong to that church, we think as Catho-
lic only so far as they are the embodiment of these
energies.
Having now given an explanation of sociation and
its relation to the ordinary sense of association, it will
henceforth be understood what we mean when we use
the old terms and speak of society as composed of indi-
viduals. When we have spoken thus in preceding
pages, the sense, after the explanation given, cannot
be mistaken. Let association be used, but let it mean
sociation. The beginner may find it diflficult to treat
society as a system of forces; but practice will over-
come the difficulty, and he will soon wonder how he
could ever imagine that society consisted of indi-
viduals as totalities, instead of the social energies of
individuals.
Men are in society and never can get out of it. Were all other
bonds severed, invisible ones would still unite them to the family
and to humanity. But when we say that men are in society, we
usually mean that they are in social groups, affecting them and
affected by them. They exert power and feel the influence of the
power exerted by others. But social power is not limited to per-
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PEll SE. 137
SOD ill presence iu company. The solitary student may solve prob-
lems and work out systems which produce social transformations.
The great uprising of Germany for freedom during the Napoleonic
wars has been ascribed to the moral power exerted by Kant.
Thus social energies work when their authors are not present or
are ah-eady dead.
"VVe now know what is meant when it is said that men unite or
combine or associate. They have a purpose in view, and it is this
purpose in each one which is united to the same purpose in the
others. The essential thing is what in each individual is asso-
ciated. I may have an associate ui business with whom I do not
associate in religion and politics. Each association I enter in-
volves certain interests and purposes and energies; other interests
and purposes and energies may be given to different associations
or to private matters.
The Greek word for community Koivwvia is from Koiwiw, to make
common, to communicate, to impart a thing, to make one a sharer
of something. This brings out the idea of the interaction of social
energies between individuals as the essential thing in association.
The process of socialization may make the idea of society more
definite. Certain aggregating forces bring people together, as
natural advantages for food and protection, and social advantages
in a city compared with the country. Men thus aggregated then
associate for various purposes, exerting different social energies in
different associations, forming societies for protection, for indus-
trial pursuits, for pleasure, and for such higher ends as can be
promoted better by union than in isolation. The first association
that rises out of the aggi-egation may be general and vague, only
society in embryo. By the process of socialization the social inter-
action can be developed indefinitely, forming all kinds of sociation
of various degi-ees and intimacy. The character of the society
formed depends, in every instance, on wliat personal forces be-
come social, and the intimacy of individuals in a society depends
on the degree in which things are held in common ; hence the
family is the society of gi-eatest intimacy.
We can easily verify these statements by an examination of
society. As a tree does not absorb the whole soil, but only so
much as its constitution requires, so each society takes from its
members w^hat its character requires. Thus individual recreative,
friendly, economic, religious energies become co-operative between
138 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
different persons and determine the nature of the societies formed.
Tlie test of societies here given is unmistakable : the nature of the
associative forces determines the character of the societies.
Every society likewise testifies that the intimacy of the members
depends on the degree in which social objects are shared.
Humanity constitutes a society only in the most general sense.
Whatever makes a man human constitutes him a member of the
human family, and only this human element is considered.
When we come to a particular race, as the African, we find the
bonds more intimate, because more is shared. Not only do those
of this race have in common all that makes them human, but like-
wise all that makes them Africans.
Still more intimate are the bonds when members of the same
humanity and the same race also have the same nationality. All
the national bonds serve to make them one.
The bonds of humanity, of race, and of nation are real, but do
not depend on our consciousness of them ; they exist whether we
recognize them or not. But when these bonds are recognized it is
evident that the ties of race and nationality unite more closely
than the looser ties of humanity.
The closest ties are those of the family, because in the family
more is shared than in other associations. Here, as in every other
aspect, we thus see that in each case it is what men share that
unites them and constitutes the association ; and that the perfec-
tion of a society consists in the nature of what men share and in
the degTee in which they share it.
We must distinguish between what men really have in common
and what they recognize in one another as common. Not what
men have in common is the attractive power to draw them to-
gether ; not even what they recognize as held in common is such
a power. That which attracts men to one another consists of
qualities they desire and seek. If another has only what I have,
I may not need or want him ; but if he has what I lack and seek,
the strongest attraction may exist. It is like the attraction of
negative and positive magnetic poles. Men may be too alilvc for
intimacy; what they have in common does not coalesce. The
bonds of union are formed by what is consciously needed and
appreciated, and whose growth can be promoted by co-operation.
Societies are formed when what men have in common interacts,
attracts, coalesces.
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 139
A very definite idea of society is thus given. Sociation consists
of the ties which unite men, of the interaction of personal forces
in different individuals. Twenty men anxious for civil reform
combine for tha,t purpose. This purpose is the bond of union, the
one factor which constitutes the association. Each man may have
a hundred private and social interests which are not absorbed into
that organization.
The idea of sociation is so emphasized here because heretofore
the chief difficulty respecting society has been that its distinctive
feature was not set in bold relief. Sociology itself was confused
because the individual himself was merged in society ; what he
himself is was not distinguished from what he shares, that is, the
purely individual factor in him has not been distinguished from
the social factor. In social analysis we have stopped with the in-
dividual, whereas the social element in him is the ultimate object
of the analysis.
Political economy is one of the social sciences. It exists for
men, and men are always the producers, possessors, and consumers
of the wealth which is the object of economics. Why is it that in
political economy we think of the laws of production, distribution,
exchange, and consumption, without always thinking of men as
the ones whom these laws concern ? We consider the economic
forces by themselves so readily because the science of economics is
so fully developed ; its laws of production have been made to
stand out by themselves, so that we can contemplate them without
continually considering the persons who are the producers.
That we cannot so readily abstract all the social forces from
the individuals is due to the fact that Sociology is comparatively
new ; attention has been concentrated on the members of society,
rather than on the laws of the social forces. Let Sociology have
the age and development of political economy, then the social
forces will be more distinct and the aggregation of individuals
less obtrusive. Sociation as a process involves a development of
all the forces which constitute society, and thus stands for the
development of society itself. In large outlines we can indicate
this process.
It begins in the most elementary manner, just as is the case in
all evolution. The personal forces of different individuals inter-
act and thus become social forces. The simplest form of society is
constituted by that primitive interaction of forces which takes
140 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
place when the first process of association arises from mere aggre-
gation. Thus some thought is coinmunicated and responded to,
this leads to other thoughts, emotions are aroused and inter-
changed, plans are adopted, social action results. This simple be-
ginning has in it the germs for all kinds of sociative development
according to cii'cumstances and needs.
Sociation must therefore be apprehended as living, small in the
beginning, but capable of endless growth. Thus we apprehend it
as an organism. In this organism (not an organism of persons, but
of personal energies) are concentrated all the factors and forces
wliich constitute sociation. Sociology deals solely with this socia-
tion, its origin, its development, and its culmination.
Taken throughout humanity and throughout history, sociation
has contents so vast and rich that detailed description is out of the
question. But certain great groups can be formed of these con-
tents and become objects of special inquiry. Three such groups
are here presented.
1. In the process of sociation many things occur which leave no
evident marks behind. It is not meant that there can be social
action which produces no effect whatever. All action must have
some results. But the result may not be in the foi-m of distinct
traces, it cannot be pointed to as exerting historical influence.
Most social action is evidently of this kind. However effective
it may be in exerting an influence on the actor and on others,
nothing of it remains to be pointed to as an abiding energy in
future processes. Thus words are spoken, schemes are discussed,
plans are laid, and deeds are done, which are like drops that fall in
the great stream of human liistory, which stream they help to
form, but in which they remain forever indistinguishable. How
little even of what was done last year stands distinctly before any
mind ? Some years of the past have left no traces whatever ;
decades, ages, centuries, with all their multitudinous activities, are
now a blank to us. Yet there can be no doubt that this unrecorded
and untraceable social action has been very effective in the evolu-
tion of society and tlie making of history.
2. In distinction from this social action which leaves no trace
behind, we find that certain deposits are made which remain un-
changeable. Perhaps long periods have wrought for their ]>roduc-
tion and they are the culmination of extended processes of thought
and effort. They remain stationary because they seem finished;
men use them as they are, Imt do not attempt to alter them.
THE PRLXCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 141
111 this class certain games are prominent, as chess, checkers,
cards, ball. There may in some be slight changes, new combina-
tions, as in games of cards and ball ; but in the main they are
stationary. Proverbs, all thoughts that seem settled, certain insti-
tutions, as monogamy, and all severe dogmatism and traditional-
ism, belong to this second class. They are survivals, perhaps of
the utmost value, petrifactions, fossils. Custom has something
of this element. A large part of life, in some cases more than
others, is attached to those fixed things. China is the classic land
for illustrations ; the caste system of India and other lands belongs
to this kind of contents. In religious systems the Bible and the
Koran are such culminations.
3. Distinct from the social forces \Yhich come and go without
leaving a trace, and from those which form changeless deposits
which perdure throughout the ages, we have a third class of con-
tents, such, namely, as are represented in continuous processes of
development. The tendency to processes of organization is very
marked in social movement. As the mind generalizes and con-
structs multitudes of phenomena into the unity of a system, so in
the progress of human history there is a trend to unite numerous
social factors and forces into a gi'owing organism. This is the
department of Sociology, as seen above, which has received special
attention.
In this process of integi'ation and organization we place the
family, which is a growth. It has in many resj)ects become
stationary, certain elements being regarded as fixed ; still, in other
respects it is capable of development. Here also belong the church,
the state, and numerous other organizations and institutions, all of
them with fixed but also with variable elements.
In language we have a good type of this organic process. Lan-
guage is a body whose soul is thought. It is a growth from small
beginnings, as roots, now mostly buried so deep in the past as to
be beyond recovery, developing for countless ages increments
visible and invisible, and still continuing its process of evolution.
The dead languages belong to the second class, but all living ones
to the third. Thus a language appears like an organism.
Philosophy, science, literature, are similar, though the organic
connection is not always so clearly tracealile in them as in the
growth of language. There are of course in language, and in all
social organisms, fixed as well as growing elements. In proportion
142 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
as any iustitutiou is stationary or developing, it may be called
static or dynamic.
It is an interesting question why certain social forces tend to
form permanent organizations, while others do not. Is it due to
the dominant interest involved, which organizes certain social
forces, as love, economics, religion, politics ; or is there something
in the forces themselves which leads to their organization ? The
play element, the recreative tendencies, whatever depends chiefly
on spontaneity, seem too subjective to form organizations as readily
as what is more objective, as economics, politics, and charitable
institutions. Evidently we can look for organization only where
there is continuity and likewise advantage in co-operation.
The idea of sociation may be brought out more distinctly by
considering some of the lower forms of organisms. Some of these
forms of animal life hardly present more individuation than is
found in a plant, all the members of the organism being so united
that each is an indivisible part of the totality, all growing together
and depending on one another, similar to the different parts of a
plant. In such cases we can speak of the social animal organism
as absorbing the individuals; they literally constitute the organ-
ism. When we come to bees and ants, there is close organization ;
bees and ants are, however, not merely distinct individuals, but
they act as individuals, so that they can be separated from one
community and put into another. In the case of man we find
that the individual counts least in some primitive societies, being
most completely absorbed by the family or tribe. Civilization is
largely a process of individualization. The social personality
grows, but likewise the individual personality. In proportion as
individuality, independence, personal interests and private affairs
are developed, the individual is differentiated from society. His
social force may be greater than ever; but it is impossible to make
him merely a social cell, or to lose him in the totality. Society
itself ceases to be a mere mass as personalities are more and more
differentiated. A man is more than merely a social specimen in
proportion as he has individuality and distinct personality.
Some pi'ocesses of evolution have been referred to in this
chapter for the purpose of making more clear the thought expressed
by sociation. This in a measure anticipates tlie next chapter; but
tlicre is no danger of confusion. Wliafevcr illustrates the actual
nature of society will make the following chapters more easy.
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 143
REFLECTIONS.
Define Sociation. Distinction between Sociation and
Association. Society an Organism of Social Forces distin-
guished from an Organism of Individuals. Illustration from
Magnetism. From Physics. Application of Sociation to In-
dividualism and Socialism. Relation of the Individual to
the Social Organism. How far does Social Excellence de-
pend on Individual Excellence ? Is the Society of an Age
an Exact Test of the Character of the Age ? Sociation as a
System. Growth from Aggregation. On what does Social
Intimacy depend ? The Relation of Individuation to Socia-
tion.
B. The Principles.
Principles are beginnings, foundations, ultimate con-
ceptions. We mean by the principles of society those
essentials which constitute society and are the final
interpretation of social phenomena. Wherever these
essentials are, there society is; where one of them is
lacking, society cannot be. These essentials exist in
that primitive condition when society first appears, they
continue through all stages of social development, and,
if society ever reached ideal perfection, they would still
be its characteristics, just as in the beginning. We
want whatever is essential to society per se, the sub-
stance, that perduring element which is the test of all
social existence in humanity. If, for instance, an
interaction of the forces of different individuals con-
stitutes society, then there must be society wherever
such an interaction is found, and never where this
interaction does not take place. The social energies
of individuals may change, the kind of association be
altered, and the whole character of society transformed ;
but there will continue to be society so long as the
forces exerted by individuals interact.
144 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
Our first division therefore discusses the structure of
society; the social functions are involved only so far as
directly connected with the structure. Aiming solely
at the fundamental anatomy and physiology of the social
organism, we do not consider the changes wrought in
the skeleton and the muscles by means of climate,
food, and exercise. The growth, adaptations, and mod-
ifications of the body we leave to the second division.
We weigh what is essential for the race; we do not
follow the races as they unfold their peculiarities.
Our attention is concentrated on the alphabet, not on
the vast literature which is produced by combining its
letters. The social embryo is the object of inves-
tigation.
The ultimate social basis which we seek gives society
in its most general sense and most abstract form. All
it contains is essential for the social structure. The
student will therefore expect no account of any particu-
lar kind of society, nor of that concrete fulness which
characterizes the actually existing societies. Yet this
first division of Sociology is not barren; it seems inex-
haustible. It involves a discussion of the forces which
constitute and control society, and which are the sources
of the social phenomena. The individuals who possess
the forces must likewise be considered, and the rela-
tion of these forces to what remains unsocialized in
the same individuals. The social energies are the key
to the interpretation of society; that which attracts,
repels, unites, divides men must be explained; the
method according to which the social foi-ccs interact
should likewise be studied. A complete knowledge of
the social energies would enable us to understand all
actual and possible social ])henomena, just as a perfect
knowledge of the chemical elements would enable us to
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 145
understand all forms produced by their combination
throughout the universe. Indeed, our first division
deals with the elements of society, while the other
divisions treat of their actual combinations.
The clicmical elements can be fully understood only
according to their manifestations and combinations.
So it may be claimed that the fundamental elements
of society can be fully known only as they work in
society. To this supposition, it seems, we owe the
stress on social phenomena and the neglect of their
ultimate sources, on the part of sociological writers.
But do we wait until we understand their perfect work-
ings before we consider hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen,
and the other elements in chemistry? So soon as
recognized they are treated as elements ; then experi-
ments are made with them in order to learn what
combinations they can enter and what they can do.
Perhaps the sixty or seventy known elements are
reducible to a primitive one. But we do not refrain
from their separate use until this reduction is accom-
plished. In Sociology our procedure is similar. We
take the elements which constitute society as we know
them, put them at the basis of social phenomena, and
as their manifestations add new knowledge respecting
their nature we thankfully accept it.
Since the individuals which are the possessors of the
social energies are not abstractions, but living beings,
they must be considered as such. And they must be
apprehended according to their actuality, namely, in
their real environment. It is impossible to abstract
man from nature and yet conceive him as he really is ;
therefore we must take him and the society he forms
in connection with the earthly conditions in which he
is placed. Neither can the individual be viewed as
10
146 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
abstracted from his fellow-men. We must consider
men in society as modified by their relations to one
another and affected by their earthly environment.
Not as empty abstractions, therefore, do we regard the
social essences, but we seek to get all they involve; yet
all we get must be in a principiant form, as an ulti-
mate associative factor and force, not in detail, not as
historically developed. If certain elements are essen-
tial to society, we aim to learn what these are ; after
we discover what they involve, we leave to the other
divisions what has actually been evolved from them
and what ought to be evolved. The principles of
society thus include all those powers which, in the
process of evolution, unfold the various social types,
constitute states, create voluntary organizations, and
develop the social phenomena. Society per se is thus
viewed as that potentiality or possibility from which
the social actuality emerges.
Every writer on Sociology considers principles as
the most essential elements in the social system, and
cannot do otherwise. They are the essence both of
static and of dynamic Sociology. Thus we find that
even those who do not adopt it justify our first division.
These principles are to bring into bold relief what is
characteristic of human society. The chaos regnant in
Sociology, as we have seen, is largely due to the fact
that the peculiarities of man have not been distinctly
marked. We seek that difference which gives distinct-
ness. Little service is rendered by describing a Gothic
cathedral as a building ; we want to know what Jcind of
a building it is. So long as all the features of human
society are made prominent, except those which make
it human, we cannot expect to overcome the prevalent
confusion. Only after its exact nature has been dis-
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 147
covered can we determine the relations of society. It
may help us to understand the ancient Greeks if we
consider their indebtedness to Egypt and to Asiatic
peoples ; but we must go to the Greeks themselves to
know the Greeks.
Every consideration leads us to emphasize the prin-
ciples of human society as the first concern. They are
so to mark this society that every one who grasps
these principles at once recognizes it wherever found.
When I deny that the physical processes alone explain
chemistry, I do not reject them from chemistry. Just
as we want chemistry as distinct from physics, so we
want human society in its distinctness as given by its
principles.
Some of the elements involved in our division can
now be indicated briefly. As already intimated, if we
get all that is involved in the principles of society, we
shall have those elements which are required to inter-
pret all the social phases which appear in the processes
of history. Thus our first division involves the essence
of sociation; that is, what it is in individuals which
sociates them. These sociative forces naturally lead
us to consider human nature, the character of the
individuals whose forces compose society, their physi-
cal being and their mental capacity. Besides this
large department which includes the whole of the social
personality, we have also external nature, on which
man depends, and which constitutes his perpetual indi-
vidual and social environment. Studies like these
deal with the first five disciplines in Comte's hierarchy
of the sciences. Then all that pertains to the associa-
tion of men with one another is involved, the reasons
for association, the kinds of association possible, the
means of association, how far association is a condition
148 IXTRODUCTIOX TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
of culture, how far a necessity for a livelihood and for
protection, and how far a convenience or pleasure. It
will be seen that every point under the first division
is intended to explain the essentials of society. All
this, however, is only preliminary, something like the
axioms in geometry. The above shows that in human
society we have a union of human and natural elements,
and this affords a basis for the physical, mental, moral,
and religious factors in association.
Now let us glance at the society whose general inter-
pretation this first division seeks. Is it an entity, like
a human being ? Is it an organism ? Certainly not of
individuals. But even if we define society as a union
of interacting social energies, it is not an organism in
the literal sense in which an individual is an organism.
We speak of a Zeitgeist or Volksgeist ; but can there
literally be a national mind? Can individual minds
coalesce and in any rational sense form a collective
mind ? The social forces exist in concrete individuals,
and pass over to other individuals. Hence we must
consider individuals in certain relations, exerting influ-
ences on one another. Mr. Spencer says that " the pro-
perties of the units determine the properties of the
aggregate. " ^ This should bo changed to read that the
interaction of the social properties of the units deter-
mines the aggregate. We know that by sharing certain
elements and exerting certain powers the individual
organisms become the means of forming the social
organism. "The characteristic of organic development
is found in the progressive subordination of the part to
the whole and the progressive differentiation of the
parts into organs. "^ What principles promote or limit
this subordination and differentiation?
1 Study of Soci()lof^\% 52.
2 " Social Peace," Schulze-Gavernitz, 289.
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 149
This will give some idea of the vastness and impor-
tance of our first division. It deals, in a principiant
form, with what is fundamental for the whole science
of society. In an age when men live in the concrete
and make their investigations almost exclusively empir-
ical, many find it extremely difficult to grasp com-
prehensive principles which contain in epitome the
whole subject. But for clearness these principles are
indispensable.
Some may be tempted to regard these principles as
the only business of Sociology. The human mind, how-
ever, is not content with abstractions and theories;
these are apt to interest it only for the sake of the
reality which they interpret and to which they lead.
Besides these principles, explaining the idea of society,
we want to see their application in real life ; that is,
we want to learn what society is historically, and what
it ought to be. By no a priori process can we evolve
from these principles the social actuality ; past failures
serve as a warning against attempting to construct his-
tory according to a preconceived theory of human nature
and of human development. Whatever truth there
may be in general conceptions on the subject, we can
learn the actual evolution of society only from a study
of that evolution. As we go to history for our know-
ledge of the historic processes, so we go to society as it
is and has been for a knowledge of the application of
the principles to the social reality. The principles
are, therefore, but the basis for the further development
of Sociology.
In a former age our first division might have been
more readily than at present designated as that part
which deals with the social affinities. Rightly under-
stood this gives the true conception. Social affinity
150 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
must not, however, be conceived as an abstract innate
human quality, but as solicited and developed by cir-
cumstances, by sociation, by culture, and by the influ-
ences exerted on the individual. With the elements of
social affinity the repulsive forces must likewise be con-
sidered. The basis for the affinities and for repulsion
of course lies in human nature ; but this nature must
be studied according to all the influences to which it
is subject.
The principles of society, that which society in every form always
involves, — by getting these primitive elements of society we not
only discover what it must be, but likewise its possibilities. Owing
to the abstractions it involves, the student will find this the most
difficult division ; as it, however, gives the essence of the subject,
it is worthy of the effort it requires.
Individual elements and forces associated and interacting, the
central thought. AVhat are these individuals ? Not as abstractions,
but as realities, must they be taken. They always have an envii-on-
ment, and they must be considered with the environment, modify-
ing it and modified by it. Man and his conditions are thus placed
before us. Sociology, as we have seen, cannot be expected to evolve
all the natural and human sciences involved in man and his sur-
roundings ; it depends on the sciences that have been developed,
and appropriates their results as needed. A vast sphere is included
in the very presuppositions of Sociology. The next step is what is
commonly called the association of individuals. Just what is meant
by this association ? What kinds and degrees of association are
possil)le ? Then the causes which lead to association. The associ-
ative elements and their possibilities furnish fruitful themes, and
they are not yet fully developed. After the idea of association is
grasped we want to get what it implies. Fundamental questions
arise on which all future progress depends.
Numerous social discussions of the day involve the question in
what sense society is an organism and the individual an organ. In
part the question has already been considered. Literally, an
organism is always an individual; but there are analogies to an
organism in society. Figuratively, then, we speak of society as
an orjianism and of individuals as social organs. In the same
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 151
sense we speak of a social mind, a social consciousness, a social
conscience. Literally they cannot exist. There is no conscious-
ness in society except in the individuals in society. When Con-
gress is of the same mind, the meaning is that the members have
come to an agreement. The state is personified and caUed an
ethical, political, juridical, or executive personality; but that is
only a personification. State action may be a unit because an
absolute monarch acts ; or it may be a unit because the represen-
tatives of authority act as one man, agreeing and co-operating
respecting a particular policy.
While the collective mind in the literal sense is a myth, many
objects are embodied in the consensus of the collectivity. Public
thought, feeling, interest, and movement are involved in the state,
in institutions, in language, and in literature.
Even, however, by taking figuratively such expressions as the
social (or public) mind, the social consciousness, and the social
conscience, they have an important meaning. In our study of
association we aim to discover the associative factors. We can
call the common or social elements the mind of the association.
Thus the problem of a society becomes essentially that of its
psychology, though the mind must not be severed from its bodily
or natural environment. The following are fundamental questions
in the study of every society ; What is the character of its mind ?
AVhat are the contents of the mind ? Whence were the contents
of the mind derived ? How are they developed ?
The mind of an association is in organic connection with the
minds of other associations. Therefore just as an individual mind
can be understood only when taken in its relation to other minds
with which it is connected, so the mind of an association can be
understood only as connected with the minds of other associations.
Thus the associations of a state, of a nation, and of the world
influence one another, and we can speak of a psychology of each
particular association, of a psychology of different nations, and of
a psychology of society as including associated humanity.
A definite object of inquiry is presented by the mind of a labor
organization, of a capitalistic combination, of a literary society, of
a church, and of a people. Of each we want the contents and
consciousness. Mind is here used as inclusive of aU that pertains
to the idea, the sensibility, the purpose, and the action of an asso-
ciation. The genesis of a society is really the genesis of its mind.
152 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
The conditions of this genesis are found in the character of the
social personalities, in the natural environment, in the actual needs
and interests, and in the means within reach for realizing social
ends. The different conditions which prevail explain the difference
between the mind of a savage horde and that of a social group in a
civilized stage.
So important is the social mind that the first division of Soci-
ology should leave no doubt as to its meaning. That division must
likewise explain what is meant by the social organism and what
the relation of the individual to the organism is. What of the in-
dividual has society a right to appropriate, and what can he claim
as an inalienable right of his personality? Some of the deepest
problems of psychology ai'e involved. The dependence of the in-
dividual on society never before received such emphasis ; but soci-
ety cannot even exist without the individixal. In proportion as
society is exalted, the individual should likewise be exalted. Our
analysis has established that the social energies are individual
forces ; therefore to emphasize what is social also emphasizes what
is individual. The individual and society are therefore co-operative.
In some measure that which concerns each concerns all. Each
works for all and all for each. Of the fruit each produces, it can
be said : —
"It forwards the General Deed of Man,
And each of the Many helps to recruit
The life of the race by a general plan,
Each living his own to boot."
The above suffices for a general conception of the fundamental
character, as well as of the richness and importance, of this division,
though we are well aware that the music is not in the knowledge
of the notes, but in the vsinging. We are only at the preliminary
considerations on which the following divisions depend. The germ
of the social evolution is not the tree in its concrete development,
but the source of all it becomes.
We place stress on the dualism and monism involved in society.
The individual and yet society, that is the problem. They are
distinct, but not independent ; just as the tree is distinct from the
soil, but not independent of it. The sacrifice of the individuals
means the annihilation of society. If individuals are the indepen-
dent monads of Leibnitz, where is tlie organism ? If society is the
substance of Spinoza, where is the individual ? How can the trutli
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 153
in the extremes of atomism (individualism) and of monism (social
organism in the literal sense, communism) be adopted, while the
errors are rejected ?
An interesting discussion of the community and the individual,
from the Christian but also philosophical point of view, is contained
under the head of Socialism and Individualism, in the first volume
of Martensen's " Christian Ethics." He regards Vinet and Kierke-
gaard as representatives of individualism. Besides pantheists, who
lose the individual in the social organism, we find a number of
modern writers who fail to do justice to the individual. Mulford,
in "The Nation," speaks of the nation as a conscious organism, a
moral organism, a moral personality, and uses numerous similar
expressions. One need but reflect on seventy million persons form-
ing another moral person in order to see that the expression is mis-
leading, unless taken figuratively.
For clearness the student will find it advantageous to discrimin-
ate between society itself and its products. Language, literature,
institutions, are social products, and likewise social instruments or
agencies ; we can, however, consider them by themselves and shall
find it profitable to do so. There is no difiiculty in understanding
social progress as the progress of the social individuals, if we always
take these individuals in connection vdth their environment. But
can we not also speak of social progress aside from the actual prog-
ress of the individual members of society ? May there not be
progress in the social products, such as language, literature, govern-
ment, while we cannot claim that the individuals have progressed
beyond the preceding generation ?
The close relation of individual to social progress must not be
taken as identical. Individual progress means social progress only
so far as the individual imparts to society the result of his own
development. There may be a marked difference between the
social potentiality and the social efficiency of individuals. Like
isolated threads are the individual forces which can become social
but do not ; like a cloth woven from the isolated threads are these
same forces when made social and actually interacting.
In order that the student may be able to grasp the idea of
society, he will find it important to define exactly what is meant by
social. What is individual pertains simply to the indi\'idual, as a
thought or feeling or possession which he keeps entirely to himself.
When he keeps from society what ought to be communicated we
154 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
pronounce him selfish, egoistic. It is in contrast with what is indi-
vidual that the meaning of social is made evident. Social is what
is communicated, shared, imparted to others so as to be theirs as
well as mine. The thought, the feeling, the possession, which I
share with others is social. Thus everything which a number of
persons have in common is social ; it is something which is not
confined to an individual, but is a possession of society. My pri-
vate opinion is individual ; public opinion is social ; property is
private so far as wholly subject to private control ; but it is social
so far as society has claims on it in respect to taxes or otherwise.
The individual himself is social in exact proportion to his relation
to, and influence in, society. Thus the same object may be indi-
vidual (so far as purely a personal concern) and social (so far as
shared by society).
But why share anything with others? The complete answer
would give the reason for the existence of society. This reason
constitutes a prominent part of our first division.
A convenient and fruitful discussion of what is involved in
human association may be pursued under the head of the following
classification : —
1. Natural Conditions which make Society possible.
2. Social Aims.
3. Social Media.
4. Personal Social Forces.
5. Social Products.
Each of these is so rich as to be worthy of separate and elabo-
rate treatment.
The first head includes those natural conditions of soil and cli-
mate which make it possible for society to live. It is the natural
presuppositions of society which ai'e here involved. There are
certain aggregating forces which bring men together, and thus the
condition for association is given.
The social aims, the second head, refer to all the conscious
purposes of men in associating. The aims exist in individuals and
may vary greatly ; only so far as common to a social group can
these aims be said to belong to society. We must distinguish
between the social aim of the individual and that of society. An
individual may make selfish ends his motive for joining a society
whose aim is altruistic.
It is in considering the social aims that the distinctive features
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 155
of society appear. In nature we have causes which work with the
absolute necessity of fate, involving inevitably the effects that are
produced. But in human society an object can be chosen, remote,
future, and its attainment made the specific aim. Thus the force
is not behind a man (cause) pushing him resistlessly onward, but
it is before him, drawing him toward it, fi:xed and chosen by him-
self. This teleological movement, this rational design, is wholly
distinct from blind impulse or dark instinct or any other force to
which a man is irresistibly subject. The aim is his own and is
subject to him.
But society is not merely marked by the fact that it moves teleo-
logically, but also by the character of its aims. The man puts
himself into his purposes, and in the aims he pursues he reveals
all that distinguishes him from his environment. Social design
does not deny the mechanical necessity to which all life is subject ;
but it uses nature's mechanism rationally, for the accomplishment
of the chosen end.
Social aims differ with the advance of society, and these aims
are among the best tests of society. An individual may have an
aim far superior to that of his environment ; by making it social,
society itself will be exalted.
Under the third head, social media, we include all the means of
social communication, such as look, gesture, conduct, language,
literature, art, not considered according to what they are in them-
selves, but as social agencies.
The fourth head includes the various forces which influence
society. Laying aside natural causation so far as it affects society,
we deal with the forces of the human mind revealed in psychology.
Thus we have human needs, human passions, and human desires ;
all are to be considered as forces so far as they lead to association.
The conditions of association may be given by nature; but the
reasons for association are in men themselves. These reasons need
not always be conscious, and often are not ; nevertheless they have
their basis and source in human nature. The personal social forces
are of course in individuals ; but they are only such forces of indi-
viduals as are exerted on forces in other individuals.
Under the last head the results of social action are considered.
That society is a reality, not a vague notion, an empty relation, or
a fruitless abstraction, becomes clear so soon as we inquire into the
products of this action.
156 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
These products can be put under three heads : —
First, the effects of social action on the individual in society.
He is not the same after he exerts a social influence that he was
before ; effort and exercise have changed him. The swinging of
an axe in the air cuts no wood, but it develops muscle. Then, the
society in which he moves also exerts an influence on him.
Second, social action affects society itself as well as individuals.
The thoughts, the feelings, the motives communicated by indi-
viduals become a common possession ; what one has, all share,
and thus all are benefited. . It is this common property which
constitutes the social possession ; and as this is increased, society
itself advances. There is actual social growth ; first a few social
forces, then many ; their action at first simple, then complex ; edu-
cation advances, and all shai'e in the depth, breadth, and richness
of thought ; the forms of communication become more varied and
more polished ; the kinds of organization are increased, and higher
degrees of development are attained in them, revealing all the
differences between the endless social variety of modern civiliza-
tion and primitive monotony. This actual social growth or evo-
lution of the social organism is seen in every department of so-
ciety, in the family, in the friendly and recreative social groups,
in the industrial, literary, and aasthetic organizations, in the
church and in the state. Thus the energy which constitutes
society is like the electricity which at first plays wildly between
the clouds, then is mastered step by step, until the present use of
electricity is attained. Society as an actuality is beheld especially
in the evolution of the social organism by means of social action.
But this comes mider our second division.
Third, we have results of social action distinct from the effect
produced on individuals and on the social organism. While the
social element in language, literature, and art is unmistakable,
still they have a kind of independent and abstract existence.
Words may exist in a dictionary which are not used in society ; so
books may be buried in libraries, and even a Raphael may be lost
for ages. The treasures which Schliemann uncovered when he
excavated the ruins of the seven cities which rose one over an-
other, revealed social products which for many ages had not been
social possessions. There are thus social products which have an
abstract existence aside from society itself.
Considering these three distinct results of social action, we can
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 157
inquire into the nature and degree of each at particular times.
Does the civilization attained mean the superiority of individuals?
Or the superiority of society? Or the superiority of language,
literature, art, institutions, things which are produced by society
and yet are not the personal essence of society ?
In considering the principles of society per se we discover the
potential forces by whose interaction these various social products
are created.
There is a temptation to specify some particular reason or
motive for association, and to make this the interpretation of so-
ciety and the essential theme of Sociology. The more specific
such a motive is the more likely its failure to account for society.
The reasons for association must, as we have seen, be sought in
human nature. Wliile the individual acts as a unit in entering
society, a variety of motives may impel him, sometimes one and
then another being dominant.
Human natm-e being the ground of association, the particular
associations formed depend on the particular character of the
social forces in the individuals. This human nature is not to be
constructed a priori or determined speculatively, but to be taken
as it is. We say little when we affirm that men associate because
adapted to one another, yet that statement is fundamental.
Since the adaptation of individuals to one another furnishes the
basis of all sociological construction and development, it deserves
more attention in order that its meaning may be learned.
We mean that human association is always a result and a form
of human adaptation ; that we must look to this adaptation for
the explanation of all kinds and degrees of association ; and that
the interpretation of this adaptation is the interpretation of society
itself. This brings before us a fundamental problem of Sociology:
What is there iu individuals which so adapts them to one another
as to become the ground of association ?
The consciousness of need is the basis of human action ; the
line of action is determined by the hope of obtaining the supply
needed. A feels a need which B can supply, and that becomes the
ground of association. Thus all the needs of human nature for
which a supply can be found by companionship with others are
associative impulses. In union with B, A can better secure food
than when alone ; or he can better defend himself against an
enemy ; or he can gratify his passion and accomplish his desires ;
158 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
he finds a craving of his nature satisfied by companionship ; he
can by means of the association promote education and all the
interests of culture. In the most general terms, we may say that
A and B associate because by means of this association pain is
relieved and pleasui'e promoted and some interest subserved.
If now we could determine all the pleasures that can be en-
hanced, and all pains that can be relieved, and all interests that
can be subserved by association, then we should also have all the
motives for association. Here of course we take pleasure and
pain and interest in the most comprehensive sense, as including
everjiihmg which forms a ground for attraction. By this study
of need and adaptation we find such motives of association as the
following : industrial reasons and the whole realm of economics ;
reasons for safety against foes, military association and the state ;
the need of companionship, the vast realm of love and friend-
ship ; the need of recreation, societies for pleasm'e ; the cultiu'e of
the higher interests, education, literature, art, science, philosophy,
ethics, and religion. Thus in every instance the study of society
refers us back to the cause of association, to the motive lying at
its basis, and to the adaptation of men in their union with one
another to satisfy their needs. Here is the test for all society of
the past and the present, here the condition for all society of the
future.^
It is thus clear that it is not as an abstraction that we consider
human natm-e or the adaptation of men to one another. This
adaptation must be learned from its manifestations in society.
The association of A and B depends on the impression each re-
ceives from the other. Thus their imagined adaptation to one
another may take the place of the real adaptation. Mistakes in
this respect are common. The attraction between individuals
must not, however, always be thought to depend on full conscious-
ness. Many are attracted and repelled without being able to tell
why.
A and B are variable factors, living organisms subject to
growth and decay. With themselves their adaptation changes,
likewise their association. Thus we have evolution in individuals,
in their social forces, and in society, resulting in differences in
the kinds and degrees of association.
In thus taking the totality of human nature into account in
^ For a classification of the iiiii)ulscs which lead to association see the next
chapter.
THE PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY PER SE. 159
order to determine the adaptability of men to one another, wo
indicate our relation to the sociologists who make a particular
element in man the associative factor. No motive or force in man
can be understood unless taken in its organic connection with the
entire personality of which it forms an integi-al part. The struggle
for existence can be regarded as the associative element only if
viewed as the struggle or energy of the personality to maintain, to
manifest, and to unfold itself. Competition is a common social
factor, but not the only one. There is imitation, but it is asso-
ciated with other psychical energies. Powerful influence may be
exerted on an individual by the world about him, but there may
also be in him a strong inherent force which is the determining
factor in social action. That the mind is not limited to sensation
in its constructions may be learned from geometry. We cannot
draw an ideally perfect circle; yet all our reasoning about the
circle is based on the conception of an absolutely perfect one.
Not what men need, but the need they are conscious of, feel,
is the impulse to action. Men may need most what they want
least. Since this consciousness depends on experience and develop-
ment, we can understand why it varies so greatly at different times
in the same man even, and still more in different men. Associa-
tion is determined by what is needed, appreciated, and desired.
" The consciousness of kind," emphasized by Professor Giddings
as the fundamental principle of society, is indeed a power of asso-
ciation, but subordinate. Certainly it is not ultimate. The con-
sciousness of kind is thus defined : " A state of consciousness in
which any being, whether low or high in the scale of life, recog-
nizes another conscious being as of like kind with itself." ^ Two
pages further he states that " it is about the consciousness of kind,
as a determinmg principle, that all other motives organize them-
selves in the evolution of social choice, social volition, or social
policy. Therefore, to trace the operation of the consciousness of
kind through all its social manifestations is to work out a com-
plete subjective interpretation of society."
The fact is that we can go beyond the consciousness of kind
and deterinine the associative power in it. Men of the same kind
associate because specially adapted to meet some felt need; but
if others not of the same kind can better meet the need, then asso-
ciation with them is preferred. A man may forsake his father
and mother and kin, and cleave unto his wife; and perhaps
1 Principles of Sociology, 17.
160 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
he prefers to take his \^■ife from another gens or even another
race. The wife, not another man, becomes the most intimate
associate. One may have so much of his own kind that he pre-
fers others who are different from himself and therefore can
better supply what he lacks. Adaptation, affection, affinity, inter-
est are the determining factors in association, to which even the
consciousness of kind is subordinated. The consciousness of what
kind is more important. When a man knows only his gens or tribe,
and regards all others as enemies, we can understand his adherence
to his own. But as society advances, his views are enlarged, and
others may become more attractive than his tribe. Hence the
breaking up of families, hence emigration.
This theory of the consciousness of kind lacks the same ulti-
mate analysis beheld in making individuals the constituent elements
of society, instead of the social factors in individuals. If I am
particularly attracted to those of my kind, it is because they pos-
sess elements peculiarly congenial to me ; if they lack these, and
others possess them, then I turn to the others. Englishmen travel-
ling on the Continent sometimes avoid one another; nor is it
unusual for immigrants from the same country to prefer the
companionship of foreigners to that of their countrymen.
Some points discussed in this chapter are considered in " Science
of Ethics," by Leslie Stephen, 90-131. On 94 a good illustration
is given of the perplexities in which those are involved who make
individuals as totalities, instead of the social energies of individ-
uals, the constituent factors of society.
REFLECTIONS.
Principles : Foundations ; the First Thought in explaining
Effects ; the Last Thought in passing from Effect to Cause.
Difficulty in apprehending Principles. Principles of Society
the Constituent Elements in all Society. Importance of these
Principles. Their Relation to Social Evolution. Define So-
ciety. An Organism in v^hat Sense. Individuals as Organs.
Aggregation, Gregariousness, Association. How far does
Human Nature determine Association? Reasons for Asso-
ciation. Associative Factors in the Natural Environment.
Richness of the First Division. Basis for Actual Societies.
Revie'wr of the Chapter.
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 161
CHAPTER YI.
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF THE PRIN-
CIPLES OF SOCIETY.
The Problem. Our first division discusses the universal
principles of society. But what is the social actuality ?
Our attention is noiv to he occupied hy the real interaction
of the social energies and the historic associations pi^oduced
thereby.
We go to history for the purpose of getti^ig social evo-
lution as a system. What takes place in a particular
part of an organism may he a type of the process in the
organism as a totality/. Thus we find in social groups^
organizations^ and states, a genesis similar to that in
society at large. The sociological point of vietv, however,
considers each pai't of society in its relation to the entire
social organism.
The prohlem therefore is : how to obtain those large
generalizations which are involved in the process of evo-
lution. We can form no conception of the countless indi-
viduals of humanity from the beginning till the present ;
nor can ive imagine any possible grouping of them which
will present the social organism in the various stages of
its development. But the kinds of social energy which
constitute society are comparatively few, they can easily
be classified, and their operation is matiifest throughout
history. It is the laws in the interaction of these energies
which specially engage the attention of the sociologist.
II
162 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
We investigate groups, parties, classes, and institutions,
but never lose sight of the unity which they form. Social
analysis should he followed by synthesis. We study the
societies which are evolved, hut we hehold in them the
evolution of society itself.
The planted seeds reproduce a thousandfold their own
kind and also develop the infinite variety beheld in the
flora of the world. This gives some general features in
the process of organic evolution. When we contem-
plate Imman development, we find that the simple
statement of the unfolding of plants from their seeds
does not make all the phases of the evolution clear.
Society not being literally an organism, its develop-
ment cannot be fully illustrated by a natural organic
process. The course taken is, however, largely from
simplicity to complexity, from unity to multiplicity, and
from sameness to diversity, just as in natural organisms.
In the beginning of society we look for little variety ;
the thoughts and interests arc few and elementary, the
social forms simple. Nevertheless, these are the germs
of all future development.
It is in constant contact with nature that humanity
develops. Through the interaction of these two factors,
what is involved is evolved, and the infolded is unfolded.
It is not a creation, but a growth, a rearrangement of
parts, something new which is nevertheless a conserva-
tion of the old.
When the acorn becomes an oak, and when from
one oak forests grow, we have a process similar to that of
the mere multiplication of human individuals. Some-
thing more, however, takes place in social evolution.
Each tree remains distinct, not uniting or coalescing
with others. In the human family, however, while each
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 163
being remains an individual, he has energies which
coalesce and co-operate with those of others, and thus
form society.
Social differentiation in the process of evolution ex-
presses an important truth ; but it must not leave the
impression that society itself is divided. It is society
that is evolved ; differentiation means that society itself
is unfolded, it is its unity that develops in richness.
In the variety developed by the tree we have nothing
but the tree itself ; it is not a division of the tree, but an
expansion. There is no reason why in the process of
social differentiation there should not also be a process
of unification. The growth in diversity may at the same
time be a growth in unity. The ceaseless wars of prim-
itive society may terminate in social unity at the same
time that the greatest diversity is developed.
Three distinct processes are involved in social evolu-
tion. There is quantitative multiplication, a numerical
increase of individuals, and mere additions of the same
kind of social force. Tliis may mean great advantages,
just as a thousand dollars enable a man to accomplish
more than one dollar. The quantitative increase gives
society more power to subdue nature and conquer foes,
and it is the condition for the division of labor, a factor
of great importance in development. Those who devote
themselves to a particular calling, such as the making of
arrows, fish-hooks, spears, canoes, ornaments, garments,
develop special efficiency. In this way quantitative mul-
tiplication promotes qualitative differentiation.
Besides, evolution involves the development of the same
forces to a higher degree, a process of intensification and
growth. Arrows and spears are improved, garments
made better, the arts, thoughts, religions perfected. The
movement continues along the same line, but goes higher
16-1 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
and higher. By this process new varieties may be pro-
duced, as new thoughts and systems are evolved from
old ones. This is the process which usually takes place
when a tribe or community is left to itself to develop its
inherent energies.
The third process in evolution consists in the union of
factors with qualitative differences, as when men or
societies with different views or different degrees of
culture combine. The different elements thus brought
together are assimilated, and the result is unlike either
of the original elements. Thus new beginnings are made
which result in new processes of evolution.
It is to this third process that the greatest differen-
tiations in the development of society are due. The son
differs from father and mother ; the children have both
the characteristics of the father and the mother, or rather
a union of both ; thus variations constantly occur through
heredity. By means of heredity acquired qualities are
transmitted but also varied, each generation being the
product of a different pair from that of the preceding.
Besides the differentiations by means of heredity, we
have those produced by natural environment. As this
changes in the same locality or as men move from place
to place, society itself is changed.^
In some respects the differentiation produced by the
contact or union of different societies is still greater, as
when one tribe conquers or unites with another, or when
peoples of different degrees of civilization coalesce, as
during the migration of barbarians into Europe. The
same process takes place in our day, in immigration, as
when multitudes from different nations settle in the
United States. There is then a commingling of different
1 Spencer, " Principles of Sociology," vol. i., p. 16, Original External
Factors.
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 165
races and nationalities and languages and religions and
degrees of culture, and the final result must be the prod-
uct of the interaction of all the energies thus united.
In this way new types ai-e continually formed where
evolution is vigorous, and each new type becomes the
source of a peculiar process of development. The present
social condition is the outcome of the entire evolution of
the past. Each age contains the deposits of the past in
the varied forms wrought out by heredity, by environ-
ment, by the union of different individuals and societies,
and by the unfolding of the types which are the products
of these processes. Some elements of the deposits are
permanent, others variable. The distinction between
the permanent and the changeable elements is among
the most important discriminations in the study of the
evolutionary forces.
The primitive social stage must have contained all
that is essential to society. It could hardly have had
more than barely the essential social factors, except
that it was not society in the abstract, but in reality,
in a concrete form. In distinction from society as a
mere conception, it now becomes an actuality. Society is
born. We have simple beings, uncultured, very near
nature and in subjection to it, with few and rude wants,
yet all human development potentially involved in what
these beings were and had. The social forces were
few, monotonous, pertaining chiefly to the securing of
food, the overcoming of foes, and the gratification of the
passions. The beings increased in number; necessity,
desire, exercise developed and multiplied the social
forces ; and that process of evolution began of which
the world to-day reaps the fruit.
Could we trace the social energies from their begin-
ning through all their processes of development to the
166 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
present time, then we should have the history of these
forces. Could we take a particular social force, say the
economic, and give the laws of its development, then
we should have a special social science. If we could
take all these forces from the beginning and trace their
interaction with one another throughout history, but
confining ourselves to principles and laws, giving simply
a comprehensive system of the actual working of the
social forces, then we should have social evolution as a
part of Sociology.
This shows how our second division is organically
connected with the first, and why it is an essential factor
in sociological inquiry. The first division is abstract.
It shows what must at all times be the social structure.
But we want to get society in its actuality. Hence
sociologists discuss what is misnamed descriptive Sociol-
ogy, and give an account of the family, the state, and
the other institutions developed in the process of social
evolution. By making a special division inclusive of
the essential elements of the evolution of society we
can avoid hap-hazard discussion and give unity to our
investigation. If Sociology did not include the historic
development and actual application of the principles of
society, it would be necessary to create a new discipline
for a systematic discussion of the actual associations
formed in the process of evolution.
As our second division naturally grows from the first,
so it is an application of the principles discovered to
the social actuality and its history. Were social phe-
nomena our ultimate aim, we should be lost in distrac-
tions. Facts are to Sociology what plants are to botany.
Especially in this second division is it important ever
to remember that the sociologist wants characteristics,
types, ideas, which contain the essences extracted from
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 167
facts, laws which comprehend great series of phenom-
ena, our study always being principiant, intent on phi-
losophy, science, and system. We look for a seed
whence forests spring, avoiding entanglement in a maze
of roots and underbrush and trunks and limbs. Yal-
uable service is rendered by history, ethnology, and an-
thropology ; but Sociology has a different point of view,
and merely looks to them for material from which social
science can be constructed.
This division, including the entire historic evolution
of society, involves so many factors and is so compre-
hensive as to be bewildering to beginners. Therefore
subdivisions are necessary, each of which requires pro-
found study and extensive research. The subdivisions
adopted should include the entire historic unfolding of
society in a logical form, giving a comprehensive view
of the social totality. We aim at the discovery of the
laws in language, literature, jurisprudence, religion, and
the various social institutions. From the facts of a
particular stage of culture we pass to the energies which
produced them. Investigators in different fields have
done valuable preparatory work ; but the student will
find that much research is still required respecting well-
known institutions and organizations in order to de-
termine their exact character and place in the social
system. We want a philosophy of the existing associa-
tions, but also of those of the past. This means that
we seek to apprehend society in the societies which are
its manifestations.
Wliile the entire personality is unfolded in the pro-
cess of evolution, the social energies are largely concen-
trated in the will. A man's social life is shaped by
the will to live and to make the most of life. This
" most of life " depends on many factors, such as the
168 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
degree of culture attained, the taste and disposition,
and the general estimates of values. Lotze is no doubt
right in claiming that we are less concerned in what
things are in themselves than in what value they have
for us. Values are the attractions in social life. Here
is the key to the diversity in association. One chooses
as an end what another reduces to means or rejects
as unworthy. It is the difference between Alexander
and Diogenes which makes their worlds different.
The aim to live is fundamental and the most univer-
sal. There must be life in order that the values of
life may be sought. Food, raiment, shelter, and pro-
tection are consequently objects of universal pursuit,
and the grounds of numerous associations in all stages
of civilization.
Divergences already occur in the method of pursuing
these objects, and give rise to various kinds of associa-
tion. Consider the horde that lives on berries, nuts, and
by hunting, or that makes war on a neighboring tribe to
eat human flesli, and the modern methods of industry.
Still greater divergences appear respecting life's aim
after a livelihood has been secured, — many living on a
low plane, while a few cherish exalted motives. These
differentiations increase with culture. Compare the
monotony of life among the savages and barbarians of
Australia, Africa, and America with the multiplicity of
interests in Paris, Berlin, London, and New York.
Each interest affects the social trend, and when signifi-
cant or specially prized it may become the nucleus of
organizations. Amid this variety of interests specializa-
tion becomes necessary.
Human needs are impulses to action ; they induce
effort and result in evolution. Some of these needs belong
to man as man, and cliaractcrize him in the highest stage
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 169
of culture as well as in his primitive state. Other needs
are the products of culture.
Can we make these needs and the motives which
spring from them the basis of a classification of the pro-
cesses of social evolution ? The following scheme gives
the main needs, motives, and impulses for social com-
binations and social evolution. This classification does
not attempt to give the order in which the motives arose,
nor does it indicate the dominance of a particular one at
any time. The motives are not isolated ; they are co-
operative, though now one and then another becomes
dominant.
1. Economic^ all that pertains to a livelihood.
2. Affectionalj relating to the family, friendship, love,
sympathy.
3. Recreative, the play element, sport, amusement,
games.
4. Political, regulative, protective, authoritative.
5. Esthetic, iustinct of beauty, art.
6. Moral, ideas of right, justice, ethical institutions.
7. Religious, spirituality, sentiment for divine being.
8. Intellectual, desire for knowledge, culture, truth.
No claim to completeness is made for this list. The
egoistic impulse — one of the strongest — ■ is omitted. It
does not so much lead to a particular kind of social
action as it lies at the basis of all the other impulses and
controls the entire personality. In social life its effects
are powerful. Associations may be formed or entered
for egoistic purposes. The impulse leads to rivalry,
competition, envy, hatred, revenge, ambition, and is
manifest in the higher as well as lower walks of
life.
Another impulse whose action is general rather than
specific is the imitative. It is universal and of great
170 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
influence. The fact that it is so largely unconscious and
beyond the control of the actor adds to its power. It is
closely allied to reflexive and instinctive action. Good
and evil are imitated, likewise faiths and fashions. By
it dogmatism and traditionalism are promoted. It ex-
erts a constant and silent influence in all the relations
of life, makes thoughts and movements contagious, and
produces social epidemics. Nothing succeeds like suc-
cess. Public opinion is mightier than reason. Among
the most powerful factors in conventions and elections is
the belief that a cause or candidate will win. Thus men
move in herds. Some give the key, and others sing ;
some pipe, and others dance. Even distortions and
mutilations are promoted by imitation. Custom be-
comes omnipotent, and it seems as if almost anything
might be made a custom. Even in what is most subjec-
tive — such as religion and morals — imitation exerts
an inestimable influence. Locke said that " we are all
a kind of chameleons, taking our hue, the hue of our
moral character, from those who are about us." ^
The effort to find a sufficient reason in conscious indi-
vidual and social activity for human phenomena must in
many instances prove a failure.^ Our subconscious ac-
tivity is probably largely under our control through
purposive action ; but we cannot become aware of it
otherwise than in its results. Often it is hardly correct
to say that we think, and feel, and act ; it would be
more proper to say that something thinks, feels, and
acts in us. All persons, not merely the insane, do things
of which they know not the motive or of whose motive
^ Imitation as asocial force is most fully developed by G. Tarde, " Les
lois de I'iinitatioii."
'•^ Tliis is made evident by vou Hartiuaun iu " Philosophy of the
UiicoLscious."
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 171
they are but obscurely conscious. In times of excite-
ment when passion is aroused, in powerful popular
movements, in elections, crises, tumults, revolutions,
wars, men arc apt to be moved rather than to move
themselves. This blind impulse, this unconscious imita-
tion, this spontaneous bursting forth of latent and occult
powers in human nature, must be reckoned with in con-
sidering the forces in social evolution.
We now consider briefly the eight impulses given
above.
Not one of these was absent at any time from human-
ity so far as known to us ; but at different stages of evo-
lution they varied greatly in degree and in the manner
of their combination and interaction. Ev^ery one has led
to numerous combinations or organizations. The first
place is naturally given to economics, on account of the
prominent part it has played in society, even the family
being dependent on it. Under the head of the affectional
impulse we place the family, love, friendship, sympathy,
a large and important group of associations, some organ-
ized, as the family, others less formal, more spontaneous.
The recreative element receives a place by itself, because
really important and apt to be overlooked. It has a
function from primitive to cultured man, and from child-
liood to old age. It is so subjective, spontaneous, that it
has not led so generally to organization as some of the
other impulses, being in this respect much like the spon-
taneity in friendly social gatherings. Games of various
kinds are formed among barbarians. Peoples have their
national games, as the Greeks the Olympic ; athletic and
other sports are prominent in our day, and healthful,
elevating recreation for the masses has become an im-
portant problem.
The need of political organizations is evident ; but
172 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
the impulse leading to them is composite. Defence
against foes, internal peace and prosperity, love of
dominion, are among the strongest. The authoritative
element in the state can be traced back to the family and
throughout other institutions up to the most perfect polit-
ical organization of modern times. All the other needs
and impulses mentioned are individual as well as social ;
but it is the peculiarity of political institutions that they
depend wholly on society. It is only in his association
with others that the individual realizes the need of a
state.
The aesthetic factor is seen in the rude forms of the
earliest art, in the brilliant colors and numerous decora-
tions among barbarians, as well as in the artistic prod-
ucts of modern times.
The moral, religious, and intellectual factors dominate
much of the higher culture, but are not altogether lacking
in the lowest known stages.
Frequently these impulses are so united as to form
strong compound impulses, as in altruism and charity.
To trace these various factors and the societies they
have formed means to trace the social evolution. The
question is not merely what degree of development each
has attained, but also how the vai'ious factors were
related. Tn the state, for instance, there is not only
room for all, but all work together.
Connected with each of these factors, and with every
association formed by them, is the question of progress, —
a problem of depth, of importance, of great difficulty, and
much in dispute. All progress means change, but all
change is not progress. Change involves progress only
when it consists of advance. Human progress is variable.
In general we can say that it means a growing realiza-
tion of life's aim ; such a development of the powers as
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 173
enables man to accomplish the higher purposes of his
being. Great advance is of course possible in the in-
dustries ; but this is to be prized mainly because it
enables society to devote itself the better to the attain-
ment of the higher interests, such as intellect, morality,
and spirituality. Only in proportion as these are
developed and made supreme can we regard human
movement as proceeding toward that goal the approach
toward which is the essence of progress.
The theory once prevalent that in human nature itself
there is an impulse to progress is now questioned. Bar-
barians are so contented if they can only live and enjoy
themselves that progress seems to be forced on them
only by the direst necessity. Even among peoples in a
semi-civilized stage there are long periods of apparent
stagnation or even of retrogression. Both Africa and
Asia furnish abundant proof. Continuous progress in a
particular people or in humanity can hardly be predicated.
Can it, for instance, be claimed that from the time of
the Greeks till the present there has anywhere been con-
tinuous progress in art, in literature, in history, and in
philosophy ? Where can we to-day find a people equal
to the Greeks in these departments ?
There may be progress in one department and retro-
gression in others. Now religion, then philosophy, then
science, then art receives most attention and exerts the
greatest influence on social life. Sometimes special em-
phasis is placed on a particular phase of a subject, as in
our day there has been in the department of art a marked
development of music.
One difficulty consists in the number of elements which
enter into progress. The causes are so complicated that
it may be impossible to determine the exact place and
influence of each.
174 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
When the whole period of social evolution is con-
sidered, it is evident that the subject can be grasped
only by means of comprehensive generalizations. From
society per se we pass to the characteristics of the great
social groups which have been subject to evolution. The
classilication of impulses given above may indicate the
lines to be followed.
In social evolution Sociology seeks the laws of society.
The difficulties in this respect are great, always leaving
the attainment far behind the aim. Often the investiga-
tor cannot determine the exact limit of the application
of a law, the data not all being within his reach ; then
he is obliged to be content with what is general, cus-
tomary, frequent, or applicable to a particular series of
phenomena.
History as but the unfolding of an idea, a manifesta-
tion of reason, or a process of the Absolute, is an attrac-
tive conception. But it has neither been justified by
Hegel and his disciples, nor by the actual historic de-
velopment. We look in vain to history for a logical
order of development even in historic philosophical sys-
tems. Unquestionably there is reason in history, but
not as developed with the consistency of a system of
logic. There is reason, not, however, the ideal reason,
but the weak, undeveloped, variable and fallible reason of
actual men, greatly influenced, frequently dominated and
controlled, by interest and passion. It is this kind of
reason which runs through history like a thread. Not
reason or any psychical factor is the sole causative force
at any time, but always connected with other factors.
Not a single or simj^le force, then, explains the evolu-
tion of society. All the forces of all men, together with
those of the natural environment, must be taken into the
account.
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 175
We must again refer to the law of the struggle for
existence as applied to human development. Whatever
the survival of the fittest may explain, it cannot explain
everything. Too much is made of it when isolated and
treated as if the sole factor in social progress. Exercise
is the great law of development, whether in the form of
competition or co-operation. Indeed, competition is
possible in society only if co-operation in some form
exists.
If we look to law in the sense of a causative interpre-
tation of facts, we shall likely find the law of the survi-
val of the fittest of little application to social phenomena.
The law itself is almost tautological. It means the sur-
vival of those who have the conditions to survive, a state-
ment so self-evident that it hardly seems necessary to
make it. The very thing we want to know, what the
conditions of survival are in society, is not given. These
conditions vary with society itself. It is not the physi-
cally strong who are always preserved ; they may go to
war and be killed, while the weak remain at home and
live. Social conditions may be such that those physi-
cally the weakest and in character the most worthless
survive, while the strong and worthy are enslaved and
perish prematurely.
Whatever the value of the law in biology, its applica-
tion to human affairs has thus far been of little service.
What does it avail to tell us that individuals and societies
which can survive do survive, when in every case we have
to find out by some other method what the conditions of
survival are ? Owing to human reason, teleological
action, and social conditions, even the effect of the
natural environment may be minimized.
In order to make investigations into the social actual-
ity fruitful, what is substantial, not merely formal, is to
176 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
be sought. The substance determines the form. Hence
our emphasis on causes, forces, essences, the factors
which affect tlie solid reality. The substances with
which we deal are the social energies. What arc they ?
Under what natural, personal, and social conditions do
they AYork ? IIow are they^ related to one another ?
What modifications take place when brought into co-op-
eration or antagonism with other energies ? What are
the social results of the co-operation and the antagonism ?
Energy is always the reality which we investigate. How,
for instance, is the economic force affected by the aes-
thetic, the ethical, and the religious ?
The value of concentrating the attention on the actual
social energies is evident from the introduction of new
forces. Perhaps no conquest over nature has been
greater than the extraction of iron from the ore. That
nameless and timeless achievement is the condition for
nearly all the great inventions of modern times.
The incursion of the barbarians into Europe is a ques-
tion of the forces they brought and modified. Human-
ism, the Reformation of the sixteenth century, printing,
gunpowder, the discovery of the New World, political
economy, the press, popular government, the arousing of
the consciousness of laborers, all are to be viewed as
forces.
We can speak of a unit of force. The individual acts
as a unit, now his forces being concentrated on private,
then on social, affairs. A great variety of forces em-
bodied in a social group may act as a unit, according to
an end and purpose ; as in the case of a political party
in an election. This unit of force is expressed in consti-
tutions, programmes, resolutions. Sometimes it is im-
possible to determine all the interactions of the various
forces in a local social group, to say nothing of those in-
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 177
volvcd in a state or the entire human family ; but we
may study the forces as a unit, the purpose and direction
of them as a totality, as when we speak of the charac-
teristics of the times, or of the trend in Russia, England,
and the United States. If it is impossible to see the mas-
sive base and icy sides and rocky crags of Mount Blanc
at a single glance, the peak in which the mountain cul-
minates and which forms its most conspicuous feature
may be beheld.
With this great sphere of inquiry definitely before us,
how shall we enter upon the investigation of social evo-
lution ? We can proceed chronologically, the beginning
being made with primitive man, and passing from him to
our own time. Prehistoric man must be studied in the
meagre remains of him before records were made in
writing. Much research has of late been devoted to this
subject, resulting in interesting and valuable material.
From the savage we proceed to the barbarian, and pass
through the long evolution which culminates in modern
civilization. We can hardly expect to do more than get
the characteristic marks of the various stages, showing
how man changes in the process of development, and
how society changes with him, what human and natural
forces are dominant as successive degrees of culture are
reached, and what social forms prevail. Even by limit-
ing the inquiry to what is general and principiant, the
results are exceedingly rich. It is a social panorama of
humanity under all the modifying influences of soil and
climate, of heredity and culture, which is thus presented.
This investigation of society according to its progres-
sive stages of culture can be made more definite by con-
necting with it the study of particular institutions.
These institutions of society are all involved in the de-
grees of culture mentioned, and a general idea of them
12
178 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
is essential for understanding that culture. But they
can, as we have seen, be taken separately and made ob-
jects of special inquiry. In institutions which are types,
centres around which society congregates and from
which its influences radiate, the ages themselves may
be studied. Society, in a measure, is concentrated in
them, and an interpretation of them is an interpreta-
tion of society. Among the institutions which spring
from the motives classified above, and whose nature
and history deserve especial study, we name, first of all,
the family in its narrower sense, and then in its most
enlarged sense when it includes the descendants from a
common origin for many generations. The state is an-
other institution whose constitution, origin, and history
deserve especial study. Religion or the church has ex-
erted an influence that gives it great prominence.
Connected with these are language and literature and
art, as social products. In all these cases we have social
forms and products which perdure and develop, while
the generations which wrought at their formation pass
away. The form in which they have come to us repre-
sents the combined labor of the entire past ; they are
the embodiment of the deposits of human culture from
the beginning of the race.
Each of the institutions involves such a variety as to
admit of numerous subdivisions, and these are necessary
for the most successful investigations. One need but
take up an ecclesiastical and a political encyclopedia or
treatise to learn what a multiplicity is involved in church
and state. The stages of culture and the development
of institutions can also be studied by nations. Thus we
can inquire into their character among the nations of
remote antiquity, or in Greece and Rome, the Middle
Ages, and in modern times. We can also investigate
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 179
what they become in the great historic systems, as in
Judaism, Christianity, and other religions. A little
reflection reveals to the student of history what a vast
realm of investigation and classification for the under-
standing of social evolution lies open before him.
Another method, with some advantages over the above,
can be adopted. Instead of beginning with the past and
moving toward our own age, we can begin with the
observation of our times and investigate the existing
state of things. Concentrating the study on our age
and mastering it, we make its interpretation our chief
aim. From our own age we then turn to the past and
ask for the social forces whose historic development has
culminated in our times and created our society.
The student can easily abstract our age and make it
an object of thorough inquiry. The fact that he is in
the age and part of it offers advantages and also dis-
advantages for the investigation ; but the advantages
predominate. Even by thus mentally isolating our age
for its more profound study, we cannot afford to forget
that it is a product of the past and can be interpreted
only if we trace its genesis in history. "We want to
know the existing social products on account of our
organic relation to them and their value to us in receiv-
ing and exerting influence. The very word " products "
refers us to the seeds and growths of the past as causes.
We might also separate the past social development and
make it a special division, thus devoting one sub-division
to the past evolution of society, and another to the social
condition of the present. But that evolution ought to
be taken as an unbroken whole, and should be studied
throughout its entire process and in its culmination.
We want, in this study, to learn the working of the
essential elements of society in the marvellous realism
180 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
of the day ; we desire to know the exact nature of our
culture and of our institutions. As we seize the present
as the culmination of past processes, so we can make
the culture attained the standard by which the lower
forms are measured. But we are by no means wholly
dependent on the past for a knowledge of the lower
stages of development. In America, Africa, and Aus-
tralia, we can study Ijarbarian, if not savage, states of
society, so that humanity as it now is presents a correct
picture of a large part of the stages through which the
human family passed in its processes of evolution. But
whether we go from the past to the present, or from the
study of our own age to its evolution, we are always in-
tent on a comprehensive and systematic view of society.
The genesis of society as here apjjrehended is thus an
integral and important part of Sociology. It is the one
to which sociologists have given most attention. It
deals with that social realism which constitutes by far
the larger realm of sociological inquiry. In this social
genesis we take a theoretical interest, and study it for
the purpose of learning what processes have taken place
in humanity ; we likewise take a practical interest in it,
because a knowledge of the forces at work in society will
enable us the better to use and influence the present.
As the past is the key to the present, so both are
the key to the future. Our age is to the coming one
what the last age was to ours. Evolution is a continu-
ous process, and our division includes the future as well
as the past. We have room here for all that can be
known of coming processes. Comte and others laid
especial emphasis on prevision as an aim in Sociology ;
but to treat this as the principal object, and as if Soci-
ology existed for its sake, is a mistake. We want to
master society, whether or not prevision is the result.
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 181
In natural science we sometimes have prevision, as in
the calculation of an eclipse. But even with respect to
nature foreknowledge is very limited. In a general way
we may foretell the seasons ; but how little can be fore-
told definitely is proved by the weather predictions in
the old almanacs and at present. We can sow seeds,
but cannot determine the harvest. Even respecting a
single individual, propliecy is hazardous ; certain data
are not within our reach ; but how much more difScult
when numerous individuals are involved, all of them
uncertain quantities ? In Sociology the factors are so
indefinite, so varied and variable, so multifariously com-
bined, so extremely complicated, that prevision on a
scientific basis is at present out of the question. If
certain factors meet under given circumstances, we may
have some idea of the result. But will they meet ?
Even if they do, our prediction is opinion and faith, or
a guess, rather than science. There may be progress in
this respect, just as in case of meteorology. But can
we ever hope to foretell the coming of a Copernicus, a
Shakespeare, a Goethe ? The unforeseen advent of a
Napoleon may upset all our calculations. According to
our knowledge, faith, and hope, we may form a general
notion of the future of human events, but that is all.
The character of the notion is apt to depend on our
optimism or pessimism. Particulars are out of the
question, and our general view, even, may be a failure.
Prophecies are usually harmless ; they are apt to be for-
gotten before the time comes to which they refer, and the
prophets do not live to correct their own predictions.
This of course does not mean that we cannot learn
the nature and working of the social forces. But we
may know how they work and what they accomplish
under certain conditions, while the conditions of the
182 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
future on which all depends are beyond our ken. A
study of natural forces reveals to us how they will act
when they meet ; but only under the operation of laws
similar to those governing the heavenly bodies can we
tell whether and when they will meet. Not for the
sake of prevision chiefly do we study the natural forces ;
we want to know them in order to use them for our
purposes. While we may not be able to tell how they
will act when left to themselves, we can so combine or
separate them as to accomplish our ends. So we want
to master the social forces for the purpose of using
them. We may not be able to foretell what society
will be ; but by prevision of what it ought to be we can
work toward the desired social end.
While definite prophecy and scientific prevision are
out of the question, there may be well-grounded expec-
tations respecting the future. With the natural forces
the same as in the past, and with human nature, how-
ever modified by heredity and environment, essentially
the same, we can learn from the rich experience of the
past what characteristics may be expected in the future.
But even general laws as the basis of a philosophy of
history may be out of the question at present. No past
experience can be a perfect type of the future, for the
conditions constantly vary ; and if progress is made
beyond the past, no inferior stage can be the exact
interpreter of the higher one.
Besides the past, of which in some measure a repeti-
tion may be expected in the future, an interpretation
of tlie present may reveal tendencies whose outcome in
the immediate future can be predicated as probable.
Sometimes a trend contains a prophetic element ; it is
like a seed which contains the plant that will spring
from it. Yet even respecting such a trend we cannot
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 183
be unerring prophets, except in a most general way and
under supposition of certain conditions. Something un-
foreseen may occur unexpectedly and give a new direc-
tion to the trend. " The philosophy of history at large,
explaining the past and predicting the future phenomena
of man's life in the world by reference to general laws,
is in fact a subject with which, in tbe present state of
knowledge, even genius aided by wide research seems
hardly able to cope." ^ The very nature of the objects
of Sociology limits its efforts at mathematical definite-
ness and certainty. "It will not do to forget that,
according to the nature of its material. Sociology never
can get the same positive certainty as the natural
science of what is inorganic." ^
Owing to the checks which individuals receive in
acting on one another, and to the constitution, the laws,
the government, and all the permanent institutions
within whose limits a people move, a nation is of course
less variable than an individual. Large bodies move
more slowly and change less rapidly than small ones.
There are therefore reasons for prevision in the case of
states and also of masses of men which do not apply to
individuals. But constitutions, laws, and institutions of
all kinds, and organizations are also liable to change. If
their transformation is less rapid than that of indi-
viduals, on account of the numerous factors which must
be changed, it is more permanent and produces greater
results. Take such a change as that from feudalism to
industrialism, from despotism to a representative gov-
ernment, and from a monarchy to a republic.^
^ Tylor, " Primitive Culture," i., 5.
2 Schaeffle, " Bau und Leben," i., 466.
3 Bacon says that " states are great engines moving slowly." "While
this is true in general, in crises states may move with rapidity toward
184 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
A survey of the whole field does not lead to a re-
jection of the various efforts at prevision ; in this
second division we have room for all within their reach.
We do not, however, want to cherish delusive hopes
respecting the possibility of predictions. The true stu-
dent will be thankful for any revelation of the future
legitimately learned from the experience of the past and
read in the signs of the times ; but he also knows that the
precious metals found in history and our age have a
present value, regardless of what their currency in the
future may be.
Since Mr. Spencer treats society from the evolutionary point of
view, his Sociology really pertains only to our second division. So
far as he discusses society itself it is merely for the sake of getting
a basis for his social evolution. In the three volumes entitled
" Princi]5les of Sociology," he first discusses " The Data of Sociol-
ogy." The first chapters, on " Super-Organic Evolution " and
" The Factors of Social Phenomena," pertain to society in general.
Then follow over 400 pages on j^rimitive man and his views of
things. The material of this part really belongs to evolution
itself, giving the supposed beginnings of the human family. Then
over 150 pages are devoted to " Inductions of Sociology," in v^'hich
we have a discussion of what society itself is. The first chapter
is headed : " What is a Society ? " He says : " This question has
to be answered at the outset. Until we have decided vrhether
or not to regard a society as an entity ; and until we have decided
whether, if regarded as an entity, a society is to be classed as
absolutely unlike all other entities or as like some others; our
conception of the subject-matter before us remains vague." The
remainder of the first volume and the whole of the other two
are devoted to Social Institutions ; namely, Domestic, Ceremonial,
Political, Ecclesiastical, Professional, and Industrial.
The Institutions named are all in society ; but they are in it,
they cannot be the whole of society. Society being larger, their
revolution or reorganization, or through processes of transformation.
Illustrations are seen in Greece, Rome, France, America, Italy, Germany,
and other states.
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 185
discussion does uot exhaust Sociology. In the sphere of aesthetics,
of religion, of politics, of education, of the industries, much social
action cannot be classed as institutional. Institutions themselves
are advanced because individuals and societies find them inade-
quate, rise above them, and lift them to a higher plane. Society is
an unbroken unit, an atmosphere in which we move, whether or
not we are in institutions ; it is a web in which there are other
than institutional threads.
By subjecting man severely to his environment during the pro-
cess of evolution and then evolving him into a network of institu-
tions, it looks as if he were wholly subject to mechanical processes.
How would it do to place the first emphasis on what is to be
evolved, namely, man himself, and then treat the environment
and institutions as ministers of their lord ? The experiment is
worth trying.
Our second division shows the intimate relation of our subject
to history, without being identified with it. The system of the
actual working of the social forces is om" aim now, not the history
of associations. Not now as in the first division, do we emphasize
human adaptation to society, social need, social force as the social
essence, social attraction and repulsion, in the abstract ; we are
intent on seeing the working of these in the actual construction of
society.
As in this second division our aim is great generalizations from
facts rather than history ; so we take the standpoint of sociological
inquiry instead of that of the special social sciences. Each social
factor is to be viewed as an integral part of the totality. We can
illustrate this by the economic and sociological view of the laborer.
By economics he is regarded as so much strength or skill to be
used in production, and the exploitation of his strength and skill
has often been pronounced a natural economic law. But Sociol-
ogy views the laborer as also so much political force, as ethical,
religious, sesthetic, and intellectual; that is, Sociology regards him
in all his relations to society, and in these relations his economic
force is but a fraction. In order that the-laborer may receive his
proper place in society, the economic must yield to the sociological
view. The capitalist, the politician, the professional man, must all
be viewed in their totality of powers and relations, in order to
occupy their proper place in society. It is characteristic of our
second division to contemplate societies from the comprehensive
sociological point of view.
186 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
It is thus evident tliat there is a clear distinction between the
first and second division. At the same time, as in our second we
aim at the philosophy of the marvellous social realism of the past
and present, it is sufficiently distinguished from the ordinary
historic disciplines. Not history itseK, but the principles un-
folded, the forces at work, and the laws operating, in history, are
the objects of our search. Our aim is better expressed by wliat
Hegel and others have called the philosophy of history, or still
better by the social philosophy of history. How far a social phi-
losophy of the past and present can be constructed, we must leave
to the study itself to determine.
Of the importance and richness of this division, the above outline
gives no adequate conception. We have all the evolutionary forces
in their actuality, with the progress they produce, with the institu-
tions and social forms that result from their operation. AVhat the
principles of the first division give potentially respecting man and
his environment, is now to be followed in its reality. How intel-
lect, feeling, and will work ; the body and the physical environ-
ment ; wliat men start with, and then become by heredity and
social environment ; imitation, aspiration, competition, social
friction; the growth of language, religion, institutions ; the indi-
vidualizing and socializing influences exerted by the progTessive
development of society; what is WTought socially by voluntary
activity and by necessity ; how far man is independent and de-
pendent — these and numerous other factors are included under
this division. The i)resent, with an importance for every mem-
ber of the age that is only faintly realized, offers the most inviting
field for investigation. Take, for instance, a country like the
United States, with the remarkable social varieties and numerous
distinct social groups ; what a study ! And then to relate the
United States to the social organism of humanity !
AVe recognize the social energies in history, and their opera-
tions are the aim of our search. The causative connections in
society are of especial interest to us. The general ideas we are
after in this division are well illustrated by Lotze's " Microcosm,"
particularly the third volume, in which he discusses the meaning
of history, the historic forces, progress, and society. Grasped in
the totality of his historic relations the individual is immeasurably
exalted ; and the true conception of him is in this totality, not in
isolation. Herbartsays: " No man stands alone ; and no known
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 187
age is independent ; in every present the past lives, and what the
individual calls his personality is itself, strictly speaking, a web of
thoughts and emotions which, for the most part, only repeats what
the environing society owns and uses as an intellectual possession.
• . . The whole mass of perceptions comes as certainly from the
world outside of us as does om- mother tongue." Not as isolated,
but as connected, causatively, we want to study the ages and
nations and institutions.
We can perhaps classify all association as follows : —
First, natural, that into which we are born, the family, the
environment, the state, and the like, and that which is requii'ed
by the very condition of things for sustenance and defence.
Second, voluntary, such as literaiy, {esthetic, and numerous
other societies which we enter from choice.
Third, natural and voluntary, partly due to the nature of things,
partly to choice. The latter associations are probably the most
numerous. Indeed, after the will is developed, we cannot see how
the force of circumstances and voluntai'y activity, sometimes one
being more potent, then the other, can be altogether separated.
Yet as the one or the other predominates, we can speak of the
association as natural or voluntary.
We must also distinguish society as formally organized and
society in a more general sense. Even among unorganized masses
there may be a community of thought and feeling and interest,
which produces a certain solidarity and similarity of movement.
Schaeffle (pp. 392-393) gives a classification of these unorganized
societies.
International and super-national bonds, what are they? If
thoughts, interests, in.stitutions, churches, which are not national,
yet prevail in different nations, ought they to be called interna-
tional? In that case international denotes locality merely, not
nationality at all. The query thus arises whether there are not
objects which should be called extra-national or super-national.
They would include all elements, for instance, which are not
characteristics of nations, but of humanity, independent, there-
fore, of national existence.
In this second division the various factors which enter society
can become objects of special inquiry, namely, individuals as pos-
sessing and exercising the social forces, nature, the relation of men
to nature, and the associations formed by men. In these four
188 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
factors the changes which characterize social evohition can be
concentrated. For us the first three have significance for the sake
of the fourth, society, in which thej- are involved.
1. Men as possessors of the social forces change, and with them
the forces likewise. This change characterizes humanity at large.
Acquired characteristics are transmitted, and thus generations are
permanently affected. The laws and limits of changes through
heredity are imperfectly understood ; but that the changes actually
take place cannot be questioned. To the physical and psychical
modifications of individuals must be added the effects produced
by au increase in numbers.
2. Besides the changes in the individuals of society, there are
those in the natural environment. How vastly diiferent the same
people under different natural conditions! Where nature does
nearly everything for them, as in the tropics, they need not exert
themselves greatly, and readily yield to the enervating influence of
the climate. Neither can great progress be expected where^the mere
struggle for existence absoi'bs the energies. To make the most of
life there must be the means to secui'e a livelihood. Energy is,
however, developed, and that makes this condition more favorable
than the other. But leisure without energy and energy without
leisure are both unfavorable.
The most effective changes in the natural environment are the
permanent ones. ^ligration, emigration are important factors.
When a tribe moves inland from the seashore, it may become
agi-icultural instead of living by fishing and hunting, and thus its
mode of life be permanently revolutionized. A people moving to
the seacoast may become commercial, as the Phoenicians. Great
changes are produced by removing to a different soil and climate.
3. Men change, their natural environment changes, but also
their relation to that environment. The view of nature changes.
The ghost and the fetich vanish, and natural objects are taken as
natural. By knowledge and skill man subdues nature and makes
it his minister. He learns to make fire easily, he manufactures
rude implements for farming, he employs bow and arrow and
spear in warfare, he tames animals and uses them, he makes boats
and facilitates travel and transportation. What a revolution has
been wrought by steam and all the modern improvements in the
use of nature !
4. To the changes in individuals and in mere increase in num-
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 189
bers, to the changes in nature and in man's relation to it, we add
the changes in the social environment. These are the changes
which most deeply affect men in their associated relations. There
ai"e social creations into which society puts its thought, its feeling,
and its wiU, which mark and promote the progi-ess of humanity.
These are permanent and cumulative social products. Before
writing, amid the migration of tribes, many traditions, arts, inven-
tions, may have been lost. Not every people had its Homer. The
permanent effects in social environment were produced by such
treasures of culture which abided, to which generation after gen-
eration added its share. To the changes in the social environment
belong all those influences which affected the association and rela-
tion of men. Changes took place in the family, in the agricultural
and industrial relations, in the religious bonds, in manners and
customs, in the government, in ethical views and in conduct, in
aesthetics, in language and literature ; and all these affected the
condition of society and the progi'ess of civilization.
These four ideas are not isolated. All the factors under each
head are intimately connected, and those classified together are
also organically united to the factors under the other heads. The
changes in individuals, in the natural environment, in men's rela-
tion to nature, and in the social environment, produce one another,
are co-operative, and belong to one and the same process of devel-
opment. But with aU their intricate interaction and organic
union, the analysis of social movements into these four ideas will
help us to understand social groups, nations, and humanity; they
aid us in interpreting the past and present, and in forecasting the
future.
The comprehensive view aimed at by Sociology may lead to
hasty generalization. Xot only is there danger of making general
or even universal what is only particular, but also of postulating
causes which do not exist. A particular cause must always pro-
duce the same effect ; but the same effect may result from a score
of causes. Death can result from poison, suicide, or hundreds of
diseases and accidents. The temptation to substitute imaginary
for real causes is peculiarly great respecting primitive man and
wherever trustworthy historic data are wanting. The scientific
student knows how to estimate the writers who show how an
event may have occurred and then dogmatically affirm that thus it
came to pass.
190 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
Many causes, for instance, may have led to the formation of
the state ; but in the absence of valid information we can only
surmise which was the producing cause. Social forms and cus-
toms in a region may have originated in one way, while in others
similar ones were due to a different origin. It is at times difficidt
to decide whether a custom or form originated with a people or
was transmitted to them by others. The same superstition may
originate in different ways ; this is also true of ethical conceptions,
of authority, respect, shame, and the like. Does the possibility
that religion may have arisen from fear prove that as its actual
origin ? Why does religion still continue after the fear or super-
stition or ignorance, which was supposed to give it birth, has
vanished? Of some customs and institutions we can hardly say
more than that they have a basis in human nature, that they meet
some need ; and if that is all we can say, it is better to say no
more, certainly wiser than to become dogmatists in order to hide
our ignorance.
In order to understand the historic evolution of society, all the
social forces must be taken into account, each in its proper place
and in its interaction with the other forces. When we consider this
requirement for mastering the history of the past, we realize how
little of it is within our reach. Effects are recorded, but the real
causes are often obscure, leaving room for the conflicting interpre-
tations of the same event by historians. The purpose, on which
so much depends in human action, is often hidden even from
observers, and still more from those remote in space and time from
the scene.
The study of the ages is largely an inquiry into their dominant
energies, some thoughts, or feelings, or purposes, which rule.
While all the energies operating in society at a particular time
must l)e known for the interpretation of the associations of that
period, special importance attaches to their relative dominance.
Often society best expresses itself in a specific aim which con-
centrates and controls the associative factors. To an age, as to an
individual, the ruling passion may be the key. When money
becomes the absorbing aim, morals, religion, and personalities are
subordinated to its attainment. The rule of Napoleon illustrates
the dominance of the military spirit, with its love of conquest and
glory. Sometimes religious motives determine the character of
ages, as has so often been the case among Jews, Christians, and
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 191
Mohammedans. Especially when supreme interests are at stake
and intense feeling is aroused, do we find some dominant purpose
as the concent)-ative and directive energy of tlie age.
In this study of ages according to their ruling types it is essential
for sociological purposes to inquire how the dominance is gained
and maintained by particular social forces. How does it happen
that these forces do not work harmoniously, each in its place and
co-operating with the rest, no marked prominence being given to
a particular one ? And how does it come that now certain forces
take the lead and then yield the prominence to others ? It re-
quires no proof to show that the golden mean is not kept by the
social energies in their relation to one another, and that history
does not move along the line of that symmetry which was the ideal
of the Gi'eeks.
Were society literally an organism the course of history would
be inexplicable ; but if it consists of the energies of the different
organisms, then its history can be understood. History, then,
changes with these organisms and their relations to one another.
Society itself is modified by the influences which affect individuals.
These influences are countless and subject to constant change.
But not only are the horse-shoes altered, and with them their
magnetism, but the relation of the horse-shoes is changed. The
prophets of the ages differ ; the schools they form differ ; and thus
the ages they mould differ. So interests vary, and with them the
tendencies they promote. We emphasize society, but do not for-
get that, in spite of the opposition to hero-worship, one man may
make an age or be the embodiment of its ruling motive. What
he becomes he impresses on the community, as the head of a
family, the chief of a tribe, the priest, medicine-man, sage, teacher,
or wanior. What is true of a limited social group also applies
to large bodies. The dominant purpose may depend on authori-
tative persons and associations, on natural conditions, on new
discoveries, or on social tendencies. A change of rulers in Constan-
tinople puts Europe in a ferment ; a famine in India changes the
world's market ; Mohammedan fanaticism may be aroused and
engage Christendom in warfare. A single strike may assume such
vast propoi'tions as to endanger nations. Give Russia the control
of Turkey, and with France as its ally the control of the Mediter-
ranean, how will English supremacy in Egypt be maintained, and
England keep its route through the Suez Canal unobstructed and
its rule in India uncontested ?
192 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
In every age it is what seems of peculiar importance which
determines the dominance, what meets the most pressing need,
what relieves pain and aft'ords pleasure, what is most appreciated,
most ardently craved, and inspu'es the highest hope. It is thus
evident that the appetite, the feeling, and the general state of
consciousness, have much to do with the matter. The variety in
the dominance of particular social forces at various times is due to
the changes which take place in the needs, feelings, and convic-
tions of men, and in their circumstances. It would be strange if
what is deemed of greatest importance at a time did not enlist the
greatest energies. An error believed is no less effective than a
truth believed, in determining the courses of men. A false
prophet who appeals to the passions may be more effective than a
true prophet who appeals to reason.
A social force may continue its dominance after the occasion
which gave it the supremacy has passed away. The military
spirit often continues after the foe who aroused it has been van-
quished. So every other social force may live as a past impulse
rather than present necessity.
Only in the most general terms can we give the interpretation
for the continued dominance of certain forces. The needs and
occasions which determined their dominance may continue. The
foe may be conquered, yet it may be necessary always to be pre-
pared to meet a foe. But another reason is weighty. Exercise de-
velops the faculty or power exercised. Although at first the use of
the power may be a trial, its exercise in the course of time becomes
easy, natural, and even a pleasure. The strength it gains deter-
mines the line of least resistance. The mind by conscious effort
is ti-ained to move unconsciously and resistlessly in particular
directions. What is true of a single individual is true of all
individuals. Habits are formed, customs arise, traditions prevail ;
the appetite gi'ows by what it feeds on ; a power continually exer-
cised develops, it attains the pre-eminence, and then more easily
retains than it originally gained the dominance. A man is
absorbed in an effort to obtain a competence ; but when he has
obtained it, all his powers have been trained solely for this end,
and his life itself is devoted to accumulations for which his past
training is the only reason.
Individuals, society, institutions, being all permeated, trained,
and carried along by this dominant force, it is difficult to change
TUE UliSTOUlCAL EVOLUTION. 193
the trend, eveu if the most urgent reasons for doing so exist.
Reason has no weight with an ii-rational conservatism, which does
things only because they were done in the past. A few feel the
need of change, they impart their feelings, which thus become
more general, and their very antagonism to conservatism tends to
make them radical. Conservatives consider only what is to be
conserved, and are blind to the new that deserves acceptance ; the
radicals consider only what is new and calculated to overcome con-
servative ills, and are blind to the good in the past. In the con-
flict which results, revolution may be the only solution. Especially
in times of crises are there but few who equally appreciate in the
old the good and reject its evils, and the truth of the new while
free from its errors and extremes. But in distinction from the
extremes of conservatism and radicalism, these fev/ are the truly
progressive ones. History is largely a movement and conflict of
extremes, and progress the union of the truth in the extremes.
This is not the place to discuss the numerous principles which
have been thought bj^ different investigators to determine social
evolution. One, however has gained such prominence and general
acceptance that it deserves brief discussion eveu in an introductory
work. In his " First Principles " Mr. Spencer applies the biologi-
cal law of evolution to society, and claims that in it we have a
principle of so fundamental a character as to indicate the progres-
sive development of all association. He holds that in the case of
living organisms the process of evolution is invariably from homo-
geneity to heterogeneity of structure ; that is, the development
consists in diiferentiation. "It is settled beyond dispute that
organic evolution consists in a change from the homogeneous to the
heterogeneous."^ "From the remotest past which science can
fathom, up to the novelties of j'esterday, that in which evolution
essentially consists, is the transformation of the homogeneous into
the heterogeneous."'-^ This transfoi-mation is not regarded a.s
the only factor in evolution, but it is regarded as being without
exception. 3
This law is applied by Mr. Spencer likewise to aU human and
social affairs. " Whether it be in the development of the earth, in
the development of life uijon its surface, in the development of
society, of government, of mauuf actxu-es, of commerce, of language,
1 First Principles, 148. 2 ibid. 174.
•^ All the factors are given on p. 21G.
13
11)4 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
literature, science, art, this same advance from the simple to the
complex, through successive dilt'ereutiations, holds uniformly.
From the earliest traceable cosmical changes down to the latest
results of civilization, we shall find that the transformation of the
homogeneous into the heterogeneous is that in which evolution
essentially consists." ^ Beginning witli the nebular hypothesis, he
attempts to trace this law throughout inorganic matter, through
all forms of life, and through every phase of human association.
At the close of his elaborate examination he pronounces the law
universal. " Among all orders of phenomena that lie within the
sphere of observation, we see ever going on the process of change
above defined ; and many significant indications warrant us in
believing that the same process of change went on throughout
that remote past which lies beyond the sphere of observation.
If we must form any conclusion respecting the general course
of things, past, present, and future, the one which the evidence as
far as it goes justifies, and the only one for which there is any
justification, is, that the change from an indeterminate uniformity
to a determinate multiformity which we everywhere see going on,
has been going on from the first, and will continue to go on." ^
This supposed principle is an illustration of the caution that
should be exercised in formulating laws of universal application,
and in applying biological evolution to social evolution. This
tlieory of evolution is the most essential factor in Mr. Spencer's
philosophy. Behind it is the Unknowable, which is beyond the
reach of our faculties ; but this evolution lies within the legitimate
sphei'e of human inquiry.
The general acceptance of the theory may make us hesitate to
criticise it ; but the very fact that it is so often thoughtlessly repeated
and pronounced absolute and final, makes criticism the more neces-
sary. While the process described is common, yet it is not a law
universally applicable. It is a philosophical hvpothesis whose ap-
I>lication to society is limited ; and for tliis reason we deny its claim
as a sociological principle or law. As an effort to subject human
society to biological and even cosmical laws it is manifestly a
failure, not taking into account sufficiently the peculiarities of
human society.
Let us follow closely INIr. Spencer's reasoning and illustrations.
He illustrates the process from the liomogeneous to the hetei'o-
1 Op. cit. 148-9. 2 Ibid. 218.
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. lOo
geneoiis by referring to a wandering tribe of savages. " As we see
in existing barbarous tribes, society in its first and lowest form is
a homogeneous aggregation of individuals having like powers and
like functions: the only marked difference of function being that
which accompanies difference of sex." ^ As social evolution pro-
gresses, " a differentiation between the governing and the governed "
takes place, which continues till one man becomes governor and
the supreme power finally becomes hereditary in a family.
" Gradually, as the tribe progi-esses, the contrast between the gov-
erning and the governed grows more decided."
In another place '^ he teaches the same doctrine. In the begin-
ning, " political authority is neither well established nor precise.
Distinctions of rank are neither clearly established nor impassable."
But in the process of evolution " the distinction between the royal
race and the people grows so extreme as to amount in the popular
apprehension to a difference of nature. The warrior-class attains
a perfect separation from classes devoted to the cultivation of the
soil, or other occupations regarded as servile. And there arises a
priesthood that is defined in its rank, its functions, its privileges.
This sharpness of definition, gi'owing both greater and more
variously exemplified as societies advance to maturity, is extremest
in those that have reached their fullest development or are
declining."
IMr. Spencer overlooks a large number of facts,^ and forgets
that by means of reflection and by choosing particular ends for
which to live, man can take a course different from that of in-
organic matter and the animals beneath him. There has been
as distinct an evolution from political heterogeneity to political
homogeneity, as an evolution which developed "the distinction
between the royal race and the people." There was a process
which resulted in making one the ruler and all the rest subjects, or
which made a few noblemen or aristocrats the rulers, and the masses
the ruled. But since then the very opposite process has been
powerful. This evolution moved from heterogeneity to homo-
geneity. The distinction between sovereign and subject was wiped
out, and all became equally sovereign and equally subject. From
the freedom of one or a few and the subjection of the many, the
1 Op. cit. 158. 2 Ibid. 188.
3 They are by no means only " apparent exceptions," p. 190, but real and
weighty ones.
19u JSTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
evolution has proceeded toward the freedom of all. Nobility by
heredity, once making such marked distinctions in society, has
yielded to homogeneity of rights and privileges, regardless of birth.
In the eighteenth century the evolution which had made the king
the state turned from heterogeneity toward homogeneity, by pro-
claiming equality of rights and the sovereignty of the people.
The same process has taken place respecting the ballot and the
right to hold office, property qualifications being abolished and
homogeneity established. Not only have we evidences of this
species of evolution in the United States, France, and Switzerland,
but students of the times declare the trend to political equality one
of the strongest characteristics of our age.
This evolution is clearly the very opposite of that described by
Mr. Spencer, and a single instance proves that what he establishes
as a rule in many cases is not a law. Nor is this striking excep-
tion to his supposed law explained by his later and more complete
statement of evolution as involving a process from indefiniteness
to definiteness, and as a process of integration. The definiteness
between sovereign and subject vanishes, and the result is not pro-
duced by an integration of heterogeneous parts, but by actually
I)utting homogeneity in place of heterogeneity.
The same process is seen in other departments. For many ages
woman is severely limited to a particular sphere, men having a
complete monopoly of certain callings. Then there is a growth of
homogeneity, women becoming preachers, doctors, lawyers, taking
the places of men in stores and offices, and becoming competitors
of men in factories. Or shall this be called a development toward
heterogeneity among women, while with respect to humanity it is a
development toward homogeneity ? It is clearly not an integration
of heterogeneity in society, but its supplanting by homogeneity.
Evolution has developed individualism in the industries, with a
sharp distinction between capitalists and laborers. But is there
not also a decided tendency in the direction of socialism? There
is a movement toward industrial partnership, making laborers
partakers, with capitalists, of the profits, whereas formerly some
took all the profits and the rest were mere wage-earners. Still
stronger is the trend from heterogeneity to homogeneity in the case
of co-operative societies, in which all are capitalists and all laborers-
Even so strong an advocate of individualism as Mr. Spencer
cannot deny these facts ; nor can the tendencies toward liberty and
THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION. 197
equality, whether in politics or the industi'ies, be disposed of by
pronouncing them evidences of decay. They are conclusive proof
that the perfection of national development may involve a trend
toward homogeneity as well as to heterogeneity. The fact is that
progress consists in the development both of diversity and of unity.
Is further proof required? Mr. Spencer's statement that in
the process of evolution " there arises a priesthood that is defined
in its rank, its functions, its privileges," is a half-truth. It is just
as true that there is a process of development when priest and
people are more and more assimilated to each other, and there may
even come a time when it is declared that all, without exception,
are kings and priests unto God.
But one more instance. Pi'ocesses of differentiation take place
among nations, churches, and organizations, developing peculiarities
sharply and increasing the heterogeneity ; but no less marked is
the opposite process, which increases their homogeneity at the
expense of their heterogeneity. Nations learn from one another,
recognize and cultivate mutual interests, become assimilated to
one another, form alliances, create international law, and establish
courts of arbitration. The term "cosmopolitanism" is signifi-
cant ; such is the homogeneity produced by civilization that out-of-
the-way places must be entered to behold the former heterogeneity.
Many of the old distinctions between the city and country even
are vanishing.
Denominations which once developed their peculiarities and
repelled one another, are now discovering and emphasizing ele-
ments of unity and becoming more homogeneous. This is seen
in the union of Lutherans and Reformed in the same state church
in Germany, also in the nearer approach of Protestant churches to
one another in other lands. It is seen in the tendencies toward
union on the part of the English, the Greek, and even the Roman
Catholic church. The same process is seen in other associations
whose antagonism was greatest at the start and decreased with
age. In philosophical and theological schools the tendency to
coalesce and unite is a common phenomenon in the process of
evolution.
The evil in the false theory of IVIr. Spencer consists in that it
puts society on too low a plane, subjecting it to a biological law,
but not doing justice to human foresight, to teleological action on
the part of man, and to social ideals. Then, the adoption of this
198 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
law fetters society to past processes of differentiation, when
human advance may require a develoiiment toward homogeneity.
We admit the extensive application of Mr. Spencer's theory of
evolution, but are obliged to reject it as a sociological principle.
It has its place ; but it is not a universal law for interpreting the
past and the present, nor is it a guide for prevision respecting the
social development of the future.
Siminel (" Sociale Differenzierung," 9) regards social phenomena
as so complicated that no definite estimate of their results is possi-
ble. This in fact seems to be the general conviction. In "Essays in
Philosophical Criticism," edited by Seth and Haldane, we read (p.
104) : " The application of the historical method to the social
sciences has a ditficulty of its own, and the historical prediction which
Comte claims for Sociology can only belong to it to a very limited
extent." L. Stephen develops the ethical doctrine in harmony
with evolutionary principles, but he regards prediction impossible.
He says (18-20) : " I need not say how short-sighted are the ablest
statesmen, and how constantly that which happens is precisely
the one thing which nobody foresaw, but which, after the event,
appears to have been just what every one should have foreseen."
But if we cannot tell even what the morrow will bring forth,
"what shall be said respecting more remote periods? Numerous
questions respecting the effects of influences on an individual are
unanswerable ; but how much more difficult the question becomes
when thousands and millions are concerned ? "If we can give
some vague answer to such questions, it is clearly not such an
answer as can be called scientific, or as enables us to give any
definite prediction of results. . . . When we reflect upon the ex-
treme difficulty of obtaining the necessary knowledge, of appre-
ciating the state of mind of millions of men, of discovering the
latent passions which may be smouldering amongst them, their
state of accessibility to new ideas and new conditions of life, we
may well feel the untrustworthiness of our so-called scientific
methods. The discovery of a new principle in mechanics or the
promulgation of a new religious creed may alter the whole social
state, or bring about political and social convulsions. But how
can we predict new discoveries or new creeds? To foretell a dis-
covery is to make the discovery yourself, and to make it before its
time. . . . Any one who should have prophesied the history of
the present century at its beginning with any precision would
THE HI.'STORICAL EVOLUTION. 199
have had himself to foresee the course of science, the attitude
taken by the greatest thinkers, the influence upon men's imagina-
tions of new conceptions of the world, and to have traced out an
incalculable series of changes in the relations of classes, and to
determine the effect of all these changes upon the material condi-
tions of existence."
So much space has been devoted to the subject because some
think there must be social prevision because Comte said so.
Others seek to reduce Sociology to a science and a method which
are to insure the exactness and prevision of natural science.
These errors had to be met.
If we cannot predicate an innate impulse to progress of human
nature, we must suppose the conditions for progress to exist there.
The capacity with which man starts must be the germ of all his
future development. The very necessities of his existence are
calculated to call forth his energies. He must struggle with
nature and with his fellow-men. Biit even in the primitive state
there is something else than struggle. Affection, friendship, family
ties, ti'ibal relations, and the force of circumstances lead to co-
operation. If there had been nothing but the perpetual warfare
about the cradle of our race which some imagine, it is hard to see
how humanity could have escaped extinction.
As culture advances, man not only emancipates himself more
and more from the dominion of nature, but he subdues it by mak-
ing it minister to his purposes. As he grows and gets a taste of
knowledge and art and all the higher concerns of life, we can un-
derstand how he may have an impulse toward more culture. But
so long as he has no knowledge of the better things of mind and
heart, we cannot well conceive what there is for him to aspire to.
In some degree wonder may be excited and aspiration aroused ;
and the primitive religions may sometimes reveal an effort, or at
least a desire, to rise. But whatever impulse beyond the existing
stage may be found, it is a dark feeling rather than an intelligent
forward movement. Of how many in our most advanced nations
can it be said that they are impelled to make life progressive ?
A distinction ought to be made between social and associative
forces. Hatred and revenge are social forces so far as they affect
society, but they are not associative. They separate rather than
unite men. " Anti-social " might be used for such affections so far
as disintegrative ; that would mean that they are not only anti-
associative, but actually destructive of society.
200 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
Mr. L. F. "Ward ("Dynamic Sociology," I., 460) says, " Society,
in its literal or primary sense, is simply an association of indi-
viduals." A few pages further on he gives a discussion of " The
Social Forces," which he divides into those " absolutely essential
to life " and such as are non-essential. The former include the pre-
servative and reproductive forces ; the latter, or non-essential, the
aesthetic, emotional, and intellectual forces.
EEFLECTIONS.
Relation of the Second to the First Division. The Idea
of Evolution in Modern Thought. Subdivisions. Study of
our own Age. Its Relation to the Past and Future. Clas-
sification of Social Impulses. Reason in History. Sub-
stantial and Causative Factors in Evolution. Hotv are
Ne'wr Forces introduced into Society ? Co-operation and An-
tagonism of Forces. How far have Social Creations an In-
dependent Existence? Sub-conscious and Semi-conscious
Forces. Possibility of Prevision. Does a Social Organ-
ism depend v^holly on its Member.'s for its Character ? The
Social Mechanism. Social Stagnation. Progress in Hu-
manity. Transitory and Permanent Factors in Evolution.
Social Institutions. The Sociologist's Aim in the Study of
History. Value of Types, Characteristics, Laws. Unity in
the Diversity of Social Development. Development from
Homogeneity to Heterogeneity. Review of the Chapter.
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 201
CHAPTER VII.
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS, OR THE PROGRESS
OF SOCIETY.
The Problem. Why not stop our sociological inquiries
with the evolution of society ? In order to justify this
third division, its organic connection with the other two
must he shown. If we learn the forces of society and the
conditions of progress, why not apply the results to the
future development of society ?
It must he determined what is meant hy ethics as a
department of Sociology. The emphasis must he placed
on morality ; hut the moral ought to he put into harmo-
nious relations ivith all the other social factors. The
prohlem pertains to the entire progress of society, and
therefore to the total conditions for this progress.
Its conditions of progress must he sought. The aim of
progress should he settled in order to fix the goal of social
effort. Is this aim social or individual ? What is the
ideal of social ethics ? The question of prevision in Sociol-
ogy has special significance for this third division.
We make a distinction hetween theoretical and practical
ethics, the science and the art. It is our aim to get the
principles for social progress as the hasis for ethical
action.
Nature has causes and facts : the mind sets an end for
itself and works teleologieally. Especially in ethics does
the importance of design, purposive action, hecome evident.
202 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
Is man wholly subject to nature, or can he subject nature
to his purposes ?
Many of the most perplexiny questions of the day are
involved in this division, such as the freedom of the will.
The beginner cannot hope to solve these hastily, nor need
he cease his sociological investigations until they are solved.
Aside from these problems in or near the realm of the
unknowable, he will find many others which are solvable
and of inestimable importance.
The definite probleyn is : Wliat ought society to he, and
how can it be made what it ought to be ?
Having now the principles of society per se, showing
what must be in order that society may be, and the
evolution of these principles, showing what society has
become through the process of actual development, only
what society ought to be remains to be considered. The
first division gives the most general idea of society,
what is characteristic of all association, what the social
structure is, what forces constitute it, how they interact,
and what potentiality they involve ; the second traces the
working of the principles in history as they produce
actual society ; our third division, sociological ethics,
treats of what the social forces ought to become, what
their interaction should be, and how the most perfect
society can be evolved. By considering what must be,
what has been, and what ought to be, completeness is
given to sociological inquiry, including all departments
of social knowledge. So far as prevision is concerned,
which has a special significance for ethics, we treat it
here as an inference from our second division, under
which it is discussed.
If a planet moves in an imperfect ellipse, it may be a
legitimate problem for an astronomer to inquire into the
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 203
conditions necessary to make the ellipse perfect. If a
chemist fails to find an element in its pure form in
nature, he seeks to produce it artificially. We try to
get rid of bacteria from the air we breathe and the food
we eat ; cities spend vast sums to secure pure drinking
water; houses, ships, and furniture are disinfected in
order to destroy the germs of contagious diseases. Our
whole medical system is based on the theory that ills
can be removed and health promoted. Empiricism has
prevailed extensively in medicine ; yet if some shallow
empiric were to charge the medical faculty with
inconsistency for trying to promote health while they
never have specimens of perfect health to examine, they
would ansvv^er that they study diseased humanity for the
sake of health. If the objector replied that after study-
ing diseases their work was done, because there are no
facts of perfect health to investigate, they would likely
deem no further controversy necessary. Helmholtz
found only imperfect eyes ; but he knew that they were
imperfect only because he had an idea of what a perfect
eye is. The wise teacher considers the ignorance and
errors of his pupils in order to remove them.
The bearing of these facts on our subject is clear.
We have the foundation and the historic superstructure
of society in the other two divisions. As we contem-
plate that superstructure we aim at its explanation. Its
genesis explains only liow it became what it is. But
you must eliminate reason from the mind to stop with
that. Neither Darwin nor the scientific gardener or
bird fancier ends his inquiries with the origin of spe-
cies ; that is but preliminary to the problem what can
be made of the existing flora and fauna. But if the
question of progress toward perfection is legitimate
respecting plants and animals, in scientific inquiry, shall
204 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
it be pronounced unscientific respecting man and his
associations ?
The student who masters sociological problems will
have revelations respecting the status attained by social
science when he discovers that it is necessary to justify
the inclusion of ethics in Sociology.
When Comte insists on making Sociology a positive
science in the same sense as physics, it may be ques-
tioned whether there is room in it for ethics. The claim
that science involves a strict adherence to phenomena
would make the historic method the only valid one.
But if we go to the historic data for the sake of draw-
ing a social science from them, it does not appear why
we may not draw ethics from them likewise. If it is
argued that ethics is not found on the surface of the
facts, we answer, neither is science found there. The
trend to unify knowledge by putting it in the form of
science is not a whit less rational, a going beyond the
mere facts, than is the construction of a system of eth-
ics. Hence Comte, instead of limiting his inquiries to
social phenomena, often leaves the impression that he
values them for the sake of the ethical factors involved
in them. He discusses morals and morality, the con-
ditions of progress and the welfare of society, treating
the perfection of humanity as the aim of social devel-
opment, and his positive method, as distinct from the
theological and metaphysical, as the ideal process for
the accomplishment of the ethical aim. This emphasis
on ethics is to his credit; it may be the product in part
of his former relation to Saint-Simon, with his social-
istic measures. Practical considerations gave Comte
the impulse to sociological inquiries, and his system
terminates in ethics. If this conflicts with his positiv-
istic philosophy, so much the worse for that philosophy.
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 205
To discuss associated liumanity and leave out ethics, is
like a theology of the Olympian gods without Zeus.^
The special social sciences leave no doubt as to the
place of ethics. The system of ethics is itself rapidly be-
coming a social science ; how shall Sociology treat that
science if it has no place for ethics ? Since the days
of Savigny the laws of the state have been treated his-
torically. But this has not done away with their
rational consideration. What they are and how they
became what they are does not eliminate the question
of what they should be. Jurisprudence is largely ethi-
cal and deals with what ought to be. We know crimes
only because they fall below the moral standard. Every
lawyer, unless a mere pettifogger, has ideals of right.
Political science deals with history and with present
actuality, but also with rational ideals. The true states-
man stands on reality, but reaches out toward ideals
of the state. In economies the historical method has
been made prominent during the last half-century, but
it is essentially a system of rational principles, or aims
to be, no matter how men may act in their industrial
pursuits.
The man who limits Sociology to social phenomena
has no voice in sociological ethics. The facts to which
he limits himself say nothing on the subject. Whoever
says that ethics oiigld to be excluded from Sociology,
has already admitted the ought as a legitimate object of
inquiry. If he has an ideal of Sociology which excludes
ethics, how can he claim that Sociology is limited to
social facts and the historic method, and therefore has
nothing to do with ideals ?
1 Let any one read what Comte says of ethical factors under the head
of Social Physics if he wants to learn what prominence is given to eth-
ical subjects in the Positive Philosophy.
206 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
In claiming ethics as inherent in Sociology, we of
course regard Sociology as more than a " descriptive "
science. That this is a misnomer has already been shown.
Science is rational, not less, but the more so, because it
strictly adheres to facts as its data. Only an irrational
exclusion of thinking from phenomena can prevent the
inclusion of sociological ethics in the social science.
Mr. Spencer is more guarded than Comte ; but one
need only look at the close of his third volume of
" Principles " to see that he cannot avoid ethical con-
siderations. These are involved in his discussion of
individualism and socialism, as well as of other subjects.
Mr. Giddings' position may seem to exclude sociologi-
cal ethics. When he defines Sociology as " an expla-
nation of social phenomena in terms of natural
causation," he makes this more specific by saying,
" Sociology is an interpretation of social phenomena in
terms of psychical activity, organic adjustment, natural
selection, and the conservation of energy." ^ But in
spite of the a priori reduction of "• psychical activity "
to " natural causation," his definition does not exclude
ethics. The " psychical activity " constantly deals
with ethical factors. Hence we find on the next two
pages that an " end " of society is recognized, and also
an " ideal." " The function of society is to develop
conscious life and to create human personality ; and to
that end it now exists. It is conscious association with
his fellows that develops man's moral nature. . . . Ac-
cordingly, we may say that the function of social or-
ganization, which the sociologist must always keep in
view, is the evolution of the personality through ever
higher stages until it attains to the ideal that we name
humanity."
J rriiic'ij)lcs of Sociulugy, 419.
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 207
In makiug a separate division of sociological ethics
we simply propose to treat systematically an essential
factor in Sociology which is now so generally treated
casually and in a desultory manner. Sociology is
" strictly an explanatory science," as Mr. Giddings says,
and so we propose to resort to all legitimate means for
explaining the ethics of society. When we are informed
that society has a " function," an " end," an " ideal,"
and that it develops " man's moral nature," we take the
statements seriously. These are the very things with
which sociological ethics is concerned, and we ask for
nothing more than to be permitted to treat these sub-
jects scientifically.
In sociological ethics we deal with the social ideal and
the means of its realization. When we have found the
standard of what society ought to be, we can make it
the measure of past attainments. Historians constantly
apply their ideals as tests of men and measures. In-
justice may of course be done personalities and institu-
tions of the past if judged by our age instead of their
own. Care must be taken not to attribute to them our
own ideal. The chief value of sociological ethics, how-
ever, consists in the fact that it not merely gives us a
test of society, but also becomes our guide in social
action. We take ethics here in its broadest sense, in-
volving all the interests and the total welfare of society.
Instead of confining it to morals in a narrow sense, we
include in it all that pertains to association, such as
education, the industries, politics, and the other factors
which apply to social well-being. It is our aim to dis-
cover the principles and laws of social progress.
Discussions of ethical elements in society abound, but
we have no sociological ethics ; that is, we have no
ethics as a component part of Sociology, so organically
208 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
related to the other two divisions as to form a complete
sociological system. We distinguish between social
ethics and sociological ethics ; the former is a social
science, the latter an integral part of the social science ;
the former is a system by itself and can enter into social
details ; the latter confines itself to general ethical prin-
ciples, and considers these not by themselves, but in
their relation to all the other social forces. Social ethics
treats the ethical factor as abstracted, isolated from the
other social factors ; in sociological ethics, however, the
ethical factor is treated in connection with all the other
factors in the social organism. In the one case, then,
we look for social ethical abstraction, isolation, detail ;
in the other, for what is inherent in the organism and
general. The two have a common ground in principles ;
but it is peculiar to sociological ethics that the correla-
tion of ethics to the total factors of the social organism
is considered ; and in social ethics it is peculiar to con-
sider ethical details of societies, which are omitted in
sociological ethics.
The sense in which we use sociological ethics is easily
apprehended. Social ethics proposes to give a system
of social morality ; in sociological ethics we aim to give
the principles of social progress. The view thus taken
in sociological ethics is thoroughly ethical, considering
what ought to be, in distinction from what must be and
from what has been, in order that the utmost social
progress may be promoted.^
^ In sociological ethics, as in the other two divisions, society is viewed
as an organism. In other words, nothing in society is treated as isolated,
but as in organic connection with all the other social factors. In the social
relations the dominance of ethics is to be established. This cannot be
done by separating the ethical factor from the other social forces and de-
veloping it l)y itself, but only by correlating it with the other forces as sub-
ordinate to it and as subservient to ethical principles.
It has already been sliown tliat religion is one of the most powerful of
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 209
In some respects our third division is more difficult
than the other two, and certainly not less important.
Indeed, the majority of social investigators are apt to
regard the otlier divisions valuable in proportion as they
culminate in the third and promote social development.
We must go to society per se and to its historical evolu-
tion in order to determine what is required for future
progress. We cannot use the forces at work in society
unless we understand their nature and operations ; so
the actuality of society must be studied in order to learn
what is still required. The social worker, no less than
the artist, must understand the nature of the material
he is intent on shaping into his ideal.
Social reforms are in the air ; earnest workers think
that these reforms absorb the mission of the age. Many
of the reformatoiy efforts, hasty and shallow, are in
danger of retarding the progress they seek to promote.
The work itself rests on a false basis, the means are in-
adequate, and the very names of reforms and reformers
are liable to become a byword and reproach. The deep
and difficvilt work demanded requires more than good
intentions and an altruistic impulse. It is the purpose
of our discipline to transform the altruistic impulse into
rational and permanent purpose.
Our age has developed a mania for the exposure of
social ills. Criticism of the most radical kind goes hand
in hand with negation and destruction. " After us
the social forces. Its connection with ethics is peculiarly intimate. Al-
though religion primarily indicates the relation between God and man,
it may also exert the strongest influence on the relation of man to man.
The latter relation is here viewed as predominantly ethical. The unpar-
alleled ethical principles of the New Testament are indissolubly connected
witli the religious teachings. In various places, most elaborately in 1 Cor.
xii., the figure of the body and its members sliows that the ideal of Chris-
tian society is a ])erfect social organism, the very thing aimed at in socio-
logical ethics.
14
210 INTRODUCTION^ TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
the deluge," say the apostles of annihilation ; and they
care not when the waters shall subside and the green
earth appear again. No wonder that, when all the
energies are exhausted in efforts at destruction, none are
left for construction. Yet if the destructive forces are
to be beneficial, the positive, edifying ones must be con-
nected with them. The best destruction may be by
construction, just as disease is destroyed by promoting
health, and darkness vanishes by letting in the light.
Where truth enters, error is doomed. Evolution may
work the most thorough revolution, just as education
overthrows ignorance. Root out an evil merely, and the
briers may flourish more luxuriantly than ever ; but
plant a good tree in its place and no room will be left
for evil to strike root. Regenerative forces are required ;
but how shall they be secured ? Speculation may help
us ; it must, however, be supplemented by an investiga-
tion of past remedial agencies, the method of their appli-
cation and the manner of their working, the power of
the individual and of collective action, the value of
education, of religion, morals, the family, the church,
the state, and other institutions and organizations.
It is important to distinguish between what is desir-
able and possible. That we cherish ideals in ethics does
not imply that we deem perfection attainable. It is a
goal toward which progress moves. Carlyle is right :
" Alas ! we know that ideals can never be completely
embodied in practice. Ideals must ever lie a great way
off, — and we will thankfully content ourselves with any
not intolerable approximation thereto." Not less true is
it that the ideal is the ultimate goal of ethical action
and the strongest impulse to moral purpose.
Men who consider only what is desirable are apt to
become visionary and to attain no practical results.
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 211
Progress is gradual ; and \vc must start from what lias
been attained in order wisely to take the next step for-
ward. We cannot do to-morrow's work to-day. Tiie
effective ethical idealism is tlius also the strictest ethical
realism. Where shall we get our seeds for future sow-
ing, except from the harvests of the past ?
Among the most important distinctions in social work
is that between a temporary removal of ills and a per-
manent cure. It is one thhig to save a few drunkards,
and another to remove the causes of intemperance. So
with poverty, with strikes, and all the evils of the day ;
momentary relief must be distinguished from permanent
remedy. Certain influences are thus found to have their
day, while others abide ; it is those that are permanent
which necessarily have the greatest value. This gives a
definite aim to ethics ; whatever temporary relief may
be furnished, the ultimate aim should always be the es-
tablishment of the purest continuous social environment
and the best permanent institutions. These things
abide, while the individual passes away. Thus an im-
provement in language, in literature, in education, in the
family relation, in the state and civic institutions, and in
other lasting social arrangements, influences whole gen-
erations and may abide as long as time itself. It is for
this reason that the great benefactors of humanity have
established new or improved principles, have corrected
theories and purified systems, and have founded institu-
tions of lasting benefit to society.
We cannot enter into an elaborate discussion of what
is included in sociological ethics. It will be an advan-
tage to consider ethical questions in the light of the prog-
ress of humanity itself, and equally so to view all social
action from the sociological standpoint, instead of treat-
ing each social force as abstracted and isolated. The
212 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
principles of the great social problem, of the burning
questions of the day, of socialism, communism, an-
archism, all find their place in this division. Social
rights and social duties, liberty, equality, fraternity, are
involved.
Social progress must necessarily be slow and imper-
fect so long as the old method of considering the in-
dividuals of society as the ultimate social analysis
continues. How can we expect the social forces to be
properly understood and used to the best advantage be-
fore we discover them in the personality and distinguish
them from what remains individual and private in that
])ersonality ? Our greatest hope of progress consists in
concentrating attention and effort on these social forces,
in sharply distinguishing them from what remains pri-
vate in the individual, and in properly developing their
power, their interaction, and their results, the associa-
tions. It is only by mastering these social forces that
the sociologist gets control of i\\Q powers by means of
which social progress is accomplished.
For social development we need to win the social per-
sonalities ; but so long as individuals are regarded as
composing society, these personalities need no longer be
won, for society already has them. Let it, however, be
recognized that society has not the individual, but only
a fraction of him, much remaining unpossessed of what
is really social ; then a new purpose respecting him will
be created. It will thenceforth become tlie aim to make
social all he now ignorantly or fraudulently withholds
from society. Education, ethics, the law of the land,
and religion will make it their mission to make a social
conquest of the social personality.
The social organism will also be better understood.
Its true nature being known, the energies can be more
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 213
wisely directed to its development. The economic,
political, and religious forces can be studied as organi-
cally united, as constantly interacting. It will become
evident that^ to treat them as isolated or as abstractions
is a perversion. By thus concentrating attention on the
actual social energies, a knowledge and control of them,
such as has heretofore been in vain sought, may be ex-
pected. We have a right to look for greater success
when we cease handling merely the rough ore as it comes
from the mountain, having learned the art of extracting
the iron from it and using that only for our social ends.
The most varied application of this study of the social
energies can be made to all social forms and institu-
tions. When we have learned what particular forces
constitute a society, we can inquire how they ought to
work. We know that economic forces control indus-
trial associations; and we know also that these asso-
ciations need ethical forces. An institution which is
a concentration of various forces sometimes needs to
make dominant a force now subordinate; thus many a
state would be transformed if it made the highest inter-
ests, instead of the lower, supreme, and if the energy
of statesmanship dominated over the Philistine forces
of degraded politicians. Thus ever}' social group and
institution can be tested by its social forces, and progress
will consist in developing the forces, in adding new ones,
or in changing the relative dominance of the forces.
The emphasis we place on the permanent social ener-
gies does not mean that the persons who are in society
are underestimated. These persons receive the benefit
of the enduring forces. Each generation begins its
work at the beginning, with such advantages as are
conferred by heredity and by the social accumulations
of culture. The children do not begin in intellect and
214 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
morals where their fathers ended ; but they must achieve
their own intellectuality and morality amid the treas-
ures of past evolutions. Intellect and ethics are not
pushed on from generation to generation, as money and
land are transmitted ; but the conditions for intellectual
and moral development are given ; and as these condi-
tions vary with the ages, so do the opportunities of
society and individuals. What shall be made of these
opportunities depends on persons themselves. Just as
diseases are contagious but not health, so what is worst
in an age may be absorbed while what is best is missed.
Not by unconscious absorption, but only by personal
energy can reason and ethics be made supreme.
By permanent social forces we mean such as are in
persons and their environment, but work so constantly
as not to be affected by the passing away of individuals.
They continue because embodied in social institutions
which endure from generation to generation and mould
the generations themselves.
In making a special division of sociological ethics our
subject is lifted out of the ordinary processes of natural
law. Ethical considerations are based on the supposi-
tion that man is not resistlessly pushed forward by phys-
ical causes, but it is taken for granted that he can set
a goal for himself toward which to move. He can re-
sist the operation of particular forces, choose the end
for which he will live, and bend all his energies toward
the attainment of that end. Whoever appreciates the
value of teleological action knows its superiority to the
vulgar conception of life as a mere struggle for exist-
ence, in which the survival of what is called the fit-
test is the result. Even when life means more than
existence, when it includes what is commonly called
well-being, it is a mistake to suppose that life itself is
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 215
necessarily the end of existence. Those whose con-
ception is most exalted are inclined to regard life as
not an end in itself, but as means to an end. Thus life
is estimated for what of truth and beauty and goodness
it can appropriate and advance. Those who live for an
idea subordinate life to it ; and they prefer to adhere to
that idea and let life go, rather than retain life and lose
the idea.
So prominent has the contemplation of natural law
and of historic processes as the working of this law
become, that for some the teleological view hardly ex-
ists. Social evolution for them is a vegetative process,
with whose course rational choice and voluntary pur-
pose have little or nothing to do. For such our third
division does not constitute an integral part of Soci-
ology. Yet deliberate purpose has had much to do with
social development in the past, and it will increase its
force in proportion as social advance is made in the
future. While purposive action has heretofore been so
largely confined to individual ends, we have a right to
expect that it will be more and more directed to social
ends as Sociology distinguishes the social from the pri-
vate forces, as society itself gains in prominence, as
altruism takes the place of selfishness, and as social
progress is studied and appreciated. It has been said
that with his purposes a man himself grows ; and with
the dominance of social themes as never before, with
the advance of sociological study, and with the steady
increase of social interests, we have a right to expect
the growth of the social personality at the expense of
the selfish personality, and a corresponding growth of
effort in behalf of social welfare.
As a practical division of our subject the following
classification will help the beginner.
216 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
1. The Ethical Ideal.
This involves the question of the ultimate aim in
social action. Suppose that we could at once transform
it, what should Ave make society ? Is the individual the
ultimate aim, or some organization or institution, as
the family, the church, the state; or is it humanity, or
humanity in its associated capacity ?
It is quite common to regard individual welfare as the
ultimate aim. To those who regard individuals as the
constituent elements of society, such a conception is not
surprising. They think individual feeling is to be pro-
moted, the feeling of pleasure, happiness. Such an end,
however, arouses serious doubt. The feeling of pleasure
is so subjective, depending on so many peculiar individual
conditions, that it is hardly conceivable how so subjective
and variable an object can be the aim of all social action.
What gives one pleasure causes pain in another. J. S.
Mill, in his "Autobiography," assures us that experience
taught him that personal happiness is missed, or apt to be
missed, when made the direct aim of life, that it is more
sure of being secured if some other purpose is chosen as
the object of life, when pleasure comes in incidentally,
of itself.^
1 The interesting passage, contained in Chapter V., is as follows : " I
never, indeed wavered in the conviction that liappiuess is the test of all
'rules of conduct and the end of life. But I now thought tliat this end was
only to he attained by not making it tlie (h'rect end. Those only are happy
(I thought) wlio have their minds fixed on sonic object other than their
own happiness ; on the haj)piness of others, on the improvement of man-
kind, even on some art or pursuit, followed not as a means, but as itself an
ideal end. Aiming thus at something else, they find happiness by the
way. The enjoyments of life (such was now my theory) are sufficient to
make it a pleasant thing, when they are taken en passant, without being
made a principal object. Once make them so, and they are immediately
felt to be inefficient. They will not bear a scrutinizing examination. Ask
yourself whether you are happy, and you cease to be so. The only chance
is to treat, not happiues.s, but some end external to it, as the purpose of
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 217
Those who regard pleasure as necessarily the aim of
life make a serious mistake. They forget that the
reason can select an aim, say truth, not because it
affords pleasure, but because it is the truth. The man,
indeed, chooses it because he values it most highly, but
he values it most highly because it is the truth, not
because it affords most pleasure. The mind has the
power of abstracting the truth from all considerations of
pleasure, and of choosing it for its own sake, regardless
of the pleasure or pain the choice involves.
Another and still more serious objection arises when
we make individual happiness the aim and end of social
progress. So long as only individuals were seen in
society, no other definite object could well be presented
as the social aim. Society consisting of individuals, their
welfare meant the welfare of society. But now we have
society without absorbing in it the individuals, and
therefore we are able to make social progress itself the
social aim. It need hardly be said that we do not abstract
this social progress from the individuals in society.
We ought to expect the end of social progress to be
the perfection of society itself, not the feeling of an in-
dividual, who is only in part in society as a social per-
life. Let your self-cousciousness, your scrutiny, your self-interrogatiou,
exhaust themselves on that; and if otherwise fortunately circumstanced
you will inhale happiness with the air you breathe, without dwelling on it,
or thinking about it, without either forestalling it in imagination, or put-
ting it to flight by fatal (juestioning. This theory now became the basis of
my philosophy of life. And I still hold to it as the best theory for all
those who have but a moderate degree of sensibility and of capacity for
enjoyment, that is, for the great majority of mankind."
We may well wonder whether, if personal happiness is missed whea
made the direct aim of the individual, happiness is not also likely to be
missed if made the aim of society. If individual happiness is felt to be
insufficient when made the personal aim, must it not be still more so if
made the social aim? The logic of the passage is against the choice of
happiness as in any case the end of life.
218 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
sonality. The well-being of society as the end to be
attained by social progress means that the social forces
are to be made as perfect as possible ; that all of the
individual belonging to society be given to society ; that
the interaction of the social forces be made healthy ; and
that the sopieties formed by this interaction be complete
in themselves and rightly related to one another. The
perfection of society is thus the ethical aim of society.
It is beyond question that such a social state will have
the most marked effect on individuals. Society cannot
make them happy ; it cannot force their subjective state
into happiness. But while leaving to individuals what
belongs to them, society makes the very conditions
which individual welfare requires. Indeed, since the
personality in which the private and social forces are not
absolutely separated acts as a unit, we expect the per-
fection of the private forces to develop toward perfection
parallel with the individual's social forces. A perfect
society thus involves the perfection of the individual,
though that society itself is composed only of the social
forces of individuals.
Social perfection, then, is the aim of social progress.
This is the immediate as well as the ultimate aim, with-
out any side-glances at this or that effect on the individ-
ual. Only when it considers the total social organism is
ethics sociological.
Under this general aim come many specific purposes
as subordinate, and yet all contributory to the same
end. Thus we are called on to deal directly with con-
crete evils about us. So vast is the realm of social needs
that our severe limitations may oblige us to confine our
studies and work to special departments. The stream
of social progress is composed of many tributaries, and
we may find it necessary to confine ourselves to a single
SOCIOLOGICAL ETITICS. 219
tributaiy. Even in that case an ideal toward which to
work is required. Always the aim is the best sociation
and most perfect social development. Whatever de-
partment may be chosen as a specialty, it should not
be viewed as isolated, but as an integral part of the
social organism.
The attention is naturally concentrated by persons on
the particular social groups to which they belong. Each
group has its ideal ; but Sociology is concerned about
societies as parts of society. Hence its aim is the prog-
ress of society, of social humanity, and of societies as
its constituent elements. There is to be no one-sided de-
velopment of a particular social force or social product,
but of all social forces and products together and har-
moniously, of the social organism as an organism.
As already intimated, the process is essentially con-
structive. When our age has been pronounced strong
in criticism and destruction, but weak in construction,
the charge is very serious. Destruction may, of course,
be the way to construction, as the removal of rubbish
prepares the way for the foundation of a building ; but
in that case the destruction itself aims at, and ends in,
construction. But sometimes destruction itself seems
ultimate, just as the habit of war may lead to slaughter
for the sake of slaughter. Scholarship may become
possessed by the spirit of nihilism. We are sure that
evils can best be overcome, and the good best promoted,
by positive and constructive efforts.
The ideal of social progress, therefore, involves such a
constructive development of society as will eliminate the
evils by unfolding the good. With economics at the
foundation, the higher interests are to be reared on it.
Economics as the beginning and end of society cannot bear
the light of reason. Progress develops economics, but
220 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
builds on it intellectuality and morality. Progress con-
sists in giving the supremacy to sociological ethics, indi-
vidual and social ethics being its ministers.
2. The EtJiical Actuality.
One thing the dominance of natural science has im-
pressed on all departments of thought : the value of
reality and the importance of facts as its interpreter.
The actuality is the source of all laws, the ground of
speculation, and the basis of valid systems. There is a
rigid logic in social progress ; it must not only start with
the attainment already made, but likewise be adapted to it.
Like the solution of a proposition in geometry, the next
step in ethics can be taken only if all on which it depends
has preceded. All improvement, therefore, like educa-
tion, depends on systematic progress. A Roger Bacon
may be so far in advance of his age that he leaves little
direct impression on it, except that he was in league
with the black art ; only when society catches up with
him does it learn the lessons he tried to teach. The
social actuality must be known in order that there may
be economy of effort, no attempt being made to do again
what has already been done ; in order that what is yet
required may be learned ; in order that the social factors
to be moulded and developed may be understood ; and in
order that the next social step which logically follows
may be taken. These considerations indicate the im-
portance of considering thoroughly the social actuality
as the substance to be shaped into the social ideal.
Even then we learn that but an imperfect notion of
the progress actually attained by humanity is within our
reach. The present state of mankind is anything but
homogeneous. An infinite variety is presented by the
stages of development from barbarism to enlightenment
which now exist. However confusing: the scene when
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 221
the whole of humanity is viewed, it is not so difficult to
obtain a conception of the actuality as formed in a
limited sphere, as a social group, a community, or even a
state. Such a conception may be sufficient for the
practical purposes toward which efforts for social reform
are usually directed.
3. The Means for Realizing the Ideal of Progress.
Definiteness of purpose is of first importance, since
that determines the nature and direction of the pro-
gressive efforts. There can be no rational ethical work
in behalf of society without keeping in view the end to
be attained and the actuality to be transformed.
In sociological ethics we never lose sight of the fact
that society itself, the total social organism, is to be de-
veloped. Among the benefits derived from the study of
Sociology is the comprehensive view it gives of society
as inclusive of humanity. This enlarged conception en-
ables each one to appreciate himself as related not merely
to his family and immediate social environment, but
likewise to the whole of mankind. This saves the indi-
vidual from a false, narrow patriotism, as well as from
degrading selfishness. With this enlarged conception
the individual is enlarged and his social work aug-
mented in point of importance. This comprehensive
view, which embraces humanity as the aim of social
progress, does not interfere with ethical effort in a
limited sphere. Indeed, it is through specific work in a
particular department that the best efforts in behalf of
humanity are likely to be made. But however specific
the work and limited the sphere, it is to be inspired by
the consciousness that it is for the entire human family.
This far-reaching view is involved in the very concep-
tion of the social organism, a totality with which all
social groups are in vital connection. The ethical de-
222 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
velopment of a family, a voluntary association, or the
state, is the progress of humanity in a limited sphere.
In all progressive movement there is a diffusive power.
Others are inspired by it and affected by its contagious
influence. Thus even unconsciously moral views and
acts are promoted ; still more will they be advanced
when made a direct aim and when means to the attain-
ment of the end are adopted. In view of the organic
solidarity of humanity no course of any of its factors can
be indifferent.
The subject is too large for adequate discussion here.
Everywhere the aim must be the translation of the
social ideals into the social actuality. Practically, of
course, it is a task of details ; but even the principles
cannot be fully considered here. The development of
the social personality as a specific aim in education ; the
perfection of existing social groups and organizations ;
the evolution of the state ; the creation of new associa-
tions to meet special needs ; making dominant the forces
which are actually supreme, but in reality subordinated :
these are among the chief aims. A deeper investigation
of the working of organizations is likewise required.
This working may retard as well as promote progress.
An idea that needs organized forces for its promotion is
made the reason for association ; but long after that idea
has received the deserved recognition and the age has
passed beyond it, the association is still tethered to it.
Thus organizations foster a conservatism that ends in-
quiry ; they stand for a traditionalism which hinders
progress ; and existing for effete and stagnant elements
which are embodied in the constitution, they fall behind
the times and lose their original mission. It therefore
becomes an important problem how far organizations
must be destroyed or revolutionized for the sake of
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 223
social progress, and how far new organizations are
required.
Among the most important topics of sociological ethics
is the perfecting of societies for the sake of perfecting
the total social organism. What affects the parts affects
the whole. It has heen suggested that what individuals'"
are to the social groups, that ought the states to be to
humanity. Each state ouglit to be an ethical leaven for
the whole human family. In order that this ideal may
even in a small measure be attained, there must be a re-
generation of states. So are they now devoured by
selfishness that they behave more like sharks than like
constituent parts of the same human organism. Might
makes right. Colonization likely means rapacity and
brutality. Who suspects the Concert of Powers to mean
humanity ? And what humane considerations are the
inspiration of Jingoism ?
Frequently the civilizing influence of the enlightened
states is accidental rather than intentional. The knowl-
edge and laws developed for home purposes are com-
municated to others and may prove a blessing to them ;
so commerce may promote civilization in some measure,
in spite of the evils that attend it. But of what nation
can it be said to-day that it recognizes itself as a respon-
sible member of the great social organism, and its mis-
sion as an ethical leaven of humanity ? Nations can
give only what they have ; what then is the character of
their ethical influence ?
At a time when extreme communistic views threaten
to lose the individual in the mass, it is no less important
to consider the relation of the personality to social prog-
ress. So great an emphasis may be placed on organized
effort as to attract attention away from personal respon-
sibility for social welfare. Much will be gained when
224 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
the individual discovers that a proper regard for self in-
volves a proper regard for society. Selfishness is the
death of sociality ; but a true self-regard is increased
when one recognizes his social personality as a constit-
uent part of the social organism. A true individuality is
the condition for the highest personal social power. The
man who does not appreciate himself cannot appreciate
others ; if we are to love others as ourselves, then a de-
crease of self-love justifies a decrease of love for others.
No man can find his proper place or perform his mission,
unless he recognizes himself as a member of the great
social organism of all ages and of all humanity.
We distinguish between the perfection of the social
mechanism in which individuals mov'e, and the perfection
of the social personalities. The individual in society is
restrained by social etiquette ; he adapts himself to ex-
isting manners and customs. Whatever his own con-
victions may be, for the salvc of others he respects certain
traditions. Long before able to think or act for himself,
the individual breathes the ntmosphere of tlie family,
and is moulded by the principles, faitli, and practices of
the home. Tlie laws of the land are the boundaries in
which the true citizens move.
These permanent institutions are an expression of
society, but they outlive the society of any particular
period. All who move within their sphere receive the
influence embodied in them. Sometimes reformers claim
tliat their aim is to reform institutions rather than in-
dividuals. Tlioir moaning is that they want to improve
tlie institutions in whicli all individuals move and by
which they are affected. The advancement of these in-
stitutions means the advancement of the social organ-
ism, so that all the members may reap the benefit. If
everywhere the family could be improved, then hu-
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 225
manity itself, all whose members belong to the family,
would be improved. Better methods of education mean
better influences on all who are educated. To lift the
church on a higher plane involves the exaltation of its
members. A better state, more equitable laws, and more
efficient government will accrue to the welfare of all the
citizens. Through individuals and organizations institu-
tions are improved, and the improved institutions benefit
all who are subject to their influence. The whole indus-
trial w^orld would be transformed if the ethical were
made to dominate over the economic force, instead of
being made subordinate.
The position that social science deals with what has been, but
not with what ought to be, is illogical. If it has no place for
ethics, then it admits its inability to deal even with the past. The
admission is universal that it must interpret social phenomena.
But in the phenomena to be interpreted those of an ethical nature
are prominent. The social student is confronted by ethical sys-
tems, individual and social ; history abounds in theories respecting
what the family, the state, the church, and voluntary organizations
ought to be ; every law enacted comes with the force of an impera-
tive ; reforms have been inaugurated and reformatory institutions
established; thus at every point in his investigations the historian
meets moral problems and is obliged to pronounce moral judgment,
if he wants to estimate the historical actuality. All through his-
tory, therefore, we have the imperative as well as the indicative
mood.i
What now is to be the attitude of the sociological student to the
ethical facts, demands, theories, and institutions which he encoun-
ters in studying what has been? It is his mission to interpret
them like all other social phenomena. But this involves an ethical
system as the test of historical ethics.
Sociological ethics is thus involved in the very affirmation that
Sociology deals with the actuality of human society. The ethical
factor belongs to the weightiest actuality.
Those who insist on making ethics a product of evolution will
1 Cohn, " System der Nationalokonomie," i., 75-78.
15
226 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
of course put it on a level with the other evolutionary products in
Sociology and demand its recognition in the social system ; and all
who recognize the scientific character of ethics will demand that it
be incorporated in the science of society as a constituent social
factor.
In sociological ethics, as shown above, we do not limit the dis-
cussion to what is ordinarily called morality, but include all the
elements of social progress, whether pertaining to the natural
environment, the body, the intellect, the emotions, or the will.
Those who object to this inclusiveness, and insist on confining
sociological ethics solely to the elements of morality, ought to con-
sider whether society can be truly ethical by abstracting morality
from humanity and treating it as something by itself, unconnected
and unrelated. Society can be truly ethical only if the social forces
receive their proper place and development in the social organism.
It is not ethical to develop tlie heart at the expense of the intellect,
or the will at the expense of the emotions. There must be har-
mony, unity, completeness. Sociological ethics could not be com-
plete if any element of social progress were neglected. From the
point of view taken by Sociology it is immoral to separate moral-
ity from its organic connections and develop it in a one-sided
manner.
There can be no mistake with respect to the attitude of sociologi-
cal ethics toward the theory which treats evolution as something to
which society is subject, but over which it has no control. We can
recognize the power of mechanical processes in social affairs with-
out ignoring the power of volition. The perversion begins when
psychology forgets the inherent energy of the mind and enslaves
the personality to its environment. The true nature of many
social processes is missed by the failure to recognize teleological
action, rational ideals, and human initiative, in human society.
The cardinal distinction between the unalterable working of a
natural law, and the ability of man to use that unalterable law
for his rational ends, is overlooked. Thus instead of being blindly
and irresistibly pushed forward by an evolutionary force which
works through environment, heredity, habit, and custom, men can
be controlled by reason, can oppose the natural evolution, and
can choose to move themselves instead of being pushed resist-
lessly on.
We but give the environment its du;> when we again emphasize
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 227
the necessity of considering the nature of that which is environed.
Imagination may likewise attribute to heredity what no scientific
induction warrants. Some theories of heredity seem ready to
restore the " innate ideas " which Locke thought he had annihi-
lated ; but aU that can be postulated at bii'th is certain capacities,
whose development depends on environment and on personal energy.
The real supremacy of mind, if duly recognized, will again
emancipate thought and enthi-one reason. We do not mean that
speculation is now wildly, as in former times, to spread its wings
and soar in aerial realms ; the advance of science has made that
impossible. But it means that to the modern emphasis on reality
shall be added the real energy of thought in the search for truth,
as exercised by the profound thinkers from Socrates to Lotze.
Professor Bastian, one of the first of living ethnologists, in tak-
ing the Philosophical Society of Berlin through the Ethnological
Museum of that city, explained the process of development from
the savage to the civilized stage, using the rich treasures of the
collections as illustrations. Pie laid special stress on man's sub-
jection to nature in the lower stages of culture. " But," he said,
"the serious mistake made by Buckle is, that he thought what is
true of man in his savage state is"" also true of him during all the
stages of development, namely, that he always remains under the
dominion of his environment. The truth, however, is, that man
frees himself from his en\dronment in proportion as he rises in
civilization, so that instead of being nature's slave he becomes its
master." In this ability to rise superior to his environment we
have the condition for the formation of ethical ideals.
We have not the condition.s for determining scientifically just
why certain objects are chosen by the mind as the aim of its teleo-
logical action. Therefore it is far more scientific to confess om*
ignorance in this respect than to attribute the end chosen to en-
vironment, to heredity, or to the mechanical working of some un-
known law. The mind itself is not sufficiently known or under
our control for us to say definitely what is inherent in it and what
is due to the environment. The very fact, however, that the mind
can and does act teleologically lifts it out of the mechanism of
nature, — a fact of momentous significance in social affairs, and
most of all in sociological ethics.^
1 Haeckel ("The Evolution of Man," chapter v.) says: " Erasmus Darwin
transmitted to his grandson Charles, according to the law of latent transmission
228 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
The reality of the past, based on tlie history of what has actu-
ally occurred, naturally impresses us more than any conception of
the future. Yet for the past, which has made its indelible record,
we can do nothing ; at best we can only appropriate what it has
wrought. AVe can, however, devote our energies to the future,
which can do nothing for us. It therefore seems unreasonable to
take a deep interest in the past and none in what is yet to come to
pass, unless we are intent solely on having something done for us,
not considering what we can do for others.
The indefiniteness of the f utiu-e compared with the solid actu-
ality of the past, may lead some sociologists to emphasize the
historical evolution of society, while they have no room for socio-
logical ethics. The same reason may make it ditficult to interest
persons in a progress which is not tangible but pertains to coming
generations. Not many recognize their solidarity with humanity
sufficiently to take an earnest interest in benefits to be reaped
through then- efforts by others, but which they themselves shall not
share. We have a right, however, to expect the study of Sociology
to intensify the conviction of this solidarity.
In sociological ethics the idea of progress is of especial signifi-
cance. So long as the notion itself remains vague the principles
it involves will be obscure.
Respecting both the nature of progress and the objects to be
benefited by it, different views have prevailed. Hardly any one
in an enlightened land would now regard an individual, say a mon-
arch, or an imperial family like that of Russia, as the sole or chief
recipient of the blessings of progress. The general trend in favor
of equalization is depriving the nobility and aristocracy of the
claim to supreme consideration. There is still class dominion
and class legislation, giving peculiar advantages to a select few ;
but the prevalent theory, at least in free countries, whatever the
practice may be, regai'ds the people, wdthout the old artificial dis-
tinctions, as the objects of well-being and of exaltation. It is,
however, astonishing how recent this conception of the aim of
progress is, and in how small a part of the human race it even now
prevails.
(Atavism), certain molecular movements of the cells in the ganglia of his power-
ful brain, which hart not marte their appearance in his son Robert." Molecular
movements transniittert to :i grandson is surely remarkable. How is it known,
or can it be known, that the^- were transmittedV
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 229
When we limit our inquiries to particular spheres, the nature of
progress does not seem difficult. There are gradual increments
which escape observation ; but the results become evident in long
periods. Epochs also occur when great improvements are suddenly
introduced. Ocular demonstrations can be given of the develop-
ment from the use of tallow candle for light to that of electricity ;
no less marked is the progress from Fulton's simple steam engine
to the vast and complicated machinery which propels our largest
ocean steamers. The advances made throughout the ages can also
be traced when we pass from a single object to large departments
of human thought and skill, as in letters, in philosophy and sci-
ence, in aesthetics, politics, and economics. History makes a
specialty of these subjects. But it is not so easy to furnish a con-
cise definition of human progi'ess which gives only its essence
while inclusive of all its details.
Progress is not mere movement, but movement which means
actual advance. It is growth, development ; but evils may grow
and result in deterioration. Human progress always stands for
improvement, for advance toward a desirable goal, toward an ideal.
It consists in the evolution of something in itself valuable, in un-
folding truth and destroying error, in creating more of the good
and making the good better.
Progress solves old problems and perhajis discovers in the solu-
tions greater problems than the ones solved. The advancing
movement of the ages consists of solutions and revelations of
problems. We master a system and pass beyond it; we catch up
with a thinker and can dispense with him who formerly seemed
indispensable ; we get the contents of an age and move on toward
the next ; we drop something, but always get more than we lose ;
whatever has abiding qualities is preserved in the higher form
into which it is developed. There is the tragedy of death as well
as the joy of birth in progress.
We must not forget that to hand down the achievements of the
past is but one factor in the process of culture. "N^'hat is thus
transmitted promotes civilization only if personally appropriated
and elaborated. An Aristotle may be obscured for ages because
the appreciation of his works is lacking, and even the Bible may
be a buried treasure.
The ultimate aim of social progress cannot be anything short
of social perfection. All the parts and forces and functions of
230 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
society are to be made perfect. Just what this most advanced
perfect stage must be cannot be described beforehand. It is a
general idea toward which all social progress is to tend, the defi-
uiteness of the idea increasing in projiortion to its realization.
At each particular social stage it is not so difficult to determine
what elements of progress are specially in demand. Certain ills
are to be removed, certain excellences to be promoted. So far as
practicable, the progress sought at any age is to be a stage in the
development toward social perfection. But the strongest impulse
to progress is in the felt needs of an age, not in any remote ideal.
" The distant future of a country is so unimportant by the side of
its immediate needs to the men in possession, that even if they
were reasonably certain that a particular evil ought to be guarded
against at an immediate sacrifice, they would rarely be possessed
of the moral force required for the effort. As a matter of fact,
however, only a few persons can feel reasonably certain as to the
future, because only a few busy themselves with distant specula-
tions." (Pearson, "National Life and Character," pp. 9-10). It
is also to be considered that those who want to affect the future
must do it through the generation in which they live.
It is clear that the individuals in society are to share in the
progress. As we have seen, individual and social progress are
organically connected. The individual is to share the development
of society, just as society is to be a partaker of the advancement
of the social personality. This, however, is very different from
making individual feeling the aim of social progress. Society has
in itself the end of its development, not something outside of
itself.
In sociological ethics we have both a science and an art ; the
art is, however, but an application of the science, and can be
treated as a corollary of the science. We need not hesitate to
include the principles of this art in Sociology. The science of
sociological ethics treats of principles : what ought to be, what the
social ideal is, what the social good is, what is right, and what
sliould be the aim in social action. As an art, social ethics seeks
to realize the ideal. The worker is an artist who takes the social
actuality as the material which he is to shape. For the individual,
for every social group, and for society at large, this ethical trans-
formation of the actuality into the ideal is the practical problem.
As Michael Angelo shapes the rough block of marble into a Moses
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 231
or a David, so the social worker wants to shape the social reality
into a form which now exists only in his mind. What is sub-
jective, a mere mental concept, is to be made objective. For
complete ethics both the scientific and the artistic concepts are
essential.
Schaffle (i. 195) shows the importance of studying the actual
situation. He says : " Whoever does not understand and consider
the existing social condition, with respect both to what is good
and to what is bad, will neither be able to explain the historic
processes of the past, nor to accomplish social reforms, however
good his intentions may be."
The relation of the individual conscience to what may be
analogically, not literally, called the social conscience is important.
Shall the individual be independent in his ethical judgments,
setting himself against society, his personal convictions against
those which are historical, his notion of right against that of the
community ? One is more apt to be mistaken, we are told, than
the social consensus of the past and the present. Yet what is the
individual worth if his morality is a kind of public contagion, if
his convictions are not his personal elaboration and possession, and
if he does not maintain them at all hazards? The common
morality is the popular test, and he who falls below it is condemned
as inferior ; but it is equally certain that distinction in excellence
is to be obtained only by rising above the ordinary level. The
social conscience reveals itself in the press, in laws, in customs,
in traditions, institutions, creeds, and political parties. What is
called public morality is frequently nothing but public legality;
from the ethics of the individual personality, social morality must
necessarily be distinguished.
We must distinguish between quantitative and qualitative
progress. The quantitative consists in the multiplication of the
same kind of objects or forces ; the qualitative in the improvement
of the objects or forces. In the one case there is a growth in mass,
in the other a development of the character of the mass. Thus in
a nation we can distinguish between the increase of population,
say from three to seventy millions, and the intellectual and moral
development of the people. The same kinds of societies can be
multiplied, or the societies themselves improved.
Let us suppose that the highest of the existing social organiza-
tions is so multiplied as continually to include a larger portion of
232 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
humanity, what will the effect be? The benefits of that organiza-
tion will be spread and a constantly growing number of human
beings blessed by it. The freedom attained by one people can in
this way exert a contagious influence on others.
But great as the blessings thus conferred are, it is only the
working and diffusing throughout humanity of an already existing
leaven, not tlie introduction of a new power. This new power is
gained by the creation of something better than now exists, by an
improvement in the social forces and in their working. Even
those interested in processes of civilization seem, as a rule, more
intent on the spread of civilization than on attaining a higher
civilization than that already existing.
How is a higher civilization than that now existing to be
attained ? "We cherish the hope that the answer to this will be
furnished by the study of Sociology, especially by the development
of sociological ethics. Much will be gained by the social education
of the individual, that is, by such a development of his social
forces that whatever of him belongs to society shaU be given to
society. This will insure a direct development of the social forces
themselves, the primitive elements of society. The sociological
conception of the individual as an integral factor of humanity
must stimulate his sociological thinking, feeling, and volition, so
that he will rise above a conception which is limited to self and to
the various societies joined by him. The interests, the affections,
and the activities will be enlarged and exalted.
The heightening of the social forces is not, however, the only
means for attaining a higher civilization. There can be improve-
ment in the interaction of these forces and in the associations
formed. Not only are there in civilization forces not found in
barbarism, but the mechanism of the forces is improved, as we
have seen, and the societies formed are made superior. Thus
there may be an advance in social aims, in the objects of social
interest, in the means for attaining these objects, and in the
results of social action.
Among primitive people exertion that leads to progress seems
to be the result of necessity, of the natural and social environment,
far more than of an innate progressive impulse. We can well im-
agine an absence of competition and of the need of exertion which
means the peace of the graveyard.
On the other hand, there may be in individuals and societies an
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 233
inner impulse toward progress, particularly in higher stages of cul-
ture. As the body grows from infancy to manhood, so there may
be stages of the harmonious development of society, just as the
mind may attain an intellectual develoiiment which shall contain
an impulse to deeper and broader knowledge, and higher and
purer truth.
Ward discusses in his second volume numerous subjects which
pertain to sociological ethics, such as teleology, progress, and the
end to be attained.
In " The Social Problem " the author of this Introduction dis-
cusses the ethical aspects of many of the social problems of the
day.
REFLECTIONS.
What is meant by Social Ethics as a Part of Sociology ?
What it includes. Relation to Individual Ethics. Exact
Aim of Social Progress. Explanation of the Trend to sub-
ordinate the Individual to Society and make Social Ethics
supreme. What Aid is furnished Social Ethics by the
Principles of Society j^er se and by Social Evolution ? In-
dividual and Social Responsibility. Criminals as Social
Products. The Ground of Responsibility. Evolution and
Revolution in Progress. Conservative, Radical, and Pro-
gressive Elements. Destructive and Constructive Forces.
Reform and Regeneration. Basis for Union of Reforms.
The Permanent and the Variable Elements in Social Prog-
ress. Does the Aim to develop Great Personalities con-
flict -with the aim to elevate the Masses ? Hovtr far does
an Advance to higher Social Forms affect the low^er Social
Forms ? Distinction between the Improvement of the
Social Organism and Individual Improvement. Impor-
tance of improving Social Institutions. Reasons for Soci-
ological Ethics. Review of the Chapter.
Completeness of the Division of Sociology.
Sociological ethics completes the division of our sub-
ject. A review of the scheme thus presented gives a
clear, comprehensive, and exhaustive analysis of Soci-
234 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ology ; that is, there is nothing which pertains to socio-
logical principles and phenomena which does not find
its place in these divisions. Each of the three divisions
furnishes a distinct subject, each is extensive and rich
enough as a department for separate treatment, and
neither of them includes material foreign to Sociology.
The main difficulty consists in the vastness, the variety,
and the complexity of the materials.
But even with these three divisions, is not the subject
unmanageable ? For the second division subdivisions
may be necessary, such as have been indicated. Thus
the genesis of society can be divided into the evolution
of the various social forms and stages of culture : how
primitive society developed, how civilization began, and
how the highest civilization was attained ; the family,
the state, the church, voluntary organizations can also
be treated separately. The conditions, causes, and de-
grees of culture in different nations can also be dis-
cussed, as the social development of the Hebrews,^
Greeks, Romans, and more recent peoples of Europe
and America. After the general idea of Sociology has
been attained, it may be most profitable to take up the
evolution of society in general, and then specialize by
taking up certain periods, nations, and institutions.
Even for a general idea of Sociology a thorough study
of different social groups is essential, leading the stu-
dent from an institution, a social organization, or some
particular phase of culture to the science of society.
For the apprehension of society as a totality, it is im-
portant for the beginner to trace the connection between
^ From the ethical point of view, Israel is by far the most interesting
and most important of the peoples of antiquity. This is due both to the
character of the social arrangements and to the completeness of the ac-
count given of them in tlie Old Testament.
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 235
allied social groups, then between those less closely re-
lated, also between such as are in conflict with one an-
other, thus following the social bonds throughout a
nation to internationalism and humanity.
Whatever our analysis for purposes of clearness and
specialization, we need the comprehensive scheme given
in the divisions for an exhaustive conception of society.
Human association as a whole, embracing all kinds of
societies, is the condition for understanding any par-
ticular social form. This is but saying that an organ
can only be understood in its relation to the organism.
Hence our emphasis on including in the science of
society every kind of association, from the family to
humanity. But it has been shown that this does not
imply that now every element of society is the exclu-
sive possession of Sociology. In many instances Soci-
ology is perhaps only to furnish the large scheme or
outline in which all the elements are included, and to
indicate their place in the sociological system. It has
been clearly stated that their independent development
can then be left to specific social sciences. Economics
and politics can continue as separate disciplines for
independent development. The aim to make Sociology
perfect may itself grow in distinctness, exactness, and
comprehensiveness, in the process of sociological de-
velopment. With the sole purpose of leading the stu-
dent into the subject as our guide, we do not profess to
mark out the exact course of sociological thought, or to
determine the character of Sociology during any period
of its progress. Our theory of prevision forbids this.
The student who wants to adopt only finished results,
and to finish his education with their appropriation is
out of his place in sociological investigations. Even
the results already attained in Sociology cannot be
236 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
appropriated in that way. They must be earned to be
possessed. Tlie great truths of the science of society
are not transmitted from teacher to pupil, but must
be personally elaborated. Then there is a large still
unexplored territory which the student should enter as
a pioneer.
In many instances it would have been more easy to
give accounts of institutions than to map out the work
which requires the attention of the beginner, and to in-
dicate the course for original investigation. Here our
aim, however, is not to make finished sociologists, but
to prepare the way for sociological investigation and to
guide the sociological inquirer. Hence problems have
been given, problems which involve the greatness of
our subject, which are an inspiration to research, and
which impel to efforts at solution. The true student
masters what has been done, for the purpose of getting
the means for accomplishing what yet remains to be
done. The special application of this to sociological
ethics is evident. Sociology without ethics is a torso.
It may require much reflection on the part of the beginner to
apprehend clearly the vast amount of material included in the
three divisions. Society as a totality is to be analyzed ; the analy-
sis must include all the contents of society, so that a synthesis of
the parts found by the analysis gives the social totality. Our
divisions give the analysis of the subject, and the synthesis of the
divisions again gives us Sociology.
Let us suppose society represeiited by a tree. The soil and roots
are the principles, the elements from which the tree grows and on
wliich its life depends. The tree above ground represents the his-
toric evolution ; in the branches at different heights we see the
various stages of evolution ; in the fruit, the culmination of the
growth, we behold the present. We then inquire whether in
the roots and the trunk some conditions are not found for the
improvement of the fruit in coming generations: that gives us
socioloijical ethics.
SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS. 237
Are there any more aspects in which society can be viewed?
Using terms of evolution, we say that there is something to be
evolved, the original elements or principles ; that we have the
evolution itself, the history and present attainments of society ;
that there are definite tendencies toward the future, but that we
can also treat the future teleologically, choosing a certain end
(design), and then working for what we conceive ought to be.
This teleology includes what men ought to be physically, intellectu-
ally, morally, spiritually, in their associated capacity.
REFLECTIONS.
Sociology as a Totality. Its Divisions and what they
include. Does any Sociological Conception lie outside of
these Divisions ? Distinction between the Principles of
Society per se, the Principles of Social Evolution, and
the Principles of Sociological Ethics. Review of all the
Divisions.
238 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
The Problem. Perhaps on account of the variety in
the materials ive ought rather to speak of methods. The
course thus far pursued will make the subject more easy ;
we need hut become fully conscious of the processes we
have folloived.
Method, a plan of work ; the aim. the complete mastery
of a subject in the best way, according to the principles of
utility. Owing to the neglect of method, the work of stu-
dents is hap-hazard ; they are not fully aware of what
they do, because they do not know why they do it. Even
if there are various ways of doing a thing, one may be
superior to the rest.
The subject determines the method. Whatever unity
may underlie the varied phenomena of the world, differ-
ent methods are required for mathematics, chemistry,
psychology, and social affairs. The different factors
ivhich enter the science of society may require different
methods of treatment, and often it becomes a problem
which shall be adopted.
The social present must be learned from persorial obser-
vation and from the investigations of others. What others
record of their investigations must be critically scruti-
nized, just as in the case of historical documents. The
observation of social facts, still more than of natural facts,
requires special training. When the facts are obtained,
THE METHOD IN TUE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 239
ive try to fathom their meaning and to learn their causes.
We want to know how things became and why they he-
came. No step beyond a mere knowledge of facts is
possible without induction and deduction. Analysis is
necessary, but also synthesis/ indeed, in Sociology the
analysis is for the sake of the synthesis. TJie growing
importance attached to statistical inqui7'ies in the science
of society makes it necessary to determine their exact
province and their limitations.
After it has been definitely stated what is to be done
by Sociology, we naturally take up the problem how it is
to be done.
By devoting a separate chapter to this important sub-
ject we can concentrate, develop, and supplement what
was said about method in the preceding chapters. An
elaborate inquiry is not necessary, since the method of
our discipline is essentially the same as in the other
humanistic studies and is frequently discussed in phi-
losophy, particularly in works on logic. As this is not
an introduction to Sociology, but to its study, such
suggestions are offered as are likely to be of special
service to beginners in social science. For them the
subject, which is usually placed at the beginning, will
be more easy here, after the preceding chapters have
been studied. The very discipline in the method fur-
nished by those chapters will aid them in understand-
ing the subject. Particularly for those who want to
make independent sociological investigations will a
discussion of the method be valuable.
So universally is the a priori method now rejected in
theory that there ought to be no necessity for discuss-
ing its abuses. While Sociology involves much that
would formerly have been treated metaphysically and
240 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
speculatively, such a treatment would hardly be at-
tempted consciously in our empirical era. No claim
is made that society can be interpreted by postulating
certain powers as inherent in human nature, and then
speculating on the association and evolution which must
result from their exercise. It is not possible to form
any presupposition which will relieve us of the neces-
sity of making the most careful inquiry into the imme-
diate causes of social phenomena. Yet while with the
theory on this subject there ought to be no question
respecting the metaphysical principles, there is diffi-
culty regarding the application. The assumptions with
which Sociology has teemed from the beginning serve
as a warning to future investigators.
The social realism should be made an object of con-
stant study. Even in doing this prejudices are apt to
lurk in the mind, which anticipate and pervert the
results. We have shown that other departments of
thought are by no means to be ignored ; but whatever
aid they may give, they cannot furnish the subject-
matter of Sociology. Just as in every other discipline
we discover the elements by means of an analysis of
the subject itself, so must we proceed with society.
We may consider the known forces in inorganic and
organic matter; but we must study their effects on
humanity in these effects themselves. Analogy should
not be identified with likeness, nor similarity with
sameness ; mere precedence is not cause, any more than
night produces the day that follows. The severest
scientific scrutiny is required in order to prevent a
mere habit, whether it be philosophical, spiritualistic,
or materialistic, from being made the law of being.
On a valid basis the inferences must be strictly logical,
in order to counteract the illusions of analogical rea-
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 241
soning. It is not a whit more evidence of ignorance to
attribute to God what we cannot otherwise explain,
than to attribute it to matter, to natural law, to biol-
ogy, so far as these belong to the unknowable.
An earnest desire to interpret everything must not be
taken for the ability to do so, still less for the actual
interpretation. True science insists on the limit of
reason as a matter of experience, if not as an axiom.
Wherever faith may soar or philosophy speculate, the
ultimate problems are clearly beyond the demonstra-
tions of science; therefore terms which imply that ulti-
mate solutions have been found should be avoided.
Such expressions as natural causation, natural law,
material force, require explanation in order to be of
service in sociological interpretation. Since every
object is to be studied and explained according to its
inherent character, it might be well to adopt such terms
as personal laws and human laws for what pertains to
personality and to humanity. This retains the pecu-
liar personal and human elements, without prejudice to
their ultimate interpretation. So in distinction from
what may be called the metaphysical, speculative, and
biological methods, we propose the sociological method
as the only one fit for our subject in the present state
of knowledge. By the sociological method we mean
that the nature of the sociological subject must deter-
mine the method of procedure, and that no discipline
that is foreign or of doubtful application be made the
law of Sociology. The social forces in individuals are
psychical, whatever influence may be exerted by nature ;
they arc distinctively human forces, and as such they
must be taken. They are not to be confounded with
physical or mechanical forces. They are conscious,
volitional, purposive, at least in their highest develop-
16
242 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ment, in which respects they differ from what is merely
mechanical. The sociological method concentrates the
attention on what is peculiar to society, and considers
its peculiarity as societary. In thus advocating a
sociological method we merely recognize and apply a
principle generally accepted, namely, that whatever
similarity of method may prevail in different disci-
plines, each subject distinct in itself must also have a
method according to its distinctness. The subject-
matter and the aim are the factors which determine
the method of inquiry.
Light will be thrown on the sociological method
when we illustrate its working as compared with the
method in the special social sciences. In economics,
for instance, as before shown, we consider simply the
economic force in its operations ; but in Sociology we
consider the economic force in its relation to, and co-
operation with, all the other social forces.
When we speak of a sociological method, meaning
that the nature of the material considered determines
the law of its investigation, we do not prejudice the
solution of the ultimate problems ; and while this
method excludes all foreign laws, it has room, in their
proper place, for all material and spiritual elements
wherever found. Another advantage in adopting the
sociological method consists in the fact that whatever
elements are used must be in the sociological form.
Thus the biological factors used arc not brutal, but
human and social.
While carefully moving within the limits of scientific
inquiry we are not to be mere social empirics. We
must be truly rational as well as empirical. By a
strange perversion the mere accumulation and classifi-
cation of facts are called scientific, while rational
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 243
interpretation is thought to be unscientific. Those who
take sensation for thinking lose the essence of science.
Facts are valuable for the sake of their meaning. A
fact of nature is not a law of nature, but involves a law,
comes under it, illustrates it, and the law latent in the
fact is the problem which the fact involves. The same
is true of social facts; we learn what they are, and
then aim to get their philosophy. The process is
inductive. The strictest adherence to reality is neces-
sary in order to avoid those fictions which so often
stand for actuality. But deduction is the counterpart
of induction. If by induction a law has been drawn
from the facts, then we apply it in all cases like those
in which it was discovered. After it is once estab-
lished, we need not rediscover the law of gravitation
before using it; its proper application is our sole con-
cern. If the exercise of a social energy is the condi-
tion of its development, then we can reckon with this
law without renewed verification. When law is used
to designate only an order of phenomena, it must not be
identified with cause. The law of gravity is a state-
ment, not an interpretation, of gravitation. The limi-
tations of a law should be considered. Undue influence
is attributed to it when abstracted from other laws and
made the explanation of phenomena which are the
result of co-operation with other laws. To ascribe the
uprising of laborers to their industrial condition is to
miss one of the most powerful factors in the phenom-
enon. They have been in a worse condition when there
was no uprising. Their agitation is largely due to
their own industrial, intellectual, and political advance,
and to the prevalence of the modern ideas of human
rights. Man must have bread to live; but he has other
interests than the bread he eats. As in explaining a
244 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
chemical compound, all the elements entering into the
substance, and their proportions, must be found, so
it is with all social phenomena. The analysis must
be exhaustive. Society can be interpreted only if all
its energies and the co-operation of all its laws are
recognized.
Unless thoroughly disciplined in philosophy, the
student will likely need most help in discovering the
most general principles of Sociology. How can he dis-
cover them and what they involve, and thus get those
essentials which are presupposed by the historic evolu-
tion and the ethics of society ?
The intelligent use of " society " implies that some
definite meaning is attached to the term. What is that
meaning ? It stands for a specific organism of ener-
gies ; what are the characteristic features of that organ-
ism which distinguish it from other objects ? These
are fundamental questions which must be answered.
Human society deals with humanity, but even with
humanity only according to its social features. This
gives the exact point of view. Fix the attention rigidly
on what is beyond all question recognized as society,
say one hundred men united for purposes of scientific
culture. Wbat constitutes this body of men a society ?
The answer will give society ^^er sc, in distinction from
those particular forms of society which depend on time,
place, and circumstances; we are after the perma-
nent and essential elements which exist after all that
is accidental and variable has vanished. All real
society is in time and place, and has certain peculiar
qualities; but our aim is the concept or idea of society
which underlies all actual society, which is in all real
society, but more than which all real society contains.
There is but one concept of society, but the actual
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 245
societies may have endless forms. The one hundred
men might be increased or diminished, and the society
still exist. The members of the society need not be men ;
some or all may be women. The society might have
some other than an intellectual aim. The purpose,
then, is not essential. So the fact that they meet at a
specified time and in a particular place is not essential
to the idea of society. Individuals arc evidently neces-
sary. Yet one on earth, another on the moon, and a
third on Mars, veould not be regarded as constituting
society. The one concept left as essential is that of
human beings in an associated capacity. But do wc
consider these beings as totalities or only their social
elements ?
This association of human beings for a definite pur-
pose is the old and most fully recognized conception of
society. In recent times, however, the conception has
been extended so as to apply to persons not united for
any definite purpose, nevertheless otherwise associated.
Even direct contact is not deemed essential, as the
members of a large denomination constitute a society
without knowing or seeing each other. It is in this
larger conception that we speak of humanity as a
society, the members having essentially the same facul-
ties, the same environment, the same conditions of
association, and some actual connection through fam-
ilies or otherwise. One need but become conscious of
the really existing associative elements among men in
order to understand why we speak of humanity as
human society.
Human beings really associated, whether consciously
or not, that is the fundamental concept of society.
Test the matter. Can there be society unless such
association exists ? Or can there be such association
246 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
and yet no society ? The notion of human beings asso-
ciated is the most abstract and the emptiest, a mere
beginning, and yet exceedingly fruitful. It is a notion
found wherever society is, and thus actually inclusive
of all human association. Our attention, by means of
this definition, is concentrated on human individuals
as possessors of the social forces, on their sociation,
and on what is necessarily involved in such sociation.
Men instead of things engage our central thought; we
have a human science distinct from what is called
natural science, without professing to fix man's exact
relation to nature ; we have a social science in distinc-
tion from the science of individual man; and we have
society as in this world and with a natural environ-
ment. What are the individuals whose social forces
constitute society ? The view is from a social stand-
point, but as such it involves human anatomy and phys-
iology, psychology, psycho-physics, and anthropology,
to say nothing of the relation of these to biology and
the other natural sciences. This psycho-physical being
is to be taken according to Avhat he is socially, his
capabilities and possibilities, in connection with the
capabilities and possibilities of his natural environ-
ment, in order to determine what the necessary pre-
suppositions of society are. One need but grasp the
meaning of the individual forces as constituting society,
in order to appreciate the vastness of the study opened
to us.
To this must be added the idea of association. What
is its meaning ? Is a mere aggregation an association ?
Is a mere aggregation of human beings possible? Are
there not associative elements in human aggregation
which involve more than an aggregation of things? It
is the associative element we seek to interpret. It
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 247
means some bond of union between the individuals,
some relation to one another which makes them differ-
ent from what they would be if wholly isolated. What
associates men, and what determines the character of
the association ? Is it nature, or some human necessity,
or a higher voluntary purpose ? Besides the kinds of
association, we must consider the degrees possible, from
the loosest tie to the most perfect union. Thus all the
motives and powers which unite men are involved. A
vast field is thus opened which is but little cultivated.
Let one but try to discover and analyze and classify and
systematize the forces which enter into human associa-
tion, and he will soon discover how complicated and
rich the subject, and how great the task which still
remains to be accomplished.
This is but a beginning. With the individuals whose
social forces constitute society, and with the idea of
association fully apprehended, what effects are wrought
by the association ? Does the individual remain inde-
pendent, or does he become dependent ? Does he sacri-
fice, or gain, or both ? Is there, after the association,
anything besides individuals ? Here the problem of
society as an organism must be solved. An organism
of what ?
We have already spoken of man's natural environ-
ment. We must not abstract men from their condi-
tions, but must take them with those conditions. Men
with their attachments are the social factors in which
the social energies inhere. The king with his dominion,
the millionaire with his wealth, the politician with his
reputation, — all men must be taken exactly as their
possessions and environment make them. Since human
power is so largely conditioned by natural force, we
must consider the influence of nature on men associ-
248 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ated, and their effect on nature. Thus to the study of
individuals and of their association, the study of nature
must be added.
Wherever at any time or in any place society is
found, the conditions for the above analysis are given.
But suppose that from society as empirically given we
draw the idea of society joerse', how do we know that our
analysis and synthesis apply to all society whenever
and wherever found ? A flippant empiricism which
knows only what it sees and handles, and does not
know that, makes an answer necessary. Some actually
question the propriety of announcing principles of uni-
versal application, claiming that experience is the limit
of knowledge, and that what we thus learn cannot be
applied to what we have not experienced.
If experience reveals a law, the universality of its
application rests on the principle given in the formula
that A=A. This must not be taken in the usual sense
of the law of identity, but of equality. It is meaning-
less tautology to say that A is A ; but there is a rich
application in the law that A equals A, that every A,
wherever found, equals every other A. Suppose that
A is the definition of vertebrate ; then whenever you
find A you have a vertebrate. A stone per se is equal
to every other stone per se ; that is, whatever consti-
tutes an object stone {not this or that particular stone)
is exactly the same as that which constitutes any other
object stone (not this or that particular stone). I
define tree, and the idea obtained is the standard to
which every object must conform in order to be a tree.
The fruitful law that A equals A is thus without excep-
tion. What constitutes society per se now has always
constituted it and always will ; and if from any empiri-
cal society I learn what society itself is, I have the idea
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 249
of society as it must ever and everywhere be. This
reveals the importance of the idea, being involved in
all society. It is this that gives empirical study its
greatest value; the evanescent facts reveal principles
and laws that are universal and eternal.
This abstraction of principles from the existing asso-
ciation of human beings constitutes the method for our
first division. In these principles we have society
potentially. How has the idea been actualized ; what
real factors have the potential factors become ? This
leads us to our second division, the social actuality as
seen in the process of historic evolution. Little more
need be said on this subject, as the different methods
for considering the vast material involved have already
been indicated. Whether the evolution be treated
chronologically, or whether we begin with the culture
of our age and trace its connection with the past to the
beginning of society, or whether the development of
social institutions be the method adopted, in each case
the material is so vast and the intellectual require-
ments are so great that a field for endless research is
opened. Large generalizations which concentrate the
materials gathered from all sources will have to be
resorted to. The general principles on which all
things rest are few; but if we want to know moun-
tains we must consider their separate peaks as well as
their common base. Certain things are common to all
ages, though not necessarily in an equal degree. If
ages have distinctive features, peculiar characteristics,
marked types in thought and life, the study of these is
of special importance. When we speak of a stone, a
bronze, and an iron period, we have in each case but
one fact, yet of such magnitude as to determine the
character of the period. What meaning, for instance,
250 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
in calling an era the age of steam ? Thus to give an
age a name is to interpret it.
Greece and Rome are distinct peaks on the common
base of humanity ; what distinguishes them from ori-
ental antiquity ? By means of their dominant ideas we
seize the Middle Ages, such as the supremacy of dog-
matism in theology, the power of the church and the
hierarchy, the fascination of asceticism and mysticism;
these are the forces in the thought and life, in the
state and institutions. Our own age is to be inter-
preted by its all-controlling thoughts and passions;
these are the keys that unlock its secrets. The dom-
inant thoughts are like the fruit in which the tree cul-
minates, puts its quality, and most fully expresses
itself. As we master society by obtaining its regnant
ideas, that interminable confusion occasioned by an
empiric survey of mere details is resolved into beauti-
ful symmetry. We study society in its characteristics,
as industrial, religious, political, literary, assthetic,
philosophical, scientific, or recreative. When we get
the kind of thought that dominates, we ask for its
quality, namely, the character of the industry, religion,
et cet. Different characteristics are found in the same
society ; what are they, what are their gradations, and
how do they blend ? In this way society is made to
stand before the mind in distinct outlines, and is com-
prehended according to its essentials. I may not be able
to examine the million trees which constitute a primi-
tive forest ; but I shall comprehend the nature of that
forest if I know that it consists of oak and poplar and
hickory and maple and elm and beech and walnut, and
at the same time know the character of these trees.
By a logical process we pass from what society is
to what it ouirht to be. The method is, airain, both
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 251
empirical and rational ; with the actuality we compare
the mind's ideality. From the reality we learn what
needs and evils prevail, what forces are at work, and
what effects they produce. To the lessons learned
from history and observation respecting the regenera-
tive powers of society, valuable materials are offered
by philosophical and Christian ethics. But while the
student need not always begin at the beginning, any
more in this than in the other divisions, much prepara-
tory work having been done for him, he should always
be discriminating, critical, and independent, in the use
of his materials.
As in the other divisions thought is concentrated on
society per se and on its historic evolution, so in this
third division the mind is concentrated on the ethical
elements of society. Will and purpose now come to
the front. The mind's ideal become Will is the genius
to transform the crude social material into forms of
beauty. Reform hardly expresses it. Some things are
to be reformed ; others are to be destroyed ; others still
are to be developed. Good seeds exist — unfold them ;
good trees grow — trim them, graft on new scions ; briers
must be rooted out. Regeneration, evolution, revolu-
tion, all are needed for progress. While will is pre-
dominantly involved in ethics, all the intellectual and
emotional powers are associated with it and aid in
furthering ethical ends.
In interpreting society as it now is we find the in-
dustrial and aesthetic stages largely dominant. Grati-
fication and the means of gratification are leading
purposes. It is a question of dominance. Industry and
aesthetics are not destroyed by ethics, but are taken
from the apex and made steps of the social pyramid.
Ethics means the good so ordered that each thing is in
252 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
its right place and right relation. Here again we see
how sociological ethics is deeper and broader than
reform. Reforms are apt to be isolated ; but in ethics
we have a system of regeneration, of evolution, and of
revolution. Reform becomes a system; the evils are
found to be united, so must the forces be that would
overcome them ; not isolated, but organically connected
powers must work for the improvement of the social
organism. Thus we deepen and broaden and syste-
matize our notions of reform, or put ethics for reform.
The scientist cannot always demonstrate; then he
invents a hypothesis or theory to account for the facts,
leaving the verification to future ages. Newton's theory
of light was of this nature. So when the course of a
planet varies from the path it ought to take according
to known conditions, the existence of another but un-
known planet causing the variation may be postulated,
and afterwards the planet discovered. These are evi-
dences of the influence of imagination in scientific
investigations.
A similar process is pursued in sociological ethics.
There is a forecasting of what ought to be; but this
does not forestall future improvements in the theory.
No more in ethics than in natural science is theory
purely imaginative; it is a construction based on facts
and in harmony with them. Thus in ethics we deal
with ideals, but as immediately related to reality. We
are tempted to call it realistic idealism. So far as the
material admits of it, scientific exactness is the aim.
Careful definition is no less important in ethics
than in mathematics. A recent discussion has made
this plain. The solution of the labor problem was
pronounced an unrealizable ideal. It is an eternal
struggle, it was said, and this struggle is held to be
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 253
the only possible solution. But why, then, strive to
solve it ? We must distinguish between the social
problem and our social problem. Nothing beyond our
reach is part of our social problem. If it is settled
that we cannot square the circle, then it is no longer
problematical. It is not a problem how I can draw
myself out of a marsh by tugging away at my hair.
Our social problem in ethics is what we can do, and
only because we can solve it is it our problem. There
is an ethical problem for humanity at which the whole
of humanity, throughout all ages, will be called to
work, but there is also an ethical problem which is
peculiarly ours.
In all these cases we have hints for ethical work as
well as for study, and the two go together. We aim
at principles here as in the other departments, prin-
ciples for theoretic comprehension and practical appli-
cation. General ideas we want, ideas which grasp the
details. In sociological ethics we deal with the char-
acter of the social forces, of the association they form,
and of its environment. The ethical force in each
social form is to be determined. The ethical element
in institutions is important, as the family, the church,
and the state. Education is one of the roots; but is
not the ethical quality of mere intellectual attainment
overestimated ? The place of ethics in the school, theo-
retical and practical, deserves careful attention. His-
tory shows that intellect by itself is not necessarily
regenerative ; the kind of intellect is the determining
factor. Everywhere the moulding forces are to be
seized, such as literature, laws, politics, economics,
religion.
A study of the past and present puts it beyond ques-
tion that the ethical process of society is not mechan-
254 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ical, but psychical. The changes in the character of
society are inner. The outside influences may be
great, and the modern emphasis on the environment
indicates progress; but in intellectual, moral, and
spiritual concerns it is the mind and heart and will
with which we must reckon. However external insti-
tutions may be improved, the improvement of society
itself is essentially that of its individual members, the
families, and the other social groups. The ethically
organic process is necessarily gradual. Spasmodic
efforts, moral spurts, and religious enthusiasm, have
their place, especially in inaugurating reformatory
movements; but to ethicize humanity requires time.
The change in conditions by means of the American
and French revolutions did not make men free, equal,
and fraternal.
The estimate of ethical forces is peculiarly difficult.
Not only are they deep and often hidden, but they per-
tain to the volitions of men, which are less subject to
the control of others than intellectual convictions. In
nature and logic we deal with what must be ; in ethics
with what ought to be, but without the ability to make
of that a necessity. The difficulties in the subject can
be inferred from such problems as the freedom of the
will, the nature of conscience, the supreme good and
its attainment. Through ethics we are introduced into
the deepest mysteries of the personality. These mys-
teries are augmented by the fact that we deal with
them, not merely as found in individuals, but also in
the complexity of the social organism.
Having now the divisions })efore us, we can consider
their relation to one another. They form but one
social system and thus present a variety in unity. The
method is essentially the same for all divisions, but
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 255
the emphasis differs. The first division is formed by
a process of abstraction, using society as it is for the
sake of getting the principles of all that society can be.
Our second division emphasizes the empirical and his-
toric methods; yet the same process of abstraction is
required as in the first, in order to get the laws of
society as it is and has been. The work is always
principiant. The third division, sociological ethics,
requires both the empirical and the abstract method,
just as the other two, in order that the ethical prin-
ciples and laws may be obtained.
So great is the variety in sociological materials that
all the methods adopted in scientific, philosophical,
and historical investigations are involved. The rule
is that the method must be adapted to the material,
not the material tortured into a pet method. So inti-
mately, however, are the different departments of
Sociology connected that while a particular method
may be more prominent in one than in the others, all
the methods co-operate to construct the compact system
known as the science of society ; and whatever throws
light on any part illuminates the whole system.
The student who has mastered the meaning of the
sociological method will know what estimate to place
on seeming and even pretentious explanations which
are deceptions. When intent on substance, he cannot
be content with empty phrases and merely formal inter-
pretations. A cosmical law to him is meaningless
until the nature of the law is explained. If he knows
natural law only as a force that works blindly and with
absolute necessity, then he also knows that man can
set an end toward which to work, that he chooses
between alternatives, and that therefore he is subject
to a law that is not known as natural. A comet mov-
256 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ing resistlessly toward the earth could not, according
to natural law, avoid collision ; but if it moved teleo-
logically and had the directing of its course it might.
Man can and does move thus ; therefore something else
than natural law reigns in him. This distinction must
be insisted on until the natural is transmuted into the
teleological law. Natural selection among brutes is
not the final law for social struggle. Even social dem-
ocrats now admit that Lassalle's iron law of wages,
according to which wages always tend to the level of
the bare existence of laborers and their offspring, the
future laborers, is not absolute. The combination of
laborers and the humanity of employers may abrogate
it. No biological theory of evolution has yet been dis-
covered as the ultimate law of human society. What-
ever value attaches to these methods, their severe limi-
tations must be recognized.
We insist in Sociology on causative interpretation.
But for that very reason we reject a priori, metaphysi-
cal, and fictitious explanations. The real causes we find
in the social substance. The social energies of individ-
uals constitute this substance. The persons who are
the possessors of these energies are affected by the
land and its products and by money ; they create insti-
tutions which arc an embodiment of the social forces,
and then these institutions in turn affect their creators.
Not as abstractions, therefore, do we take the social
energies, but as affected by their relations to things.
Society consists of the social energies of persons subject
to the most manifold influence.
These social energies of persons being the social sub-
stance, we go to them in our study of social causation.
Our sociological method leads us to inquire what these
energies are ; what affinities and repulsions exist be-
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 257
tween them; what the conditions of their coalescence
and interaction are ; how they interact ; what changes
take place in them by means of the interaction;
what sociation results or what societies they form;
and how the forces themselves can be perfected, how
their interaction can be made harmonious, and how
their social product can be made the best possible.
The social energies as the social substance (the anat-
omy and physiology of the social organism, the founda-
tion of the social superstructure) constitute our first
division.
The social energies as they unfold the actual or his-
toric societies (their social genesis or evolution) con-
stitute our second division.
The social energies developed according to the per-
fection of the potentiality involved in them (ideal
social progress, sociological ethics) constitute our third
division.
This recapitulation gives the substance with which
in every instance our causative method deals.
A man without a method has been called " a vessel without a
rudder," Sir William Hamilton says, " All method is a rational
progress — a progress toward an end."
It is a correct observation that in general men care more to do a
thing than to know how it is done. But for the student to know
how to do a thing is the condition for the best intellectual work.
This simply means that instead of haphazard efforts and a waste of
energy' he is to be fully conscious of self and his subject, and master
of his powers and of the materials on which he works. Socrates,
Bacon, and Kant made epochs in thought by directing attention to
the methods of research and pointing out the way that leads to
truth.
There is a peculiar fascination in comprehensive generalizations
and universal laws, so that their mere statement may insure their
acceptance. Rigid criticism should be the rule, in order to deter-
mine the correctness of the generalization and the sphere of the
17
258 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
application of the law. If, for instance, claims are made for a law
as cosmical, it should be determined what is meant by cosmical :
whether it is held that the law works on all occasions or only under
certain circumstances ; whether it is isolated or works in conjunc-
tion with other laws. It may also be a legitimate inquiry whether
the law is found by an a priori method, or is the result of an actual
investigation of the cosmos. Has the whole cosmos been traversed
or only a part ? Especially when cosmical laws are promulgated in
the name of an empiricism which denounces speculation have we a
right to know the authority for an afih-mation which puts into one
monistic formula all that pertains to matter and mind. The law
may be correct, but we want to know whether it is correct.
In social science the difficulties of method are much greater than
in the study of natural science. This is due to the nature of the
material. Sociology deals with facts behind which there is a world
of thought and feeling and volition, which is not subject to direct
observation. Human phenomena often hide rather than reveal
the motives of men.
To observe correctly objects of nature is itself an art learned only
after long scientific discipline. Scientists have argued that mathe-
matics and the study of nature ought to take the place of the
classics in a collegiate course, in order that the student's power of
scientific observation may be the better developed. Special train-
ing is also required for correct observation in the human disciplines.
The study of mathematics and nature, it has been claimed, does
not prepare directly for the complicated psychical processes of
society. They must be studied in the human disciplines ; and in
the study of these the mind must be trained for social observation.
Observation, however, is only the first step. What is observed
is also to be interpreted. Not the bare fact is ultimate for the
sociologist; he wants to know its secrets, what it involves, what
has caused it, whither it tends, how it is related to other facts, and
what law works in it. A single fact requires a many-sided inter-
pretation of thought; but we have a whole universe of facts to
be mastered, all related, intricately interwoven, co-operating, and
antagonizing. The magnitude of the task presented impresses
us too deeply with our limitations to permit the spirit of dogmatism
to prevail.
Not as in nature can we isolate phenomena in Sociology. No
particular social force is alone, as nitrogen or oxygen may be.
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY 259
Therefore our social analysis does not give us distinct, sharply
separated entities, as natural science. Whatever isolation is possi-
ble in social studj^ the analysis is always for the sake of the most
comprehensive synthesis, — a task still more difficult than the
analysis of a particular social phenomenon.
Our method aims at nothing less than humanity in its asso-
ciated capacity. By means of observation and from history we
seek to draw inferences respecting humanity as a society. But
never can we observe all facts now occurring, or master all the
events of history. Therefore a complete knowledge of the facts
never can constitute the basis of our inferences. Our inductions
being incomplete, we cannot claim demonstrations, but must be
content with hypotheses or theories, which are always to be held
liable to correction by new facts of observation and history.
Nevertheless, certain facts are so numerous and invariable as to
give a basis for valid inferences of a general character. So many
evidences, for instance, exist to prove men self -regarding that we
cannot question that this is a potent force in human conduct. For
many things we can claim an approach to law, if not the establish-
ment of the law itself.
Another factor is to be noted. We do not contemplate with the
same degree of impartiality human, as we do natural, objects. The
former lie nearer self-interest, appeal to prejudice and passion, and
may be seriously affected by traditionalism and dogmatism. The
testimony in courts, and narratives of the same event show with
what allowance judgments respecting human affairs must be taken. ^
The genetic method is pursued in all historical investigation.
To trace a single social force, as that of economics or aesthetics, is
beset with difficulties on account of the numerous factors involved
and the hidden processes of which the phenomena are but imper-
fect manifestations. What varied motives, besides that of a liveli-
hood, may enter into business ? And who is prepared to interpret
1 The eminent historian Leopold von Ranke was so deeply impressed with
the need of a thorough criticism of historical documents in order to get at the
truth, that he laid it down as a rule that, so far as possible, we must go behind
the records to learn the character of their authors. Such questions as these are
fundamental: Did the author want to tell the trutli ? Was he biased or con-
trolled by self-interest and class preferences ? Was he competent to judge of
what he wrote? Were the facts within his reach, and did he make a faithful use
of them V In order to learn the truth, therefore, we must go beyond the records
to a study of the character of their authors.
260 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
the art impulse from its rudest beginnings in savage life to the
highest creations of genius ?
Even physical facts affecting society may be obscure on account
of the variety of possible causes. Psycho-physical ones are much
more difficult on account of the mysteries in the connection of body
and mind. To these must be added the psychical facts which are
the immediate results of individual action in society. Then we have
the endless interactions and complications of what are distinc-
tively social forces. It is the entire social web, with its many un-
seen threads, which the sociologist seeks to comprehend. If he
follows a single thread or unravels the web, he fails to get the total-
ity he wants to seize. The more microscopic his investigations,
the more liable he is to miss the great conception of Sociology.
Only by connecting the largest synthesis with the closest analysis
can he hope even approximately to gain his end.
From the investigations of Siissmilch, particularly since the
time of Quetelet, the statistical method has been used in human
affairs. Numerous scholars have in recent years tried to develop
it into a science and to fix its exact apjplication to social phe-
nomena. Since it deals with figures, its exactness has been
emphasized. Its value is great, but often its services have been
overestimated. As it contemplates masses and seeks averages in
their movements, it frequently gives facts of a general and barren
character. It may show that more male than female children are
born, that suicides are specially numerous in Saxony and contigu-
ous regions, and that there is a singular regularity in actions
which seem hardly subject to law; yet of the causes, the very
things we want most to know, no revelations are given. In moral
statistics the number of crimes punished may be known, while the
number actually committed and the reasons for their committal
may be unknown. The heart and its motives are not subject to
mathematical calculations. This applies to religious as well as
to moral statistics. If a score of men at the age of sixty apply
annually for admission to an alms-house, the mere statement of
fact reveals nothing but so much poverty in old age. They are
feeble and cannot support themselves. What we are most anxious
to learn is, why they are poor and feeble. Are the causes due to
heredity, to tiie natural environment, to the individual, or to
society? Must we look to accident or misfortune for the explana-
tion, to the failure of crops or to business crises, to indolence or
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 261
intemperance ? Which of the hundreds of causes of feebleness and
poverty were the effective ones in these particular cases ? Highly,
then, as we value statistics, its limitations are manifest, and it
must usually be coupled with other investigations in order to
furnish the social facts most of all desired.^
Not by rejecting empiricism, but by making it the means for
rational interpretation shall we secure the best results. Buckle
says : " For one person who can think, there are at least a hundred
persons who can observe. An accurate observer is, no doubt, rare ;
but an accurate thinker is far rarer." Besides observers we have
memorizers — both mere empirics. It has been declared that our
whole culture aims merely at reproduction. In view of this it has
been said : " Teach men to think, not what has been thought."
Every student of Sociology should enter upon original research.
For this his own environment offers abundant material. Let him
take the social groups to which he himself belongs and give their
philosophy. In a lower stage of culture social groups are limited ;
in the progress of culture these groups increase, interests are
multiplied, and the relations of men are enlarged. The powers,
the interests, the relations of a man of cultui'e far surpass those of
the uncultured. What, now, are the relations of a man of culture ?
Analyze the sphere of his thought, his feeling, his activity. What
determines his social relations? What are the associative ele-
ments ? What effect is produced on him by association, and what
influence does he exert ? The dominant ideas of groups, of nations,
of stages of culture are of special value for interpreting society.
How are formal organizations related to unorganized groups?
There are numerous social organisms, and all must be understood
in order to interpret a community, a state, or a nation. Some
associations have little coherence, they approach mere aggrega-
tions; others are more like organisms, but even in these great
differences prevail with respect to the closeness of the union of the
members. The numerous kinds of association must be studied
separately, but also in their relations and interaction, as a totality
or social unity. By this method our present vague, general,
empty, and abstract conception of society will become rich in
content, a counterpart of the social actuality. We should never
forget that we want social thought for the sake of the social
actuality for which it stands.
^ For moral statistics the work of Ottingen, " Moralstatistik," is valuable.
262 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
While methodology teaches the true method, it also guards
against false ones. A method may be chosen hastily and be with-
out reason ; a method with limited application may be applied to
objects foreign to it ; systems are formed before the preliminary
investigations justify them ; and thus processes are made absolute
and final which are one-sided and defective. The history of
philosophy and science teaches that men may become slaves of
their methods, and deceive themselves as well as others. The
same lesson is taught by the development of Sociology from
Comte to the present time. The method which a trained sociolo-
gist adopts as the result of his investigations may seem to have
sufficient reason and yet be faulty. For a beginner to adopt it
without critical investigation would be mere dogmatism. Method
and system are tools, not chains.
Our ethical convictions do not permit us to expei'iment with
society as we do with brutes in vivisection or otherwise, solely for
the sake of investigation. No human being is to be reduced to
mere means for the sake of learning lessons for the benefit of
others. Nevertheless, experiments are constantly made in politics,
political economy, reform, and in other departments, and valuable
lessons may be drawn from them. The difficulties, however, are
all but insurmountable. Social phenomena cannot be isolated,
modified, subjected to numerous tests, and observed at different
times and by different investigators under the same conditions.
The peculiar conditions of a given time may never occur again, and
it may be impossible to determine how far the same do occur
again. This makes it seem as if exactness could be obtained only
in the form of abstractions, not in concrete reality. Therefore
the attainment of social and historic laws is so difficult, and many
have declared them impossible. For this reason the student may
find it of greatest service to seek what is customary, typical, of
general, if not of universal, application.
The importance of mechanical law in human society can be
fully recognized without reducing that society to a mechanism.
Instead of explaining all social phenomena in this way, the expla-
nation often seems to be hindered. The mind is immediately con-
scious of a vast number of human objects, of ideas and emotions
and purposes, which are not explained by introducing from the
external world matter, force, and motion, but which, by this
method, actually seem to lose much of their content and quality.
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 263
Our very conception of force may have its source in the will, so
that it is an inner and mental phenomenon which we transfer to
the external world and to matter.
The law of equality, A=A, is discussed in the author's " Intro-
duction to the Study of Philosophy," 215-218.
"On the Difference between Physical and Moral Law" see'
a work with that title by William Arthur.
Wundt, "Logik," II., 500-012, gives an elaborate discussion
of the method of the social sciences. Dilthey, " Einleitung in
die Geisteswissenschaften." Menger, " Untersuchuugen Uber die
Methode der Socialwissenschaften." A good review of the last
in Schmoller's "Zur Litteraturgeschichte der Staats- und Social-
wissenschaften."
Schiiffle, in " Zeitschrift fiir Staatswissenschaft," beginning in
1876, gives a series of valuable articles on the relation of Dar-
winism to social science; Gustav Cohn, " Grundlegmig der Na-
tionaldkonomie," first chapter, gives an account of method in
the social sciences.
Professor Giddings discusses " The Methods of Sociology " in
the third chapter of Book I.
In a Supplementary Number of "The American Journal of
Sociology," May, 1897, Dr. J. H. Hyslop has a paper on " The
Science of Sociology." It is a keen criticism of Professor Gid-
dings' method and a valuable contribution to the general subject
of method in Sociology.
On the importance of method see the author's " Tendencies in
German Thought," Lecture 9, on " The Purpose and the Method
of the Scholar and the Thinker." Also Chapter X. in his " Intro-
duction to the Study of Philosophy."
Where there is a teacher of Sociology it can be left to him
to direct students in the continuance of their sociological studies
and in making independent researches. For such as have not the
advantage of a teacher to guide them, a method for further study
is here proposed.
Method for Independent Sociological Research.
The preceding pages can have left no doubt that in
sociological inquiry the student is largely thrown upon
his own resources. In his motives for associating with
264 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
his fellow-men he will find the key to many of the asso-
ciative forces of humanity in all ages. Society in
general is beheld in his social action, and in his rela-
tions in the family, the community, the church, the
state, and voluntary organizations. In differentiating
his private from his social affairs, distinguishing be-
tween himself as social and extra-social, he learns to
discern the individual or private from the social
personality.
With this study of himself in society, in which he
likewise studies the social relations of others, he nat-
urally connects personal investigations into the asso-
ciations of his environment. For this purpose the plan
of the study of a community, at the close of the volume,
gives directions. When this inquiry is made scientific,
it will become the basis of all further investigations.
This personal scientific research is especially lacking
in various sociological works, for which no compensa-
tion can be found in the statistics and researches of
others.
We place this kind of investigation first, but it is
not to be isolated. The student should also learn
from other investigators, especially from sociologists.
Among the best services which can be rendered him is
to give directions in the use of sociological literature.
References to works in the preceding pages may be
a general guide. Every good sociological book refers
to literature on the subject, and in this way the student
can learn what to read. The different standpoints of
sociologists and the confusion reigning in their specialty
make it difficult to say definitely what books are best.
Scores can be recommended as valuable ; but every
one should bo read critically. They furnish important
materials, give excellent suggestions, and are very ser-
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 265
viceable to independent thinkers. They will be found
far more valuable as aids than as authorities.
The student is likely to find that, after a general idea
of Sociology has been attained, his best work can be
done by specialization ; that is, by taking special socio-
logical themes and mastering them. For this study by
limited subjects all the most important sociological
works can be used, taking from each what bears on the
particular subject in hand. In this way clearness and
thoroughness may be gained ; and if the totality aimed
at in Sociology is kept in view, the specialization will
also promote comprehensiveness.
If there is any doubt in his mind respecting the
meaning, the scope, and the subject-matter of Soci-
ology, he should first of all concentrate his energies
on their interpretation. He must understand them in
order to insure his further progress ; they are an in-
troduction to the whole discipline. We recommend
the following books, confining ourselves to works in
English, though for the best results French and German
are also necessary. Many of these are, however, trans-
lated into English. The first here named belongs to
this class, Comte's "Positive Philosophy," translated
by H. Martineau, the last book, which treats of " Social
Physics." Spencer's "The Study of Sociology" is
important on account of general suggestions on Soci-
ology and its study, but its chief value probably con-
sists in the discussion of the various kinds of bias
which interfere with the discovery of truth. He dis-
cusses the subject-matter and scope of Sociology in the
first volume of his "Principles of Sociology," pp. 3-43
and 454-618. Ward's "Social Dynamics," Introduc-
tion, Fairbanks' "Introduction to Sociology," pp. 1-44,
Giddings' "Principles of Sociology," pp. 3-51. Other
^66 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
parts of the last three works named are important for
Sociology in general, as well as for specific departments.
From a definite conception of Sociology and society
the student can proceed to investigate the social actu-
ality. For this various methods have already been
given. Ethnologists have been mentioned who give an
account of early society. For an introduction into this
subject the following are recommended : E. B, Tylor,
" Primitive Culture," and " Early History of Mankind ; "
Sir John Lubbock, "The Origin of Civilization and
the Primitive Condition of Man;" L. H. Morgan,
"Ancient Society, or Researches in the Lines of Human
Progress from Savagery, through Barbarism to Civiliza-
tion;" D. Wilson, "Prehistoric Man, Researches into
the Origin of Civilization in the Old and the New
World." On the "Religions of Primitive People," a
new work, by D. G. Brinton, has just appeared. In the
first volume of Ratzel's "History of Mankind " an ex-
cellent summary of the results of the researches into
primitive peoples is given. The works of Max Miiller
on language and religion are so well known that the
mention of them is hardly necessary.
The student cannot be at a loss respecting excellent
works on social institutions. Most of the material in
Mr. Spencer's three volumes on "Principles of Soci-
ology " pertains to them. In Bascom's " Social Theory "
Customs, Economics, Civics, Ethics, and Religion are
discussed. Fairbanks' "Introduction" has chapters on
The Industrial Organization of Society, The Family
as the Social Unit, and The State. The special sci-
ences abound in works on the same subjects, such as
economics and political science. For the historic view
of the family the work of E. Westermarck on "The
History of Human Mai-riage " is important. The two
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 267
volumes of E. J. Siincox on " Primitive Civilizations "
treat more especially of industrial institutions. The
various works of H. S. Maine are valuable, especially
" Lectures on the Early History of Institutions ; "
"Ancient Law, its Connection with the Early History
of Society, and its Relation to Modern Ideas ; " and
"Village Communities in the East and West."
We have already intimated that the exclusive study
of institutions or a one-sided emphasis on them inter-
feres with that organic view of society as a totality
which is so essential to Sociology. Where is the con-
necting bond, the underlying unity, if each institution
is to be considered by itself ? In that case Sociology
loses its mission because the special social sciences can
do its work.
The common use of " social " (like the German gesellig)
does not apply to institutional society, but to the more
free, spontaneous intercourse of the people. Aside
from the family, the church, the state, and voluntary
organizations, there are countless motives and reasons
for men to associate with one another, such as affection
and friendship, mutual sympathy and interest, desire
for companionship and amusement. Not only are the
motives for such unrestrained associations precious,
but they also lead to numerous gatherings and are the
occasion of much social activity. In some respects
this kind of social life is more important than that of
institutions. In it humanity manifests itself, while in
the institutional life there is more formality and more
legality.
This vast and multiform unorganized social life pre-
sents greater difficulties to the student than the definite
institutions. Its importance, however, is manifest.
Sometimes governments suppress formal organizations ;
268 ISTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
then the people have only their social gatherings to
give expression to themselves. Here we find the folk
lore, cherished beliefs, traditions, manners and cus-
toms, proverbs and songs. What other parliament have
the people of Russia to-day for the expression of their
views ? French society has had its celebrities, and its
influence has been great. The same is true of England
and Germany and other countries. This society no one
takes as an institution. No theme, no interest was
foreign to it ; seditions were fomented and revolutions
incited. To this universal forum of the people we must
add, as also extra-institutional, court circles with their
intrigues, and what is called polite, fashionable, aristo-
cratic society.
How can the student investigate this department of
Sociology ? Histories of civilization, like that of Guizot,
will aid him; the histories of different peoples also
contain numerous references to the subject. Interest-
ing glimpses are given in works on French history from
the time of Louis XIV. till the Revolution and later.
For English society "Social England," edited by H. D.
Trail, is good. Frequently, however, we have to resort
to letters, biographies, and magazines, for the desired
information. To the written social history the unor-
ganized society of humanity is similar to what the
individual's sub-conscious activity is to his conscious
life. Fortunately, this kind of society can be per-
sonally investigated by the student, and he may render
excellent service by formulating its principles and laws.
Another important and much neglected sphere, for
understanding which the student will also depend
mainly on his own researches, is the social study of
the age. The last chapter in the volume aims to lead
him into the subject.
TBE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 269
Numerous ethical works of recent date are valuable
for the sociological student. Some of them devote
much space to social ethics. Spencer's two volumes,
"Data of Ethics," are well known. In connection with
them and the ethics of evolutionists generally the work
of C. M. Williams can be read, "A Review of the Sys-
tems of Ethics founded on the Theory of Evolution."
The following are recommended : J. L. Mackenzie,
" Introduction to Social Philosophy ; " Leslie Stephen,
" The Science of Ethics ; " H. Sidgwick, " The Method
of Ethics ; " James Seth, " A Study of Ethical Prin-
ciples;" W. Wundt, "The Facts of the Moral Life;"
B. P. Bowne, "The Principles of Ethics;" J. H. Muir-
head, "The Elements of Ethics."
There is, however, as yet no sociological ethics, its
right to existence even being disputed.
The plan here outlined will lead the student into all
departments of Sociology. The books named here and
in other parts of the volume contain numerous refer-
ences to works in different languages, of which no men-
tion is made in this volume. Indeed, such a wealth of
material and literature will be at his command that he
will find difficulty in using it all.
Much literature exists outside of works regarded as
direct sociological aids. History, as we have seen,
teems with the most important revelations respecting
society. It is the repository of social forces and social
forms. Coming to its study from the sociological point
of view, the student will find in history numerous social
agencies, activities, and trends, which were overlooked
in former times. Historic social study is actually
obscured by thrusting into the foreground the myriads
of individuals with which we know not what to do.
But by putting individuals in their proper place, by
270 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
attributing to historic personages the influence they
actually exerted, and by giving to social forces the
emphasis due to them, a correct conception of historic
society is formed. There are countless ages in which
there is no record of a single individual ; not to this,
however, is due the obscurity of prehistoric times, but
to the fact that our knowledge of the social forces at
work is so imperfect. Yet we have some idea of early
society, proving that our social knowledge does not
depend on a knowledge of individuals. Even in the
thousands of years properly called historic, compara-
tively few individuals are mentioned. History is an
account of the interaction of social forces, and as such
it is to be studied.
Historic literature is therefore one of the richest
mines for sociological inquiry. From it great human
and social characteristics can 1)C learned : forces, asso-
ciations, and tendencies common to society in general.
The same motives are beheld in their activity amid an
endless variety of circumstances. While all human
history is important for the sociologist, certain parts
are specially valuable, such as crises and transition
eras like our own, epochs, the introduction of new
social types or forces, periods when great interests
clash and momentous decisions arc made, when intense
feeling, vigorous thinking, and resolute action reveal
society in the utmost tension. In the more ordinary
periods of historic quiet the conditions of social stag-
nation, retrogression, and progress can likewise be
studied. "We are getting histories of the people, and
they promise to be of special importance.
It is taken for granted that the student will not be a
mere accumulator of facts or lose himself in distrac-
tions. Only by means of classification and system can
THE METHOD IN THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 271
he make his studies successful. Enough has been said
to warn him against hasty generalizations and the estab-
lishment of laws where only rules are warranted.
REFLECTIONS.
Meaning of Method. Value. Scientific Method. Gen-
etic Method. Speculative Method. Psychological Method.
Sociological Method. Natural and Social Laws. Facts and
their Interpretation. Facts and Laws. The Problem in Facts.
The Influence of the Environment and of the Struggle
for Existence in different Stages of Culture. The Principle
of Identity and of Equality. Psychology and Philosophy de-
posited in History. Nature furnishes what is, the Actuality ;
whence then the Ideals or the Distinction betw^een w^hat is
and what ought to be ? "Working in the Present for the Fu-
ture. Forecasting. Mechanical Processes and Ethics. The
Intellectual Factor in Progress. Induction and Deduction
in Sociology. Union of the Scientific and the Philosophical
Methods. Different Methods for different Kinds of Material
in Sociology. Statistics ; Value and Limitation. Review
of the Discussion of Method. Analyze the Plan for Inde-
pendent Sociological Research.
272 INTRODUCTION TO ^TUUY OF SOCIOLOGY.
CHAPTER rX.
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE?
The Problem. The term " science " is used so vaguely
and loosely that it must he defined in order to determine
its sense. Methods and disciplines are sometimes termed
scientific because that designation is supposed to confer
on them absoluteness and finality. Then we are told
that even in the natural sciences^ as chemistry, botany,
geology, physiology, ive cannot have science in the same
sense as in algebra and geometry. We determine to
make everything scientific because that means exactness ;
then we are staggered by the infor7nation that there are
" inexact " sciences. Would it not be better to eliminate
the inexact from the scientific?
How is the question of the scientific character of Sociol-
ogy to be determined ? One need but look at much that
vaunts itself as science in our day to learn what un-
scientific methods are resorted to in the name of science.
Besides the sense in ivhich the term science is used, it
is also necessary to investigate the conditions for settling
the scientific character of a discipline. The problem is
essentially this : Shall the scientific character be made
a postulate to which a subject must submit, or shall the
nature of the material determine the scientific character
of the treatment ?
Perhaps the great variety in the sociological materials
makes science applicable to some in one sense and to
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 273
others only in a different sense. Here we may use math-
ematics ; there natural laiv ; while in other departments
we resort to psychology, to history, to hypotheses and
theories, for interpretation.
We want to make scientific in the strictest sense what-
ever admits of it ; we tvant to discern the exact nature
of the material considered, in order to learn in ivhat
sense it can he made scientific ; and we want to evolve
from every subject the science which it involves.
All sociologists are agreed that no sociological system
thus far developed can claim to be thoroughly scien-
tific. Dr. Ward says : " I do not hesitate to pronounce
as mere patchwork the greater part of all that now goes
by the sounding name of social science." ^ Numerous
other writers liave been no more respectful in their
utterances. The purport of the question, however, is,
whether the conditions exist for ultimately constructing
the science of society.
It seems presumptuous to determine before the inves-
tigation what shall be made of a subject. How is that
possible so long as the materials have not been mas-
tered ? In our aim to interpret society by all legitimate
means we have refused to let the question of the possi-
bility of absolute science in social affairs interfere with
our investigations. With the most scientific method
possible we aim at the science of society ; how far the
aim is realizable the result must show ; it cannot be
determined dogmatically beforehand. It is on this basis
that our discussion has thus far proceeded, in order not
to embarrass the beginner with problems for whose
solution he has not the data. Society as a fact is given
1 Dynamic Sociology, i., 700.
18
274 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
and can be investigated by all ; we aim to discover its
essence, its evolution, and its laws, so as to form a com-
plete social system, without prejudicing the ulterior
results. This rational procedure leaves the mind per-
fectly free in its researches, requiring only knowledge
in the best possible form. This process has, however,
been forestalled by another method. From the begin-
ning Sociology has been designated and treated as a
positive science. This decides the matter if tradition-
alism is to be the arbiter. The very history of Sociol-
ogy obliges us to consider the question at the head of
the chapter.
We have seen that when Comte introduced the term
" Sociology " he defined it as the science of society, and
aimed to make it a physical science. The mania to
reduce all knowledge to a species of natural science
culminated about the middle of this century. Of the
many signal failures in this respect, Comte's " Positive
Philosophy " is a striking example. He agreed with
Kant in emphasizing empirical investigation instead of
metaphysics as the basis of knowledge of the real world.
The sensationalism of France had taught him the same
lesson. But he failed utterly in seizing the critical
spirit of Kant and in applying the critical method to
liis own constructions. The results he attained are a
significant commentary on his claims. The inchoate
state of Sociology might have suggested reserve respect-
ing the determination of the positive character of its
material, unless the question was to be settled dog-
matically. But the general trend favored the making
of all knowledge scientific. As a consequence, when
it was found that all knowledge could not be made
scientific in the sense of natural science, the term
" science " itself was so stretched as to apply to mate-
rs SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 275
rials subject to various degrees of definiteness and
certainty.
When science includes not only mathematics, physics,
and biology, but also anthropology, history, theology, and
various kinds of speculation, it loses its specific character.
Science in that case is not limited to what is objective
and can be proved as such, but it is left to men them-
selves to determine the use of the term and to make
it the repository of their subjective notions of truth.
Science now suffers from that vagueness with which
the term " philosophy " has long been afflicted. There is
a temptation to claim that investigations are scientific
because science is thought to be absolute ; and then the
loose sense in which science is used enables one to label
" scientific " all kinds of real and supposed knowledge.
The consequence is that science itself is thrust from its
throne of exactness and finality. Even Mr. Spencer
embarrasses us when he expects us to pass through his
" Synthetic Philosophy " as the way to science. He uses
science in the popular rather than the technical sense.
He speaks of " inexact " science, and thus finds room
for much " scientific " material which others might
prefer to call by another name.
There is a marked difference in what are recognized
as sciences in a technical sense, some admitting of a
much greater degree of definiteness and exactness than
others. At the head of all we place mathematics, an
a jjriori science, all its constructions depending on exact
and absolute numbers and axioms. Comte's hierarchy
of the sciences can be studied profitably in respect to
their exactness. Biology cannot be as definite as the
sciences which deal with inorganic matter. The definite-
ness in every instance depends on the nature of the
objects. In chemistry the objects are themselves defi'
276 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
iiite, but less in organic than in inorganic. The in-
organic objects can be examined by many investigators
under the same or similar conditions, and exact results
secured. As we enter life and investigate psychological
phenomena and social intricacies, we deal with objects
of the most difficult character and least of all subject
to investigation by means of the scientific method.
Numerous illustrations are afforded by medical practice
when it treats physical ailments, to say nothing of men-
tal diseases. The body can be dissected, but only when
dead ; yet it is life we want to understand. Can we not
also speak of a body and soul of society ? This at least
is clear, that science becomes difficult in proportion as
the objects are complicated and variable.
In all these respects Sociology is peculiarly difficult.
Society is composed of the forces of individuals ; the
individual is himself exceedingly complicated, being the
highest of organisms. Can we claim to have a science
of him as physiological, psychical, and psycho-physical ?
We are not dealing with an abstract, unreal individual,
but with the concrete, real man, who teems with ele-
ments wholly beyond the province of strict scientific
analysis. This individual in his natural environment is
subject to perpetual changes ; were the scientific data
of one moment possible, the changes of the next, chiefly
internal and invisible, might be wholly beyond our
reach. The body changes, the mind changes, the en-
vironment changes; as the changes themselves, so must
their results be unforeseen. It should be remembered
that we cannot experiment with the individuals as with
other objects, and least of all with society.
Take now two individuals of neither of whom we have,
strictly speaking, a science ; can we speak of a science
of their association ? If the action of one can be fore-
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 277
told, cau its effect on the other be ? Strict scientific
knowledge is evidently out of the question. How much
less possible is it to foretell the action and interaction
and reaction of the social forces of a thousand individ-
uals, or of a whole nation, or of humanity, with factors
all variable and amid variable surroundings ; and can
we get a science of the actions, the relations, the results ?
We cannot start with a science of the individual ; much
less can we end with a science of multitudes of indi-
viduals or of their social energies.
Natural science has become so dominant that it has
determined the strict sense in which the term " science "
is to be used. It is evident that in point of accuracy,
definiteness, and exactness. Sociology cannot rank with
the natural sciences. Nor can any one of the human
disciplines in which psychical as well as physical ele-
ments are involved. Sociology deals with numbers and
with physical elements, and thus, in a certain sense, a
strict science is possible ; but this does not imply that
the entire subject will yield to scientific treatment. So
far as the data are now at hand, we must conclude that
in the strict technical sense (in the sense of natural or
physical science), a science of society is impossible.
This does not in the least interfere with the effort to
attain the utmost scientific accuracy, but it prevents
scientific postulates where they are manifestly out of
place. Should future investigation prove a strict socio-
logical science possible, every honest inquirer will hail
the result with joy.
If not as in the case of mathematics and chemistry,
in what sense, then, can we speak of a science of society ?
History shows that the term " science " is used with a
remarkable degree of latitude. Formerly philosophy
included science, frequently the terms have been and are
278 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
used synonymously, so that a " philosophical " magazine
may be devoted to chemistry or other natural sciences.^
Writers are apt to mean the same thing whether they
speak of a science or a philosophy of law, of language,
and of history. Before the term " science " was applied
to a special kind of objects which were investigated ac-
cording to a particular method, it was used to designate
deeper knowledge, especially such as inquired into the
causes of things, or knowledge developed in a systematic
way. Hence it came to mean system, and some specu-
lative philosophers have claimed that metaphysic is the
most absolute science. We speak of theology and his-
tory as sciences. Yet only in part is the scientific
method applicable, and the system called science may be
one of faith rather than of scientific data. Thus the
source and character of what was termed knowledge
were not always taken into account. Less than a cen-
1 In the introduction to his " Logic " Ilegel calls attention to the fact
that in England philosophy, in his estimation the very essence and climax
of exact thinking, was not yet differentiated from natural science. He
says that the eminent scientist Newton is constantly spoken of as the
greatest philosopher. Thermometers, barometers, and similar apparatus
are called " philosophical instruments ; " but wood, iron, and other
materials should not be regarded as the instruments of philosophy, whose
only instrument is thought. He found that " Annals of Philosophy " was
" a magazine of chemistry, mineralogy, mechanics, natural history, agri-
culture, and arts." Most astonishing, however, was the title of an English
book : " The Art of Preserving the Hair, on Philosophical Principles,
neatly printed in post 8, price 7 sh." What would he have said to the
philosophic and scientific monstrosities in the literature of our day, not to
mention our scientific education, our scientific politics, our scientific gar-
ments, our scientific cooking utensils, our scientific nostrums? What
would he have said if ho could have stepped out of his own metaphysics
into the crude metaphysics of modern Sociology, crudely dubbed Science ?
He might have said : " I have demonstrated tliat being ctjuals non-being
or nothing. These scientists illustrate my position. They prove meta-
physics nothing, and then fill their books with metaphysics. According
to their own showing, they al)Ouud in something which is nothing."
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 279
tury ago philosophical speculation was deemed pre-emi-
nently scientific in Germany, while knowledge based on
observation, experience, and experiment, was rather con-
temptuously called empiricism. Now the reverse is the
case. A priori speculation is disparaged, and science in
the technical sense means objective knowledge, access-
ible to all who have the scientific method, and verifiable
by means of this method. When used technically, a
sharp distinction is made between philosophy and science,
the former dealing with abstractions, principles, and the
ultimate problems of the human mind, while the latter
adheres more closely to reality, using observation and
experiment as its means, and aiming to discover the
causes and laws of phenomena, and to construct a system
of them. For their best work scientists, however, re-
quire the highest philosophical powers ; but we must
discriminate between their science and their philosophy.
Monism, materialism, spiritualism, pantheism, are not
science, but philosophy, speculation which no experiment
or demonstration can verify. When men start with
materialism, which is a mere hypothesis, they make it a
law for the reduction of all phenomena to its material-
istic monism, test all knowledge by it, and reject as
unworthy of inquiry what cannot be subjected to physical
force. They may call this science, but it is speculation
without scientific warrant.
While not subject to the same exactness as the natural
sciences, we are justified in speaking of Sociology as a
science in the sense of systematized Knoivledge. We
say knowledge, not opinion or faith ; and if this knowl-
edge cannot be made as strictly scientific as mathe-
matics, that no more interferes with its trustworthiness
and value than the genuineness and preciousness of
music are destroyed for the man who sees no science in it.
280 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
The unscientific data usually increase in proportion as a
subject is exalted and appeals to the highest human
interests. We thus put Sociology in the same category
as the other human disciplines called sciences, such as
psychology, economics, jurisprudence, ethics, politics, all
of which admit of principles, laws, and system ; but it is
immeasurably more complicated and difficult than these,
involves all of them and much more, and for scientific
treatment in any sense presents the greatest perplexities.
With an evidently realizable sense of science before us,
we can pursue the study of Sociology with the determi-
nation to make our investigations as scientific as possible,
and to put the knowledge gained in the best form. We
shall be thankful if this knowledge can be made strictly
positive, but prefer not to call it positive and capable of
prevision before it has been proved such. So much at
least has the era of criticism and of scientific progress
taught us, — that we must learn what the mind can do
with a subject before we settle dogmatically what it
must do with it. In other words, in order to make the
most of Sociology, we must expel that arrogant a
priori dogmatism which obstructs real knowledge by put-
ting in its place empty speculation and undemonstrable
hypothesis.
Our aim is thus unmistakable. We go to the mind
to study its character, before we class psychology with
the natural sciences or with philosophy ; we go to history
for our knowledge of human events, without settling
beforehand that in history we must find only the work-
ing of physical forces, and that definite and final laws
of progress must be the result ; we study human ethics,
before resolving to find only an evolution of the ethics
of brutes ; we try to master political economy, without
determining that the struggle for existence and the
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 281
survival of the fittest furnish the sole law for human
industries : and just so we go to society for our knowl-
edge of society, banishing all unscientific bias in favor
of science, in order to be perfectly free in using to best
advantage all means to make our interpretation definite,
exact, comprehensive, and final. It is admitted that the
man who starts with the purpose of writing history to
prove materialism or spiritualism, or to establish some
political dogma or ethical theory, is liable to vitiate the
whole process of his inquiry, none the less really though
it be done unconsciously ; but the genuine historian is
intent solely on the truth, takes it where and as he finds
it, and lets it be its own invincible advocate. Does the
sociologist become unscientific when he pursues the
same course ?
Sociology, according to its etymology, is the reason of
society, the intellectual interpretation and logical system
of human association. This sociological system is yet
an ideal, but we keep it in view while dealing with the
confused actuality of Sociology. For the realization of
this system much preparatory study and long processes
of development will yet be required ; but if we must
adopt Comte's Positive Philosophy, or Spencer's Syn-
thetic Philosophy, as the way to Sociology, we are afraid
of being lost on the way and of taking theories for facts.
Is it not significant that philosophy is by these writers
made the road to science ? Why not resort to the
scientific method of induction, construct a science so far
as possible, and make that the basis of the philosophy ?
The exploded speculation of the metaphysical era drew
its science from its philosophy ; modern thought prefers
to start with science and build on it, as a basis, the
philosophy of the universe.
With the term " science " so carefully guarded as above,
282 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
we do not hesitate to employ it for the system of society.
Sociology as the philosophy of society may be less
liable to misunderstanding ; but we must insist on mak-
ing the study of the social realism and the scientific
data within reach the foundation of our philosophy. All
disciplines, so far as involved in society, are to be used
in our research, whether they be natural or humanistic.
Some laws we may term natural, others psychical, some
personal as involving the entire psycho-physical person-
ality, others sociological. If we can find laws expressive
of the forces at work, we shall accept them ; if they are
merely empirical, we shall designate them as such ; if a
law stands only for a series of events or for a rule, and
indicates what is customary rather than universal and
necessary, in every case just what is found should be
given, remembering that our idea of society is true in
proportion as it is the intellectual counterpart of society
as an actuality. We cannot foretell just what the results
will be, but we are justified in believing that they will be
of the utmost value.
There are various methods for determining the scientific charac-
ter of Sociology. The traditional method follows Comte in regard-
ing all knowledge as positive and scientific. When this theory is
adopted as final, it is a dogmatism which dispenses with tlie pain-
ful necessity of inquiring into the exact sense in which "science"
is to be used. By ignoring the fact that natural science has deter-
mined the technical sense of "scientific," the term "science" can
be used loosely and variably. A scientific " habit " can be put for
scientific thinking. With tliis loose use of the term all the a priori
possibilities of the use of " science " have not yet been exhausted.
Hypotheses respecting primitive peoples, ideas, and things of
which we have no scientific data ; beliefs with reference to the
origin and evolution of social forms and institutions, of which no
knowledge is within reacli ; and preconceived notions about secret
processes in evolution, — all can be designated as scientific. Meta>
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 283
physic can be ridiculed as utterly unscientific, and then, in the
name of monism or physicism or transmutationism or some other
ism, can be lugged in and given the scientific stamp.
The scientific character of Sociology can also be assumed by
making natural science the model to which it must, nolens volens,
be conformed. This test has been applied to history, psychology,
ethics, politics, philosophy, and social affairs generally. Its empha-
sis on facts as the tangible reality gave a marked impulse to his-
torical investigation; but it was soon discovered that facts in
humanity and facts in nature are very different, and that the laws
of investigation in one sphere may help those in another, but can-
not be authoritative and final. But in order to make humanity
subject to natural law, why not reduce it to mechanical and physi-
cal necessity ? Hence the materialistic dogmatism respecting man
and society. Emphasis was placed on what was thought explicable
in terms of natural science ; what could not even be thought explica-
ble now was postulated as undoubtedly explicable in this way at
some future time. The materialistic hypothesis is considered more
fully later. We have reason to believe that this species of postu-
lated naturalism has had its day, except in the case of metaphysi-
cal survivals.
An entirely different method is the truly scientific one. Rejecting
all a priori constructions falsely called science, it goes to the subject-
matter of Sociology, and from the natui'e of the material learns
what methods, what laws, what system are possible. Thus we
evolve from society the science it involves, instead of forcing on
society a science from a foreign department or from our preconceived
notion of science. No argument is needed to commend to the
scientific thinker this scientific method of determining the scientific
character of Sociology.
We can understand how, when the progress in natural science
threatened to make nature the sole object of valid knowledge, all
subjects were to be made scientific in the sense of the physical
sciences. The results of this attempt have been commented on by
scientists themselves. The most emphatic protests against the
effort to reduce all knowledge to natural science, and to make this
science the test of the value of all thinking, came from the ranks of
science. See, for instance, Du Bois-Reymond's addresses : " tjber
die Grenzen der Naturerkenntniss" and "Z)te sieben Weltrdlhscl."
The works of Lotze and Wundt also show that science in its techni-
284 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
cal sense is severely limited. The testimony of these two thinkers
is the more significant because they passed through physiology and
medical science to philosophy, and rank both as scientists and phi-
losophers. The most eminent scientists, like Helmholtz, have been
far more modest in their claims than those of the second or third
rank, who expected to catch in their scientific net all that was worth
knowing, and were able, with a single postulate called scientific, to
evolve the universe.
Too much rigor cannot be exercised in the method and criticism
of knowledge, but the mere form of knowledge does not determine
its substantial value. We refuse to depreciate the vast realm of
the personality because we cannot make it as strictly scientific as
physics. The term "science" has been suSicieutly abused by mak-
ing it give absoluteness and finality to mere vagaries which were
dubbed scientific, and every thinker in Sociology will strive to keep
these abuses from his specialty. Shall we ignore history and
literature and politics and ethics and religion because we cannot
reduce them to natural science V Is a fact less a fact because its
scientific place has not been determined ?
Many a mistake consists chiefly in putting the ideal of science
for the attained actuality. There is as yet but little science, though
every subject is striving to become scientific. Even in the sense of
a logical system, Sociology is scientific only tentatively. We may
believe that a science lies at the basis of all we call intellectual
and spiritual ; but whether we shall ever be able to discover this
science is a different matter. Now to apply the scientific test of
mathematics or physics to objects which do not yet admit of such
a test is simply a piece of arrogance.
We of course recognize social phenomena as connected, not
arbitrary, not creations out of nothing, but as caused and causa-
tive. There must be some kind of regularity in human society,
some kind of law; otherwise society could not be an object of
rational thought or of a logical system. Chance and accident are
purely subjective ; they mean that we do not apprehend the causes
actually at work. But how far we can discover the causes and
laws must be left to future development. So exclusively has
Sociology been treated as historic that some sociologists have
made the regularity found in human history the essence, just as if
the sole aim of the study were to find sociological laws in human
progress and to make social prevision possible. That there are
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 285
laws of human association aside from the historic progress of
humanity has been overlooked. Even if the laws of history are
beyond our reach, we can have a Sociology, namely, a science or
system of human association, giving the principles on which all
society rests. If Sociology in this sense is not possible, how
can social statics be a department of Sociology? Sociology as
the science of human development reduces the whole to social
dynamics.
Although an exact, mathematical determination of human
events is out of the question, this does not imply that human
affairs are involved in impenetrable mystery. In social reform
and in our outlook into the future we can never treat persons as
inorganic or material factors and mechanical forces. Our limita-
tions leave beyond our knowledge and control many powers and
their operations. Nevertheless, certain conditions are within our
reach. We cannot foretell what progress will occur, or when and
how ; there may even be retrogressions or spiral movements which
we cannot foresee. The past, however, inspires the confidence
that there will be evolution, and that this will promote the progress
of humanity. Certain powers inherent in human nature and in
the external world must continue their work ; the discovery of these
is our especial aim, since they give us, whatever unknown forms
they may take, the permanent factors in history. But aside from
these there are other objects which we understand, and they are of
great importance in Sociology. Education, ethics, religion, the
state, language, literature, laws, institutions, we can interpret, their
influence we know, their character we can affect. These have a
kind of independent existence as social products, abiding while
individuals and whole generations pass away. However variable
and transitory personalities may be, here we have a large class of
objects respecting which thorough knowledge is within reach. So
far as these permanent factors are known we can form an estimate
of their reformatory character and of their influence in shaping the
future course of society. It need hardly be stated that for this no
claim to scientific knowledge can be made.
Sociology is largely a philosophy of these social products.
They are the treasures of culture, and their existence is the chief
measure of culture. It is from these treasures that the individual
draws his wealth. Culture consists in using, developing, and con-
serving such treasures. We can understand why the conditions
286 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
for civilizatiou are most favorable in zones where men are obliged
to exert themselves to secure a livelihood and yet find time for
other exertions than the struggle for existence. What is wrought
out, accunmlated, and handed down by a people becomes a perma-
nent element of culture. Perhaps in a lower stage of civilization
people were stronger than now ; but the treasures of culture were
inferior. Our hope of human progress is based chiefly on those
permanent social products which shall prove a blessing to coming
generations. The study of society is thus largely a study of social
institutions and inheritances.
That the study of these according to their nature is different
from the study of material objects is evident. As in the latter we
adopt the method of natural science, so in the former we adopt the
sociological method. When writers like Gumplowicz insist that
Sociology must be scientific in a naturalistic sense, they ignore the
difference in the subject-matter of society and of nature. Such an
insistence is an assumption which is neither scientific nor rational,
and does not in the least enhance the scientific character or value of
Sociology.
In a previous chapter we have attempted to limit sociological
inquiries strictly to the sphere of Sociology. How difficult it is to
do this becomes especially evident when the attempts to make of
Sociology a science in the technical sense are considered. In order
to accomplish that, there has been a marked tendency to reduce
sociological to physical laws, which has given a strong flavor of
materialism to the subject. This fact, not the investigation of the
ultimate problems, is the reason for referring to the discussion of
materialism here.
What matter is in itself we do not know ; only its manifestations
are within reach of our faculties. The same is true of mind.
This careful investigators recognize, and for that reason they do
not now as confidently as some decades since transmute matter
into mind. Under the head of psycho-physics a new department
of inquiry has been originated; but psycliology has not been
reduced to physiology. Even if investigators believe that natural
force will eventually be able to explain consciousness, reason, and
ethics, they have no right to promulgate their faith as a scientific
axiom. Wherever Kant's philoso]>liy has penetrated, confidence
in solving the ultimate problems of l)eing is shaken; where
noumena are believed to be beyond our reach, phenomena absorb the
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 287
attention. Especially was this natural for English philosophers
under the iniiuence of Locke's empiricisui and Hume's scepticism.
"We are not surprised, therefore, to find Mr. Spencer very modest
in his claims respecting the ultimate problems. In his "First
Principles" (51) he pronounces Matter, in its iiltimate nature,
" absolutely incomprehensible ; " Force passes all understanding
(GG) ; Motion is likewise a mystery (5G-7). In other words, matter,
force, motion belong to the unknowable. The charge of materi-
alism does not apply to him ; for, since the ultimate questions are
unanswerable, there is just as much ground for spiritualism as for
materialism (502-3). ^ Yet he attempts "the interpretation of all
phenomena in terms of matter, motion, and force," which are pro-
nounced inscrutable and nothing but symbols. It is not apparent
what is to be gained by a resort to the mysterious and unknowable
for the interpretation of phenomena which lie open before us. If
Mr. Spencer's symbols are themselves uninterpretable, of what
use can they be for the interpretation of society ? We have not
yet learned the art of extracting intelligence from ignorance, the
knowable from the unknowable. But the very fact that symbols
to interpret social phenomena are drawn from the natural and
physical realm tends to give a materialistic stamp to Sociology.
However guarded Mr. Spencer may be in explaining the use of his
terms, others may be tempted to employ matter, force, and motion
for the promotion of materialism.
There are evidences that we are passing out of the era when
scientific phraseology and philosophical theories were taken for
science, into a more critical era which seeks to conserve science
itself while consuming the dross attached to it. The mind is
1 The passage is as follows: " The interpretation of all phenomena in terms of
Matter, Motion, and Force is nothing more than the reduction of our complex
symbols of thought to the simplest symbols; and when the equation has been
brought to its lowest terms the symbols remain symbols still. Hence the reason-
ings contained in the foregoing pages afford no support to either of the antago-
nist hypotheses respecting the ultimate nature of things. Their implications
are no more materialistic than they are spiritualistic; and no more spiritualistic
than they are materialistic. . . . He who rightly interprets the doctrine contained
in this work will see that neither of these terms can be taken as ultimate. He
will see that though the relation of subject and object renders necessary to us
these antithetical conceptions of Spirit and Matter, the one is no less than the
other to be regarded as but a sign of the Unknown Realitj' which underlies
both."
288 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
coming to itself and asserting its claims ; that is, it recognizes
matter, and itself as different from matter.
A superficial view is inclined to regard material phenomena as
more clear than the mental, and to make the former the means
of interpreting the latter. A deeper view, however, reverses this.
The entire external world is known to us only as a reflection
of our own minds, only as it becomes a subjective element. We
know the material only in terms of our intellects, and never can
get out of our minds into things as the interpreters of our mental
processes. Since we never can deal with anything but mental
percepts and concepts of objects, it seems strange, as Lotze re-
mai'ks, that mind, which alone can discern or interpret matter,
should ever be lost in matter. Some terms become so familiar
by frequent use that we take it for granted we have their meaning,
when they are the very ones that most of all need explanation.
If men would think through the terms they use, they would be less
inclined to resort to natural law, material force, and mechanical
processes, all frequently used without any definite sense, for an
interpretation of the universe, particularly of social phenomena.
Men who proclaim their total ignorance of matter need only
become fully conscious of what they do in order to make them
hesitate to absorb mind in matter and reduce the social to
material phenomena. Carpenter says in his " Mental Physiology,"
" There seems valid ground for the assertion that our notion of
Matter is a conception of intellect. Force being that externality of
which we have the most direct — perhaps even the onZ^^ direct —
cognizance." To us, mind is always first; through it alone, and
only in mental terms, can we know matter.
Brande says: "Of the ultimate nature of matter the human
faculties cannot take cognizance; nor can data be furnished by
observation or experiment on which to found an investigation of
it. All we know of it is its sensible properties."
Lord Rayleigh, professor of experimental physics, Cambridge,
England, said in his presidential address to the British Science
Association : " Many excellent people are afraid of science as tend-
ing towards materialism. That such apprehension should exist
is not surprising, for unfortunately there are writers, speaking in
the name of science, who have set themselves to foster it. It is
true that among scientific men, as in other classes, crude views are
to V)e met with as to the deeper things of Nature ; but that the
rs SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 289
life-long beliefs of Newton, of Faraday, and of Maxwell are incon-
sistent with the scientific habit of mind, is surely a proposition
which I need not pause to refute."
Huxley : " Matter and force, so far as we know, are mere
names for certain forms of consciousness." He also says : " When
Materialists stray beyond the borders of their path and begin to
talk of there being nothing but matter and force and necessary
laws, I decline to follow them."
Numerous equally significant utterances of other scientists we
are obliged to omit. We cannot, however, refrain fi'om quoting
a recent statement of a scientific, economic, and social thinker
of the highest rank. Professor Schmoller, now Rector of the
University of Berlin. In vol. vi., " Handwdrterbuch der Staats-
wissenschaften " ( 549) he says : " Whatever one may think in
our day about the connection of physical and psychical life ; no
matter how one may emphasize that our intellectual life is con-
ditioned by our nervous system ; liowever one may properly con-
ceive our feelings as attached to physiological processes ; so much
is certain, that we cannot explain the coexistence and sequence
of intellectual conditions by means of nervous conditions, that the
last recognizable condition of material elements and the first
actions (or responses, Accorde) of the soul's life now, and probably
for all time to come, must stand opposite each other as inde-
pendent phenomena. Therefore those attempts at explanation
which claim to deduce the conduct of man from mere physical
or biological elements must all he pi'onounced failures or insuffi-
cient. . . . Whatever action there may be of natural and intellec-
tual causes on each other, it must be maintained that we deal with
two independent systems of causes, each following its own laws,
and each requiring, and capable of, independent investigation of
the connections they sustain."
It is significant that the scientist Ernst Haeckel felt it necessary
to oppose that shallow sensationalism which disparages reason,
and to defend emphatically and repeatedly the union of philosophy
and science, of reflection and empiricism, of the idea and experi-
ence. His influence in favor of that species of monism which has
become so powerful in Sociology is great, and for that reason we
here refer to him. He identifies the monistic and mechanical
philosophy. " The mechanical or monistic philosophy asserts
that everywhere the phenomena of human life, as well as those
19
290 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
of external nature, ai'e under the control of fixed and unalterable
laws, that there is everywhere a necessary causal connection
between phenomena, and that, accordingly, the whole knowable
universe forms one undivided whole, a monon." There are no
purposive, teleological causes. What is called free-will is declared
to be as much subject to fixed laws " as any other natural
phenomenon." He rejects the popular distinction between nature
and spirit. "Man is not above nature, but in nature." ("The
Evolution of Man," English translation, vol. ii., 455). This
monism, he claims, might be called spiritualism as well as materi-
alism ; but as it is mechanical monism, it has a materialistic rather
than spiritualistic quality.
Not a few scientists have been astonished at the facility with
which Haeckel evolved man from the monera and amoebae, and
philosophers must be equally astonished at his monism. He
declares that the monistic philosophy "can as little believe in
force without matter, as in matter without force. . . . The ' spirit '
and ' mind ' of men are but forces which are inseparably con-
nected with the material substance of our bodies. Just as the
motive force of our flesh is involved in the muscular form-element,
so is the thinking force of our spirit involved in the form-element
of the brain. Our spiritual forces are as much functions of this
part of the body as every force is a function of a material body.
We know of no matter which does not possess force, and,
conversely, of no forces that are not connected with matter "
(456-7).
And this dualism of matter and force we are seriously asked to
take as 'Zionism ! The one cannot be resolved into the other, the
one does not precede the other, but both are inseparable. This
inseparableness is, consequently, the monistic element. For the
sake of intellectual honesty let us call this system dualistic monism
or monistic dualism.
He is consistent with his theory that antbrojiology is a part of
zoology. He claims that lie sees that " in tlie entire history of
the evolution of man, in the history of the germ, as well as in that
of the tribe, no other active forces have been at work than in the
rest of organic and inorganic forces." Man under " the fixed and
unalterable laws " of nature, entirely controlled by mechanical
causes, absolutely without free-will, cannot, therefore, be any
more responsible for his actions than the brute.
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 291
Now turn to the preface of this book. Of its subject he says :
" No other branch has been so wilfully obscured and mystified,
by priestly influence." The conclusions reached by the study
produce " an incredulous smile " and even " disgust." But are
not the priestly influence, the smile, and the disgust the inevitable
product of the unalterable mechanical laws ? He denounces scien-
tists who dissent from his conclusions, as severely as he does " the
infallible Vatican " and " the black international ; " yet, according
to his own theory, those scientists, and that Vatican, and all the
gods of Olympus, and all the ghosts that haunt men, are nothing
but the product of those fixed and unalterable laws ! His wrath
is kindled against men and gods, the very product of his monism.
If an absolute mechanical law does away with all freedom, why
blame the product of absolute necessity? The Greeks already
knew that it is folly to fight against Fate. But as an apology for
his wrath, we must remember that it too is the product of fixed
and unalterable mechanical laws, just as the mischievous views
he so heroically combats, if the mechanical laws admit of heroism.
We have no language to express our convictions respecting a
monism that produces all in the universe according to an absolute
and blind necessity, and then turns on men and gods, on supersti-
tion and wickedness, which are solely and helplessly its own
product, and berates them as if they were not its legitimate off-
spring, as if they could help what the mechanical laws made
them. A system that ends in absurdity needs no further criti-
cism. When, however, it is to be made the law of Sociology, we
have a right to protest. Here a healthy agnosticism is more
rational. This scientific agnosticism may have room for faith
where science and philosophy cannot rule. Haeckel himself gives a
striking passage respecting the limits of scientific inquiry: "The
history of the evolution of organism, equally with the history of
human civilization, can never be the subject of ' exact ' investi-
gation."
Sociology has too long suffered from philosophical speculations
and metaphysical hypotheses, which were confidently proclaimed
scientific. Schafiie ("Bau und Leben des socialen Kdrpers," i.,
128) thinks that the work now most of all required is of a pre-
paratory character. " The work of description is far from being
completed." To him it seems doubtful whether we are prepared
to establish any social laws. " At the present stage of the investi-
292 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
gation we do not presume to decide whether social laws of general
application will be the result of the comparative description."
To the student can be commended the reserve found (vol. i., 3)
in Tylor's " Primitive Culture : " " None will deny that, as each
man knows by the evidence of his own consciousness, definite and
natural cause does, to a great extent, determine human action.
Then, keeping aside fi'om considerations of extra-natural interfer-
ence and causeless spontaneity, let us take this admitted existence
of natural cause and effect as our standing-ground, and travel on it
as far as it will bear us. It is on this same basis that physical
nature pursues, with ever-increasing success, its quest of laws
of nature. Nor need this restriction hamper the scientific study of
human life, in which the real difficulties are the practical ones of
enormous complexity of evidence, and imperfection of methods
of observation."
Darwin's definitions of nature and law show that he was anxious
to avoid the metaphysical problems. " I mean by nature only the
aggregation and product of many natural laws, — and by laws only
the ascertained sequence of events."
In Draper's "Intellectual Development of Europe," the first
chapter contains a discussion of law in human affairs.
Quatrefages, in " The Human Species," Book I., chapter i., rec-
ognizes the relation of man to the lower animals, but at the
same time lays stress on his peculiarities. '* Is man distinguished
from animals by important and characteristic phenomena, abso-
lutely unknown in the latter ? For more than forty yeai-s I have
answered this question in the affirmative, and my convictions,
tested by many controversies, are now stronger than ever." He
puts the human phenomena in a sjiecial kingdom, declaring them
to be " the attributes of a kingdom which we call the Human King-
dom." Anthropology has " its own special field of study, and on
that account alone its special questions, which often could not be
solved by processes borrowed from cognate sciences." This does not
interfere with the organic unity of man as an animal with the rest
of the world. " In anthropology, every solution, to be sound, that
is to say, true, should refer man, in everything which is not exclu-
sively human, to the generally recognized laws for other organized
and living beings."
Schiiffle, in the volume quoted above, discusses the limits of
sociological knowledge, and makes frequent mention of the mate-
IS SOCIOLOGY A SCIENCE? 293
rialistic hypothesis, which he rejects as untenable. In his " Ge-
sammelte Aufsatze," the first article discusses the relation of
Dai-winism to social science. He shows that in reference to soci-
ety the application of natural selection is limited.
The following, from F. M. Sprague's book on " The Laws of
Social Evolution," is one of numerous evidences that the reduction
of Sociology to a natural science is deemed a failure. " The unsuc-
cessful but chronic attempt to explain the social in terms of a
physical organism must be abandoned. It was born of arrogant
physicism. It is an analogical monstrosity and a grotesque cari-
cature of the scientific method. The social organism is based on
mind, the physical organism on matter. The properties of matter
cannot be compared with those of mind."
Our position is thus clear. In the interest of true science we
demand the rejection of all false scientific assumptions. Not the
least objection is urged against making Sociology as positive or
scientific as possible ; we in fact insist on this, but we distinguish
between this and the adoption of a system of sj)eculative and meta-
physical philosophy as the basis of Sociology, then making this
philosophy a species of dogmatism, adherence to which is made
the condition of science ! In order to avoid this, a former chapter
has urged the separation of Sociology from all adulterating admix-
tures and confusing entanglements.
Let natural law be applied to society so far as possible. But
after it has explained all within its reach, let the peculiarity of
psychological, personal, and sociological factors be acknowledged.
If these factors are mysterious, let us say so, without professing to
explain them by simply hiding them under still greater mysteries.
Thus we shall gain as much as liy dogmatic assumptions, while our
method wiU be scientific, which the other is not.
In order to test the correctness of the views here given, the stu-
dent is requested to examine the sociological works from Comte
till the present. They have scientific elements and aim at positive
knowledge, and this knowledge they seek to reduce to system.
But so far as scientific knowledge is concerned, knowledge gained
by means of the scientific method, knowledge as exact as natural
science, absolute and final, it forms a small fraction of the works.
They abound in description and historic references, in presupposi-
tions and theories and surmises, and sometimes a whole system of
speculative philosophy is suddenly thrust as science on the unsus-
294 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
pecting student. Those who come to the study with different
presuppositions and a different psychology, also give different in-
terpretations of the same social phenomena. Hence, instead of
strict science, which is indisputable and has objective validity for
all, we have tentative scientific efforts, and, in many instances,
a conglomerate mass whose chaotic state is its most striking
characteristic.
Is Sociology a science ? Yes and no. It is not a science yet in
any sense ; it has not the conditions for a mathematical or physical
science. Some of its material can be made more strictly scientific
than the rest. Taking all its material into account, we ai'e war-
ranted in saying that it can be made scientific in the sense of valid
and systematized knowledge. Even in this sense we are now
obliged to regard Sociology as but tentatively the science of
society.
A fuller discussion of various points in tliis chapter are found in
the following books of the author : " Introduction to the Study of
Philosophy," chapter iii., Philosophy and Science ; " The Life of
Immanuel Kant," chapters viii. and ix; and "Tendencies in Ger-
man Thought," second and third lectures on " Tendencies in Ger-
man Philosophy."
In " Essays in Philosophical Criticism," edited by Seth and
Haldane, the second essay, by R. D. Haldane, is on " The Relation
of Philosophy to Science."
REFLECTIONS.
Different Meanings of the Term " Science." Technical and
Popular Use. Difference between Science and Philosophy.
Scientific Method as determining the Scientific Character of
Disciplines. Exactness and Certainty in Natural and Human
Affairs. In Tvhat Sense is Sociology a Science ? The Factors
in Sociology w^hich yield the most Scientific Data. Is Ma-
terialism Scientific ? Tentative Character of Sociology as a
Science. Review of the Chapter.
THE SOCIOLOGICAL ISTUDY OF THE AGE. 295
CHAPTER X.
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE.
The Problem. Special interest attaches to our oivn age.
It is the culmination of the entire j^focess of evolution;
the past is known to us only as its results have come
doivn to our time ; we have direct contact tvith the age,
are part of it, and can hy means of personal observation
study its sociological character ; and then it is the only
age whose society immediately affects us and whose social
affairs ive can directly help to mould.
What is the sociological character of the age? What
societies exist and how are they related to one another?
Amid the varied factors of our social life, none of the
forces of the past are wanting : but our problem pertains
to the degree of development attained by them, how they
are correlated and tvhat their interaction is, and which
forces are dominant, which subordinate. We aim at the
sociological characteristics of the times.
Especially for ethics is a knowledge of the social forces
and needs important. We must learn the social needs
and demands in order to supply them ; we must know
the social forces in order to use them ; and we must
understand the social aspirations in order to direct them.
Particularly worthy of study are certain great economic
movements, such as communism, socialism, and indi-
vidualism. The importance of viewing these subjects
sociologically consists in the fact that in this ivay
296 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
the pernicious partial and partisan tendencies can be
overcome.
In his own country the American student ivill find
some of the most fruitful as well as most momentous
sociological questions of the day.
Tlie social humanity of the aye, ivhat it is, hoiv it
became what it is, and ivhither it tends, — that is the
problem.
Weighty reasons have led to the discussion of this
subject. The sociological study of the age will give the
student an opportunity of applying the principles enun-
ciated in the preceding pages to his own environment
and times. Besides thus fixing the principles more
definitely and more firmly in his mind, he will be led
into the social realism of the day. From the sociologi-
cal interpretation of the age he can turn back to the
past and trace the genesis of society as it now is, and
to the future to consider what conditions are required
for social progress. Even though we are obliged to
limit our investigation to general outlines, they may
be guides for the study of a lifetime.
Just what is aimed at is the first question. If we
consider the whole of humanity as it exists at this
particular time, w^e are at once impressed how small a
portion of it we know or can know with any degree of
thoroughness. There are vast regions, including many
millions of inhabitants, of which our knowledge is very
imperfect. Even Americans and Europeans, with rare
exce[)tions, do not understand each other. To scholars
themselves much in America, in Russia and the Balkan
States, in China, India, and other parts of Asia, in
Japan and Africa, has to be classed as terra incognita.
So soon as we consider the question of details, we find
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 297
that at best our knowledge is vagiie in proportion as it
is comprehensive. Only among the advanced nations
do we find trustworthy statistics ; so that so simple a
fact as the number of people on the globe, on continents,
and in nations has to be estimated or guessed.^
In a limited sphere our knowledge may be tolerably
definite, as in our immediate environment, state, or na-
tion. Other countries may be visited, or detailed accounts
of them are accessible. But taking the society of our
age as a whole, we find ourselves limited to gen-
eral features. Some particular parts can be taken for
special study because they most nearly concern us, or
are of most importance for understanding the age.
Thus a study of the enlightened nations reveals the
progress attained throughout the process of evolution.
For the sake of his own discipline as well as for the
knowledge to be gained, the student ought to make a
thorough personal investigation of some society or
societies. In general, however, the aim should be to
^ The population of the globe is supposed to be between fourteen and
fifteen hundred millions, more than twenty times as many as there are
inhabitants in the United States. The births are from forty to fifty
millions annually, the deaths somewhat less than the births. Not only
are these numbers too large for definite conception, but there is no pos-
sibility of making them exact, on account of the lack of statistics outside
of Europe and America. How limited our knowledge of the world's
social condition is becomes evident so soon as we reflect on our ignorance
respecting our own people and other enlightened nations, which con-
stitute but a fraction of humanity ; of the rest our ignorance is still more
dense. Unless a specialty is made of the subject, it is safe to say that
of more than nine-tenths of the world's inhabitants even scholars have
not an intelligent general conception. In confirmation of this we need
but look at the distribution of these inhabitants: America, 120,000,000;
Europe, 369,000,000; Asia, 800,000,000; Africa, 200,000,000. Most
students know even North America and Western Europe very imper-
fectly ; South America and Eastern Europe are obscure, while extremely
vague notions prevail respecting A.sia, Africa, and the islands of the sea,
containing over two-thirds of the populatiun of the globe.
298 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
get the dominant characteristics of the age in which
the character of society is embodied. The study of
the age is largely a study of its purposes, of the objects
which attract men, of the needs which they feel most
deeply, of the motives of action. In these we behold
the Zeitgeist^ to which other things are subordinate.
A society may express its heart in a single trend. At
the same time other motives come in and modify the
dominant ones. Nations are often unjust to one an-
other because the whole nation and all the affairs of the
nation are judged by some general characteristic, as
when Germany is apprehended as merely a military
power, England as a nation of shop-keepers, and the
United States as a moral (or immoral) wilderness in
which the golden calf is worshipped.
The study of the advanced nations is most important.
The lower peoples represent types which have been
found, with some variations, in other ages. For the
characteristics of the times we look chiefly to the civ-
ilized states. Not that the lower stages of culture
are to be neglected. A panorama of existing peoples,
passing in regular gradation from the lowest to the
highest culture, would present many of the most essen-
tial characteristics of the world's history. For the
enlightened of the age this study of the lower existing
forms of society has a direct significance : they behold
the various stages through which their ancestors passed
and through which the ages have pushed their way to
our age. In the Indo-Gcrmanic languages, literatures,
and history, many deposits of the various stages of
development are distinctly seen. In many higher forms
of culture wc have survivals or })roducts of the lower,
and in their genesis we have conditions for their inter-
pretation. For another reason also this study is im-
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 299
portant. The inferior races are engaging the attention
and enlisting the energies of the advanced nations.
They are affected by the civilization with which they
come in contact; but they, in turn, influence civilized
lands, and this influence is likely to grow with their
culture.
The times are peculiarly favorable for the sociologi-
cal study of our age. Science, fame and adventure have
led men to explore the habitable parts of the globe and to
penetrate regions heretofore deemed inaccessible ; the
darkest realms have attracted missionaries, because in
greatest contrast with the light they brought ; the indus-
trial nations make the world their market, and their com-
merce, freighted with blessings and curses, seeks the
peoples by the seas, and traverses valleys and moun-
tains to find those that are inland. The world's postal
and telegraph arrangements, the ease of communication,
the frequency of travel, have done their part to make
the world know the world. Colonization aids in this
spread of knowledge. The great interests and move-
ments of our times bring the leading states into close
relations. The stronger care for the weaker, as the
large fish of the sea do for the small. A few nations
rule the world, not because requested, but because they
find it to their interest and have the power. This
makes diplomacy active and puts a premium on such
knowledge as will give one nation an advantage over
another. The peoples watch and study one another,
in order to obtain the requisite knowledge for their
economic and political affairs.
The growing intimacy of nations has promoted simi-
larity. In Russia, Poland, Bohemia, Hungary, Ger-
many, Greece, Italy, Ireland, and other lands, the
development of the consciousness of nationality during
300 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
the century has been marked. But parallel with this
has also been the development of cosmopolitanism.
Internationalism has grown as well as nationalism,
and men can go abroad and feel at home. A monot-
onous sameness is even complained of as characteristic
of the great cities of different countries.
The same trend is seen in scholarship, in literature,
in inventions. Genius now thinks, writes, and invents
for the world. Thanks to the post and telegraph offices
and the press, important discoveries, inventions, and
movements are at once communicated to all nations.
The people generally take a deeper interest in the
world's affairs as education spreads and they them-
selves receive a share in the government.
These facts show what advantages are offered to the
sociological student for the study of the age. A knowl-
edge of the nations whose characteristics are of most
value to him is within his reach. By studying the Euro-
pean and American nations which are in the van, he
will learn the most striking features of the age, the
peculiarities which distinguish our times from the past,
and also the most potent influences to which the other
nations and peoples are subject.
"With so large a field before him, and with details of
such bewildering variety and multiplicity, a systematic
plan of study is indispensable. How can he master the
subject ?
Every sociologist must be gratified by the popular in-
terest in his specialty ; but he ought to insist on main-
taining its scientific character. For this reason we
emphasize Sociology as a system, and treat as sociologi-
cal only such social material as forms part of the system.
Isolated social data are not sociological, but they may
become so through systematic correlation. Keeping in
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 301
view the distinction between social and sociological, the
student will perceive that by the sociological study of
the age we mean such an investigation as will give a
knowledge of the existing society, of the social systems
which prevail, of the associative energies of the times,
and of the organism they form. A social fact is to the
sociologist what a stone is to the geologist. Not as iso-
lated phenomena does he view the murder of Alexander
II., of Carnot, and of Canovas, but so far as the nihilism
or anarchism in the deeds have their cause in society.
What was said under Sociation leaves no doubt that
the social forces are the special objects of investigation.
We must consider the individuals of the times in order
to understand the association of the age ; but we con-
sider them as the possessors of the social energies.
Thus it is claimed by a specialist on the character-
istics of the age that more stress should be placed on
feeling than is usually done by students. He holds that
feeling, as the basis of taste, inclination, and disposition,
determines the course of the intellect and the will. This
places peculiar stress on feeling as a social energy. Is
it true that now society is dominated by emotional im-
pulse rather tlian by rational considerations, dogmas,
and theories ? If so, then the kind of feeling which is
dominant becomes one of the most important problems.
On the principle that the dominant interest determines
the focus of thought, the social element in the literature
of the past has become an object of inquiry. In the lit-
erature of our age the social factor is a constantly in-
creasing quantity. Much in it, however, will strike as
strange the sociologist who has apprehended the social
energies as the essence. For the sociological study of a
nation, the nativity of its inhabitants, on which many lay
great stress, may be to little purpose. The more homo-
302 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
geneous a people, the more valuable their nativity in
sociological study ; but if the dii^ferentiations are great,
the nativity cannot be regarded as a mark of character.
There is some value in the statistics in America of Chi-
nese, Italians, and Irish in this respect, because signi-
ficant traits are general among these peoples. Less
importance is to be attached to immigrants from Russia,
with its 120,000,000 inhabitants. Are they Stundists,
Lutherans, Baptists, or of the orthodox faith ? Perhaps
they are expelled Jews, or nihilists, or followers of
Tolstoi. Still less valuable for social study are the sta-
tistics of Germans and their descendants. There are
nearly a score of factions in the German Parliament, rep-
resenting numerous phases of economics, of revolution-
ary, republican, and monarchical views ; and yet many
throughout the empire may claim that their views are
not represented. The religious sentiments vary from
avowed atheism, based on bald materialism, to ultra-
montanism. When accordingly it is said that a certain
percentage of American citizens are of German origin,
it does not reveal their character. Bismarck once
lamented that his countrymen so readily adopted the
characteristics of the people among whom they settled.
But aside from their Americanization which wipes out
past peculiarities, the difference in the immigrants them-
selves must be considered. The Pennsylvania Germans
are a type by themselves. Later immigration has
brought numerous other varieties. In the early part of
the century came the Missouri Lutherans of hyper-
orthodoxy ; 1848 brought freethinkers ; then followed a
strong tide of immigrants from Catholic districts; since
then social democrats have come in large numbers.
With this variety, representing diverging religious, polit-
ical, and industrial types, what definite notion is given
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 303
when the statistics of Germans in the United States is
given? It means little even to say that a man is a na-
tive American. Is he a Yankee ? There are Yankees
and Yankees, an endless diversity. Is he from the
South ? From the West ? It has even been questioned
whether a distinct American type has been developed.
Even to state his religion, politics, and industrial pursuit,
may give but a vague notion of the man.
This vagueness is overcome when, instead of number-
ing persons, we seize what actually constitutes society,
the social forces. In this way we master what actually
determines association, and drop all foreign elements.
Whatever nationality may mean or not mean, the social
forces mean everything. Classified according to their
social energies, large bodies of Germans will be placed
with certain other foreigners and with certain native
Americans, rather than with the rest of their country-
men.
In the sociological study of the existing social forces
we investigate them not as isolated, but as organically
connected, as co-operative. This must be remembered
in order not to lose ourselves in a social science, instead
of confining ourselves to the social science.
With the whole of humanity before us various classifi-
cations of society are possible. The study according to
races is vague. The racial bounds are not sharply
drawn ; even the number of races is in dispute. Besides,
marked differences are found in the same race. There
are advantages in the division according to religion ; but
even when we consider the highest religions, Avhat a
confusing variety in different nations! The adherents
of Christianity would have to be put into various classes
in order to get a definite idea of them. A more satis-
factory division is possible according to the degree of cul-
304 INTrxODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ture attained. As a general classificatiou we have the
barbarous, the semi-civilized, the civilized, and then we
might add the most enlightened. But each of these di-
visions requires numerous sub-divisions. In each stage
of progress, however, certain social forces are dominant
and determine characteristics of the peoples belonging
to that stage.
If we confine our sociological inquiries to the most
advanced nations as of supreme importance, we concen-
trate our attention on Europe and America, particularly
the western part of the former and the northern of the
latter. Their religion, their education, their politics,
their industrial pursuits, their intimate relations and in-
fluence on one another, and their general trend give cer-
tain common characteristics which enable us to study
them together.
Taking these nations as a whole, the most dominant
trend is toward Objective Realisyn?-
By this we mean that they seek something objective ;
no longer satisfied with subjective notions, they demand
reality in the ordinary sense. Objective reality being
made the supreme aim, it becomes the test of faith,
hope, and all religious conceptions and mental products.
Hence historical and biblical criticism ; the emphasis
was formerly placed on ivhat men believed, but now it is
on the grounds of belief. So many opinions have been
found to rest on imagination that the age has become
suspicious not only in religious matters. General scep-
ticism and agnosticism respecting the foundations of
1 For a fuller discussion of the subject the author refers to his volume
on " The Age and tlie Cliurch." The Appendix contains " The Study of
the Age," giving the method and means of the study. The Principles in-
volved in the study are found in tiie first chapter of the book. The sec-
ond and tliird chapters discuss "Tlie Characteristics of the Age."
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 305
knowledge make ours a transition era in intellect.
While objectiAX realism is sought as the bottom rock,
the trend appears with different force and in various
forms among the advanced nations, and the counteract-
ing influences also vary greatly ; but that trend is the
most distinctive fundamental feature of our times.
The creation and promotion of this trend are largely
due to the intellectual place and popular influence of
natural science.^ This has also had a large share in
determining the most striking characteristic in this
general trend. What kind of objective reality do men
seek ? Not that of the next world and in the future, but
here and now. This-worldliness, this-sidedness are the
new terms which characterize the tendency. Hence
theoretical materialism ; hence practical materialism even
where the theoretical is rejected ; hence realism in art
and literature ; hence the prevalence of industrialism,
economics, capitalism ; hence material welfare as the
great concern of politics and the daily press ; hence
1 The nineteenth century has frequently been called the century of
natural science. This has been justified by the remarkable achievements
in this department, and by the inventions and practical results which fol-
lowed. The effects produced arrested the popular attention, affected the
method of research, gave new conceptions of the universe, and deeply in-
fluenced all departments of thought. But an exclusive predominance of
natural science cannot be claimed. Historians affirm that the advance in
their specialty is no less marked. For proof they point to the archives
which have been opened during the century, to the extensive excavations
of buried remains in Europe, Asia, Africa, and America, to the decipher-
ing of inscriptions unread for thousands of years, to the numerous histori-
cal works of great excellence in various languages and in all departments
of research, and to the progress in historiography. In no department of
learning is the claim to exclusive predominance justified. Progress can
be claimed in economics and political ."cience, as well as in natural science
and history. A mighty impulse has been given to empirical investiga-
tions, particularh' to such as have a direct bearing on industrial and
social life.
20
306 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
revolutionary socialism, so far as it makes political
economy the social science on which life and society
depend. Here, then, we have the fruit of the factory, of
steam and electricity, of inventions, and of that marvel-
lous industrial development which has transformed the
world.
Intimately connected with this materialistic and realis-
tic trend is the decline of philosophy where once the
dominant intellectual pursuit ; the prevalence of history
as dealing with facts ; the preference of sensationalism
and empiricism over intellectual rationalism and specu-
lation ; the attempt to reduce Sociology, ethics, and all
human affairs to natural law ; the absorbing pursuit of
earthly pleasure or happiness as the aim of life.
The new studies, interests, and developments have
stimulated life in general. The age is characterized by
marvellous activity. New subjects have been developed,
religion has been energized by the very opposition it has
encountered. The conflicts of thought, of education, of
faith, of life, have prevented stagnation and promoted
energy. Hence the variety of activities in modern
society.
A reaction against the naturalistic trend has set in.
It is felt in France, where realism celebrated its greatest
triumphs in art and literature. Philosophy has received
fresh impulses in Germany, and in that land of ideals
one hears less now than quite recently the comj)laint that
the ideals have vanished.
We thus find a dominance of economic forces in
society ; the political forces largely subject to the eco-
nomic ; with a strong trend towards hedonism in ethics ;
with education, art, literature, and the church deeply
affected by the mammonistic spirit. The subordination
of higher interests, the crushing out of faith by tlie
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 307
weight of crass materialism, the satiety wrought by
pleasure, the contrast of realizations with the ideals
and aspirations of modern life, and the sensitiveness
of our culture, produce that pessimism which has
become so common in certain circles, so that men
wonder, particularly in emergencies, whether life is
worth living.
In Germany and France, in England and the United
States, the social forces here indicated are found in dif-
ferent degrees of intensity, with peculiar manifestations
in each, and with a variety of forces trying to counter-
act or modify the dominant ones. The rise of Germany
to a leading economic nation is a sign of the times. In
spite of its militarism and educational interests, it is now
attempting with remarkable success to rival the first
industrial nations in production and commerce.
Those who rely on the continued supremacy of a par-
ticular force may build on a sandy foundation. Soon,
or in the course of time, the dominance may be trans-
ferred to other energies. Our age of fermentation teems
with transformations. Past impulses continue traditional
courses, but these are met by strong counter-movements.
It is one of the firmest convictions of the age that momen-
tous changes are inevitable. The demand is imperative
that things be dethroned that man may be enthroned ;
the emphasis is being shifted from objective realism to
the claims of the heart and the conscience, of reason,
faith, and hope ; and abnormal and partisan tendencies
will be doomed in exact proportion as Sociology, with
its stress on all the social energies and on society as a
unity, is promoted. The consciousness of existing evils
is the condition for overcoming them ; and this conscious-
ness is being deeply developed. That peoples can be
lifted to a higher plane of thought and life is evident
308 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
when some great interest is to be conserved, when
slavery is to be abolished, when national unity and safety
are to be achieved, or when a faith dearer than life is to
be maintained.
This struggle for existence, for earthly being and well-
being, with its fierce competition, with means often so
brutal as to trample on persons for the sake of getting
things, could be traced, with its attendant forces,
through various phases of social life. That there are
many social groups and organizations in which higher
aims, intellectual, ethical, religions, are dominant, is
fully admitted ; we are only speaking of what is of most
general prominence.
We cannot investigate, but only indicate, other plans
of study. Different forms of organization and associa-
tion can be taken up for special inquiry. The aristoc-
racy can be examined, whether of birth, of wealth, or of
intellect ; the middle class, and laborers. Particularly
in the rising, the solidarity, the internationalism, and the
trend, of laborers is much of the age reflected. This
pressing upward from the lowest social stratum suggests
the uprising of the people at the time of the French
Revolution. But what was a local volcano a century
ago has now become an earthquake shaking all the
enlightened nations. The materialistic element is prom-
inent in the social agitations of the masses, but there
are also ideal factors in the aspiration to rise to a better
condition.
Besides the general characteristics of the age which
permeate all its social forms, we can specialize on par-
ticular associations and institutions. Too much stress
can hardly be laid on the family, the social nucleus.
The sacredness of the family relation, the theories of
marriage and divorce, and the laws on these subjects.
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 309
the actual family life, all are important. Worthy of
special study also are the school, the church, politics,
the ethical, literary, scientific, philosophical, and aesthetic
societies. Their power as a concentration of specific
energies is the object of the investigation. For thor-
ough knowledge the organizations and institutions must
of course be studied in their genesis and correlations.
Astonishing results will likely be discovered by the
student who distinguishes between Avhat the society of
the day has inherited and what it adds to this inherit-
ance through its own achievements. Owing to another
of those pernicious and undiscriminating generaliza-
tions, we credit existing society with excellences which
are not its own creation. We glory in the advance of
society over the past, when its very superiority may
consist in the contributions made by the past. This
becomes evident when we distinguish between the treas-
ures transmitted to society, and the mechanism in which
it moves, on the one liand, and the actual social forces
exerted by the members of society, on the other. It is
like the etiquette of a court : it has a polite and refined
mechanism in which each is obliged to move, a mechan-
ism so dominant that it is calculated to hide the weak-
ness, the inanity, the vice, and even brutality, of such as
are admitted into the first society of the land. Why
emphasize the substance when the form is everything ?
Are the social forces of the age really an advance
over the past, better in quality, of greater degree, of
more vigorous interaction than in former times, or is the
advance in the inheritances from the past ? When so
generally ours is designated as an era of decadence, it
surely cannot mean that there is a decrease in what has
been transmitted to us.
It may be a question whether there is not danger of
310 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
over-organization or of over-socialization. There can
be no doubt that certain communistic and socialistic
tendencies do not sufficiently respect individual rights
and peculiarities. A decay of individuality is com-
plained of ; in free countries public opinion is the new
despot which enslaves the personality. As in some
places the government has heretofore left to individuals
what should have been settled by law, now the reaction
may tend to a paternalism which seeks to do everything
for the people and leave nothing for them to do for
themselves. Legal enactments have their limits; they
are no substitute for character and will.
The tendency to organize the social forces is very
marked. An idea, a dogma, a purpose, a conscious
need, becomes the nucleus of an organization. In this
century of organizations — religious, industrial, politi-
cal, literary, scientific — is there not danger of consign-
ing to associations, committees, clubs, what can only be
done by individuals ? We are liable to forget that the
social forces, even in organizations, are individual forces
in interaction and depend on individual character and
energy for their efficiency. Tlie individual is enervated
if he dwindles into insignificance compared with the
power of organization. Yet we must look to strong
personalities for creative forces and initiative efforts.
The association represents the average ; it is composed
of what enters into the interaction of forces. What is
highest and best may be individual, not social ; then it
can be made social only if it is transmitted by the in-
dividual to society. There ought to be a growth of the
personality and individuality in proportion to the growth
of socialism and organization.
As the century culminates and closes, the effects of
its marvellous activity and development become appar-
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 311
ent. Distraction is one of the characteristics of the
times. Men are bewildered by the multiplicity of ob-
jects and interests which demand their attention. A
fair sample of this is seen in the daily paper. The
power of forgetting is a blessed gift ; what could a man
do with himself if all the stuff he reads had to be lugged
along ? So many things appeal to the mind and heart
that men lose themselves. They are under constant
strain. Hence they are excited, nervous. Sensations
develop the taste for sensation ; therefore the spectacu-
lar and sensational must grow in order to continue to
interest.
These characteristics are marks of modern society.
Men belong to so many societies that they do not belong
to themselves.^ As new interests are presented they
become the cause of organizations. These are often
in conflict with one another, and increase the conflicts
and distractions. Especially are these evident in the
industries, politics, and religion. The antagonism be-
tween organizations (capitalists and laborers, individ-
ualists and socialists, conservatives and radicals in
politics. Catholics and Protestants) is such that for the
sake of internal peace the determination of the relation
of voluntary associations to one another and to the
government has become one of the most important
functions of the state.
The prominence given to society was the condition
for the origin and rapid development of Sociology. It
is destined to revolutionize social theory ; and momen-
tous practical results must follow. The study of the
1 I know of a lady in private life who belongs to thirty-seven societies,
not including the churcli, the state, the family, and unorganized social
circles. There are no doubt men and women who belong to a still larger
number.
312 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
social forces will more and more lead to the mastery
of their use. An apprehension of the organism of these
forces will overcome their false isolation and one-sided
development, and promote their proper correlation and
harmonious development. Already we are passing from
a perverted individualism into a new social era, — some
prefer to say socialistic. We are beginning to realize
what the individual owes to society, what social respon-
sibility means, and the need of socializing of the indi-
vidual what belongs to society.
Society as a totality is coming to the front, instead
of societies. We are learning that what is called social
because in the interest of a fractional or partisan organ-
ization, may be anti-social, because opposed to the inter-
est of society at large. A community of interests is
recognized as pertaining to all members of society. The
welfare of one part at the expense of another is known
to be detrimental to society itself. One reason why the
functions of the state are increased is that the convic-
tion prevails that society must do more for the general
welfare. That what belongs to the public should be
done by the public is a growing sentiment. The social-
izing trend is seen in the tendency toward mutualism,
partnei'ship, co-operation, conciliation, arbitration, in the
industries, instead of wild competition in which might
makes riglit, and instead of an antagonism which threat-
ens society, and of an anarchy which endangers the
authority of the law and the existence of the state.
The trend toward solidarity is also seen in international
affairs, as in the movement toward arbitration, in form-
ing alliances among nations, and in the Concert of
Powers.!
' Is there not in nations a trend toward combination, just as in the
industries ? The Triple Alliance and the Concert of the European
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 313
Eternal peace between nations may for a long time
be a dream, and an alliance which shall include all
peoples may be the hope of only a few now ; but these
few may stand on summits where fall the morning's first
rays which usher in the new day. Truth and right and
goodness and the beauty of harmony point in that direc-
tion. It is the prophecy which lies concealed in Soci-
ology. The fact that there is a strong trend toward an
equalization which places the elements of our common
humanity above the fiction of rank attained simply by
birth, is significant.
The filling up of this meagre outline must be left
to the student. He can trace more fully the develop-
ment and interaction of the social energies wliich have
been mentioned. Ages are not so much distinguished
by the absence or presence of social forces as by the
relations the forces sustain to one another. Two ages
may contain the same forces, yet one be controlled by
religious interests, the other by industries, and there-
fore show marked differences ; or in both the indus-
tries may be dominant, yet in different degrees. No
investigator questions that relatively religion now absorbs
Powers seem iudicative of that trend. The solidarity of interests among
nations is likely to lead to international co-operation. No one familiar
with national action questions that such action, no less than that of
individuals and voluntary associations, is largely controlled by selfish
interests. But nations are more guarded ; diplomacy may be the art
of so using words as to hide the real meaning. By the interaction of
nations the interests held in common will receive more attention. The
conditions and movements of the times now more than ever promote
internationalism. There are indications that we are on the eve of great
national conflicts ; but they are likely to be but means for greater unity
among nations. The organic relation of nations is becoming more evi-
dent, just as the social organism of humanity. Certainly at no former
period did the conditions for general j)rogress seem so favorable as at
present. But there are also powerful deteriorating and destructive ten-
dencies which must be studied in forming an estimate of the age.
814 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
less attention than during the Middle Ages, the Refor-
mation, and later periods. Yet it may be that this does
not indicate an actual loss of religious power. Perhaps
religion has not lost, but the industries have gained,
and that makes the change in relative prominence.
Trinity Church, New York, need not lose a particle,
and yet the attention may be so concentrated on Wall
Street and on the tide of humanity sweeping along
Broadway that nothing but the clock of the church is
looked at ; and the business blocks may so overtower
the steeple that the church, once a most conspicuous
landmark, is hardly visible. The church is the same,
the surroundings are changed.
The account of the social forces of the age here given is the
result of decades of special study in America and Europe. Differ-
ent views on so extensive a subject will naturally prevail. The most
conflicting opinions are found even among scholars. Few try to
get a philosophy of the age, being content with the facts given by
the papers rather than intent on passing from them to principles.
A local study of the social forces in one's environment or state
may yield results different from those obtained when the study is
extended both to Europe and America.
In the preceding pages tlie emphasis has been placed on promi-
nent and dominant tendencies. Many a heart and many a region
may promote other tendencies without interfering with the
correctness of the statements given.
The social forces of the day must be judged according to the
influences under which they act. Forces active in humanity from
the first have been unusually developed because stimulated and
exercised under peculiar circumstances. The factory, the use of
steam and electricity, machinery, have exerted a dominant influence.
The faculties have grown in the line in which they were cultivated;
the taste, the purpose, have grown in the same dii-ection. The
ease of production has absorbed attention in production. Add to
this the increased appreciation and study of nature, and the trend
indicated by realism, industrialism, capitalism, economics, materi-
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 315
alism, coiiimercialisni, competition, is easily understood. What is
intended as the means of life is made the end.
As the study of the age is largely that of the relative dominance
of social forces, so the changes to be made will be in respect to
this dominance. "We must have bread; but that does not mean
that it is life's essence. In future progress not an iota of any real
value gained in the past is to be dropped. The sociological student
by his study of the social totality, and of the harmonious relation
of its various forces, is saved from the popular movement of a
reaction against an extreme toward another extreme. The problem
of progress for him is the right proportion of the social forces.
The higher interests must be made supreme ; and the value of the
industries consists in making them the foundation on which life
builds.
Much of the eflBciency of the social forces depends on the
nature of their organization. Education and the intellectual
forces generally are best organized in Germany. The schools are
state institutions under the control of a cabinet minister (Cultus-
Minister) ; education in the common schools is compulsory; for the
learned professions, a regular course in the gymnasia and univer-
sities is required by the state ; scholars form a distinct rank or
class (Gelehrteiistand). The unity of oi'ganization in the schools
and among scholars gives scholarship a prominence and power
there as found nowhere else. Each university is a great learned
corporation ; all universities are intimately connected with one
another, with the gymnasia of the land, with the learned pro-
fessions, and with intellectual movements generally. This soli-
darity promotes scholarly independence, freedom of thought, and
concentrated power respecting the other forces and tendencies of
the country.
The same country has a powerful social democracy with an
organization of great compactness. Not only is its influence felt
among laborers, but also by capitalists and the church. It is a
political as well as industrial organization, and takes a prominent
part in national affairs.
In religion the influence of organization is seen in the difference
between state and free churches, also in the unity of Catholicism
and the divisions in Protestantism.
The different ages in a community are important factors. It
has been claimed, for instance, that it takes three generations, as
316 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
a rule, to gain the ascendency for a new view. Those who are in
mature life or aged when the view is announced, are too much
controlled by conservatism and traditionalism to be won by it.
The young, however, are more easily influenced ; they accept it,
or some of them do, teach it to their children, and the children
develop it and impart it, and thus it gains the victory.
While the future is so much in the hands of the young, for the
dominant influence of the age itself we must look chiefly to those
between the ages of '25 and 70. In infancy children are totally
dependent on others and occupy the time of older persons. From
infancy till twelve or fourteen they are still dependent in part.
Whether they enter business or a profession, few gain ah independ-
ent place or maturity of judgment before 25 which enables them
to make themselves felt in the community ; many have to wait
longer. Perhaps it is safe to say that the strongest influence is
exerted from 30 to 60, though the influence of some begins earlier
and that of some lasts longer. The strength of a nation certainly
lies in those above 20 and imder 70.
The United States Census for 1890 gives the ages of the popu-
lation of 28 cities with 100,000 inhabitants and upward. Their
total population was 9,697,900, of whom 4,850,653 were males,
4,847,307 females ; 227,391 were under one year; 1,059,637 under
five years; 2,904,118 under fifteen; 5,199,410 from fifteen to forty-
five ; 1,280,547 from forty-five to sixty-five ; 285,368 sixty-five and
over; and 28,517 unknown. This shows that about two-thirds of
the population are between the ages of fifteen and sixty-five.
Statistics and estimates made in Europe place over one-half of
the total population of the advanced nations between the ages of
twenty and sixty, and over 40 per cent between twenty and fifty.^
In our study of the age certain factors must be reckoned with
which are either new or modifications of older ones. Their influ-
ence should be considered in estimating the probable progress in
the future.
Sociology as a new element has already been mentioned.
Sociological studies are permeating aU departments of literature
and affecting all the relations of life. No prediction of the prob-
able changes can be made, but they can hardly be short of a revo-
lution. Individuals and associations will be viewed as in vital
connection with the great social organism, thus doing away with
that false isolation which is now so common.
1 SchiifDe, " IJaii niid Leheu," iii., 59.
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 317
Running parallel with this development of sociological thought
we find a growing discontent of the masses, the uprising of labor,
socialism and communism, anarchism and nihilism, all evidences
of a deep social ferment intent on radical changes. The theoretical
and practical movements unite in making ours an age of social
crises and revolutions.
As a phase in the marvellous development of modern industries
with their division of labor we note the remarkable growth of cities.
The improvement in agriculture has made manual labor on farms
less indispensable, and the development of manufacture and com-
merce has more and more concentrated population in the cities.
This process is seen throughout Europe and America. In the
United States 3.35 per cent of the inhabitants were in cities of
4,000 inhabitants and upward in 1790 ; but in 1890 there were
29.20. The significance of this fact will be appreciated when we
consider the effect of massing men in large bodies, the increase
of association by this process, and the powerful influence always
exerted by large cities in social movements.^
The male and female population in the different nations and
the world is nearly equal ; but in many places woman's influence
is confined chiefly to the family. Throughout the civilized world,
however, woman is coming to the front, and exercises new and
greater social power. This is evident in education, in the pro-
fessions, in business, in politics, and in all the social relations.
Other new^ or more emphasized factors can only be mentioned.
The one-sided dominance of natural science seems to be at an end ;
on the passion for nature rises the passion for humanity. But the
absorbing study of nature and the wonderful achievements of
natural science have produced effects which are likely to be per-
manent. Whatever ideals niay enchant the human heart, for
this earthly life success will depend largely on subduing and using
the objects and forces of nature. As humanity realizes its distinct-
1 Mulhall ("Industries ami Wealth of Nations," 16-17) says that in Europe,
the United States, and the British Colonies, " cities (over 50,000 souls) show
an increase of 470 per cent in 60 years, while the population outside them has
risen only 70 per cent, the former growing 6 J times faster than the latter. . . .
Rural population constitutes in the United Kingdom 45, on the European Con-
tinent 82, and in the United States 72, per cent of the total." "One-half of
the world is engaged in agricultural pursuits, one-fourth in manufactures, one-
tenth in trade and transport, and the remainder (15 per cent) in professions,
public service, and other useful occupations " (19).
318 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
ness, it will, however, protest against so naturalizing man as to
make him subject to nature ; it will insist on humanizing nature
in order to meet the demands of the human head and heart. The
value of the environment will not be lost sight of again ; but it
will be adapted to man, not man enslaved by its conditions. The
close relation of mind to body will not be forgotten, though physi-
ology will not be substituted for psychology. In general, the trend
will be from abstractions to concrete reality, without forgetting the
function of reason, the value of principles, and the importance of
laws and systems. This simply means that the lessons learned from
the mai-vellous progress of the nineteenth ceutmy will henceforth be
integral parts of the social forces. One-sided movements will be
overcome in the course of progress, such as the extremes of conserva-
tism and of radicalism, and the false views of individualism and
socialism in economics and politics; the consciousness of self, being
recovered, will determine man's place in nature ; and the irrepressi-
ble needs of the human heart and life must promote a more har-
monious co-operation of intellect, susceptibility, and will, in place
of the cold intellectualism which tries to rationalize what requires
to be experienced and practised.
Among the newer and most potent social forces of the times we
put the United States. European as well as American scholars are
tempted to indulge in predictions as they contemplate this rising
nation. What new type of Anglo-Saxon civilization will the New
World develop ? Will it be Anglo-Saxon, or will foreign admixture
make it an un classifiable conglomeration? These and numerous
questions of nationality and literature and life we cannot discuss.
To one important point, often overlooked, attention is here
directed : the effect of the position of the United States on the
social power of the nation.
Their very location determines the intimate relation of European
powers. Even Russia is afraid of being overwhelmed by tlie
thought and life of the civilization of Western Europe, and the
isolation of the Turk is due to his religion and the fact that he is
Asiatic rather than European. When any power gains an eco-
nomic advantage, others at once seek to rival the same. The powers
watch one another with respect to education, politics, and military
aifairs, and each country carefully studies and weighs the diplo-
macy, the press, and the general trend of the others. Thus each
nation in its action considers the rest. There is therefore a certain
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE, 319
European internationalism. As for many ages the world's culture
and progress have been so largely concentrated in Europe, the same
concentration is taken for granted respecting the future. America
is studied with interest, but chiefly in its industrial movements, in
the development of its vast resources, and the relation of the
government to economic affairs. European scholars in particular
have other interests in America ; but in general its importance is
supposed to consist in the fact that it affords a market for buying
or selling agricultural products, manufactures, and stocks. The
outside of the new university of Vienna is ornamented with the
portraits of eminent scholars from all countries and ages. There
is but one portrait of an American, and he belongs to the begin-
ning of our national history : Benjamin Franklin. Thousands of
Americans go abroad to absorb European culture ; but what is
America doing for the social progress of the world V
The question does not affect the culture at home, but only its
influence abroad and on the whole of humanity. A young nation
may have to concentrate its energies on the development of its
resources in order to get a firm basis for the future ; but the time
will also come when it must consider its place in the total social
organism and its influence on other nations. Our very isolation
and independence may interfere with the exertion of powder over
other people. How far have we developed a characteristic Ameri-
can literature which has become a world power ? In what depart-
ments of scholarship are we the leaders among the nations? To
which of our schools do Europeans flock as the deepest fountains of
wisdom ? Have the unrivalled agricultural and industrial resources
culminated in advancing to the pinnacle of modern culture all the
highest interests of humanity? Do even Canada, Mexico, and
South America sit at our feet to learn science and philosophy,
literature and art, morals and religion, or do they look rather to
distant Europe for the best models and most eminent teachers in
these departments?
We cannot discuss these questions of such moment to sociologi-
cal students, but present them for consideration. The answers are
by no means always easy. But they are problems which naturally
arise in the sociological study of the age, and come with special force
to the American sociologist.^
1 America affords remarkable advantages for sociological research. Good
suggestions on this subject are given in the preface of " Ancient Society," by
320 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
The European comiilications are bewildering. Will England be
able to maintain its industrial and commercial supremacy, and to
hold its foreign possessions? There is no evidence of a decrease
of the military armaments of the Continental nations, in spite of
the crushing debts under which the people groan, llussia, with
its marvellous growth iu power and influence, is a problem for
Europe and perhaps still more for Asia. Neither in Europe nor
in Asia has that country an outlet to the south, but it seeks one
to the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf. The Turk, who has
long been thought sick enough to die, could easily be disposed of
if it were decided what to do with the country. Kussia, ever since
the testament of Peter the Great, has been eager to get Constanti-
noi)le; but the enormous advantage thus given would meet with
the opposition of the other European powers, France perhaps ex-
cepted. It is an interesting question for Europe and Asia and, in
fact, the world, what civilization will be developed in that vast
empire, which includes one-seventh of the territorial surface of the
globe, — namely, one-half of Euroi)e and one-third of Asia.
In the importance of Europe and America for a knowledge of
the age, the other peoples must not be overlooked. European in-
fluence is rapidly extending in Africa, as the following, from " The
Library Atlas of Modern Geography," shows. The possessions in
Africa are : —
Square Miles. luliabitauts.
Great Britain .... 341,859 4,963,060
Portugal 916,100 11,781,970
France 250,000 5,275,770
Spain 13 5,086
Germany 833,000 5,110,000
Italy 316,100 5,658,000
Lewis H. Morfjan. American s)ipcialists on Indian antiquities complain of the
difficulty of excitinj; an interest in the United States in their accumulation and
preservation. European etlniolo^ists maTiifest a deep interest in the subject, and
some of tiie best researches are made by them. The antiquities of Egypt have
enriched European museums ; and witli an apathy like that of modern Egypt,
Americans let many of the treasures of America's rich past wander to Europe,
leaving it to others to appreciate what sliould be most prized at liome. Not
even the hand of vandalism is stayed in destroying the relics of buried tribes and
old civilizations !
It is to be hoped that some day sociologists will learn to appreciate Washington
as a centre for sociological investigation, on account of its Smithsonian and otlier
collections, its government institutions, and its representatives from different
nations.
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 321
Whatever influence these nations may exert in the way of poli-
tical organization, industrial development, education, and religion,
the climate and general sanitary conditions of a large part of the
continent are not favorable to extensive and permanent settlement
by the white race. Africa, while developed largely under Euro-
pean influence, will no doubt continue to belong to the Africans.
As civilization increases they may become more independent of
foreign influence. Before the supremacy of European influence is
secure, many conflicts with the different peoples and with Moham-
medan fanaticism may be necessary.
It is idle to speculate on the changes likely to take place in Asia
•with more than one-half of the population of the w'orld. Other
factors in the near future may become more important than the
struggle between England and Russia for the supremacy. Ger-
many, France, and other European nations may become factors in
the struggle. More significant, how^ever, may be the development
of the Asiatics themselves. The rapid advances of Japan with its
forty million inhabitants must be reckoned with. The Chinese
Empire contains a population of four hundred millions. The ex-
clusivism which prevails limits foreign influence. The people are
industrious, their standard of living enables them to underbid the
European in the labor market, and their effect on the industries
is keenly felt in the numerous countries to which they emigrate.
China wiU probably continue to belong to the Chiiaese ; and if the
military spirit of the people is aroused, all the calculations of Euro-
pean supremacy in Asia may be at an end.
What will become of India, with some three hundred million in-
habitants ? Can a foreign ruler maintain himself after the people
grow in consciousness of power and become better able to govern
themselves ?
The very civilization introduced by Europe will tend to promote
the independence of the Asiatic nations. The Europeans would
not be apt to exterminate the natives if they could, nor can they
hope to gain the perpetual dominance over them by means of colo-
nization. Whatever outside influence, therefore, may be exerted,
there seems to be no doubt that Asia will remain Asiatic, as Africa
will continue to be African. ^
This changes materially the aspect from that which considers
1 Statistics of population make doubtful even the continued supremacy of
the white race in South America.
21
322 INTRODUCTION TV STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
only the most advanced nations and takes their world-supremacy
as a matter of coui'se. Interesting discussions of the subject are
found in " National Life and Character," by C. H. Pearson. Many
of the forecasts are far from encom-aging. " The day will come,
and perhaps is not far distant, when the European observer will
look round to see the globe girdled with a continuous zone of the
black and yellow races, no longer too weak for aggression or
under tutelage, but independent, or practically so, in government,
monopolizing the trade of their own regions, and circumscribing
the industry of the European ; when Chinamen and the nations of
Hindostan, the States of Central and South America, by that
time predominantly Indian, and, it may be, African nations of the
Congo and the Zambesi, under a dominant caste of foreign rulers,
are represented by fleets in the European seas, invited to inter-
national conferences, and welcomed as allies in the quarrels of the
civilized world. The citizens of these countries will then be taken
up into the social relations of the white races, will throng the
English turf, or the salons of Paris, and will be admitted to
marriage" (84-85).
So far as the enlightenment of the advanced nations is con-
cerned it is almost universally overestimated. To them is falsely
attributed the science, the learning, and the culture of the very
few who are on the summit. Those who study the actual condi-
tion of the most civilized nations are appalled at the fearful reign
of barbarism and heathenism. Amid great industrial and intel-
lectual development, it has been claimed that there is an actual
loss of moral power. As the savage is intent on eating and drink-
ing and pleasure, so amid material interests we see the survival of
the savage in the life absorbed by gratification, but regardless of
the higher purposes of life. We have no complete statistics of the
oft-repeated decadence of the most advanced nations. In many
instances there is decay at the top. Some of the aristocratic
families are dying out, in many others there are but few descend-
ants. The laborers usually have larger families, and in the lower
races the increase of population is often rapid. Tliere can be no
doubt that in Europe and America great deterioration results from
luxury, from vice, from alcoholism, and from the hardships and
the low standard of life among the poorer classes.^ But in con-
1 " The Decline of the Family " and " The Decay of Character " are the
closing chapters in Mr. Pearson's work.
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 323
nection with these destructive factors the remedial agencies, never
before so general and constantly increasing, must be considered.
In connection with the study of the age a practical plan for
studying a community is added. This plan will afford an oppor-
tunity for the application of many principles given in the preced-
ing chapters. For a beginning it may be advisable to take a
community smaller than a state or large city. However circum-
scribed the sphere, the study ought to be made a model for an in-
vestigation of all communities, whether lai'ge or small. Such a
scheme as that presented is specially valuable as a guide for
original investigations and is adapted to Seminar work. Each
member of the class can investigate a particular department of the
commimity and present the results to the whole class for discussion.
The plan ought to be a discipline in the method of original re-
search, and each student should give a full account of his method
of procedure.
Numerous other subjects can be chosen for similar class exer-
cises. A sociological work can be selected for discussion ; the
social forces of a particular time or a particular people can be inves-
tigated ; a study of institutions is very important ; in the present
age the general social character, the social trend, the relative domi-
nance of particular social forces, the social movements in different
nations, the uprising of the masses, the social problem, socialism,
and many other subjects are admirably adapted for special inquiry.
Of such importance to the student is a knowledge of the age in
which he lives that it may be best to take subjects from the times,
considering them in connection with their genesis and also in the
light of future progress.
Plan for the Study of a Community.
First make the community to be studied as definite
as possible. Whether it be a village or city, a township
or county, let the boundary be so exact that there can be
no mistake respecting the limits of the investigation.
After determining the sphere of the investigation, fix
the aim of the inquiry. What is to be the result of the
3-24i INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
study ? The aim is so impurluiit because on it depends
the nature of the inquiry and of the results.
The objective reality is to be mastered. The scien-
tific method should be adopted so far as possible.
Statistics should be gathered whenever attainable. A
definite method should be adopted for every department
of the inquiry.
After settling the preliminaries investigate —
1. The Natur'al JEyivironment of the Commwiity.
This includes all the natural conditions, such as the
longitude and latitude, the face of the country whether
a valley or hilly, the character of the soil, the minerals,
the flora and fauna, the climate, the hydrographic con-
ditions. After describing the natural environment, its
effect on the community should be indicated, on the
health, on the industries, on recreation, on the life and
views of the people in general.
2. The History of the Community.
Origin of the Community. The process of develop-
ment. Epochs, Dominant factors at different periods,
influential persons, significant events. Emphasis should
be placed on what is characteristic and typical. What
permanent forces have prevailed throughout the history ?
Growth of Institutions. Show the effect of the history
on the present condition of the community, — on tradi-
tions, manners, customs, and the general character.
Folk lore.
We now pass to the study of the community itself.
3. Racial and National Distinctions.
Indians, Caucasians, Africans, Mongolians. Natives,
their ancestry. Were their parents natives or of foreign
birth ? Foreigners, their nationalities and social forces.
The influence of race and nationality on the population,
on the industrial, political, social, moral, and religious
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 825
situation. Advantages and disadvantages of the mix-
ture of different races and nationalities. Processes of
assimilation. Should immigration be restricted ?
4. The Family Life.
Views respecting the family. Divorce. Number of
families. Size of families. Family life. Number of
married and single men and women. Causes of the
surplus of men or of women in a place. The relation of
the sexes. The position of woman, social, industrial,
legal, intellectual. Description of the homes.
5. Ages in the Population.
Rate of birth and death. Other causes affecting age
— emigration and immigration. Number of children
under five ; between five and fifteen ; number of persons
between fifteen and twenty ; between twenty and sixty ;
over sixty. Deaths by accident ; suicide ; diseases
among children ; consumption and other diseases. Gen-
eral sanitary condition. The differences in age as affect-
ing the character of the community.
6. Social Groups, Unorganized.
These include the natural, spontaneous social distinc-
tions of a community which divide it into different
classes. These groups require no specific organization
to make them distinct. The lines are usually drawn
definitely between the higher, the middle, and lower
classes. Each of these classes may again be subdivided,
so that numerous separate groups are found in every
general class. The social ranks of the community are
to be studied. Is there a nobility of birth ? Is there
military rank ? Who constitute the aristocracy ? The
reason for social groupings is especially important.
Usually the bond of union consists in what men prize
most; hence the appreciation of a community can be
studied in its social groups. There are groupings
326 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
according to family (consanguinity), or according to the
position of ancestors (aristocracy of birth), or according
to wealth, or according to pursuits, whether intellectual,
artistic, or economic. It should be studied what deter-
mines the friendship of men, their associations, their
social gatherings. The character and conduct of the
various groups should be investigated, their sentiments,
the customs and fashions which prevail, the traditions
and tendencies. What is the influence of these groups
on the members, on one another, and on the community ?
Analyze the groups in order to determine what forces
prevail in them. The aim is a definite view of the social
life outside of the regular organizations.
7. The Economic Cotidition.
Wealth of the community. Its source. Employments,
agricultural, industrial, commercial, professional. Capi-
talists, laborers, servants, drones. Production, distribu-
tion, exchange, consumption. Means of communication.
Different kinds of manufacture, kinds of merchandise
sold. Effect of the economic condition on the character
of the community. Are material interests dominant ?
Contrasts in the economic situation. Relation of the
classes to one another. Condition of manual laborers.
Does the sweating system prevail ? Do women and chil-
dren work in factories ? Hours of labor. Treatment of
laborers. Describe the manufacturing and business
establishments.
8. The Moral Condition.
Business integrity — the etliics of Trade. The social
evil. Intemperance. Gambling. Number of saloons.
The criminal classes. Causes of crime. Statistics of
arrests and convictions. Character and efficiency of the
police. Justice in the courts. The relation of lawyers
to crime. Treatment of pi-isoncrs. Is anything done for
released prisoners ? Various efforts at reform.
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 327
9. The Religious Condition.
The denominations. Their relation to one another.
Churches. Character of the religious services. Statistics
of attendance at the services. Church members, pro-
portion of the entire population. Infidelity and religious
indifference. The churches and the masses. The effect
of the churches on the moral, social, industrial, and
political character of the community. Other religious
societies than churches.
10. The Intellectual Condition.
The Schools. Character of the education. Is educa-
tion compulsory ? The position of the teachers. Is
there co-operation between the home and the school ?
Do many students attend schools away from home ?
Statistics of illiteracy among natives, foreigners, and the
different classes. Libraries ; character of the literature
read. Lectures. Journals. Literary and scientific
societies. Intellectual character of the professions. In-
tellectual influence of the professions. Literary men and
authors. Is there a history of the community ? Are
there archives for valuable documents ?
11. Artistic or Esthetic Interests.
Development of taste. Appreciation and cultivation
of the beautiful in nature and art. The study of music.
Sculpture in homes and in public. Painting, draw-
ing, photography. Architecture. Landscape gardening.
Parks. Museums. Concerts, operas, theatres. Artists.
Musicians. Poets. Societies for the promotion of art.
What does the community do to promote aesthetic
culture ?
12. The Political Condition.
Exact nature of the government of the community.
The constitution and the laws. Officials and their func-
tions. The relation of the community to the state and
328 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
nation. What is left to the individual, and what is con-
trolled by the public ? Who controls the gas and water
works and the street railway ? Taxes. Efficiency and
honesty of the government. The saloon in politics.
Political parties. Questions at issue. Character of the
elections.
13. Public Institutions.
Penal and charitable institutions. Prisons, reforma-
tories, asylums. Theory respecting the aim of punish-
ment. Character of the penal institutions. Provision for
paupers and the defective classes. The almshouse. The
insane asylum, A study of the physically and men-
tally defective, such as the blind, the deaf and dumb, the
lame and diseased, epileptics, idiots, etc., and the provi-
sion made for them. The relation of public to private
charity. Efficiency of the charities.
14. Volimtart/ Organizations.
For industrial, political, intellectual, sestlietic, recrea-
tive, moral, and religious purposes. The motives which
lead to organization. What social forces are involved in
the organizations ? Classify the organizations. Masons.
Odd Fellows. Labor organizations. Temperance and
other reformatory societies. Combinations of capitalists.
Religious associations. Indicate the cliaracter and effi-
ciency of the various organizations. The relation of the
organizations to one another and to the community.
The good and the evil in the organizations.
15. The Community as an Orgaiiism.
What unity prevails ? What is held in common ?
The public interests. Disintegrating factors. Antago-
nisms. Conflicts. Individualistic and communistic tend-
encies. Is there a public opinion ? If so, how is it
formed, how expressed, and what is its influence ? The
exact character of the community as an organism.
THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE AGE. 329
16. The External Relations of the Community.
What bonds unite it to contiguous communities ? The
influences it exerts on, and receives from, them. De-
pendence and independence. Show the exact nature of
the relation to the environment, whether predominantly
agricultural, industrial, political, intellectual, moral, or
religious. The place of the community as an organism
in organisms is to be determined. From its immediate
social environment we consider the relation of the com-
munity to the state, the nation, and to humanity. Not
being isolated, it can be understood only in its organic
connection with the totality to wliicli it belongs. Has
the community a representative in the legislature or in
congress ? How is it affected by the laws of the state
and the nation ? Has it direct or only indirect connec-
tion with foreign countries ?
To this scheme for the study of the natural environ-
ment, the character, the history, and the relations of a
community can be added an inquiry into its ethical
needs, in order to promote its future progress.
REFLECTIONS.
The Age, define it. Exact Aim of the Study. Difference be-
tween Social and Sociological Study. Classification of Na-
tions for the Study of Humanity. "What Nations are worthy
of Special Inquiry ? Dominant Forces. Genesis of their
Dominance. Reactions. Importance of the Relative Prom-
inence of Social Forces in Different Ages. Power of Organ-
ization of Forces. Effect of the Differences of Age in a
Community. Forces which are New or have been Changed,
The Social Influence of the United States as affected by
Location. Give the General Outlines of the Plan for the
Study of a Community.
INDEX.
Adaptation, basis of association,
157-159.
Age, The, its characteristics, 304-308,
311, 312; its study, 179, 180; lim-
ited knowledge of, 296, 297.
Ages in a community, 315, 316.
Animal organization, 59, 142.
Aristotle, how used in Middle Ages,
39; obscured for ages, 229; phi-
losophy of, 89 ; politics, 13, 78, 86.
Association and aggregation, 46, 117,
137.
Association, classification of, 187; con-
scious and unconscious, 8, 9, 46, 47 ;
distinct from sociation, 130; kinds
and degrees, 137, 138; not as its in-
dividuals, but as its social forces,
125, 126; primitive, 9; reasons for,
157-160; what it involves, 154-159.
Associative forces, 246, 247.
Associative impulses, 169-172.
Augustine, 86.
Bacon, Lord, formulated law for
science, 20, 31, 257; movement of
states, 183.
Bacon, Koger, 220.
Bascom, John, definition of Sociology,
110; subjects discussed b}', 266.
Bastian, P. W. A., on environment,
227.
Bentham, 22.
Bernheim, E., history, 93, 99.
Biology and Sociology, 48, 59.
Bossuet, 21.
Bowne, B. P., 269.
Brande, W. T., on matter, 288.
Briuton, D. G., 266.
Buckle, mistake of, 227; the thinker
and the observer, 261.
Caird, E., on the Positive Philosophy,
41.
Carlyle on ideals, 210.
Carpenter, W. B., on matter, 288.
Causes, real and imaginarj', 189, 190.
Characteristics, American, 303; Ger-
man, 302, 303 ; Russian, 302.
Christianity, 15, 16.
Christian thought and the science of
society, 18-20.
Civilization and the lower races, 321,
322.
Civilization, improvement of, 232;
wherein distinguished from sav-
agery, 11, 12.
Clearness and distinctness, 73.
Clement, Epistles, 39.
Cohn, G., ethics, 225 ; method, 263,
Communism, 134.
Community, analysis of, 323-329.
Comte, 28-37; on ethical factor in
Sociology, 205; hierarchy of sci-
ences, 32, 33, 147, 275; Positive
Philosophy, 67; theological, meta-
physical, and positive stages, 29-31.
Conscience, individual and social, 231.
Consciousness of kind, 159, 160.
Conservatism and Radicalism, 192,
193.
332
INDEX.
Constructive social forces, 209, 210.
Co-operation, individual and social,
152, 153.
Copernicus, 181.
Cosmopolitanism, 300.
Crabbe on society, 52.
Critical meiliod, Kant and Comte, 34,
35, 274.
Culture, history of, 28, DO; literature
on history of, 92.
Darwin and heredity, 227, 228.
Darwin, on evolution, 60-tJ2; on na-
ture and law, 292; on practical
application of science, 203.
Decadence, 322.
Deduction, 243.
Descriptive Sociology, 107.
Design, 61.
Differentiation, process of, 194-198.
Dilthey, W., 263.
Division, a mental convenience, 105;
benefit of, 106 ; completeness of so-
ciological, 233-237; how found, 108;
into Static and D3'namic Sociology,
objections to, 106, 107; mental ab-
straction, 103, 104; rules for, 105.
Dogmatism, 262, 280, 282, 283, 293.
Draper, J. W., on law, 292.
Du Bois-Reymond, 283.
Duns Scotus, on natural and super-
natural, 20.
Education, individual and social,
132.
Emerson on society, 133.
Encyclopedists, 35.
Engels, Friedrich, emphasis on eco-
nomics, 85.
Environment, limit of its inliuence,
226, 227.
Equality, law of, 248, 249, 263.
Ethical Actuality, The, 220, 221.
]':thi(al factors in Comte, 204,205.
Ethical Ideal, The, 216-220.
Ethics, sociological, aim of, 207, 208,
210-212, 216-219, 226; importance,
209; justified, 202-207, 225, 226;
distinguished from social, 208;
science and art, 230, 231.
European complications, 320.
European iufiucuce in Africa, 320, 321.
Evolution of homogeneity into heter-
ogeneity, 193-198.
Evolution, sociological, what it in-
cludes, 166, 167.
Eaikbanics, Arthur, 43, 265, 266.
Family, The, 9-11, 50-52.
Flint, K., 39, 40.
Franklin, B., 319.
Freedom of will and law, 18, 19, 65.
Fulton, Robert, 229.
Gekmain, Sophie, 31.
Giddings, F. H., 43, 263; conscious-
ness of kind, 159, 160; sociological
ethics, 206, 207.
Goethe, 181.
Grotius on international and natural
law, 22, 40.
Gumplowicz, 69, 286.
Haeckel, Ernst, on Darwin, 62, 227.
Haeckel's monism, 289, 290.
Haldane, R. D., 198.
Hamilton, Sir William, on method,
257.
Ilartmann, E. von, 170.
Hebraism, its social thought, 14, 234.
Hegel, 89; history, 174, 186; philoso-
phy, 278.
Helmholfz, 203.
Herbart on psychology, 63, 186.
Heider, the history of humanity, 23-
28, 41.
Heredity, 164, 227, 228.
Historical and rational in(|uiry, 90, 91.
History and biography, 121, 135.
INDEX.
333
History, its aim, 88-89, 92; its early
records, 13 ; origin of, 12, Vi ; reason
in, 174; social thought in, 2U9, 270.
Hobbes, 22.
Homer, 189.
Humanism of Greece, 14.
Humanity as a society, 47-53, 121.
Humboldt, A. von, 67.
Hume, 287.
Huxley ou materialism, 289.
Hyslop, J. H,, ou method, 263.
Ideal, of Progress, means for realiza-
tion, 221-225.
Imagination in science, 34.
Imitation, 169, 170.
Independent sociological research,
263-271.
Individual and society, 7, 8, 37, 53, 54,
116-126.
Individualism and socialism, 130-132.
Individuality and socialization, 133-
134.
Individuals, distinction between iso-
lated and associated, 121-123; not
viewed as abstractions, 145, 146, 150.
Induction, 242, 243, 259.
Institutions, 177-179, 184, 185.
Internationalism, 300, 312, 313, 318,
319.
Kant on human development, 28, 41 ;
on ultimate problems, 286.
Kepler, 34.
Kierkegaard, representative of indi-
vidualism, 153.
Language, 95, 141.
Lassalle, F., iron law of wages, 256.
Law, its meaning, 257, 258; origin of,
12, 257-259.
Laws in humanity, 66, 284, 285.
Lazarus, Moritz, psychology of na-
tions, 10, 93, 94.
Leibnitz, influence of, 22; monads of,
152 ; on mental energy, 64.
Lewes, G. H., on Comte, 31, 35, 36.
Literature on Sociology, 39-43, 265-
269.
Littre, 41.
Locke, imitation, 170; innate ideas
227. '
Lotze, "Microcosm," 24, 186; energy
of thought, 227; materialism, 288;
value, 168.
Lubbock, Sir John, 266.
Mackenzie, J. L., 269.
Maine, H. S., 267.
Malthus, indebtedness of Darwin to,
62.
Martensen, socialism and individual-
ism, 153.
Martineau, Harriet, translation of
"Positive Philosophy," 41,265.
Marx, Karl, economics, 85, 86.
Materialism, 288, 289.
Matter unknowable, 286-289.
Menger, A., 263.
Metaphysics, views of Comte and
Kant, 33, 34.
Method, a priaii, 239, 240; dependent
upon the material, 244, 255 ; in So-
ciology, literature on, 263; of social
evolution, 249, 250; of sociological
ethics, 250-254; of Sociology, 239;
of Sociology, difficulties, 258-260;
sociological, 241, 255, 256, 257; sta-
tistical, 260, 261.
Middle Ages, their social thought, 16,
18-20, 39.
Mill, J. S., on happiness as life's aim,
216.
Milton, 34.
]\Iohl, R. von, on the state, 51.
Monism, 280-291.
Montesquieu, " Spirit of Laws," 21,
40, 96.
Morgan, L. H., 266, 320.
Muirland, J. H., 317.
334
INDEX.
Mulford, E., a nation an organism, 153.
Mulhall, M.G.,on statistics, 317.
Miiller, F., on classification of lan-
guage, 113.
MuUer, Max, language, 113, 266.
Nationality, development of, 299,
300.
Need, basis of Association, 157-159,
168, 169.
New social era, 312.
New social factors, 316-318.
Newton, 34, 252.
Objective realism, 304-307.
Organizations, when effete, 222, 223.
Orient, its social thought, 14, 15.
Original research, 261, 263-271.
dttingen, A. von, 261.
Over-organization, 309, 310.
Pearson, Chas. H., higher and lower
races, 322; motive for action, 230.
People, their growth in prominence,
17, 18.
Philosophy, Greek, 13-15.
Plato, the state, 13; philosophy of, 39,
89.
Political economy, changes in, 86, 87 ;
its place, 85-87; its prominence, 84,
85; literature on, 87, 88.
Population of the globe, 297.
Prevision in Sociology, 180-184, 198,
199.
Primitive social state, 165.
Principles, how obtained, 244-249.
Principles of society, 143-160; and
social evolution, 149; defined, 143-
146, 150; their contents, 147-149.
Processes involved in social evolution,
163-165.
Progress, 172, 173, 199, 212-214, 228-
233 ; indi\idual and social, 153, 223-
225.
Psychology and environment, 63-65.
Psychology of Nations, 93, 94.
QuATREFAGES on Human Kingdom,
292.
Quesnay, 21.
Qu^telet, 31, 260.
Eanke, L. von, on use of historical
documents, 259.
Ratzel, F., 266.
Ratzenhofer, G., on Sociology, 110.
Rayleigh, Lord, on materialism, 288.
Reform, 251, 252.
Riehl, A., freedom of the will, 19;
natural selection, 61.
Riehl, W. H., 83.
Rome, Ancient, influence on social
thought, 15, 39.
Rousseau, 9, 21.
Russia, its growing influence, 320.
Saint-Simon, relation to Comte, 31f
204.
Savigny, 205.
Schiiflle, A. E. F., 183, 187, 263; limit
of sociological knowledge, 292 ;
study of the social condition, 231.
Schiller on History, 22, 23, 24, 41.
Schleicher, 113.
Schliemann, 156.
Schmoller, G., on physical and psy-
chical processes, 289.
Schonberg, G., 87.
Schulze-Gaevernitz, G. von, organic
development, 148.
Science and association, 276, 277.
Science and philosophy, 277-279.
Science, its limitations, 275-277; tech-
nical sense, 277.
Seminar, subjects for, 323-329.
Seth, James, 198, 269.
Sidgwick, H., 269.
Simcox, E. J., 267.
INDEX.
335
Simmel, G., social phenomena, 198.
Social achievement and inheritance,
308, 309; action, its effects, 156, 157;
and private action, 123-126; and pri-
vate personality, 127-130; and soci-
ological, distinction between, 113,
\U, 300, 301; characteristics, 249,
250, 310, 311; causation, 256, 257;
classification, 303, 304; energies in
evolution, 175-177; energies the
social substance, 257 ; evolution,
162-164; evolution, factors in, 187-
189; evolution, how studied, 177-
180; evolution, richness of content,
186; experiments, 262; forces and
nationality, 301-303; forces, condi-
tion of organization, 142 ; forces,
relative dominance, 190-192, 307;
groups, 54, 55, 70 ; growth, effect on
social thought, 18 ; its meaning, 153,
154; laws, 174; mind, the, 151, 152;
perfection, the aim of social prog-
ress, 217-219; physics, 107, 129;
principles and social evolution, 166,
167; products, 55; science and the
social sciences, 75-77, 97-101; study
in history. 269, 270; thought in
modern times, 16-18, 21, 22; unity
and social differentiation, 163.
Socialism, 130, 312, 317.
Sociation, 127-142; its definition, 127-
129 ; its process, 140-142.
Society, idea of among the Greeks,
13, 14, 39; and manhood, 4; and
personal freedom, 132, 133; and self-
hood, 2, 3; and social phenomena,
110; and societies, 5-6, 37, 38; and
the educated, 4, 5; and youth, 3;
an organism, 70, 136, 150-152, 2l2,
213; as a system of forces, 136;
composed of social forces, 54, 55-56,
128, 129, 137, 138, 144, 145; defined,
46; difficulty of the conception, 2,
6, 39, 40 ; genesis of the idea of, 1-
43; how its conception arises in the
individual, 2-8 ; its idea how found,
111 ; not dependent on individuals,
134, 135; per se, 244-246, 248, 249;
science of, 45.
Sociological and economic view, 112,
185; inquiry, its limits, 56-66, 68, 69;
literature, 40-43; specialization, 68.
Sociology and biology, 59 ; and evolu-
tion, 59-62; and institutions, 111;
and metaphj'sics, 58 ; and philology,
101, 112, 113; and political economy,
84-88; and political science, 78-83;
and psychology, 62-65; and science,
273, 274; and theology, 65.
Sociology, definition, 44-53; division,
109-114; division of labor in, 67, 68;
not a grouping of social disciplines,
97-101 ; origin of, 36, 37 ; reason for
its separate treatment, 73-75; re-
lation to history, 88-93 ; a science
in what sense, 279-281 ; its scientific
character, how determined, 282-285;
its scope, 53-71; static and dynamic,
106,107; its subject-matter, 52,56;
what it includes, 51-53, 55.
Socrates, 227; humanism of, 14; in-
fluence on method, 257 ; view of the
state, 13.
Spencer, Herbert, Descriptive Soci-
ology, 107, 108; ethical discussion
in Sociology, 206 ; on social evolu-
tion, 193-198; on matter, force,
and motion, 287; on social statics,
106 ; on stud)' of Sociology, 265; on
the use of the tenn "science,"
275, 281; his view of society, 52,
110, 148, 184.
Spinoza, 152.
Sprague, F. W., on social evolution,
293.
State, The, 78-83 ; its ethical mission,
223 ; literature on, 83 ; its origin,
10-12; its prominence in Greek
thought, 13 ; a society, 52.
Stein, Lorenz von, on Sociology, 69.
Steinthiil, H., psychology' of nations,
93, 269.
Stephen, Leslie, 269; prevision, 108;
social organism, 52, 120 ; society, 160.
336
INDEX.
Stoics, social thought of the, 15.
Struggle for existence, 175.
Supernational bonds, 187.
Sussmilch, 260.
Tarde, G., on imitation, 170.
Tauler on society, 133.
Teleological action, 155, 214, 215, 226,
227 ; and natural law, 255, 256.
Tertullian, 20.
Tolstoi, 302.
Tonnies, F., 47.
Trail, H. D., 268.
Treitschke, H. von, on Sociology, 83.
Turgot, forerunner of Comte, 21, 30,
31.
Tylor, E. B., history, 92, 183, 266;
natural causation, 292.
Ultimate problems, 241, 242, 286, 287.
Unconscious action, 170, 171.
United States, social influence of, 318,
319.
Unorganized society, 69, 70; impor-
tance of, 267, 268.
Unit of force, 176, 177.
Unity and differentiation, 163.
Vico on the science of history, 20, 40.
Vinet, representative of individualism,
153.
Voltaire. 21.
Wagnek, a., economic function of the
state, 87.
Wtintig, H., on Comte, 31, 41, 42.
Ward, L. F., ethics, 233 ; social forces,
200; Sociology, 65,66, 273.
Westermarck, E., on marriage, 266.
Whitney, W. D., on linguistics, 112.
Will in ethics, 251.
Williams, C. M., 269.
Wilson, D., on prehistoric man, 266.
Wundt, W., ethics and method, 263,
269.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
Los Angeles
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.
OCT i —
TO^URL
n^
REC'D LD-URl
URL DEC 171900
OEC 1 3 ,36e
Form L9 — 15m-10, '48(31039)444
LOS ANGELES
LIBRARY
HM
LONDON
BOOK CO.
644
VlARKET St.
>.(